Another UN lie about a house in Samoa being deserted because....
-
of "climate change".
so dishonest.
he isn't so stupid as to be "mistaken".
"but, but, man made global warming"
no, woodpecker.
https://redstate.com/wardclark/2025/03/08/un-chief-caught-in-lie-about-climate-claim-n2186425
UN Chief Caught in Lie About Samoa Climate Claim
-
I wonder if the bulldozers they used were electric???
-
See, climate change is real. Now we have volcanoes erupting!
-
of "climate change".
so dishonest.
he isn't so stupid as to be "mistaken".
"but, but, man made global warming"
no, woodpecker.
https://redstate.com/wardclark/2025/03/08/un-chief-caught-in-lie-about-climate-claim-n2186425
UN Chief Caught in Lie About Samoa Climate Claim
of "climate change".
so dishonest.
he isn't so stupid as to be "mistaken".
"but, but, man made global warming"
no, woodpecker.
https://redstate.com/wardclark/2025/03/08/un-chief-caught-in-lie-about-climate-claim-n2186425
UN Chief Caught in Lie About Samoa Climate Claim
The overall global temperature is increasing due to human greenhouse gas emissions.
"Climate change" = Human greenhouse gas emissions, primarily:
carbon-dioxide,
nitrous oxide and
methane.
This is mainstream-science and not "religion".
It is not a form of belief only, because it is science-based.
On the other hand climate-denial is a form of belief (since is not based in mainstream-science), and therefore accusing those who are concerned by the mainstream-science of being a "religion", is a form of “Psychological Projection”.The U.N. Secretary General (if the article is accurate about the reason for the house's abandonment), may have made a "mistake" about that particular house, but human-caused global warming/climate change, is mainstream science:
More than 11,000 scientists declare a Global Climate Emergency November 5, 2019:
https://www.sciencealert.com/a-monumental-alliance-of-world-scientists-declare-a-climate-emergencyClimate emergency:
https://www.sciencenews.org/century/climate-change-carbon-dioxide-greenhouse-gas-emissions-global-warming -
Yes because it's mainstream it must mean it's fact, not biased info at all.
Back in the day, there was a mainstream belief that the world was flat.
Not that long ago, there was a mainstream belief the world was going to be in an ice age by now.
-
Yes because it's mainstream it must mean it's fact, not biased info at all.
Back in the day, there was a mainstream belief that the world was flat.
Not that long ago, there was a mainstream belief the world was going to be in an ice age by now.
Yes because it's mainstream it must mean it's fact, not biased info at all.
Back in the day, there was a mainstream belief that the world was flat.
Not that long ago, there was a mainstream belief the world was going to be in an ice age by now.
Contributor "Jax" wrote:
'Yes because it's mainstream it must mean it's fact, not biased info at all.':
He as quoted me selectively. I did not refer to "mainstream-belief", but to "mainstream-science". Scientific study is designed to seek always to exclude bias from the study in question.He also wrote:
' there was a mainstream belief that the world was flat':
That was indeed "mainstream-belief', but not modern "mainstream-science".He wrote:
'there was a mainstream belief the world was going to be in an ice age by now.':
He has not produced evidence for his "by now".
This refers to a natural periodic phenomenon, whereas the climate emergency is a non-natural human-caused phenomenon.
Ice Ages:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation
Next Ice Age:
https://www.livescience.com/planet-earth/next-ice-age-would-hit-earth-in-11-000-years-if-it-werent-for-climate-change-scientists-say
Disruption by human greenhouse gas emissions, to the natural ice age cycle:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2470262-we-now-know-how-much-emissions-have-delayed-the-next-glacial-period/ -
oh, baloney, Robert.
Oct 20, 2023The awkward part isn't trying to grasp the subtleties of Norwegian since it's also available in English. It's that the Abstract bluntly declares that "standard climate models are rejected by time series data on global temperatures" while the conclusions state "the results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 -
Baloney, Robert, Part II
https://redstate.com/wardclark/2025/03/12/dont-panic-antarctica-isnt-melting-n2186589
Don't Panic—Antarctica Isn't Melting
-
So who’s taking credit for Robby the robot?
-
So who’s taking credit for Robby the robot?
So who’s taking credit for Robby the robot?
My bet?.. Lumbergh or Ccunt
-
Yes because it's mainstream it must mean it's fact, not biased info at all.
