Compared to the deniers that have been right with most of their prediction, who have been blocked, threatened, suppressed, ostracized and insulted anytime they offer any evidence to the contrary. And let's not forget that many of the AGW Cult are now admitting that it's not really warming in spite of official claims that it's getting warmer.
Oh and then let's throw in the fact that we've for more then 5 years now have had some of the coldest winters in recorded history.
So let me get this straight: We need to look at the big picture? OK, let's do that!
The AGW Cult (who were originally funded by BIG OIL: Shell & BP) and who are getting paid hundreds of billions of dollars to prove AGW (or get no funding if it doesn't exist) have been caught falsifying data, destroying data, concealing facts, suppressing any opposition, and so far almost every prediction they have made has proven wrong.
All around the world governments are imposing a carbon tax. But Star Scientific's Muon Catalysed Fusion provides NO CO2 so therefore NO CARBON TAX. Also NO Nuclear Fission waste it is completely safe NO Fukushima here. It is very cheap to produce so if you care about the cost of your energy you will want this.
see website "Star Scientific Limited"
blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath"
Youtube video "In the Footsteps of Fusion" + youtube channel
What do you do when you own the majority of the market share and want to make more money? Get the government to create a high tax on the very product you produce. Imagine what'll happen to your pesky competition! HA! And with no competitive balance in the industry, and with carbon tax as your excuse, imagine what you can do with prices.
@gazitroubler your opinion is not falsifiable, meaning no one in the world can prove you wrong, because it is not held in logic or reasoning, just in mere assumptions and beleifs. so no one, not even this guy, can argue with you. but don´t think that means you are right, it jsut menas you don´t think logicly...
MykeeRamen: Data? You mean modelling... because the satellite data shows a decline in the temperature over the last decade.. To quote “we can’t hide the decline and it's a travesty we can’t" ever wounder why Al Gore just bought a mansion by the sea if he believes sea levels are going to rise twenty feet? where is that rise in sea level? children are dying in 3rd world countries because you wont afford them the same development & opportunities you have.. Thats the travesty!
MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN I COULD LISTEN TO YOU TALK ABOUT DAY, 1 OF THE FEW INSIGHTFUL VIDEO BLOGGERS ON YOUTUBE...& THE BOOK WAS A MASTERPIECE...GREAT READ
Look, climate change = world tax, , the facts just don’t ad up, Google Lord Monkton, his a man that just deals in scientific facts, not climate change modelling (guessing)
@i8uNWO and tell me, in what does it changes the rules of the game? are you so sure, or so proud, that you wont even admit the possibility that lord monkton is wrong as you suppose the other guys are wrong too? and if you admit that possibility, meaning that you or lord monkton may be wrong and GCC turns out to be true with all the negative consecuences that it has, you are not whilling to take any meassure about that? and just carry on beleiving that you own the truth?
@shreder89 I don’t believe, I check the facts, test Monkton out, Check out what he says for yourself, don’t believe me him or anyone, in most cases he states where his facts come from, as apposed to the IPCC just forecasting, knee jerk reactions like bio fuels have reduced the food being produced and forced up world food prices, fact, so people in 3rd world countries already starving are dying faster, That’s not acceptable to me sorry, look after the planet without killing people.
@i8uNWO sorry man, i live in a 3rd world country and that isn´t happening, and i am afraid that you know nothing about hte biodiesel situation in countries like mine. anyway that doesn´t have anything to do with what i told you.The AAAS and the NAS, wich are THE science in your country,both agree that we should lower our co2 emissions right now.we can lower our co2 emissions by replacing, for instance, coal powered plants for nuclear plants or hydroelectric plants.
@shreder89 “The AAAS and the NAS, wich are THE science in your country” This sort of attitude is the problem; you think because government sponsored science groups say something, that’s the end of it? When you stop questioning science and just believing, that’s religion, anyone that apposed the IPCC was shut down by there own admission! Carbon tax puts more money in the banks pocket and erodes peoples freedoms even further, I agree, nuclear, Hydro, but run that past the greens?? Piece
@rstevewarmorycom I'm sorry my friend, but it is you that is so hopelessly confused if you think that a carbon trading scam will not be a huge win fall for the big banks…
i support you 100% lets save the planet, oh just wanted to ask any fellow environmentalists what do you think of jeremy clarkson? he is encouraging people to destroy the planet!
According to your graph, I will have you graph this. I will destroy the world unless you give me 1 million dollars. -yes, just like Dr. Evil. The yes/true, yes/false, no/true, no/false graph points in Dr. Evils winning direction. Keep in mind that many things are tied to the idea of Global Warming- like money, politics. Ask yourself why Global Warming gets so much attention when the local news REFUSES to do a story on toxic dumping in our water ways? Look up sunspots and the year 1100 A.D.
I could say your a moron - like I am sure you have heard before. However, I have found that many try with honest intent. So why persecute someone for at least thinking? Thinking and getting it wrong does not make you a moron. I would encourage you to understand one thing. Coming to a conclusion based on simple minded process is dangerous. If you want the answer to your question regarding Global Warming, I will be more than happy to answer the question.
(My comment take two) Thought provoking, yes problems arise when the cost of greening on a meeger budget. Then there are the leaders of the free world winging there way to meeting after meeting to promote the latest fix for the global warming problem. UUUUMMMMMM hey Gore and Pres Obama how big was your carbon footprint when you flew to Denmark or Swiss or China or where ever you went? Then they want us to make changes?!?? We can only do so much on our budgets and they want to tax us more?!!?
Your grid really got me to think. Surely we can use your grid to answer other question but it will only leads to the same answer. I think its a nice toll to enslave our mind just like maslow pyramide.Giving us answer to accept others ideas and making us do what they want us to do. You see ,whatever the question, the answer is to do something about it. Makes your grid in fact terrifying indeed i give that. What if your asking question about suicide ?Think about it.
Let me say this to your grid argument since you blocked comments: if your reasoning is valid, someone could make up ANY possible future scenario with a certain fix. Your arguing would allow for any fix to be "reasonable" no matter what the odds are and the basis for believing the scenario would happen.
I did think, sir, and your "silver bullet" argument is a fallacy. It is nothing more than a description of paranoia.
What you should be arguing with is science and not untrained philosophy.
@KrunchyGoodness True, but it must be understood, the only fault with the grid analogy is if probability is omitted. For instance, the question, "Should I invest in this company's stock?" would always say that investing and losing money is worse than not investing and not gaining money. The probability, your research on the company, would push your decision in one direction, making the choice less black and white and much more knowledgeable.
@Myersaws Yes, but all you're doing is agreeing with me that the grid argument is pointless. To further that, I don't think that we should make our decisions on responding to how probable climate change is. Rather we should base our decisions on the answer to the question is climate change occurring and how? These are questions of the present and the physical and they should be answered by science.
@KrunchyGoodness The idiocy of people never fails to amaze me. Of COURSE it will work with ANY given PROBABILITY SCENARIO. That's because there's a PROBABILITY that ANY ONE outcome will happen. This isn't philosophy, or science, it's PROBABILITY. Your argument is fucking moot because you failed to understand a 3rd grade math class! Nowhere did ANYONE say that this is a silver bullet, and it CAN NEVER BE. IT'S PROBABILITY! Any ONE of those can happen! Just asking you to think, idiot. :)
@ZergyNaggafin Oh, by the way, Mr. KrunchyGoodness sir (love that name, LOVE IT), wonderingmind42 even AGREED with you that this wasn't a silver bullet! Oh joy! Maybe you should bother hearing what he has to say, watch "How It All Ends". Oh, and, don't forget to google for a 3rd grade math class, just to get a probability course, because you can't seem to comprehend the obvious.
@ZergyNaggafin He was arguing philosophy you moron. First, you should know that my original comment is about the grid argument video because it doesn't allow comments. In that video, he argues that no matter what the PROBABILITY, the better choice is the one that prevents the worst POSSIBLE outcome. None of his argument has to do with how probable anything is. And that is what is wrong. I'm this whole thing had to be kept out of context, but I hope now that you understand.
@KrunchyGoodness EVERYTHING in this argument has to do with how probable the outcomes are. His ENTIRE grid based idea if on the foundations of probability, and NOWHERE does he say in that video that "Hey you should choose this because it seems to me to be the best way", he left it completely up to the viewer to decide. Stop trying to attack this like it's a silver bullet, because that it is definitely far from. You still have yet to point out one philosophy here to me.
I suggest if you haven't read Merchants of Doubt. "Oreskes and Conway tell an important story about the misuse of science to mislead the public on matters ranging from the risks of smoking to the reality of global warming. The people the authors accuse in this carefully documented book are themselves scientists—mostly physicists, former cold warriors who now serve a conservative agenda, and vested interests like the tobacco industry.
The authors name these scientists—all with powerful connections in government and the media—including Robert Jastrow, Frederick Seitz, and S. Fred Singer."
