Trudeau's mantra is "fighting climate change".

[blackbird]

The question is,  Is this the biggest fraud in history?   Just consider Trudeau's claim he is making in Quebec today.  Trudeau says fighting climate change is the ONLY WAY to produce good jobs in the resource and manufacturing industries across the country.  Really.  So we need to kill the energy industry, put red tape regulations on anything that might emit some CO2 and hammer Canadians with increasing carbon taxes?   Is this really a credible claim?  The truth is Trudeau's war on climate is actually doing the opposite.  It is harming industry, jobs, and increasing the cost of living.

I think it is.  Man cannot control the climate.  There is no proof that man-made CO2 is having any effect on the climate.  Only speculation.  This is not empirical science.  Genuine science has to be supported by the scientific method which was abandoned long ago.  

However, this fraud provides a useful political tool for the liberal left as they can and have instilled fear in much of the population.  Quebec has especially bought into climate alarmism. The reason may have something to do with the fact Trudeau is Quebec's boy (or man) depending how you look at it.  He is their favourite son as was his neo-Marxist father Pierre Trudeau who had a love for Communist dictatorships.  Quebec is basically a very isolated province that considers the only people qualified to be PM have to be Quebecers.  

Man-made climate change is a natural go-to claim that fits in well with liberal and NDP thinking because it is centred on making mankind the scapegoat for all problems in the world.  So if there is bad weather or undesirable climate, it must be man's fault.  That is the natural outcome of a society that does not believe in a God who created everything and is in control of such things as the climate.  These neo-liberals somehow think since man is to blame that man can somehow control the climate, which is like the day when mankind thought they could build a tower to heaven in the book of Genesis in the Bible.  It is the result of the liberal unbelief and the false thinking that man knows everything and is a kind of god.   This is egotistic and nihilistic which is the rejection of all moral and religious principles.

The Stunning Statistical Fraud Behind The Global Warming Scare | Investor's Business Daily (investors.com)

Edited January 18, 2023 by blackbird

[TreeBeard]

Another climate conspiracy thread?  Haven’t you created enough of these already?  ?

[Queenmandy85]

47 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Man cannot control the climate.  There is no proof that man-made CO2 is having any effect on the climate.  Only speculation.  This is not empirical science.

You have been misinformed. The statement of yours that I have quoted is wrong. It contradicts every reputible climatologist and physicist in the world. 

 

50 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Trudeau is Quebec's boy (or man) depending how you look at it.  He is their favourite son as was his neo-Marxist father Pierre Trudeau who had a love for Communist dictatorships.  Quebec is basically a very isolated province that considers the only people qualified to be PM have to be Quebecers.

Of the last three Prime Ministers from Quebec, only Jean Chretien was of predominantly French heritage. Brian Mulroney was of Irish descent and Prime Minister Trudeau is mostly of Scottish ancestry. 

I don't recall the late Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau ever expressing any love for Communist dictatorships, other than to follow the Conservative Prime Minister John Diefenbaker's policies of maintaining close relations with Cuba and making huge trade deals with Red China to sell our wheat. The Nixon administration asked the Canadian government to open relations with the PRC as an opening for President Nixon to open relations with the Mao government. 

[Infidel Dog]

50 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

Another climate conspiracy thread?  Haven’t you created enough of these already?  ?

The idea some exclusive club called "reputable climatologists" believe there is a hard science proof of a coming climate catastrophe caused by man's use of fossil fuels is the conspiracy thread.

By the way, do you know how you become one of these "reputable climatologists?" You don't need real science. You just have to push the theory they now call "Climate Change" but is more "Climate apocalypse." So "reputable climatologists" believe the theory (actually it's more just a hypothesis) that Warmageddon is coming and you become a "reputable climatologist" by pushing the hypothesis. See how that works.

But I see why you're tiring of the topic. That happens with the true believers every winter. In the winter cold records are just weather. In summer heat records are climate.

Edited January 18, 2023 by Infidel Dog

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

But I see why you're tiring of the topic. That happens with the true believers every winter. In the winter cold records are just weather. In summer heat records are climate.

In what way?  Do climate scientists say that climate change only happens in the summer, or is it that the word "climate" only applies to warm weather?

Edited January 18, 2023 by bcsapper

[TreeBeard]

To borrow a phrase:  debating climate change deniers is like playing chess with a pigeon…  it’ll knock over all the pieces, shit on the board and strut around as if it won. 