Back in the day, there was a mainstream belief that the world was flat.
Not that long ago, there was a mainstream belief the world was going to be in an ice age by now.
Contributor "Jax" wrote:
'Yes because it's mainstream it must mean it's fact, not biased info at all.':
He as quoted me selectively. I did not refer to "mainstream-belief", but to "mainstream-science". Scientific study is designed to seek always to exclude bias from the study in question.He also wrote:
' there was a mainstream belief that the world was flat':
That was indeed "mainstream-belief', but not modern "mainstream-science".He wrote:
'there was a mainstream belief the world was going to be in an ice age by now.':
He has not produced evidence for his "by now".
This refers to a natural periodic phenomenon, whereas the climate emergency is a non-natural human-caused phenomenon.
Ice Ages:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation
Next Ice Age:
https://www.livescience.com/planet-earth/next-ice-age-would-hit-earth-in-11-000-years-if-it-werent-for-climate-change-scientists-say
Disruption by human greenhouse gas emissions, to the natural ice age cycle:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2470262-we-now-know-how-much-emissions-have-delayed-the-next-glacial-period/Contributor "Jax" wrote:
'Yes because it's mainstream it must mean it's fact, not biased info at all.':
He as quoted me selectively. I did not refer to "mainstream-belief", but to "mainstream-science". Scientific study is designed to seek always to exclude bias from the study in question.He also wrote:
' there was a mainstream belief that the world was flat':
That was indeed "mainstream-belief', but not modern "mainstream-science".He wrote:
'there was a mainstream belief the world was going to be in an ice age by now.':
He has not produced evidence for his "by now".
This refers to a natural periodic phenomenon, whereas the climate emergency is a non-natural human-caused phenomenon.
Ice Ages:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_glaciation
Next Ice Age:
https://www.livescience.com/planet-earth/next-ice-age-would-hit-earth-in-11-000-years-if-it-werent-for-climate-change-scientists-say
Disruption by human greenhouse gas emissions, to the natural ice age cycle:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/2470262-we-now-know-how-much-emissions-have-delayed-the-next-glacial-period/Belief, science based on bias reviews, all the same. Get it? Does it compute or do I need to come unplug you from the wall?
I give it no respect, doesn't mean I even deny anything happening, just waiting for some some real studies.
-
oh, baloney, Robert.
Oct 20, 2023The awkward part isn't trying to grasp the subtleties of Norwegian since it's also available in English. It's that the Abstract bluntly declares that "standard climate models are rejected by time series data on global temperatures" while the conclusions state "the results imply that the effect of man-made CO2oh, baloney, Robert.
Oct 20, 2023The awkward part isn't trying to grasp the subtleties of Norwegian since it's also available in English. It's that the Abstract bluntly declares that "standard climate models are rejected by time series data on global temperatures" while the conclusions state "the results imply that the effect of man-made CO2What a surprise that the Norwegian state-owned agency "Statistics Norway" has produced a report seeking to delegitimize the mainstream science on human greenhouse gas emissions causing a climate emergency!:
- - - - Start of extract: - - - -
'In 2011, Norway was the eighth largest crude oil exporter in the world (at 78 Mt), and the 9th largest exporter of refined oil (at 86 Mt). It was also the world's third largest natural gas exporter (at 99 bcm), having significant gas reserves in the North Sea.[3][4] Norway also possesses some of the world's largest potentially exploitable coal reserves (located under the Norwegian continental shelf) on earth.[5] More recently (2017), the Norwegian government has ranked 3rd worldwide as the largest exporter of natural gas, just behind Russia and Qatar. '(See webpage for citations.)
Webpage heading: "Energy in Norway":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Norway
- - - - End of extract - - - -
Can anyone see any possible State bias here ...! ?
A scientific response to the "Statistics Norway" report (which was linked by contributor "calfoxwc"), can be seen here:
"A distraction due to errors, misunderstanding and misguided Norwegian statistics":
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2023/11/a-distraction-due-to-errors-misunderstanding-and-misguided-norwegian-statistics/
-
oh, baloney, Robert.