Seriously. These people are a known quantity - with a paper trail...
Is global warming real? Of course it is, all you have to do is look at the satellite images of the polar caps of the last 20 some years.
There are all sorts of signs of global warming, try looking them up instead of listening to people that have an agenda that hurts them financially if we try doing something about it.
@Diemerstein LOL could you explain to me what about global warming is real other than the fact some elitists say it is and that it's imperative that you take action. Who could come up with a better swindle than that? In individualistic America, YOUR world is ending unless YOU do something about it, it's all a fucking scam. You'd have to be blind to not understand that global warming is just another tool used by the political and social elite.
@hotfudgemoney These people are the monarchs of our time, what monarch ever wanted to lose his/her power? Are you retarded? Open a fucking history book.
"ClimateGate, GlacierGate, AmazonGate, PachauriGate..." — proof that journalists have no creativity in the naming of scandals.
I mean, come ON! Nixon's Watergate break-in scandal was almost FORTY YEARS ago!! Over ½ a human LIFETIME!
The Watergate is a fine luxury hotel. Must it FOREVER have its very name tarnished by being used for EVERY scandal since then!? Okay, I admit, "Whitewatergate" was kinda clever, but even THAT was going on two decades ago!
Mr. Craven - I have watched the videos and read many of the reports. I like the grid, however it is truely over simplified and flawed - I understand to make your own point. Going forward utilize credible information with various avenues of action, then plug it into a decision matrix with weighting for a real assessment. Again I enjoy what you posted for entertainment, but this is more on a 6th grade level and well over simplified.
I find your opinions lacking in the sense that You seem to be covering your ass from both sides so as to defend your own credibility. On one hand your saying.. maybe it does & on the other hand your saying maybe it don't. What you fail to be addressing is, who benefits from the idea that climate change could be real? Once you discover who's pushing the buttons & making the investments, You'll have all the answers you need. Follow the money & you'll discover if it's a fraud or not.
@wingnut4427 Every "scientist" who claims that Climate Change is a consiracy are financed by think tanks which are financed by the car industry (Ford) and the oil industry (Koch)
@RazielKain LOL YEAH BUD every scientist who doesn't believe the political elite has an agenda... LOL Please, if anyone were to have an agenda, I'd think it would be the political and social elite not the REAL scientists who don't believe in consensus, the ones who do it for science, not money. You're a fucking idiot.
CLIMATE CHANGE IS NO POLITICAL DEBATE STOP MAKING IT ONE. It's a scientific "debate" and every real scientist is at the consensus that climate change is real, look at the data. The one thing we can't be 100% certain about is "Why does it happen" there is where wonderingminds video comes in.
Plus in the many factors which control climate green house gases are the only one we can control
@RazielKain I think it is the other way around buddy. The oil industry is hedging against the carbon tax and the car industry is licking its chops at the subsidies.
@azezel2311 Many "anti-climate change "scientists"" like Patrick Michaels are employee of the Cate Institute which is financed by the Ford Foundation. You don't even need to search for it. It's even on wikipedia :D
@RazielKain Probably true. There are multiple sides to the argument. Just like ted turner to a major supporter of climate change and in his mind the only way to save the earth is to kill 5.5 correction now. 6.3 billion people. In rockefeller's mind you have to purge the screwups that proliferated and are now getting in the way. David rothschild is on record on the alex jones show and zeitgiest 2007 as saying we are in 3 planet economy and people are the problem. Then there is the gates' proposal
@RazielKain And the government gives grants to those who show that they can produce "desired" results, and nothing to those who will not play such a game. But I understand: 8, 10, 15, 20, 30k or more plus the possible trips to remote locations around the world -- ya, scientists are impervious to such incentives.
@RazielKain Actually Big Oil Companies and banks are the main funders of man-made Climate Change. Google it. BP are one of the main players, they even helped write the original carbon Tax Bill back in the 90's with Al Gore/
I also suggest you read a book called "Ecoscience" by Holdrick and Elrich.
@RazielKain and all the so called "scientist" that clam Climate Change is man made are financed by the government that wants to tax you for it, to make money. But 1 thing theres a island made of trash in the pacific thats 270,000 sq mi the governments stants on this is ( it's too big of a job for any country or for any grop of countries to under take) in short you can't make money off it.
ok. I'll give you that. But answer me this. How is taxing us to death going to solve the problem & how are we to know that the money collected is even going to solve the "problem" ? Of course We won't know because Al Gore uses 30 times more energy per year than the average American. & if it's such a big deal why isn't china, india, mexico, & japan joining in to "fix the problem" ? because My friend.. It is a scam.
@wingnut4427 Some people like you believe so strongly that it's a scam, that no amount of facts and research can change their mind. I prefer to be at the side of science. And with that "follow the money" philosophy think about the fact that oil companies' business depends on people burning fossil fuels. And that's not a small amount of money.
@ShwangShwing I prefer to fallow the facts. Like email confessions that they can't account for the cooling & how it's a shame they can't. You should look into the climate gate scandal & consider the Science that the 6000 plus climate scientists are talking about that disprove climate change. I believed it for a long time but then began learning the whole agenda. It goes WAAAY deeper than just "Climate change / Global warming" I suggest you look into these peoples backgrounds. Start with Al Gore
I'm not ridiculing you. I'm only trying to help you see that you are being deceived. The very people pushing for this agenda are the very people who suppressed the technologies that could have averted this so called " Climate change". You need to do some digging into these scientists past's & discover who they are working for. Once you figure that out you''ll understand My position.
@wingnut4427 Climate gate hacked mails are a few quotes taken out of context. Have you read the actual emails? And there are youtube videos that point just that. Lots of the guys that talk in the public against the global warming had a dark background: they were working for the tobaco industry to disprove that smoking is bad and so on. As for Al Gore... Al Gore is a politician, not a scientist. I don't need to listen to him. The physics of the greenhouse effect are known for centuries.
@wingnut4427 The fact that more co2 rises temperature is a fact of physics. The debate was (Yes, was years ago) how fast is the effect of human produced co2, how would the climate react to warmer average globe temperatures, will human produced aerosols counter the warming effect of the new co2 (aerosols block sunlight from reaching the earth) and so on. I'm obviously not a scientist, so I prefer to let the scientists do their job. The physics of the greenhouse effect are known for a long time.
@ShwangShwing Happy reading.. if you dare. h t t p : / / w w w (DOT) eastangliaemails (DOT) c o m /
I have read about 75% of these emails & most of it is pretty mundane garbage not pertaining to the subject @ hand. But the Juicy ones are pretty damning. After you read them then you can dispute me.
@wingnut4427 climate change is here. it's irrelevent what is causing it. 97% of the science is accurrate and sea levels are rising. we are past the point of safe return and we have to prepare for more extreme weather events and climate refugees, where ever we live. :-)))
@lillith886 there is no proof that it is carbon dioxide causing the alleged global warming thing. There is also hard scientific evidence the sun get's hotter & cooler but no one wants to consider that.
@wingnut4427 well i'm thinking that the extra tax is governments preparing for the eventual dry up of fossil fuels(we have about 30 years left) at this stage i think it's getting to be about rationing, and hoping this will tide us over 'til we can organise alternatives. my physics teacher taught us about this at school over 30 years ago. i can see that knowledge has been supressed!!! he taught us about the greenhouse effect too!:-)))
@lillith886 Dude the alternatives WOULD be organized and developed if it weren't for TAXATION and REGULATION by our government. The same taxation and regulation that ruins the free market, ALSO ruins innovation. You're thinking, who wants to ruin innovation and creativity? Those who are in power want to ruin innovation. Why? Because it keeps them important. We'd have been off fossil fuels ages ago if we truly lived in a free market.
@hotfudgemoney i see loads of alternatives around me. sadly, people wont do anything untill it's legislated. some of us have been aware of this issue for a very long time and pressing for changes to the way large companies are allowed to destroy fragile eco-systems and the communities who rely on them. i hope obama throws the book at bp for what they've done over the last few weeks!!!
@c02Pirate Please read the following report of an investigation of the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee about that (or at least the summary):
publications. parliament. uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/387/38702. htm (add ww at the front)
Unfortunately this was hardly an investigation - this promted me to look who chaired it.
Not surprisingly the chair Lord Oxburgh has vast interests.
He is: * President of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association * Chairman of wind energy firm Falck Renewables * A member of the Green Fiscal Commission
Its rather like having the president of Phillip Morris tobacco chair an inquiry into smoking heath risks.
@c02Pirate I'm talking about the house of commons report, not the science assessment panel (the last one was chaired by Lord Oxburgh). I'm in the process of reading the science assessment panels report.
I said so in my comment that I was talking about the house of commons report and provided the link to this report. So why are you responding about the science assessment report and saying you've read it, while I'm talking about a different report?
