this guy is an almost nobody as the journal he publishes in is not a leader in its field.
his paper isn't easy to find - indicating its not as groundbreaking as you may consider - i'm a phd student with access to pretty much the widest access to info sources that you cannot gain unless your into research big time.
despite this, his research paper has very little to say on the climate debate and if you haven't read it yourself, why are you posting here.
@september81000 So to make a comment worthy of being read and considered valid, you must be published in the leading magazine do you? Go back to East Anglia University and read the emails.
If someone turned up with a different conclusion to the one Dr Jones wanted, he was prevented from being published or discredited or both. It even happened here with a meteorologist sent packing after saying he doubted Global Warming.
The people at the top are on a crusade mate! Truth doesn't matter to them.
@september81000 the paper is easy to find (just search Google Scholar and you will find it). I take it you have read the paper? As a phd student you are presumably qualified to understand it, and maybe even point out where it is wrong. Or are you just following the heard? I have read it and also the criticisms. None of the criticisms have disproved it, only offered suggestions of possible ways of attempting to refute its findings. No-one has come forward to do so yet.
Is this mainstream science? I thought Miskolczi was comprehensively challenged on this issue by his peers? realclimate(.)org/wiki/index(.)php?title=Ferenc_Miskolczi
This is kinda easy to find, so I suspect that comments here are moderated to remove dissent?
"Miskolczi was thrown out of NASA?" No He resigned after his supervisor (who had his name on an earlier paper) logged on Ferenc's account ad forged an email requesting the paper which was under review be withdrawn. Not quite cricket now is it?
"or all the big institutons are in on a Grand Conspiracy! Hmm. tough call "
Not so tough nor a conspiracy whistleblowers traditionally have a hard time of it. Nick Stokes isn't a scientist he is a mathematician who does not really understand it.
Thanks for info gerjanp. I really hope this (conspircy thing) works out, & we can all 'go home', but for now I find it almost impossible to research it on the net. I'll have to remain open minded and on the fence untill some big science/maths names can stake their reputations - one way or other -hopefully not 2 long now.
IMO it smells too much of tobacco (& ozone, acid rain ..) & has all the distinct traits of obstructionist politics. - utube "Answering Climate Change Skeptics Oreskes"
you are welcome but I wouldn't be calling anything a conspiracy it's really just a common agenda of covering the backside. Think about it you agitated for taxpayer funds get it and spend $300,000,000 putting a satellite instrument into orbit then find it doesn't quite work as you though and it's next to useless. Who are you going tell who are you going to want to keep it from? You are going to shut up spend the money again send it up hope it works better and keep a lid on it.
Well, you can believe that if you like, but all the world's scientific bodies (including our own CSIRO) would point out that your believe is not based on any real science. How is it that people think they know better than all the world's climate scientists? Kinda arrogant dont you think? Or is science somehow now a pluralistic matter of belief and opinion?
Sami Solanki and his team at? the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany, have looked at the concentrations of carbon-14 in wood and beryllium-10 in ice as far back as 11,000 years ago. The similarity of the fluctuations in both isotopes convinced them that they were seeing effects due to the sun. "Periods of high solar activity do not last long, perhaps 50 to 100 yrs, then you get a crash," says Weiss. "It's a boom-bust system, expect a crash soon."
"It supports the contention that the level of activity on the Sun will significantly diminish sometime in the next decade and remain low for about 20 30 years. On each occasion that the Sun has? done this in the past the Worlds mean temperature has dropped "
From wattsupwiththat(.)com
Ian Wilson, one of the authors
Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia
Does a SpinOrbit Coupling Between the Sun and the Jovian Planets Govern the Solar Cycle?
"the Earth is entering a prolonged cooling phase because sunspot activity"
Habibullo Abdussamatov
He is the supervisor of the Astrometria project of the Russian section of the International Space Station and the head of Space research laboratory at the Saint Petersburg-based Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Search:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE by Habibullo Abdussamatov
David Dilley of GWO predicts Global Warming will end? around the year 2010 based on the discovery of a powerful "Natural Forcing Mechanism" PFM that controls global warming cycle, hurricane track landfalls, El Niño cycles and many other climate weather cycles.
"The establishment of the cool PDO, together with similar cooling of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), virtually assures several decades of global cooling and the end of the past 30-year warm phase. It also means that the IPCC predictions of catastrophic global warming this century were highly inaccurate."
