Six Climate Realist Specialists Speak Out

[meercatdotcom]

Great video of a bunch of cracks and looneys gathered togetther lecturing us on how they know more than the experts. 

[sesamestreetgang]

The 1st man is a conservative member of British Parliament

The 2nd man is an architect and urban developer

The 3rd is a meteorologist and astrophysicist who runs "Weather Action" criticized for it's inaccurate forecasts and "gambling/betting" on forecasts

The 4th man is a Reverend

The 5th is a Geologist known for his belief in "dowsing" and advocating that "dowsing" courses be taught at universities

The 6th is a hydrology consultant

NONE of them are climatologists, LOL!!!

[footiebeanz]

Bloody Koch-shills; they should be put in the stcks for a couple of days.

[adjuk]

Google Hurricane Erin and 911 - I think even these people are missing something - totally agree with them about the Co2 con.

[TankUni]

So a politician, a libertarian, Piers Corbyn (no explanation needed), a creationist, a retired professor and expert dowser and an obscure specialist who doesn't appear to be active in climate research.

These are 'specialists'? Seriously?

[z0f0draz]

@TankUni Piers Corbyn astrophysicist meteorologist(I can understand why believers would have omitted Piers credentials, great at hiding truth) accurately predicted the last 3 winters, while the IPCC and MET office claimed mild winters, once the "hell on earth" winter as Piers described came the IPCC and MET came out with the BS "warming creates cooling!!... so thanks to history we can easily spot the lies and liars...

[mandisita]

Good points... but even if plants thrive with more CO2 (which gives sustenance to the life that feeds on it, including us) what happens when we cut all the trees down, pollute our oceans, air and destroy the land? What do we do when we don't have enough nature to counter our pollution? We have to ask what the motive behind the carbon tax is. If it was really about the environment they wouldn't continue to allow large scale destruction while punishing ordinary citizens for living.

[ryanshaunkelly]

Government is playing dumb about the 'weather'

just like they still play dumb about 911 false flag

[Cloisim]

Anyone with the ability to think on their own, knows that this global warming is a complete and utter lie.

Look, its getting Colder now, not warmer...(thank you mother nature) so what did they do?....alter the name to climate 'change'

.

More importantly, gov. are going along with this Criminal lie and forcing people to pay up, because they live?.

The devil is charging us a toll folks...

.

How completely absurd.

Next they will want to sacrifice virgins....oh wait, I think they already do



[vtcpdx]

We can't continue to view our planet as having endless resources and as a massive landfill. However, until we evolve our economies past the greed/consumption motivators, nothing will stop ecological destruction. A CO2 tax will require MORE production and consumption as governments rely on it for war, empire building, and further socialization/fascism of our societies. Governments caused our environmental problems, if you think governments will fix them you are a fool.

[pensivethought]

Do not forget bout Haarp heating up the ionosphere..

[fullcircle2012]

Ice Age cycles are approx 104,000 years long with 12-18,000 years being like our current warm period. 'IF' CO2 causes temperature to rise then the more we burn the more we could potentially sustain current life on this planet as life doesn't do all that well in cold climates. Not to mention the fact that if you put any plant in an environment which has 1000+ ppm of CO2 just watch how big it grows and how much more yield it produces. CO2 is not a poison its used as the building blocks of life.

[vtcpdx]

@fullcircle2012 Not to mention that the fossil evidence, as well as physics, shows that a warmer climate precipitated rising levels of CO2, not the reverse.

[eyeseethroughyou]

I wonder how much Exxon mobile is paying this guys.

[newstart49]

Governments just hate it when they can't control something, so they come up with falsities to make it look like they can- at our expense.

[AnyeongF91]

if we find out the truth that our weather is being manipulated, these guys are out of a job instantly

[BassGoesBoom1]

MMGW = myth

[seemorerocks]

They may have nice accents but they are all speaking a load of bollocks!

[CrazyChitTV]

@seemorerocks Now that is clear that we are nearing a new ice age it's time for us to burn as much fossil fuels as possible to prevent the coming ice age!

[stvbrsn]

@seemorerocks OK, trollerino... I'll bite. Where's the "load of bollocks" of which you speak? I listened to the whole 3 1/2 minutes, and didn't hear anything non-factual, poorly-reasoned, or alarmist. You do realize this has NOTHING to do with the actual climate, right? Carbon taxing/capping/trading is a last-ditch effort by the central bankers to create one last bubble before the entire monetary (not financial) system implodes.

[kimdpetersen]

@stvbrsn Ok, lets take one particularly strong "load of bollocks":

0:36 [see as a problem that] "... too many people on the planet who breathe out carbon dioxide ...."