[Infidel Dog]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

In what way?  Do climate scientists say that climate change only happens in the summer, or is it that the word "climate" only applies to warm weather?

Oh, everybody is a scientist who believes Warmageddon is coming now are they?

Because my point was a general maxim that people who push climate doom prefer to do it in the summer when the weather is hot. Too them Summer heat is Climate. Cold winters are just weather. That's what I actually said.

[Infidel Dog]

Would you like to see that in action BCSapper? I can start reeling off cold weather events from this winter.

How long do you think it will be before somebody starts Dorksplaining to me the difference between climate and weather?

Edited January 18, 2023 by Infidel Dog

[Infidel Dog]

10 minutes ago, TreeBeard said:

To borrow a phrase:  debating climate change deniers is like playing chess with a pigeon…  it’ll knock over all the pieces, shit on the board and strut around as if it won. 

The first time I saw that one it wasn't targeting Climate realists like myself. It was directed at leftists.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Would you like to see that in action BCSapper? I can start reeling off cold weather events from this winter.

How long do you think it will be before somebody starts Dorksplaining to me the difference between climate and weather?

If you don't understand it, isn't it incumbent on someone who does to explain it?  Why would you prefer to remain ignorant about the issue?  I don't think it's dorksplaining, unless it's explaining to a dork.

Or, you could just look it up:

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/weather-vs-climate

A question:  Why would you suppose that "reeling off cold weather events from this winter" is an argument against climate change?

[Infidel Dog]

 

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

If you don't understand it, isn't it incumbent on someone who does to explain it?  Why would you prefer to remain ignorant about the issue?  I don't think it's dorksplaining, unless it's explaining to a dork.

Or, you could just look it up:

https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/news/weather-vs-climate

 

I do understand it. You don't seem to understand I'm talking about a logical fallacy where people who talk like you want to tell us when it's a heat record in the summer it's climate. If it's a winter cold record it becomes just weather.

What I don't understand is why you're having so much trouble with such a simple concept.

[Infidel Dog]

BTW, I don't deny climate changes. I deny there's any real scientific method support for the hypothesis a climate catastrophe is coming worse than anything we've seen before.

 

Edited January 18, 2023 by Infidel Dog

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

 

I do understand it. You don't seem to understand I'm talking about a logical fallacy where people who talk like you want to tell us when it's a heat record in the summer it's climate. If it's a winter cold record it becomes just weather.

What I don't understand is why you're having so much trouble with such a simple concept.

Because it's insane, I guess.

[Queenmandy85]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

This is egotistic and nihilistic which is the rejection of all moral and religious principles.

How many of the prominent leaders in the CCF-NDP are ordained Christians. Woodsworth, Douglas, Knowles, Calvert, Prebble, Father Bob Ogle, Colin Clay, and Ben Smiley, just off the top of my head.

Charlie Angus is an active member of the Roman Catholic Church. Jagmeet Singh is a devoted Sikh.

So, you can't say the CCF-NDP is a party that rejects all moral and religious principles.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

BTW, I don't deny climate changes. I deny there's any real scientific method support for the hypothesis a climate catastrophe is coming worse than anything we've seen before.

 

By "worse than anything we've seen before." do you mean you personally, the human race or the planet?

[Michael Hardner]

34 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

In what way?  Do climate scientists say that climate change only happens in the summer, or is it that the word "climate" only applies to warm weather?

Ask about the high temperature records that happen in winter too.

Ask what % of high records are exceeded each year vs low records.

 

[Queenmandy85]

37 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

By the way, do you know how you become one of these "reputable climatologists?" You don't need real science. You just have to push the theory they now call "Climate Change" but is more "Climate apocalypse." So "reputable climatologists" believe the theory (actually it's more just a hypothesis) that Warmageddon is coming and you become a "reputable climatologist" by pushing the hypothesis. See how that works.

I am surprised someone of obvious intelligence such as yourself would post a comment that is contrary to that reputation. I am sure you are knowledgeable about how one actually becomes a physicist and/ or a climatologist.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, TreeBeard said:

Another climate conspiracy thread?  Haven’t you created enough of these already?  ?

Apparently not.  Volume > Facts right ?

This is what the Trumpian fringe has learned - flood the zone with questions and try to baffle people who don't know better.

