Friday, July 12, 2019

Man-Made Climate Change Doesn't Exist

Startled boffins in Finland and Japan were shocked to discover that man-made climate change, aka anthropogenic global warming doesn't exist.

In a bombshell report, the weather experts found that the human contribution to the last century's 0.1% rise in temperature amounts to a negligible 0.01%. Via ZeroHedge:


During the last hundred years the temperature increased about 0.1°C because of carbon dioxide. The human contribution was about 0.01°C”, the Finnish researchers bluntly state in one among a series of papers.

Climate scientists in Kobe, Japan, agree and pin the blame on low clouds brought about by cosmic rays, producing an "umbrella effect."

High-Energy Particles

New evidence suggests that high-energy particles from space known as galactic cosmic rays affect the Earth's climate by increasing cloud cover, causing an 'umbrella effect.'

High energy particles from space clouding everything up. Perhaps the effect's not limited to the weather?

The Cosmic Ray

Here at the Compound we look forward to a new Cosmic Ray Tax (CRT) to fund our brave new borderless rainbow utopia. All those immigrant votes don't come cheap, you know.

Your Friend,



Kid said...

You got this one covered. Steal our money and dilute our vote (or cancel our vote) with illegals.

The Vikings began to homestead a grassy Greenland LONG before the first locomotive showed up.
There is no such thing as 'climate science' even though it has a name it does not exist.
The chick who was head of the IPCC stated that the single goal of the global warming scam was to eliminate Capitalism. Well, you could write a 100000 page hardcover on the ignorance of the climate people.

What else needs to be known. Yet we continue to spend Billions maintaining New Orleans in a sinking delta and rising ocean (about 0.0945 inches per year). I hope they are flooded out every 6 months from now until the end of time.

Undergroundpewster said...

We won't hear about that on the evening news. Tropical storm Barry will be blamed on us no doubt.

Well Seasoned Fool said...

Once again we have folks disturbing the "narrative" and folks like you abetting them.

LL said...

Over the course of the Earth's existence places such as Alaska, was a rain forrest (which is why there is oil under the ice), and some existing rain Forrests were deserts. It's not as though a trained chimp couldn't follow that sort of logic, which is precisely why it eludes AOC and her tribe.

The climate changes without human intervention or influence, and it has for billions of years that left behind geological documentation.

As to the issue of clean energy, the only source of reliable, clean energy is nuclear (fission) energy. One day we will be able to harness fusion energy (turning a hydrogen isotope into helium, a noble gas). But the American left hates nuclear energy. Even though France is powered by 80% nuclear energy and the UK is at about 70%. And we run a large fleet of nuclear powered ships and submarines.

If the left were proposing that we replace oil and coal burning plants with nuclear energy plants, I would tend to agree with them. We have a lot of nuclear power plants in the US (including one in Arizona that I drive past when I go to California) but we could use more of them. Presumably it would reduce the cost of electricity. My electric bill at the White Wolf Mine (5000 square foot home) is less than the bill at my 3800 square foot home in California. Though there are variables due to temperature, etc.

I haven't heard AOC say one word about nuclear energy. Why is that?

Jim said...

The Society For Creative Anachronism is a group specializing in reenacting the pre 17th century lifestyle. I understand that their motto is "Forward into the past!" They do this for fun and to educate others. The climate change loons, however would have us actually living their. I prefer modern conveniences over muscle power and the 40 year life span.

Kid said...

LL, Check out LFTR's - Thorium/Molten Salt based reactor. 100% safe from meltdown and lack of containment. Doesn't need water under pressure. Fukashima would not have happened with that type reactor.

Quick 5 min vid on the subject.

Had one running in the 60's. I figure we didn't go with it as it does not produce byproducts that go into nuclear weapons. Guess Iran would never build one..

These things can even eat the nuclear waste of conventional reactors.

LSP said...

Kid, New Orleans obviously forgot to pay its climate tax!

LSP said...

Our media's strangely selective when it comes to reporting the news, Pewster. It's almost as though they were the propaganda arm of some... political party.

LSP said...

WSF, for me, the best thing about the climate scam is its monumental audacity. What an epic con.

LSP said...

Interesting nuke point, LL. I'm not against it provided we don't go Fukushima, but let's see FUSION.

In the meanwhile, AOC & Co want to go back to year zero. That'll play well in 2020.

LSP said...

With apologies to the SFCA I'm with you on that, JIm.

LSP said...

Thanks for the vid, Kid.