Oct 20, 2023The awkward part isn't trying to grasp the subtleties of Norwegian since it's also available in English. It's that the Abstract bluntly declares that "standard climate models are rejected by time series data on global temperatures" while the conclusions state "the results imply that the effect of man-made CO2What a surprise that the Norwegian state-owned agency "Statistics Norway" has produced a report seeking to delegitimize the mainstream science on human greenhouse gas emissions causing a climate emergency!:
- - - - Start of extract: - - - -
'In 2011, Norway was the eighth largest crude oil exporter in the world (at 78 Mt), and the 9th largest exporter of refined oil (at 86 Mt). It was also the world's third largest natural gas exporter (at 99 bcm), having significant gas reserves in the North Sea.[3][4] Norway also possesses some of the world's largest potentially exploitable coal reserves (located under the Norwegian continental shelf) on earth.[5] More recently (2017), the Norwegian government has ranked 3rd worldwide as the largest exporter of natural gas, just behind Russia and Qatar. '(See webpage for citations.)
Webpage heading: "Energy in Norway":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Norway
- - - - End of extract - - - -
Can anyone see any possible State bias here ...! ?
A scientific response to the "Statistics Norway" report (which was linked by contributor "calfoxwc"), can be seen here:
"A distraction due to errors, misunderstanding and misguided Norwegian statistics":
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2023/11/a-distraction-due-to-errors-misunderstanding-and-misguided-norwegian-statistics/
What a surprise that the Norwegian state-owned agency "Statistics Norway" has produced a report seeking to delegitimize the mainstream science on human greenhouse gas emissions causing a climate emergency!:
- - - - Start of extract: - - - -
'In 2011, Norway was the eighth largest crude oil exporter in the world (at 78 Mt), and the 9th largest exporter of refined oil (at 86 Mt). It was also the world's third largest natural gas exporter (at 99 bcm), having significant gas reserves in the North Sea.[3][4] Norway also possesses some of the world's largest potentially exploitable coal reserves (located under the Norwegian continental shelf) on earth.[5] More recently (2017), the Norwegian government has ranked 3rd worldwide as the largest exporter of natural gas, just behind Russia and Qatar. '(See webpage for citations.)
Webpage heading: "Energy in Norway":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Norway
- - - - End of extract - - - -
Can anyone see any possible State bias here ...! ?
A scientific response to the "Statistics Norway" report linked by contributor "calfoxwc" can be seen here:
"A distraction due to errors, misunderstanding and misguided Norwegian statistics":
https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2023/11/a-distraction-due-to-errors-misunderstanding-and-misguided-norwegian-statistics/
That does not compute.
-
Robert? has the idea that bashing a source for "possible" bias is right out of woodpecker's playbook.
I don't think he? is legit.
-
Robert? has the idea that bashing a source for "possible" bias is right out of woodpecker's playbook.
I don't think he? is legit.
Robert? has the idea that bashing a source for "possible" bias is right out of woodpecker's playbook.
I don't think he? is legit.
What I was seeking to point out it that Norway has a "vested interest" in fossil fuels as shown in the Wikipedia information, and in my personal view very likely commissioned the report to support its own financial interests. -
Robert? has the idea that bashing a source for "possible" bias is right out of woodpecker's playbook.
I don't think he? is legit.
What I was seeking to point out it that Norway has a "vested interest" in fossil fuels as shown in the Wikipedia information, and in my personal view very likely commissioned the report to support its own financial interests.
What I was seeking to point out it that Norway has a "vested interest" in fossil fuels as shown in the Wikipedia information, and in my personal view very likely commissioned the report to support its own financial interests.likely? as in, the UN passing wind constantly about man made global warming? Like the UN funding terrorist groups in the Mideast? "Likely" like all the scientists who warped their mmgw findings because they didn't want to lose their huge grants from the UN etc?
"Likely" like al gore who had a huge giant home and flew around on private jets and who became a very, very rich slug?
In one month last year, the report found, Gore's home consumed more electricity than the average family uses in 34 months. The electricity used just to heat Gore's swimming pool would power six ...*********************************this is a great read:**********************************so, Robert, I think you are a grad student in college doing a paper on argumentation or something.I'm giving you far more credit than the woodpecker. -
What I was seeking to point out it that Norway has a "vested interest" in fossil fuels as shown in the Wikipedia information, and in my personal view very likely commissioned the report to support its own financial interests.likely? as in, the UN passing wind constantly about man made global warming? Like the UN funding terrorist groups in the Mideast? "Likely" like all the scientists who warped their mmgw findings because they didn't want to lose their huge grants from the UN etc?