There is a fundamental flaw with your chart: The consequences are based on speculation and opinion, rather than by raw data. Therefore, the decision made is based on fear rather than fact, and is precisely how the government has sold this global warming "theory" to people around the world.
I could use your matrix to say "Aliens might invade and take over the Earth", the stake is the same, we might lose the earth, prevention requires massive investment, and it is possible... yet ludicrous.FEAR
Now I would not mind if you were teaching my children.
On the chart about the choices and possible actions; I still think, we need to add "it will cool" and "try to oppose cooling".
According to Corbyn, we are at the end of the warming cycle and at the very beginning of the next 60-year long cooling cycle.
I am also waiting for the results from the CLOUD-experiment from CERN. That will either confirm or disprove (or something in between) Svensmark's theory.
Richard Feynman would advocate we argue against the strongest possible phrasing of contrary views, but that factcheck piece does the opposite - they emphasize and respond to the weakest opposing arguments so as to hide and ignore any valid points being made. When evaluating a source like factcheck my first question isn't how do others think they are biased but WHAT DO THEY SAY and does it directly address the issues at hand? Their response fails on that front; no need to look further.
CO2 and warming are problems, the issue is us.Currently only 17% of the planet can be lived on,4% is currently used for non animal food production. If the population of America grows by 2.5%p/a,by 2050 thats an extra 100.000.000 humans, or 25 cities as large as L.A is today.America can't feed it's people now;
"Lead author Professor Anthony Costello (UCL Institute for Global Health) says that failure to act will result in an intergenerational injustice, with our children and grandchildren scorning our generation for ignoring the climate change threat -- with moral outrage similar to how we today look back on those who brought in and did nothing to stop slavery."
I think this guy assumes we only have time to listen to him and no-one else. Cut to the chase, mate. I've pulled out before he even gets to his point.
@GabrielNoWings What ever, but I believe people will eat the Earth alive before time. I mean, rain forests are being cut, pollution is increasing, and so on, and we just started to consume. There are 2 billion poor people and add 3 billion people that have not yet born, that is 5 billion new consumers. Earth is going to take some heavy impact. We need to start acting now, not think that nothing is going to happen.
@Kratax You're right. Was this the point he was taking too long trying to make? I agree, over-consumption is the problem, irrespective of whether 'global warming' is a symptom of our excess. As I 've said before, even if 'man-made climate-change' was disproved, it wouldn't alter the fact we're using up irreplaceable resources. Humans should ditch the whole global warming/climate change debate and get on with the real issue of managing man's future on this planet, however hot or cold it gets.
@GabrielNoWings Part of learning to think things through for ourselves is cultivating the skill of expanding our attention level - rather than only "having time" for sound bytes! Keep thinking it's good for you
@sspliving Too much to do in too little time. It's not a matter of the receiver's attention level, it's the provider's obligation to be concise, precise and brief. In a lifetime in broadcasting that's the first thing we learn. Youtube promotes self-indulgence and delusions of grandeur but it's the provider who loses when the viewer switches off. But I do like your bantams!
Wonderingmind42, oh my friend wouldn't that be a wonderful thing--if people can only think, think, to think. People have not realized this magnificent thing called brain that's between their ears is solving the future all the time. They haven't realize even with all the microchips in the world can't build this brain. I respect what you are doing. Keep up the good work and maybe the penny will finally drop in. You're awesome, glad you are here.
Made it through the first 1:13 at which time you lost credibility by claiming you had been busy instead of waiting until the worst winter in decades was over to make your bid for your lost credibility. Climate change is un-predictable just like when and where it will rain in 3 or 4 weeks. When and where it will snow. (Try 49 of all fifty states this year) and where the next tornado will strike.
@RoyStewart Global government? Really?The government of poor countries are not in, judging by their income and allowances. The Jews and Muslim countries allies?Communist China working with Capitalist US?
Forget Global warming. It is all about your savings and well-being
Just switch off the light when not using it, close your tap water. Save on your bills.
Buy fuel efficient car and save money.
Walk if possible, you can lose weight.
And pls for others: Don't pollute the air our children breathe.
@dotaonline I agree on the actions you suggest, and according to tests we did our family ( In New Zealand ) have a very low impact, for example the family only drive about 1200kms per year in total, we walk for just about everything, make our own clothes, use $20 in electricity per month and have as many trees and food bearing plants as we can fit on our suburban section. We haven't used a doctor in 12 years.
@dotaonline I agree on the actions you suggest, and according to tests we did our family ( In New Zealand ) have a very low impact, for example the family only drive about 1200kms per year in total, we walk for just about everything, make our own clothes, use $20 in electricity per month and have as many trees and food bearing plants as we can fit on our suburban section. We haven't used a doctor in 12 years.
@dotaonline I agree on the actions you suggest, and according to tests we did our family ( In New Zealand ) have a very low impact, for example the family only drive about 1200kms per year in total, we walk for just about everything, make our own clothes, use $20 in electricity per month and have as many trees and food bearing plants as we can fit on our suburban section. We haven't used a doctor in 12 years.
Hrm, not a bad tag line, very similar to cdk007's, "think about it". Adding "it" is useful, as you said to make sure no one takes it as an accusation of not thinking at all.
Greg, many MANY thanks for hangin' in there and keeping us informed. Thank Heaven that YouTube is still available and isn't yet quite under the thumb of big-oil or big-coal or big-pharma.
Follow the money, folks. Do a little research. Pay attention. Like the man says: "it's your planet..."
It seems like you have done a lot of work on how to best make a decision on global warming, but you might want to study more about game theory and psychology because it appears that your real goal is how to convince people to take this issue seriously.
What gets me are the people who acknowledge climate change, but deny any human causation, and by that denial concluding that nothing should be done about it. Reminds me of the time I truthfully told a woman, "Come on. We need to get outside. The house is on fire," and she resisted leaving saying, "So? I didn't start it."
You're saying that people shouldn't figure out what they should believe?
Your saying they should figure out what to do before they figure out what they believe? What we believe determines what we do, anything else is thougthlessness. You want people to not have beliefs related to global warming but to just decide what to do. That is so fucking idiotic.
Beliefs are for when absolute certainty is unavailable which would obviously be the case here.
@dotaonlineWhat city in the United States do you need 2 wear masks 2 play outside??? I will make you a deal! If you make a video debating me on your BS I will be happy 2 take you on via video. BTW on my channel you will find the definition of reality please check it out
@MadBadVoodo Don't have a camera sorry. Reality is not your neighborhood only and the US is not the world. There is a bigger world outside with billions of people.
Is not polluting and not wasting energy and food a big deal?
Less allergy,more clean water?
What is wrong with walking to the shop next door instead of taking the car?
Saving fuel? Loosing weight? better health?
2 similar cars, same price, same comfort, A uses twice as much as fuel as B.
The media as well as the sciences are the majority opinion makers. And they are so smart in steering people that they would even walk into war, under false pretenses. So is it not too obvious that this time the public did not take the bait from the 'accredit scientists' since they falsify studies etc.
There are so many studies showing that the ocean level is not rising that drastically, that the polar caps are even stronger that last years. Follow the money and you shall find out what's cooking.
I actually like your tagline... Just asking you to think.
I know, I know, there is an implied 'you're not doing it now' but honestly, in our sound bite driven society, most of us don't. We rely on tried and true 'talking points' that reinforce the frames we're already operating from. Asking people to think, is in some ways, revolutionary. After all, while I pretty clear what your position is on this issue, you are providing people with an approach to go 'think it out for themselves".
Greg, I love your videos, but I just noticed your glasses in this video has a strange illusion where part of your head is in the lens of the glasses. Looks really strange. If you've never noticed, I hope you get a chuckle.
@AHarris1764 That's normal, given that lenses bend light. He's probably farsighted, like I am. If he were nearsighted, his eyes would look larger. Only prop glasses in movies don't bend light.
That was great. I wonder if people will do the same about christian mythology and the probability jesus never existed? When you start to question, you have to question all beliefs.
That was great. I wonder if people will do the same about christian mythology and the probability jesus never existed? When you start to question, you have to question all beliefs.
Today in this world, many people are being bribed, bought off, hired by, and lobbying for the gas corporate giants. Many people are believing these people and it's saddening because they say that carbon dioxide is good for the environment. Wait hold on! We're deforesting at such an alarming rate and we put different gasses within the atmosphere. I dont see why people even get this. It's so simple if you research and study about this with out any media background because they always lie.
Okay to be incredibly factual about this is that climate change studies have been monitored and done since the 1800's by scientists who were skeptical about the idea. They were shut off by the public of course but they've been doing it ever since. The scientists who were behind this climate gate isn't the first person. Al gore one of the many people have been doing it since they were young. You can't accuse him of setting a whoel scandal. Rachel carson had evidence in the 1960's
I've been into this for quite a while. The best thing to do is not even look at the Media. The media always manipulates the information about climate change. For example, Lord monkton(whatever his name is) was bribed by the gas corporations to spout fake facts out and simply. Glenn beck is also a great example who doesn't even use the correct factual information but sprends in a highly distorted concept when the factual information already shuts him up.