Don J. Easterbrook is a geology professor emeritus at Western Washington University
No 'skeptic' has ever come up with a decent motivation behind any conspiracy. I've never met a young person who's actually going to have to live with the consequences who's a skeptic.
And just look at where the lobbying money comes from: on your side all the money comes from self-interested oil/coal lobbies.
There's so much I could say but I'm not gonna waste my time on you freaks.
You see this again is you spouting the government line. In truth oil companies are amongst the biggest promoters of climate change! Exxon Mobil anyone? Gore's dealings with Occidental? You see the oil companies won't be paying the majority of the taxes WE will. They are happy because they are already in the back pockets of the bankers and globalists. They want climate change bills to be passed - it keeps power at the top. Peter Sutherland of British Petroleum was one of the first pushing tax.
Oh and just for the record I hate the government's carbon trading scheme. It's totally flawed, it's useless, and it's expensive -we're actually on the same wavelength there, believe it or not. So yeah, not sure what you're on about with government PR and spouting the government line.
There's no decent evidence the MWP was as warm globally or had such a rapid temperature rise compared to today. Maybe regionally, as in Europe, was really warm, but anecdotal evidence of wineries in England or farmers in Greenland or whatever you're going by, hardly add up to a reliable global assesment.
I suggest you grow up and learn to look into things a bit before you jump on bandwagons! Also when you write decades or centuries, as in "1100s", it's incorrect to put an apostrophy.
I apologise for my apostrophy... Seriously, how old are you..? That's juvenile...
If you don't classify that as evidence, as well as the whole "climate-gate" incident - you are obviously in denial, and too incompetent to perform any independent research of your own...
Keep regurgitating other people's words and work...
Okay, let's all make unsubstantiated generalised assesments based on localised anecdotal evidence from several hundred years ago! That's reeeally good science right there!
Yet you have the cheek to throw in a couple of insults (learn to control yourself, I'm embarassed for you).
Basically what you seem to be saying is because I'm younger than you, it's inappropriate for me to come to my own conclusions. I should ditch my research (thorough, and on both sides) and blindly swallow your preachings based on 700 year old anecdotal evidence.. hmmm no thanks!
So you've insulted my competency because I choose to question the reliability of my evidence (unlike you); posted a comment (your second last one) that has pretty much nothing to do with anything when I point out the stupidity of your logic; and then quoted Aristotle, suggesting I'm wrong by default because I'm younger than you, and then said I'll learn for some reason...
And I'm supposed to take you seriously???? okayyyy...
I'm not actually doing society a favour at all since in case it's different on the planet you live on, here our societies are pretty reliant on fossil fuels.
I'm not sure exactly what my age has to do with anything, surely research is research, evidence is evidence, and you saying it doesn't make it any more valid than me saying it but okay... you keep throwing around the insults, but please get back to me when you learn how to argue in a civilised manner.
And I would have liked to know where in particular I was irrational or illogical, but I forgot evidence and reasoning aren't exactly your strong points.
I wouldn't expect anything else from someone who blindly accepts the anecdotal ramblings of the self-interested coal lobby in the face of real science... (and to think your profile says you're "upholding and defending the universal values of truth, democracy, justice and liberty" -what a joke)
This isn't an isolated thing in the climate skeptic community either. I've been tracked down by some old creep after a letter to the local paper too.
Nah seriously I've done stacks of personal research on both sides, even signed up to the climate skeptic newsletter and stuff and the difference in quality and intellect between the two camps is stunning (and no, I don't mean the skeptic freaks come out on top lol)
You really just have to look at some of the comments here, and some of the comments elsewhere and you can really see the difference between the two camps.
It's scary how deluded skepic freaks are. It's also interesting the way I make a simple comment that wasn't even really serious, and I get freaks with way too much time on their hands searching my background and basically cyberstalking me.
You only need one to be right you dolt. But since numbers are so important to you, perhaps you should Google the "Oregon Petition", which "thousands and thousands" (over 31,000 actually) of scientists have signed stating no scientific consensus exists on man-made global warming. But being 17 and a uni student you probably don't pay taxes (and since you're clearly a moonbat left-wing kook, you probably never will), so any tax grabs based on this hoax wouldn't concern you.
Lol at your cyber-stalking, and also lol at how judgemental you are. Lol at how you think I support the carbon trading scheme in its present form. Lol at your name too, monarchist ey? Have fun with that.
More like thousands of papers vs thousands of news reports.
