RE: Climate Change is Real(ly Not Such a Big Deal)
Lord Christopher Monckton: "Man made climate change is a Hoax!"
What I've noticed, in opposing the mainstream viewpoint, the people they give us actually cement the central claim. In this instance, CLIMATE IS CHANGING, but not because of man.
Is it hotter for you now than when you were four?
Not for me, each year, similar temperatures. Sometimes a good summer, sometimes a bad summer, but it's no hotter. The main difference, the quality of light has changed to more blue, I suspect because of the trails they constantly pump into the sky via planes. While Russia admitted in the 1980s it modifies the weather by cloud seeding, our governments are oddly silent on the subject, yet villages get flooded out by extreme weather events...
This story was supposedly debunked, but the central fact is that researchers wanted to get rid of tree ring data because it didn't show change in temperatures. They now say tree ring data is inaccurate compared to weather stations and it's no longer used, the flip side, this data couldn't be manipulated to show false warming.
So, Lord Christopher Monckton, while looking to be on side of the climate change is unreal, doesn't appear to be calling out the actual fraud.
Did you watch the video? He's not on the side of climate change.
I didn't watch this video first time around, I've watched quite a few of his others, I don't dislike him, he makes good points and uses graph data very well. But it all seems set up like a never ending story... The article I referenced is from 2009, but nearly ten years later we're having the same argument. Forgive me for being cynical.
We should have moved on from this. Trees don't show signs of climate change in their rings, so if trees don't care, neither should we. I mean, plant life is really the only important thing because it's the bottom of the food chain. But instead, 'tree ring data is unreliable', so let's naval gaze at some forced statistics. And the craziness of demonising CO2 when this is the chief component in photosynthesis – we've got some sick bastards in government.
While arguing about a possible one degree celsius rise in temperature, let's not address the following questions: Why are governments allowing the spraying of our skies with chemicals that fall on plant life and change soil acidity? Do governments actively use cloud seeding to purposely flood areas of their own population?
I'm not attacking Lord Monckton per se, I'm just hoping to add another dimension to the discussion beyond his key points.
Regarding plane trails, I was sitting in the garden enjoying the sun and they started spraying. It's definitely coordinated, planes come over one after another to form a set of lines. One plane was throwing out so much stuff, it was like a flour bomb...
See the vertical streams, that's the stuff falling through the air like flour, the actual trail is the top white line.
It's scary stuff what they're doing.
I think that Monckton is actually on the same side of the argument that we are on. What he's trying to do is catch them in a lie so that he can take legal action against them. That may be why his focus is on the fact that their calculations do not take into account sun temperature data. I too am disappointed that this push wasn't stopped in it's tracks all the way back to the hacked emails from climategate when they were hiding the decline. I don't know if the tree ring data can be used to attack the mathematical equations that they've gotten wrong, but if it can you may want to suggests that to Monckton. He seems to be one of the key figures doing the most to discredit the hoax that antroprogenic global warming can in any way be significantly reduced by taxing industry.
Yes, he argues well. We'll just have to see where it goes, I suspect there'll be another round of 'debunking' from the opposition. As he says, academics get funded to prove climate change, it's a joke.