If all the researchers are working on a tainted data set then your results will have been predetermined since the methodology used to get ot the result is fairly uniform. Would there be any real surprise when everyone came to the same conclusion? You can't claim the results are valid if you're stacking the deck in favor of a predetermined outcome and silencing decent from those attempting to provide another view.
Your "Not what should we believe, but what should we do" is very insightful and useful.
I think that "deniers" tend to be the conservative/religious type, who obviously approach EVERYTHING as a decision about what to BELIEVE--and then think that "believing" something magically creates some "value" or even "truth."
DO IT! I'd love to see a vlog from you. As an artist, Youtube vids get me through some very tedious commission paintings. The more vids I can add to my list of things to listen to, the better.
I did take the baton, before you even offered it. If you are though being bitter ( very understandable) and thus incommunicado, are you ready to have a conversation? Let me know.
WHY would scientist do this? TO IMPLEMENT A GLOBAL CARBON TAX.
HOW CAN CARBON BE THE PROBLEM??? why don't you attack the other 1,000+ pollutants that are killing our earth everyday spread out by the global elite corporations....NOBODY TALKS ABOUT THOSE. EVERYBODY ATTACKS THE ELEMENT THAT IS ESSENTIAL TO ALL LIFE ON EARTH.
@CommentorX YEAH.... and thats why you don't see it getting banned..... or taxed, or demonized, maybe someday with weak minded citizens such as yourself it will be banned.... "oh NO... WE HAVE TO BAN WATER BECAUSE IF YOU BREATH IT IN YOU WILL DIE!!!!!"
scientist aren't always credible as you can tell by there E-MAILS.
15+ years of emails hacked, that they admit ARE their emails, that specifically say they altered temperature to make global warming seem like a man made threat, all while high school teachers across the world are insisting that the "emails were taken out of context"
Compared to the deniers that have been right with most of their prediction, who have been blocked, threatened, suppressed, ostracized and insulted anytime they offer any evidence to the contrary. And let's not forget that many of the AGW Cult are now admitting that it's not really warming in spite of official claims that it's getting warmer.
Oh and then let's throw in the fact that we've for more then 5 years now have had some of the coldest winters in recorded history.
I'm going with deniers!
TAMPADOC64 1 month ago in playlist ThoughtBites: a Occasional Video Blog
So let me get this straight: We need to look at the big picture? OK, let's do that!
The AGW Cult (who were originally funded by BIG OIL: Shell & BP) and who are getting paid hundreds of billions of dollars to prove AGW (or get no funding if it doesn't exist) have been caught falsifying data, destroying data, concealing facts, suppressing any opposition, and so far almost every prediction they have made has proven wrong.
Cont.
TAMPADOC64 1 month ago in playlist ThoughtBites: a Occasional Video Blog
All around the world governments are imposing a carbon tax. But Star Scientific's Muon Catalysed Fusion provides NO CO2 so therefore NO CARBON TAX. Also NO Nuclear Fission waste it is completely safe NO Fukushima here. It is very cheap to produce so if you care about the cost of your energy you will want this.
see website "Star Scientific Limited"
blog "The Big Picture by Andrew Horvath"
Youtube video "In the Footsteps of Fusion" + youtube channel
2110kop 7 months ago
Comment removed
DigitalDreamLabs 9 months ago
The biggest scandal should be your dyed-hair-gate! What a load of boloney! You are a total idiot mate! Typical global warming nut job.
guydecervens 11 months ago
Comment removed
freethinkerfreelover 11 months ago
Lord Monckton (v=4zOXmJ4jd-8) pretty much tells you why this "debate" was over two years ago (hint: the earth has been cooling for the last 10 years)
Applest2oApples 1 year ago
What do you do when you own the majority of the market share and want to make more money? Get the government to create a high tax on the very product you produce. Imagine what'll happen to your pesky competition! HA! And with no competitive balance in the industry, and with carbon tax as your excuse, imagine what you can do with prices.
coaster61 1 year ago
@gazitroubler your opinion is not falsifiable, meaning no one in the world can prove you wrong, because it is not held in logic or reasoning, just in mere assumptions and beleifs. so no one, not even this guy, can argue with you. but don´t think that means you are right, it jsut menas you don´t think logicly...
shreder89 1 year ago
MykeeRamen: Data? You mean modelling... because the satellite data shows a decline in the temperature over the last decade.. To quote “we can’t hide the decline and it's a travesty we can’t" ever wounder why Al Gore just bought a mansion by the sea if he believes sea levels are going to rise twenty feet? where is that rise in sea level? children are dying in 3rd world countries because you wont afford them the same development & opportunities you have.. Thats the travesty!
i8uNWO 1 year ago
MAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN I COULD LISTEN TO YOU TALK ABOUT DAY, 1 OF THE FEW INSIGHTFUL VIDEO BLOGGERS ON YOUTUBE...& THE BOOK WAS A MASTERPIECE...GREAT READ
EverybodyAVictim 1 year ago
Look, climate change = world tax, , the facts just don’t ad up, Google Lord Monkton, his a man that just deals in scientific facts, not climate change modelling (guessing)
i8uNWO 1 year ago
@i8uNWO Haha Lord Monkton, you actually believe that dumbass? That's hilarious.
SuperBlahmaster 1 year ago
@SuperBlahmaster I don't believe him, I check facts for myself, it’s not that hard? I'll leave the just believing… to you.
i8uNWO 1 year ago
@i8uNWO Where do you get your "facts"?
I haven't found any facts that support the claim that "climate change = world tax", maybe I haven't been on enough conspiracy websites.
SuperBlahmaster 1 year ago
@SuperBlahmaster good idea, Turn of Fox news... have a search and get back to me when you find out who is really behind the carbon tax push.
i8uNWO 1 year ago
@i8uNWO and tell me, in what does it changes the rules of the game? are you so sure, or so proud, that you wont even admit the possibility that lord monkton is wrong as you suppose the other guys are wrong too? and if you admit that possibility, meaning that you or lord monkton may be wrong and GCC turns out to be true with all the negative consecuences that it has, you are not whilling to take any meassure about that? and just carry on beleiving that you own the truth?
shreder89 1 year ago
@shreder89 I don’t believe, I check the facts, test Monkton out, Check out what he says for yourself, don’t believe me him or anyone, in most cases he states where his facts come from, as apposed to the IPCC just forecasting, knee jerk reactions like bio fuels have reduced the food being produced and forced up world food prices, fact, so people in 3rd world countries already starving are dying faster, That’s not acceptable to me sorry, look after the planet without killing people.
i8uNWO 1 year ago
@i8uNWO sorry man, i live in a 3rd world country and that isn´t happening, and i am afraid that you know nothing about hte biodiesel situation in countries like mine. anyway that doesn´t have anything to do with what i told you.The AAAS and the NAS, wich are THE science in your country,both agree that we should lower our co2 emissions right now.we can lower our co2 emissions by replacing, for instance, coal powered plants for nuclear plants or hydroelectric plants.
shreder89 1 year ago
@shreder89 “The AAAS and the NAS, wich are THE science in your country” This sort of attitude is the problem; you think because government sponsored science groups say something, that’s the end of it? When you stop questioning science and just believing, that’s religion, anyone that apposed the IPCC was shut down by there own admission! Carbon tax puts more money in the banks pocket and erodes peoples freedoms even further, I agree, nuclear, Hydro, but run that past the greens?? Piece
i8uNWO 1 year ago
@i8uNWO You seem to be confused as to who all of
"them" are. You have government confused with big
banking, and science confused with religion. Tax puts
more money in banks? How? Government doesn't keep
its money in banks! Government doesn't even get to keep
it, it has to SPEND it!! One problem is that it spends MORE
than it gets. And you're confusing money with freedom.
You're very confused.
rstevewarmorycom 2 months ago
@rstevewarmorycom I'm sorry my friend, but it is you that is so hopelessly confused if you think that a carbon trading scam will not be a huge win fall for the big banks…
i8uNWO 2 months ago
@i8uNWO As long as there are big banks, there will be
trading scams, sure. But there have already been scams
over home loans, and health insurance, etc. Didn't we
want those things, they were scammed, but our need for
them wasn't a scam. Our need for limitation of carbon
dioxide isn't a scam either, though inevitably some rich
person may find it fodder for one.
rstevewarmorycom 2 months ago
@i8uNWO But even if you get
rid of the banks and the rich people and go socialist or
communist, we will still need to limit carbon dioxide to
protect our climate and our safety on this planet. Or
are you so stupid as to imagine that everything that
science has said is a scam? If so then you're positing
the biggest possible conspiracy, and that's an outrageous
claim, which of course requires heavy duty proof.
rstevewarmorycom 2 months ago
@i8uNWO I don't think you have the least idea what you're
promoting, because in that case you can't believe ANYTHING
you have ever heard or been taught, you're in the Matrix and you
don't know a way out. There's no way to know what IS true,
so you're screwed. That's an exciting game, because you never
know when it's really over or not. But it's also not at all likely
to be true. It involves corrupting everyone, and that makes even
a definition of corruption nonsense and unbelievable.
rstevewarmorycom 2 months ago
@rstevewarmorycom Wow! What nonsense,
you have really whipped yourself into a frenzy…You need to let go of the fear you have been so successfully brainwashed with my friend.