Even in the 70s when I was learning about the coming ice age I knew it was wrong, and not that it's a coming global warming I still know it's wrong. The data does not show either unless manipulated. Study the data if you don't believe me, and I don't mean a hockey stick, I mean the REAL, raw data, and see the trends. The trends are that of a cyclical pattern, and systematic inaccurate temperature record in the first world nations.
Hmm lets see - more global control over the world, which they've been set up to do from the start? No it can't be that.... What do you think the word United Nations actually means? I don't think it means Unite the World's Nations in a wonderful pixie marsh mallow land, because they've done a rubbish job so far if world peace is their aim.
There's such thing as saying one thing and doing another. Do you think they're really going to come out and say "today we are going to rule the world, good day to you". I'm not the deluded one, you're the one spouting government PR. History is written by the winners, the winners were corrupt bankers and globalists.
lmao okay then dude, whatever you say. The UN is a giant, big, bad conspiracy, out to take over the world... Makes perfect sense! ahhh!!
I'm tempted to leave this comment here but I'll just suggest you do a little basic study into global politics or at least a little research into the UN and how the UN operates in the global stage before you embarass yourself with the conspiracy theories lol.
the sun is in a quiet state right now...and probably for awhile...the earth will cool and hopefully our leaders will wake up to the fact that global warming is ont real. Its amazing that this is happening now with what the climate agenda will mean....God is helping in fighting the forces of evil...lets hope he continues!
We just need to shout the truth out louder than the greenie eco terrorists. Right now the politicians and general population think man is causing global warming although most of my friends don't believe it.
The proof is in the science. CO2 does not cause global warming nor is it a pollutent. It is less than .04 of 1% of our atmosphere it is food for plants. Tax and trade will not save the planet. It will not help anything. It will only put a hardship on us all. But there's hope people a waking up and there are more prominent scientists with real research speaking out against this leftwing political scam.
There's hope. More and more people are learnig the truth and waking up to fight this misguided attempt to save the planet. Many scientists of high standing are speaking out read the U S senate minority report on global warming.
this guy is an almost nobody as the journal he publishes in is not a leader in its field.
his paper isn't easy to find - indicating its not as groundbreaking as you may consider - i'm a phd student with access to pretty much the widest access to info sources that you cannot gain unless your into research big time.
despite this, his research paper has very little to say on the climate debate and if you haven't read it yourself, why are you posting here.
september81000 1 year ago
@september81000 So to make a comment worthy of being read and considered valid, you must be published in the leading magazine do you? Go back to East Anglia University and read the emails.
If someone turned up with a different conclusion to the one Dr Jones wanted, he was prevented from being published or discredited or both. It even happened here with a meteorologist sent packing after saying he doubted Global Warming.
The people at the top are on a crusade mate! Truth doesn't matter to them.
BrianWheatley69 9 months ago
@september81000 the paper is easy to find (just search Google Scholar and you will find it). I take it you have read the paper? As a phd student you are presumably qualified to understand it, and maybe even point out where it is wrong. Or are you just following the heard? I have read it and also the criticisms. None of the criticisms have disproved it, only offered suggestions of possible ways of attempting to refute its findings. No-one has come forward to do so yet.
j101saar 4 months ago
@september81000 stupid autocomplete - minus the a!
j101saar 4 months ago
Is this mainstream science? I thought Miskolczi was comprehensively challenged on this issue by his peers? realclimate(.)org/wiki/index(.)php?title=Ferenc_Miskolczi
This is kinda easy to find, so I suspect that comments here are moderated to remove dissent?
garlicbreds 1 year ago
" I thought Miskolczi was comprehensively challenged on this issue by his peers?"
Er no there has been no refutation of his work in the literature not any of it.
gerjanp 1 year ago
Yes, you seem to be right! Ta.
But I cant know with certainty - Im not a scientist, nor should I have to be one to work it out. Too many McScientists on the case already.
Miskolczi was thrown out of NASA? & not accepted by the rest of the scientific community?
So I use Occams Razor - Either he has gone astray, or all the big institutons are in on a Grand Conspiracy! Hmm. tough call :-)
The debate thread (semi-transparent atmosphere model) at wattupwiththat - search 'Nick Stokes'.
garlicbreds 1 year ago
"Miskolczi was thrown out of NASA?" No He resigned after his supervisor (who had his name on an earlier paper) logged on Ferenc's account ad forged an email requesting the paper which was under review be withdrawn. Not quite cricket now is it?