No one who has any idea of biology or climate science would consider breathing a problem .... None. Look up the Carbon Cycle - breathing has ZERO impact on rising or falling CO2.

[stvbrsn]

@kimdpetersen I dunno, I don't share all the views of the people represented here. But I do know this: One volcano in Chile has spewed out enough Co2 in the past week to thoroughly negate any "carbon offset" schemes already in place, and then some. So if you want to talk about breathing, that's your mother THE EARTH exhaling. Krakatao released more Co2 than all humans burning things since prometheus. In a few hours. So please don't tell me Co2 is any kind of hazard to a carbon based biosphere!

[kimdpetersen]

@stvbrsn Sorry but your "Krakatoa released more CO2" is wrong. Krakatoa didn't increase atmospheric CO2 significantly - and neither does any other Volcano. For Krakatoa - look up "Law Dome CO2" where you can see the "non-existing" effect. The Volcano in Chile is significantly smaller than the one in Iceland, and i'm sorry to tell you that these do not release significant amounts of CO2. You can check this in the "Mauna Loa" records (ie. no peaks from Volc. erup.).

[kimdpetersen]

@stvbrsn, further if you Google "Volcano CO2" then you would know that it was wrong. Here's a quote:

Iceland's Eyjafjoell volcano is emitting between 150,000 and 300,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) per day, a figure placing it in the same emissions league as a small-to-medium European economy, experts said on Monday

Just to illustrate the point.

[stvbrsn]

@kimdpetersen One last thing (and I do mean last, I'm turning my attentions elsewhere- know that if you respond I wont see it, so it'll just be mental masturbation on your part). If you're the Kim Petersen of Dissident Voice, I'm disappointed that you can't see beyond the paradigm of this debate to the bigger (monetary) picture. Implementation of the AGW agenda will only result in more wealth concentrated into fewer hands.

A problem cannot be solved at the level where it was created -Einstein

[kimdpetersen]

@stvbrsn Another:

~0:06: "All the changes we've seen, and they are very small changes, are part of well- established long term natural cycles"

If they are so well-established - then why haven't anyone pointed this out? Well-established means that there is a "provable" cause/effect there. It means that you can take a natural cycle and extend it into the future and see the obvious cause. Unfortunately no scientist so far has done so.

[stvbrsn]

@kimdpetersen Well sure, you don't see scientists doing it, because it could mean loss of funding. I don't subscribe to scientism. Science is something else entirely, notably not practiced by scientists (practicing scientism). Numerous other researchers and scholars have done exactly that. But either way, you didn't address the issue I was posting about: the fact that the AGW agenda is, was and always will be about markets. Nothing AT ALL to do with real environmentalism.

[kimdpetersen]

@stvbrsn Sorry but to my knowledge - *no* scientist has shown these "well-established long term natural cycles". And i'm fairly well read on this topic.

As for "the fact" as you call it. I'd say that it belongs in a conspiracy theory and not in reality. Its not a fact, its a conjecture.

[stvbrsn]

@kimdpetersen Ok well, I'm not really here to argue fine points, so I'll defer to you. I do not disagree that human industrial activity degrades the environment in general. I just feel AGW theory is being used to slam legislation down our throats (main complaint of the folks in the clip) that creates markets in support of a fiat monetary system that can no longer exist without such bubbles being created. The longer they keep adding cards to the house, the more people get hurt when it comes down.

[kimdpetersen]

@stvbrsn My personal problem with this argument is the basic assumption that "tax must be evil" and that they bend facts to make it "appear" to be correct.

If you are against doing anything about CO2 - then argue that we're better off adapting. Don't argue that "science must be wrong" because it clashes with your ideology. If you reject on ideology - then you are little better than ... say .. creationists.

[stvbrsn]

@kimdpetersen It appears you're a different Kim Petersen after all. No matter, i am only trying to help broaden the perception of these issues in what little way I can. I am not married to any ideology and I don't have an agenda. Ultimately, my purpose is to be a sharpening stone for Occam's razor. All I ask is that you thoroughly question why you are so (seemingly-I don't know you) attached to the notion of human driven climate change.

[kimdpetersen]

@stvbrsn I'm certainly not "married to" anything. Most of my reading is the "sceptical" literature. Its there i find the inspiration to read up on the scientfic literature. You might say that it is the "sceptical arguments" that make me confident. Arguments such as these are so basically wrong when you dig down into them, that you have to wonder why no "real" sceptical argument is presented.

[britpod]

1 Climate scientist who's entire career and income depends on the AGW myth, dislikes this video.

[kimdpetersen]

@britpod can you mention even one scientist whos entire career and income depends on the AGW myth? (whatever that might be - since there isn't a comprehensive single view present in this video).

[Skeptic121]

gotta love those Scottish accents!

These guys are absolutely right...