I hope you find some peace.
i8uNWO 2 months ago
@i8uNWO Is mere lame disparagement the best you
can do? Are you not capable of actual reasoned
response? Are you actually a Perl robot-script just
saying semi-random crap at people you've selected?
rstevewarmorycom 2 months ago
"Climategate" does not change the data!
I challenge any denier to quote something from the documents that shows they were deliberately falsifying proven measurements.
The data speaks for itself!
FACTS! NO DENYING
CO2 traps heat
Solar activity theory doesn't hold up past 1975
For 200 years:
Earth's temperature has risen greatly
and Humans have made enormous amounts of CO2.
"It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people wonder if you are and idiot then to open it and remove all doubt."
MykeeRamen 1 year ago
i support you 100% lets save the planet, oh just wanted to ask any fellow environmentalists what do you think of jeremy clarkson? he is encouraging people to destroy the planet!
carlo4528 1 year ago
Take your graph and apply it to over population. What is the worst that can happen? Is overpopulation a real problem? Well now go over your choices.
Geuss what by your logic you must kill yourself now to reduce your population footprint on the world in the future.
so stop making videos and get to it smartypants.
sparky303 1 year ago
According to your graph, I will have you graph this. I will destroy the world unless you give me 1 million dollars. -yes, just like Dr. Evil. The yes/true, yes/false, no/true, no/false graph points in Dr. Evils winning direction. Keep in mind that many things are tied to the idea of Global Warming- like money, politics. Ask yourself why Global Warming gets so much attention when the local news REFUSES to do a story on toxic dumping in our water ways? Look up sunspots and the year 1100 A.D.
HelpMeee2HelpYoou 1 year ago
I could say your a moron - like I am sure you have heard before. However, I have found that many try with honest intent. So why persecute someone for at least thinking? Thinking and getting it wrong does not make you a moron. I would encourage you to understand one thing. Coming to a conclusion based on simple minded process is dangerous. If you want the answer to your question regarding Global Warming, I will be more than happy to answer the question.
HelpMeee2HelpYoou 1 year ago
(My comment take two) Thought provoking, yes problems arise when the cost of greening on a meeger budget. Then there are the leaders of the free world winging there way to meeting after meeting to promote the latest fix for the global warming problem. UUUUMMMMMM hey Gore and Pres Obama how big was your carbon footprint when you flew to Denmark or Swiss or China or where ever you went? Then they want us to make changes?!?? We can only do so much on our budgets and they want to tax us more?!!?
jimhadly 1 year ago
Your grid really got me to think. Surely we can use your grid to answer other question but it will only leads to the same answer. I think its a nice toll to enslave our mind just like maslow pyramide.Giving us answer to accept others ideas and making us do what they want us to do. You see ,whatever the question, the answer is to do something about it. Makes your grid in fact terrifying indeed i give that. What if your asking question about suicide ?Think about it.
Kingcantine 1 year ago
lol when i heard free republic, wonderingmind42 do u go on lf by any chance?
Saltedkoshersalami 1 year ago
Let me say this to your grid argument since you blocked comments: if your reasoning is valid, someone could make up ANY possible future scenario with a certain fix. Your arguing would allow for any fix to be "reasonable" no matter what the odds are and the basis for believing the scenario would happen.
I did think, sir, and your "silver bullet" argument is a fallacy. It is nothing more than a description of paranoia.
What you should be arguing with is science and not untrained philosophy.
KrunchyGoodness 1 year ago
@KrunchyGoodness I like the way you think.
Kingcantine 1 year ago
@KrunchyGoodness True, but it must be understood, the only fault with the grid analogy is if probability is omitted. For instance, the question, "Should I invest in this company's stock?" would always say that investing and losing money is worse than not investing and not gaining money. The probability, your research on the company, would push your decision in one direction, making the choice less black and white and much more knowledgeable.
Myersaws 1 year ago
@Myersaws Yes, but all you're doing is agreeing with me that the grid argument is pointless. To further that, I don't think that we should make our decisions on responding to how probable climate change is. Rather we should base our decisions on the answer to the question is climate change occurring and how? These are questions of the present and the physical and they should be answered by science.
KrunchyGoodness 1 year ago
@KrunchyGoodness The idiocy of people never fails to amaze me. Of COURSE it will work with ANY given PROBABILITY SCENARIO. That's because there's a PROBABILITY that ANY ONE outcome will happen. This isn't philosophy, or science, it's PROBABILITY. Your argument is fucking moot because you failed to understand a 3rd grade math class! Nowhere did ANYONE say that this is a silver bullet, and it CAN NEVER BE. IT'S PROBABILITY! Any ONE of those can happen! Just asking you to think, idiot. :)
ZergyNaggafin 1 year ago
@ZergyNaggafin Oh, by the way, Mr. KrunchyGoodness sir (love that name, LOVE IT), wonderingmind42 even AGREED with you that this wasn't a silver bullet! Oh joy! Maybe you should bother hearing what he has to say, watch "How It All Ends". Oh, and, don't forget to google for a 3rd grade math class, just to get a probability course, because you can't seem to comprehend the obvious.
ZergyNaggafin 1 year ago
@ZergyNaggafin He was arguing philosophy you moron. First, you should know that my original comment is about the grid argument video because it doesn't allow comments. In that video, he argues that no matter what the PROBABILITY, the better choice is the one that prevents the worst POSSIBLE outcome. None of his argument has to do with how probable anything is. And that is what is wrong. I'm this whole thing had to be kept out of context, but I hope now that you understand.
KrunchyGoodness 1 year ago
@KrunchyGoodness EVERYTHING in this argument has to do with how probable the outcomes are. His ENTIRE grid based idea if on the foundations of probability, and NOWHERE does he say in that video that "Hey you should choose this because it seems to me to be the best way", he left it completely up to the viewer to decide. Stop trying to attack this like it's a silver bullet, because that it is definitely far from. You still have yet to point out one philosophy here to me.
ZergyNaggafin 1 year ago
Hello all,
cnn DOT com/2010/WORLD/europe/07/07/climategate.email.review/index.html
60l23 1 year ago
I suggest if you haven't read Merchants of Doubt. "Oreskes and Conway tell an important story about the misuse of science to mislead the public on matters ranging from the risks of smoking to the reality of global warming. The people the authors accuse in this carefully documented book are themselves scientists—mostly physicists, former cold warriors who now serve a conservative agenda, and vested interests like the tobacco industry.
CityzenJane 1 year ago
The authors name these scientists—all with powerful connections in government and the media—including Robert Jastrow, Frederick Seitz, and S. Fred Singer."
Seriously. These people are a known quantity - with a paper trail...
CityzenJane 1 year ago
There is no global warming. And if there is or ever is, humans aren't causing it. There's nothing we can do to cause it or stop it.
Global warming is a hoax created by world and national leaders and politicians to tax us into oblivion.
dsrtflwr 1 year ago
You are a complete idiot.
Is global warming real? Of course it is, all you have to do is look at the satellite images of the polar caps of the last 20 some years.
There are all sorts of signs of global warming, try looking them up instead of listening to people that have an agenda that hurts them financially if we try doing something about it.
Diemerstein 1 year ago
@Diemerstein LOL could you explain to me what about global warming is real other than the fact some elitists say it is and that it's imperative that you take action. Who could come up with a better swindle than that? In individualistic America, YOUR world is ending unless YOU do something about it, it's all a fucking scam. You'd have to be blind to not understand that global warming is just another tool used by the political and social elite.
hotfudgemoney 1 year ago
@hotfudgemoney These people are the monarchs of our time, what monarch ever wanted to lose his/her power? Are you retarded? Open a fucking history book.
hotfudgemoney 1 year ago
"ClimateGate, GlacierGate, AmazonGate, PachauriGate..." — proof that journalists have no creativity in the naming of scandals.
I mean, come ON! Nixon's Watergate break-in scandal was almost FORTY YEARS ago!! Over ½ a human LIFETIME!
The Watergate is a fine luxury hotel. Must it FOREVER have its very name tarnished by being used for EVERY scandal since then!? Okay, I admit, "Whitewatergate" was kinda clever, but even THAT was going on two decades ago!