"or all the big institutons are in on a Grand Conspiracy! Hmm. tough call "
Not so tough nor a conspiracy whistleblowers traditionally have a hard time of it. Nick Stokes isn't a scientist he is a mathematician who does not really understand it.
gerjanp 1 year ago
Thanks for info gerjanp. I really hope this (conspircy thing) works out, & we can all 'go home', but for now I find it almost impossible to research it on the net. I'll have to remain open minded and on the fence untill some big science/maths names can stake their reputations - one way or other -hopefully not 2 long now.
IMO it smells too much of tobacco (& ozone, acid rain ..) & has all the distinct traits of obstructionist politics. - utube "Answering Climate Change Skeptics Oreskes"
garlicbreds 1 year ago
you are welcome but I wouldn't be calling anything a conspiracy it's really just a common agenda of covering the backside. Think about it you agitated for taxpayer funds get it and spend $300,000,000 putting a satellite instrument into orbit then find it doesn't quite work as you though and it's next to useless. Who are you going tell who are you going to want to keep it from? You are going to shut up spend the money again send it up hope it works better and keep a lid on it.
gerjanp 1 year ago
sad that it cost money to be a member of that page they link you to in the video.. but i still believe in that co2 doesn't hurt's the climate..!
mrjoez 2 years ago
Well, you can believe that if you like, but all the world's scientific bodies (including our own CSIRO) would point out that your believe is not based on any real science. How is it that people think they know better than all the world's climate scientists? Kinda arrogant dont you think? Or is science somehow now a pluralistic matter of belief and opinion?
garlicbreds 1 year ago
Sami Solanki and his team at? the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Katlenburg-Lindau, Germany, have looked at the concentrations of carbon-14 in wood and beryllium-10 in ice as far back as 11,000 years ago. The similarity of the fluctuations in both isotopes convinced them that they were seeing effects due to the sun. "Periods of high solar activity do not last long, perhaps 50 to 100 yrs, then you get a crash," says Weiss. "It's a boom-bust system, expect a crash soon."
FF org
siliggy 2 years ago
"It supports the contention that the level of activity on the Sun will significantly diminish sometime in the next decade and remain low for about 20 30 years. On each occasion that the Sun has? done this in the past the Worlds mean temperature has dropped "
From wattsupwiththat(.)com
Ian Wilson, one of the authors
Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia
Does a SpinOrbit Coupling Between the Sun and the Jovian Planets Govern the Solar Cycle?
siliggy 2 years ago
"the Earth is entering a prolonged cooling phase because sunspot activity"
Habibullo Abdussamatov
He is the supervisor of the Astrometria project of the Russian section of the International Space Station and the head of Space research laboratory at the Saint Petersburg-based Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
Search:
THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE by Habibullo Abdussamatov
siliggy 2 years ago
David Dilley of GWO predicts Global Warming will end? around the year 2010 based on the discovery of a powerful "Natural Forcing Mechanism" PFM that controls global warming cycle, hurricane track landfalls, El Niño cycles and many other climate weather cycles.
From Globalweathercycles(.)com
siliggy 2 years ago
"The establishment of the cool PDO, together with similar cooling of the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO), virtually assures several decades of global cooling and the end of the past 30-year warm phase. It also means that the IPCC predictions of catastrophic global warming this century were highly inaccurate."
Don J. Easterbrook is a geology professor emeritus at Western Washington University
From: globalresearch(.)ca
siliggy 2 years ago
No 'skeptic' has ever come up with a decent motivation behind any conspiracy. I've never met a young person who's actually going to have to live with the consequences who's a skeptic.
And just look at where the lobbying money comes from: on your side all the money comes from self-interested oil/coal lobbies.
There's so much I could say but I'm not gonna waste my time on you freaks.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
You see this again is you spouting the government line. In truth oil companies are amongst the biggest promoters of climate change! Exxon Mobil anyone? Gore's dealings with Occidental? You see the oil companies won't be paying the majority of the taxes WE will. They are happy because they are already in the back pockets of the bankers and globalists. They want climate change bills to be passed - it keeps power at the top. Peter Sutherland of British Petroleum was one of the first pushing tax.
wideshutuk 2 years ago
Oh and just for the record I hate the government's carbon trading scheme. It's totally flawed, it's useless, and it's expensive -we're actually on the same wavelength there, believe it or not. So yeah, not sure what you're on about with government PR and spouting the government line.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
And I agree that it's a total scam the way we'll be footing the bill, not the oil companies, like you say.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
Medieval Warm Period in the 1100's to 1300's that put our current heat-wave to shame... Factories in the 1100's??