"Likely" like al gore who had a huge giant home and flew around on private jets and who became a very, very rich slug?
In one month last year, the report found, Gore's home consumed more electricity than the average family uses in 34 months. The electricity used just to heat Gore's swimming pool would power six ...*********************************this is a great read:**********************************so, Robert, I think you are a grad student in college doing a paper on argumentation or something.I'm giving you far more credit than the woodpecker.likely? as in, the UN passing wind constantly about man made global warming? Like the UN funding terrorist groups in the Mideast? "Likely" like all the scientists who warped their mmgw findings because they didn't want to lose their huge grants from the UN etc?
"Likely" like al gore who had a huge giant home and flew around on private jets and who became a very, very rich slug?
In one month last year, the report found, Gore's home consumed more electricity than the average family uses in 34 months. The electricity used just to heat Gore's swimming pool would power six ...*********************************this is a great read:**********************************so, Robert, I think you are a grad student in college doing a paper on argumentation or something.I'm giving you far more credit than the woodpecker.
It would seem that Ms Joanne Nova is not a climate scientist, and has connections to the oil industry:- - - - Start of extract: - - - -
'For four years, [Joanne] Nova jointly co-ordinated[7] the Shell Questacon Science Circus, a partnership between Questacon, the Shell Oil Company Australia and the Australian National University
She self-published[8] the book The Skeptics Handbook, which rejects the scientific consensus on climate change and promotes various falsehoods about climate change.[11] The book argues that temperatures have not increased, and that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change.[11][5] [...]
She has falsely claimed that fewer than half of climate scientists agree with the IPCC's conclusion that CO2 is the dominant contributor to climate change.[4] PolitiFact described that as a "flat-out wrong" interpretation of data from a survey, and the lead author of the survey in question said that the survey showed "a strong majority of scientists agree that greenhouse gases originating from human activity are the dominant cause of recent warming."[4] Nova has argued that climate science is distorted by money, saying "thousands of scientists have been funded to find a connection between human carbon emissions and the climate. Hardly any have been funded to find the opposite."[15] [...]
Citation 4:
"Santorum cites flawed climate change figure, and misquotes it". @politifact. Retrieved 3 December 2019.(See webpage for the other citations.)
Extract source:
"Joanne Nova":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joanne_Nova
- - - - End of extract - - - -
So far as Mr. Al Gore is concerned, while he is sincerely concerned about the environment, I do not debate individuals because I am concerned only with the mainstream science.
You asked about my education. I have answer that here (but you would need to scroll down to my relevant post):
https://www.thebrownsboard.com/topic/68684-the-support-israel-palestinians-could-have-had-their-own-state-when-israel-was-created-thread/#comment-1152667
-
It's not a stretch to say mainstream can and has been biased, just as you refute resources only because they come from the oil industry but without actual evidence based material to back that up. It's false merely because you connect a dot to the oil industry, accurate or not.
If we only listened to the mainstream media, for example, this country would be screwed.
Mainstream science is not much different. For example, to challenge anything that is accepted by mainstream science, would be to sign a death sentence to your career because you don't step in line. Yet isn't science about exploring and questioning the world around you? How can you have science if you don't question everything around you?
People who have no evidence or can't think for themselves hide behind the 'science'. Fauci was supposed to be an expert and in charge of all the big scientists behind disease control, and this country, especially the politicians got behind him blindly to follow the 'science', look where that got people. Mask up, 6 ft apart, all of that was bullshit that did more harm than good.
When people reference Al Gore, it's because he used all the data from 'scientist', and with just a little bit of time anyone who isn't brain washed could see the fear mongering to exploit people's stupidity was garbage because his predictions based off 'science' came and went. It was so bad mainstream science had to relabel man made global warming to climate change.
As we've said before, we don't doubt that man 'can' mess up the climate, big maybe on the global scale, but the evidence put out hasn't proven much and beyond that, not a single soul has or can come up with a solution. Most of all, you cannot rely on gov't or it's bureaucratic agencies to have the answer, solutions or even a hint of what to do.
In this case, it's not up to anyone to prove that climate change isn't happening or real, it's up to people to prove that man is in direct control of global climate change(man made global warming) and then to offer solutions with direct effects not generalities about a wind farm here and there, or banning oil and coal.
Right now all that's happening is gov't is using climate change to gain power, control and cash.
-
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login