COMALiteJ 1 year ago
Mr. Craven - I have watched the videos and read many of the reports. I like the grid, however it is truely over simplified and flawed - I understand to make your own point. Going forward utilize credible information with various avenues of action, then plug it into a decision matrix with weighting for a real assessment. Again I enjoy what you posted for entertainment, but this is more on a 6th grade level and well over simplified.
ericfedak85 1 year ago
wow this guy what a dick.
piscesgutt 1 year ago
I find your opinions lacking in the sense that You seem to be covering your ass from both sides so as to defend your own credibility. On one hand your saying.. maybe it does & on the other hand your saying maybe it don't. What you fail to be addressing is, who benefits from the idea that climate change could be real? Once you discover who's pushing the buttons & making the investments, You'll have all the answers you need. Follow the money & you'll discover if it's a fraud or not.
wingnut4427 1 year ago
@wingnut4427 Every "scientist" who claims that Climate Change is a consiracy are financed by think tanks which are financed by the car industry (Ford) and the oil industry (Koch)
RazielKain 1 year ago 2
@RazielKain indeed they are My friend. BTW.. love the name ! :D Soul Reaver is awesome !
wingnut4427 1 year ago
@RazielKain LOL YEAH BUD every scientist who doesn't believe the political elite has an agenda... LOL Please, if anyone were to have an agenda, I'd think it would be the political and social elite not the REAL scientists who don't believe in consensus, the ones who do it for science, not money. You're a fucking idiot.
hotfudgemoney 1 year ago
@hotfudgemoney FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS HOLY
CLIMATE CHANGE IS NO POLITICAL DEBATE STOP MAKING IT ONE. It's a scientific "debate" and every real scientist is at the consensus that climate change is real, look at the data. The one thing we can't be 100% certain about is "Why does it happen" there is where wonderingminds video comes in.
Plus in the many factors which control climate green house gases are the only one we can control
RazielKain 1 year ago
@RazielKain I think it is the other way around buddy. The oil industry is hedging against the carbon tax and the car industry is licking its chops at the subsidies.
azezel2311 1 year ago
@azezel2311 Many "anti-climate change "scientists"" like Patrick Michaels are employee of the Cate Institute which is financed by the Ford Foundation. You don't even need to search for it. It's even on wikipedia :D
RazielKain 1 year ago
@RazielKain Probably true. There are multiple sides to the argument. Just like ted turner to a major supporter of climate change and in his mind the only way to save the earth is to kill 5.5 correction now. 6.3 billion people. In rockefeller's mind you have to purge the screwups that proliferated and are now getting in the way. David rothschild is on record on the alex jones show and zeitgiest 2007 as saying we are in 3 planet economy and people are the problem. Then there is the gates' proposal
azezel2311 1 year ago
@RazielKain And the government gives grants to those who show that they can produce "desired" results, and nothing to those who will not play such a game. But I understand: 8, 10, 15, 20, 30k or more plus the possible trips to remote locations around the world -- ya, scientists are impervious to such incentives.
watch?v=F_G_-SdAN04
regresseur 1 year ago
@RazielKain Actually Big Oil Companies and banks are the main funders of man-made Climate Change. Google it. BP are one of the main players, they even helped write the original carbon Tax Bill back in the 90's with Al Gore/
I also suggest you read a book called "Ecoscience" by Holdrick and Elrich.
BrutePUNKROCK 1 year ago
@RazielKain and all the so called "scientist" that clam Climate Change is man made are financed by the government that wants to tax you for it, to make money. But 1 thing theres a island made of trash in the pacific thats 270,000 sq mi the governments stants on this is ( it's too big of a job for any country or for any grop of countries to under take) in short you can't make money off it.
ikeones 1 year ago
@wingnut4427 If (I say if) somebody makes money from global warming that doesn't mean that it isn't real.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
ok. I'll give you that. But answer me this. How is taxing us to death going to solve the problem & how are we to know that the money collected is even going to solve the "problem" ? Of course We won't know because Al Gore uses 30 times more energy per year than the average American. & if it's such a big deal why isn't china, india, mexico, & japan joining in to "fix the problem" ? because My friend.. It is a scam.
wingnut4427 1 year ago
@wingnut4427 Some people like you believe so strongly that it's a scam, that no amount of facts and research can change their mind. I prefer to be at the side of science. And with that "follow the money" philosophy think about the fact that oil companies' business depends on people burning fossil fuels. And that's not a small amount of money.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing I prefer to fallow the facts. Like email confessions that they can't account for the cooling & how it's a shame they can't. You should look into the climate gate scandal & consider the Science that the 6000 plus climate scientists are talking about that disprove climate change. I believed it for a long time but then began learning the whole agenda. It goes WAAAY deeper than just "Climate change / Global warming" I suggest you look into these peoples backgrounds. Start with Al Gore
wingnut4427 1 year ago
I'm not ridiculing you. I'm only trying to help you see that you are being deceived. The very people pushing for this agenda are the very people who suppressed the technologies that could have averted this so called " Climate change". You need to do some digging into these scientists past's & discover who they are working for. Once you figure that out you''ll understand My position.
wingnut4427 1 year ago
@wingnut4427 Climate gate hacked mails are a few quotes taken out of context. Have you read the actual emails? And there are youtube videos that point just that. Lots of the guys that talk in the public against the global warming had a dark background: they were working for the tobaco industry to disprove that smoking is bad and so on. As for Al Gore... Al Gore is a politician, not a scientist. I don't need to listen to him. The physics of the greenhouse effect are known for centuries.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@wingnut4427 The fact that more co2 rises temperature is a fact of physics. The debate was (Yes, was years ago) how fast is the effect of human produced co2, how would the climate react to warmer average globe temperatures, will human produced aerosols counter the warming effect of the new co2 (aerosols block sunlight from reaching the earth) and so on. I'm obviously not a scientist, so I prefer to let the scientists do their job. The physics of the greenhouse effect are known for a long time.
ShwangShwing 1 year ago
@ShwangShwing Happy reading.. if you dare. h t t p : / / w w w (DOT) eastangliaemails (DOT) c o m /
I have read about 75% of these emails & most of it is pretty mundane garbage not pertaining to the subject @ hand. But the Juicy ones are pretty damning. After you read them then you can dispute me.
wingnut4427 1 year ago
@wingnut4427 climate change is here. it's irrelevent what is causing it. 97% of the science is accurrate and sea levels are rising. we are past the point of safe return and we have to prepare for more extreme weather events and climate refugees, where ever we live. :-)))
lillith886 1 year ago
@lillith886 there is no proof that it is carbon dioxide causing the alleged global warming thing. There is also hard scientific evidence the sun get's hotter & cooler but no one wants to consider that.
wingnut4427 1 year ago
@wingnut4427 well i'm thinking that the extra tax is governments preparing for the eventual dry up of fossil fuels(we have about 30 years left) at this stage i think it's getting to be about rationing, and hoping this will tide us over 'til we can organise alternatives. my physics teacher taught us about this at school over 30 years ago. i can see that knowledge has been supressed!!! he taught us about the greenhouse effect too!:-)))
lillith886 1 year ago
@lillith886 Dude the alternatives WOULD be organized and developed if it weren't for TAXATION and REGULATION by our government. The same taxation and regulation that ruins the free market, ALSO ruins innovation. You're thinking, who wants to ruin innovation and creativity? Those who are in power want to ruin innovation. Why? Because it keeps them important. We'd have been off fossil fuels ages ago if we truly lived in a free market.
hotfudgemoney 1 year ago
@hotfudgemoney i see loads of alternatives around me. sadly, people wont do anything untill it's legislated. some of us have been aware of this issue for a very long time and pressing for changes to the way large companies are allowed to destroy fragile eco-systems and the communities who rely on them. i hope obama throws the book at bp for what they've done over the last few weeks!!!
lillith886 1 year ago
Greg -
Just one thing I think you may want to check up before making the same mistake as a lot others in attempting to discredit climategate.
The notion of "thousands of scientists all in collusion" etc... This is totally wrong and is not the case.
The CRU comprises only a handful of people - but their data was used and relied on by a great many other scientists.
Thus it was only this small handful of people that misrepresented, manipulated data, perverted peer review, FIO, etc... etc...
c02Pirate 1 year ago
@c02Pirate Please read the following report of an investigation of the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee about that (or at least the summary):
publications. parliament. uk/pa/cm200910/cmselect/cmsctech/387/38702. htm (add ww at the front)
CollinMaessen 1 year ago
@CollinMaessen
Yes - I have read the report.
Unfortunately this was hardly an investigation - this promted me to look who chaired it.
Not surprisingly the chair Lord Oxburgh has vast interests.
He is: * President of the Carbon Capture and Storage Association * Chairman of wind energy firm Falck Renewables * A member of the Green Fiscal Commission
Its rather like having the president of Phillip Morris tobacco chair an inquiry into smoking heath risks.