Grow up... Find the truth before the truth finds you!
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
There's no decent evidence the MWP was as warm globally or had such a rapid temperature rise compared to today. Maybe regionally, as in Europe, was really warm, but anecdotal evidence of wineries in England or farmers in Greenland or whatever you're going by, hardly add up to a reliable global assesment.
I suggest you grow up and learn to look into things a bit before you jump on bandwagons! Also when you write decades or centuries, as in "1100s", it's incorrect to put an apostrophy.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
I apologise for my apostrophy... Seriously, how old are you..? That's juvenile...
If you don't classify that as evidence, as well as the whole "climate-gate" incident - you are obviously in denial, and too incompetent to perform any independent research of your own...
Keep regurgitating other people's words and work...
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
Okay, let's all make unsubstantiated generalised assesments based on localised anecdotal evidence from several hundred years ago! That's reeeally good science right there!
Yet you have the cheek to throw in a couple of insults (learn to control yourself, I'm embarassed for you).
You idiot.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
Good luck little man! You'll need it in life!
I was as arrogant as you once - you'll grow out of it and learn to shut up when you realise that you really don't know anything...
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
Umm okay... fantastic comment there, well done...
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
"It is unbecoming for young men to utter maxims."
- Aristotle.
You'll learn little man...
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
You like calling me 'little man' :-s
Basically what you seem to be saying is because I'm younger than you, it's inappropriate for me to come to my own conclusions. I should ditch my research (thorough, and on both sides) and blindly swallow your preachings based on 700 year old anecdotal evidence.. hmmm no thanks!
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
I would never ask anyone, let alone you, to believe what I say dogmatically - that's for the sedated and uneducated...
You seem like a bright young fellow - I have faith that you'll findthe truth before it finds you.
I genuinely wish you luck with your research...
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
Now THAT'S a better comment, your last one right there. Well done.
Thanks for the wishes, and good wishes for any of your own research since we're actually in the same boat in that respect: we all seek the truth.
I do hope however, that you're thorough and scientific, and remember to check the sources of your evidence.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
So you've insulted my competency because I choose to question the reliability of my evidence (unlike you); posted a comment (your second last one) that has pretty much nothing to do with anything when I point out the stupidity of your logic; and then quoted Aristotle, suggesting I'm wrong by default because I'm younger than you, and then said I'll learn for some reason...
And I'm supposed to take you seriously???? okayyyy...
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
Okay... As a young kid, you should have friends - I'm far too busy to keep replying to a kid that's just come out of puberty...
As I said, you'll learn that we all know nothing!
"I am the wisest man alive for I know only one thing; that it, that I know nothing."!
- Socrates.
In essence - yes. You know nothing is what I'm saying - neither do I...
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
And I'm far too busy to be replying to you too, trust me...
BUT I'd like to think we've found at least a little common ground, and a few positive vibes, so lets respectfully leave it here on a high?
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
Indeed. All the best...
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
Bahaha you're actually doing the green lobby a favour by tearing down the credibility of you skeptics from the inside!
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
I get it - I forgot... Little men like to have the last word.
You're doing society a great favour by complying and being a sedated loyal slave - great work!
I expect nothing less from a little kid - utter irrationality and illogical.
Good bye.
Believe me - you'll look back and think to yourself, "I can't believe how young and juvenile I was to think I know something"...
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
Aw shame you had to ruin it.
I'm not actually doing society a favour at all since in case it's different on the planet you live on, here our societies are pretty reliant on fossil fuels.
I'm not sure exactly what my age has to do with anything, surely research is research, evidence is evidence, and you saying it doesn't make it any more valid than me saying it but okay... you keep throwing around the insults, but please get back to me when you learn how to argue in a civilised manner.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
How are you reading your messages??
You seem to be responding to a message I wrote two messages ago - prior to agreeing to "end on a high"...
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
You seem to be doing the same thing to me, so it seems to be a youtube thing, it's all messed.
Look at the times the comments were posted and it should work, i think.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
@jaydenluke
Let us end this here on a good note...
All the best.
WeAreChangeMelbourne 2 years ago
Deal!!!
All the best to you too.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
And I would have liked to know where in particular I was irrational or illogical, but I forgot evidence and reasoning aren't exactly your strong points.