Remember when the Conspiracy chuds kept telling us that Osama Bin Laden wasn't on the FBI Most Wanted List proving it was an "inside job" ?

My mantra, TB, has become "Isolate and Ignore"... Chud symphonies are most harmonic when the discordant sounds of reason are absent...

[Infidel Dog]

4 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Because it's insane, I guess.

I agree. It's nuts to think if it happens in summer it's climate but if it happens in winter it's just weather.

So we finally agree then? That's nice.

Oh, sorry I didn't click you're NOAA link. I've seen them before I know what they think. I know even they know a climate trend is generally believed to be at least 30 years not a few months of winter or summer.

Check this forum in the section called Local (I think). There's a thread there about the fire in Lytton during a heat wave. The other guy I'm talking to there is certain that because Lytton broke its heat record that summer week that is proof of what he calls "climate change." He goes on and on about it. Are you starting to see what I mean yet?

[Guest]

Just now, Infidel Dog said:

I agree. It's nuts to think if it happens in summer it's climate but if it happens in winter it's just weather.

So we finally agree then? That's nice.

Oh, sorry I didn't click you're NOAA link. I've seen them before I know what they think. I know even they know a climate trend is generally believed to be at least 30 years not a few months of winter or summer.

Check this forum in the section called Local (I think). There's a thread there about the fire in Lytton during a heat wave. The other guy I'm talking to there is certain that because Lytton broke its heat record that summer week that is proof of what he calls "climate change." He goes on and on about it. Are you starting to see what I mean yet?

I think that what is insane is your contention that there are serious people who believe and put forward as fact the idea that "if it happens in summer it's climate but if it happens in winter it's just weather".

But you knew that.

[Infidel Dog]

5 minutes ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I am surprised someone of obvious intelligence such as yourself would post a comment that is contrary to that reputation. I am sure you are knowledgeable about how one actually becomes a physicist and/ or a climatologist.

OK. What about Doctor Roy Spencer then? The scientist that co-manages the satellite record at UAH. Is he a "reputable climatologist?

Is he what you want to reference?

If so check out this one:

IPCC Climate Models Grossly Exaggerate 'Global Warming'

Quote

In November 2022, meteorologist Roy Spencer, Ph.D., a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, published a ground-breaking study demonstrating that 36 climate models used to guide national policy may have exaggerated “global warming” over the last 50 years by as much as 50 percent. Specifically, Dr. Spencer utilized “a relatively new global dataset of urbanization changes over the previous 40-year period, 1975-2014, based on Landsat data to determine the average effect urbanization has had on surface temperatures.”

Quote

Spencer’s research shows that increased urbanization, not increased CO2, is responsible for exaggerating the temperature measurements recorded in the NOAA homogenized surface temperature dataset. In other words, Spencer’s point is that observed increases in temperature result from the greater heat urbanization generates, not from increased CO2 concentrations generated in the atmosphere by burning hydrocarbon fuels. Spencer was able to achieve this result by eliminating the negative Urban Heat Island bias from the NOAA temperature database to get more truthful readings of the CO2 heat forcing effect.

 

[Queenmandy85]

46 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

But I see why you're tiring of the topic. That happens with the true believers every winter. In the winter cold records are just weather. In summer heat records are climate.

It is not a matter of belief. It is a matter of observation. You can create a physical model in any undergraduate lab in the country.

The real effects of climate change will be manifesting in the next couple of centuries. What we do now will have its true impact in the future. The anomolies we are experiencing now are just the tickle of what is to come. 

[Infidel Dog]

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I think that what is insane is your contention that there are serious people who believe and put forward as fact the idea that "if it happens in summer it's climate but if it happens in winter it's just weather".

But you knew that.

Not sure what you mean by "serious people".

I think I've been pretty clear about who was talking about in reference to them pushing summer heat records as climate but cold records in winter as just weather.

I'm talking about people I talk to in forums like this one.

[Queenmandy85]

4 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

OK. What about Doctor Roy Spencer then? The scientist that co-manages the satellite record at UAH. Is he a "reputable climatologist?

How about the late Professor Stephen Hawking.

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Not sure what you mean by "serious people".

I think I've been pretty clear about who was talking about in reference to them pushing summer heat records as climate but cold records in winter as just weather.

I'm talking about people I talk to in forums like this one.

They would be wrong.