Its a joke and no surprise
c02Pirate 1 year ago
@c02Pirate I'm talking about the house of commons report, not the science assessment panel (the last one was chaired by Lord Oxburgh). I'm in the process of reading the science assessment panels report.
I said so in my comment that I was talking about the house of commons report and provided the link to this report. So why are you responding about the science assessment report and saying you've read it, while I'm talking about a different report?
CollinMaessen 1 year ago
There is a fundamental flaw with your chart: The consequences are based on speculation and opinion, rather than by raw data. Therefore, the decision made is based on fear rather than fact, and is precisely how the government has sold this global warming "theory" to people around the world.
I could use your matrix to say "Aliens might invade and take over the Earth", the stake is the same, we might lose the earth, prevention requires massive investment, and it is possible... yet ludicrous.FEAR
urveen 1 year ago
@wonderingmind42
Congratulations!
Now I would not mind if you were teaching my children.
On the chart about the choices and possible actions; I still think, we need to add "it will cool" and "try to oppose cooling".
According to Corbyn, we are at the end of the warming cycle and at the very beginning of the next 60-year long cooling cycle.
I am also waiting for the results from the CLOUD-experiment from CERN. That will either confirm or disprove (or something in between) Svensmark's theory.
judomagyar 1 year ago
Richard Feynman would advocate we argue against the strongest possible phrasing of contrary views, but that factcheck piece does the opposite - they emphasize and respond to the weakest opposing arguments so as to hide and ignore any valid points being made. When evaluating a source like factcheck my first question isn't how do others think they are biased but WHAT DO THEY SAY and does it directly address the issues at hand? Their response fails on that front; no need to look further.
glenra 1 year ago
Mr. Craven's a champ.
maooga 1 year ago 2
CO2 and warming are problems, the issue is us.Currently only 17% of the planet can be lived on,4% is currently used for non animal food production. If the population of America grows by 2.5%p/a,by 2050 thats an extra 100.000.000 humans, or 25 cities as large as L.A is today.America can't feed it's people now;
with less land how will you feed more ?
theMacvarish 1 year ago
Got one word for the doubters (hehe): "Glub!"
RyuDarragh 1 year ago
From University College London:
ucl. ac. uk/news/news-articles /0905/09051501
"Lead author Professor Anthony Costello (UCL Institute for Global Health) says that failure to act will result in an intergenerational injustice, with our children and grandchildren scorning our generation for ignoring the climate change threat -- with moral outrage similar to how we today look back on those who brought in and did nothing to stop slavery."
substanti8 1 year ago 2
Keep up the good fight!
platoscaveman 1 year ago 2
I think this guy assumes we only have time to listen to him and no-one else. Cut to the chase, mate. I've pulled out before he even gets to his point.
GabrielNoWings 1 year ago
@GabrielNoWings What ever, but I believe people will eat the Earth alive before time. I mean, rain forests are being cut, pollution is increasing, and so on, and we just started to consume. There are 2 billion poor people and add 3 billion people that have not yet born, that is 5 billion new consumers. Earth is going to take some heavy impact. We need to start acting now, not think that nothing is going to happen.
Kratax 1 year ago 2
@Kratax You're right. Was this the point he was taking too long trying to make? I agree, over-consumption is the problem, irrespective of whether 'global warming' is a symptom of our excess. As I 've said before, even if 'man-made climate-change' was disproved, it wouldn't alter the fact we're using up irreplaceable resources. Humans should ditch the whole global warming/climate change debate and get on with the real issue of managing man's future on this planet, however hot or cold it gets.
GabrielNoWings 1 year ago 2
@GabrielNoWings Part of learning to think things through for ourselves is cultivating the skill of expanding our attention level - rather than only "having time" for sound bytes! Keep thinking it's good for you
sspliving 1 year ago
@sspliving Too much to do in too little time. It's not a matter of the receiver's attention level, it's the provider's obligation to be concise, precise and brief. In a lifetime in broadcasting that's the first thing we learn. Youtube promotes self-indulgence and delusions of grandeur but it's the provider who loses when the viewer switches off. But I do like your bantams!
GabrielNoWings 1 year ago
Wonderingmind42, oh my friend wouldn't that be a wonderful thing--if people can only think, think, to think. People have not realized this magnificent thing called brain that's between their ears is solving the future all the time. They haven't realize even with all the microchips in the world can't build this brain. I respect what you are doing. Keep up the good work and maybe the penny will finally drop in. You're awesome, glad you are here.
bohemian360 1 year ago
your glasses are not on your ears asshole ...
0101furqan 1 year ago
so basically, you believe in global warming, and climategate hasn't changed your mind.
sblxi 1 year ago
Made it through the first 1:13 at which time you lost credibility by claiming you had been busy instead of waiting until the worst winter in decades was over to make your bid for your lost credibility. Climate change is un-predictable just like when and where it will rain in 3 or 4 weeks. When and where it will snow. (Try 49 of all fifty states this year) and where the next tornado will strike.
budedees 1 year ago
inyteresting connection aborted twice comming here
short circited it by clicking on like [before default message clicked in to abort]
oneundergod 1 year ago
How did it get to the point where either you are a climate change denier or you think money laundering and theft reduces amounts of carbon dioxide?
sleepyriggles 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A lot of words just to sell us an argument from authority. You suck
RoyStewart 1 year ago
Comment removed
RoyStewart 1 year ago
Comment removed
RoyStewart 1 year ago
Comment removed
RoyStewart 1 year ago
@RoyStewart Global government? Really?The government of poor countries are not in, judging by their income and allowances. The Jews and Muslim countries allies?Communist China working with Capitalist US?
Forget Global warming. It is all about your savings and well-being
Just switch off the light when not using it, close your tap water. Save on your bills.
Buy fuel efficient car and save money.
Walk if possible, you can lose weight.
And pls for others: Don't pollute the air our children breathe.
dotaonline 1 year ago 2
@dotaonline I agree on the actions you suggest, and according to tests we did our family ( In New Zealand ) have a very low impact, for example the family only drive about 1200kms per year in total, we walk for just about everything, make our own clothes, use $20 in electricity per month and have as many trees and food bearing plants as we can fit on our suburban section. We haven't used a doctor in 12 years.
RoyStewart 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@dotaonline I agree on the actions you suggest, and according to tests we did our family ( In New Zealand ) have a very low impact, for example the family only drive about 1200kms per year in total, we walk for just about everything, make our own clothes, use $20 in electricity per month and have as many trees and food bearing plants as we can fit on our suburban section. We haven't used a doctor in 12 years.
RoyStewart 1 year ago
@dotaonline I agree on the actions you suggest, and according to tests we did our family ( In New Zealand ) have a very low impact, for example the family only drive about 1200kms per year in total, we walk for just about everything, make our own clothes, use $20 in electricity per month and have as many trees and food bearing plants as we can fit on our suburban section. We haven't used a doctor in 12 years.
RoyStewart 1 year ago
Hrm, not a bad tag line, very similar to cdk007's, "think about it". Adding "it" is useful, as you said to make sure no one takes it as an accusation of not thinking at all.
midare 1 year ago
Greg, many MANY thanks for hangin' in there and keeping us informed. Thank Heaven that YouTube is still available and isn't yet quite under the thumb of big-oil or big-coal or big-pharma.
Follow the money, folks. Do a little research. Pay attention. Like the man says: "it's your planet..."
ThLuckyOne 1 year ago
@ThLuckyOne following the money will lead you to the corrupt politicians and bankers posing as greenies
RoyStewart 1 year ago
It seems like you have done a lot of work on how to best make a decision on global warming, but you might want to study more about game theory and psychology because it appears that your real goal is how to convince people to take this issue seriously.
wwickeddogg 1 year ago
Simple but true -- a lot of our problems could be easily solved if people just thought a little more...
artvandelay13 1 year ago
I'm Greg Craven, standby for news....
. . . and now the rest of the story ... And thats the way it was....
Greg Craven......... Good Day?
No those have all been used... your tag is just fine Greg.
whotoinfinity 1 year ago
Nice well thought out video
I'd give you 5 stars if YouTube would let me
cantorock 1 year ago
Excellent thoughts Greg!
WAKeele 1 year ago
What gets me are the people who acknowledge climate change, but deny any human causation, and by that denial concluding that nothing should be done about it. Reminds me of the time I truthfully told a woman, "Come on. We need to get outside. The house is on fire," and she resisted leaving saying, "So? I didn't start it."
bobpeters61 1 year ago
How about - "just askin' for a little more thinkin'"
Nick
aylesmerep 1 year ago
Good video, Greg. Like the signoff.
luserjoe 1 year ago
idiot
You're saying that people shouldn't figure out what they should believe?
Your saying they should figure out what to do before they figure out what they believe? What we believe determines what we do, anything else is thougthlessness. You want people to not have beliefs related to global warming but to just decide what to do. That is so fucking idiotic.
Beliefs are for when absolute certainty is unavailable which would obviously be the case here.
You are asking for ignorance! Figures!
evan13579b 1 year ago
Global Warming is a bunch of Horse Shit end of story!
MadBadVoodo 1 year ago
@MadBadVoodo Whether you believe it or not;We are just asking you to:
1 stop polluting the air so that kids don't have to wear mask in schools
2 Stop wasting water and energy so that our bills does not go up because of the increase in demand
3 stop over-consuming so that food price is affordable for the poor
4 stop deforestation and dumping of waste to save animals from going to zoos as endangered species
5 Stop polluting so that people don't have to go to the doctors for allergies and diseases
dotaonline 1 year ago
@dotaonline "We are just asking you to" BULL SHIT and you know it!!
MadBadVoodo 1 year ago
@MadBadVoodo Ok, I get it. You don't believe in Global warming and you like the word "bullshit".
But, have you ever lived in a polluted city where everyone is wearing masks because the air is toxic? Even kids wear masks to play outside.
Why do you think the price of raw materials, food and oil goes up? Increase in demand from developing countries like China.
I guess it is useless to tell you about animals and plants if you don't even care about the lives of poor people, "Mr love BS".
dotaonline 1 year ago
@dotaonlineWhat city in the United States do you need 2 wear masks 2 play outside??? I will make you a deal! If you make a video debating me on your BS I will be happy 2 take you on via video. BTW on my channel you will find the definition of reality please check it out
MadBadVoodo 1 year ago
@MadBadVoodo Don't have a camera sorry. Reality is not your neighborhood only and the US is not the world. There is a bigger world outside with billions of people.
Is not polluting and not wasting energy and food a big deal?
Less allergy,more clean water?
What is wrong with walking to the shop next door instead of taking the car?
Saving fuel? Loosing weight? better health?
2 similar cars, same price, same comfort, A uses twice as much as fuel as B.
Which one do you buy?
No need to debate!
dotaonline 1 year ago
The media as well as the sciences are the majority opinion makers. And they are so smart in steering people that they would even walk into war, under false pretenses. So is it not too obvious that this time the public did not take the bait from the 'accredit scientists' since they falsify studies etc.
There are so many studies showing that the ocean level is not rising that drastically, that the polar caps are even stronger that last years. Follow the money and you shall find out what's cooking.
KingTingRolloTong 1 year ago
Do you have lazy eye, because I just noticed that your glasses allow me to see sort of "through" your head.
jayjjj3 1 year ago
Greg -
I actually like your tagline... Just asking you to think.
I know, I know, there is an implied 'you're not doing it now' but honestly, in our sound bite driven society, most of us don't. We rely on tried and true 'talking points' that reinforce the frames we're already operating from. Asking people to think, is in some ways, revolutionary. After all, while I pretty clear what your position is on this issue, you are providing people with an approach to go 'think it out for themselves".
Wallrat 1 year ago
Greg, I love your videos, but I just noticed your glasses in this video has a strange illusion where part of your head is in the lens of the glasses. Looks really strange. If you've never noticed, I hope you get a chuckle.
AHarris1764 1 year ago
@AHarris1764 That's normal, given that lenses bend light. He's probably farsighted, like I am. If he were nearsighted, his eyes would look larger. Only prop glasses in movies don't bend light.
EdwardHowton 1 year ago
Please start a vlog! We need more thought- not more rhetoric in this issue and sooooo many more!
outdoorrecmann 1 year ago
You are such a genius
Cloudwolf40 1 year ago
are you also a socials studies teacher? cause you'd be a great one
MusicBeat24 1 year ago
That was great. I wonder if people will do the same about christian mythology and the probability jesus never existed? When you start to question, you have to question all beliefs.
jaggnosis 1 year ago
That was great. I wonder if people will do the same about christian mythology and the probability jesus never existed? When you start to question, you have to question all beliefs.
jaggnosis 1 year ago
thats a good tag line
cream0fwheat 1 year ago
I think your sign off is just what the world needs to hear. People who think will take no exception because they know how true the statement is!
hennomarais 1 year ago
You are very wise.
This is very useful not only in assessing ClimateGate, but in assessing any similar issue
iamnotapie 1 year ago
Thanks greg for giving such amazing insight. ^_^
loloioi 1 year ago
Today in this world, many people are being bribed, bought off, hired by, and lobbying for the gas corporate giants. Many people are believing these people and it's saddening because they say that carbon dioxide is good for the environment. Wait hold on! We're deforesting at such an alarming rate and we put different gasses within the atmosphere. I dont see why people even get this. It's so simple if you research and study about this with out any media background because they always lie.
loloioi 1 year ago
Okay to be incredibly factual about this is that climate change studies have been monitored and done since the 1800's by scientists who were skeptical about the idea. They were shut off by the public of course but they've been doing it ever since. The scientists who were behind this climate gate isn't the first person. Al gore one of the many people have been doing it since they were young. You can't accuse him of setting a whoel scandal. Rachel carson had evidence in the 1960's
loloioi 1 year ago
I've been into this for quite a while. The best thing to do is not even look at the Media. The media always manipulates the information about climate change. For example, Lord monkton(whatever his name is) was bribed by the gas corporations to spout fake facts out and simply. Glenn beck is also a great example who doesn't even use the correct factual information but sprends in a highly distorted concept when the factual information already shuts him up.
loloioi 1 year ago
I love you
doutonight 1 year ago
If all the researchers are working on a tainted data set then your results will have been predetermined since the methodology used to get ot the result is fairly uniform. Would there be any real surprise when everyone came to the same conclusion? You can't claim the results are valid if you're stacking the deck in favor of a predetermined outcome and silencing decent from those attempting to provide another view.
Leavon 1 year ago
@Leavon
"dissent"
But you do have a valid point.
Kaulen777 1 year ago
"Is it a blogger or a scientist?" Kind of an irrelevant question as far as science is concerned. Evidence and reproducible results is the beef.
mooseythejuiceman 1 year ago
@mooseythejuiceman If evidence and reproducible results are the beef, then climate scientists are vegetarians.
CommentorX 1 year ago
Great tag line and wonderful video Greg :) You should check out the TED talk on "starting a movement" you inspire us all!
goney3 1 year ago
Your "Not what should we believe, but what should we do" is very insightful and useful.
I think that "deniers" tend to be the conservative/religious type, who obviously approach EVERYTHING as a decision about what to BELIEVE--and then think that "believing" something magically creates some "value" or even "truth."
GetMeThere1 1 year ago 3
Thx Greg,
Cogent as usual. Can't belive the ranting comments this draws from those who won't (or can't?) think a little for themselves!
Please hang in there and keep up the good work. Like the idea of a vlog.
Keenon350 1 year ago
I don't like this lack of description boxes... that's fucked up
Craigipedia 1 year ago
check out REGURGE . NET and let me know what you think
Craigipedia 1 year ago
DO IT! I'd love to see a vlog from you. As an artist, Youtube vids get me through some very tedious commission paintings. The more vids I can add to my list of things to listen to, the better.
Bobbiethejean 1 year ago
@Machomatscho read my next comment, to implement a global carbon tax.
gullette777 1 year ago
I did take the baton, before you even offered it. If you are though being bitter ( very understandable) and thus incommunicado, are you ready to have a conversation? Let me know.
DonQuixotedeKaw 1 year ago
fear-based bull-crap from a mush-mouthed book-whoring retard
climate change is natural and beyond our human control
carbon credits is a scam met to make al gore and his buddies billions
period.
rtardbox 1 year ago
WHY would scientist do this? TO IMPLEMENT A GLOBAL CARBON TAX.
HOW CAN CARBON BE THE PROBLEM??? why don't you attack the other 1,000+ pollutants that are killing our earth everyday spread out by the global elite corporations....NOBODY TALKS ABOUT THOSE. EVERYBODY ATTACKS THE ELEMENT THAT IS ESSENTIAL TO ALL LIFE ON EARTH.
gullette777 1 year ago
@gullette777 Water is essential to all life on Earth too. Try to breathe it sometime.
CommentorX 1 year ago
@CommentorX YEAH.... and thats why you don't see it getting banned..... or taxed, or demonized, maybe someday with weak minded citizens such as yourself it will be banned.... "oh NO... WE HAVE TO BAN WATER BECAUSE IF YOU BREATH IT IN YOU WILL DIE!!!!!"
gullette777 1 year ago
@gullette777 If you don't think water is billed for, try reading your (or your parents') electric bill sometime. It's in there.
CommentorX 1 year ago
@CommentorX I said banned or taxed, not billed, learn the difference, my water is free, it comes from a well.
gullette777 1 year ago
ARE YOU A Globalist FREEMASON????
scientist aren't always credible as you can tell by there E-MAILS.
15+ years of emails hacked, that they admit ARE their emails, that specifically say they altered temperature to make global warming seem like a man made threat, all while high school teachers across the world are insisting that the "emails were taken out of context"
gullette777 1 year ago