I wouldn't expect anything else from someone who blindly accepts the anecdotal ramblings of the self-interested coal lobby in the face of real science... (and to think your profile says you're "upholding and defending the universal values of truth, democracy, justice and liberty" -what a joke)
jaydenluke 2 years ago
This isn't an isolated thing in the climate skeptic community either. I've been tracked down by some old creep after a letter to the local paper too.
Nah seriously I've done stacks of personal research on both sides, even signed up to the climate skeptic newsletter and stuff and the difference in quality and intellect between the two camps is stunning (and no, I don't mean the skeptic freaks come out on top lol)
jaydenluke 2 years ago
You really just have to look at some of the comments here, and some of the comments elsewhere and you can really see the difference between the two camps.
It's scary how deluded skepic freaks are. It's also interesting the way I make a simple comment that wasn't even really serious, and I get freaks with way too much time on their hands searching my background and basically cyberstalking me.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
Hmm one paper versus thousands and thousands of experienced climatologists... I think I know who I'm putting my money behind haha.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
You only need one to be right you dolt. But since numbers are so important to you, perhaps you should Google the "Oregon Petition", which "thousands and thousands" (over 31,000 actually) of scientists have signed stating no scientific consensus exists on man-made global warming. But being 17 and a uni student you probably don't pay taxes (and since you're clearly a moonbat left-wing kook, you probably never will), so any tax grabs based on this hoax wouldn't concern you.
aussiemonarchist 2 years ago
Lol at your cyber-stalking, and also lol at how judgemental you are. Lol at how you think I support the carbon trading scheme in its present form. Lol at your name too, monarchist ey? Have fun with that.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
More like thousands of papers vs thousands of news reports.
Even in the 70s when I was learning about the coming ice age I knew it was wrong, and not that it's a coming global warming I still know it's wrong. The data does not show either unless manipulated. Study the data if you don't believe me, and I don't mean a hockey stick, I mean the REAL, raw data, and see the trends. The trends are that of a cyclical pattern, and systematic inaccurate temperature record in the first world nations.
Brantoc 2 years ago
No no, thousands of UN funded scientists encouraged to skew data!
wideshutuk 2 years ago
Yeaahhhh right, it's a big UN conspiracy! Must be it because jeez, I can really see all their motivation there, they stand to gain so much!
jaydenluke 2 years ago
Hmm lets see - more global control over the world, which they've been set up to do from the start? No it can't be that.... What do you think the word United Nations actually means? I don't think it means Unite the World's Nations in a wonderful pixie marsh mallow land, because they've done a rubbish job so far if world peace is their aim.
wideshutuk 2 years ago
Hmm nope, the UN was actually never set up to out-rank state sovreignity.
United Nations is actually two words.
Yes, peace is their aim and yes, they have done a rubbish job.
Not sure what planet you're on but you're quite deluded.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
There's such thing as saying one thing and doing another. Do you think they're really going to come out and say "today we are going to rule the world, good day to you". I'm not the deluded one, you're the one spouting government PR. History is written by the winners, the winners were corrupt bankers and globalists.
wideshutuk 2 years ago
lmao okay then dude, whatever you say. The UN is a giant, big, bad conspiracy, out to take over the world... Makes perfect sense! ahhh!!
I'm tempted to leave this comment here but I'll just suggest you do a little basic study into global politics or at least a little research into the UN and how the UN operates in the global stage before you embarass yourself with the conspiracy theories lol.
jaydenluke 2 years ago
We have been conned.
Eriksz 2 years ago 4
the sun is in a quiet state right now...and probably for awhile...the earth will cool and hopefully our leaders will wake up to the fact that global warming is ont real. Its amazing that this is happening now with what the climate agenda will mean....God is helping in fighting the forces of evil...lets hope he continues!
ed2see 2 years ago 3
green is the new red, it has nothing to do with science and everything to do with control and taxes.
1965ace 2 years ago 7
Agreed. It is the traffic light tendency. Most environmentalists call them selves green because they are too yellow to admit they are red.
steam0001 2 years ago 6
Environmentalism is melon-politics.... Green on the outside but red on the inside! *<;-)
RammuDK 2 years ago 4
We just need to shout the truth out louder than the greenie eco terrorists. Right now the politicians and general population think man is causing global warming although most of my friends don't believe it.
eezyone 2 years ago 2
Yup, those poor giant oil corporations don't stand a chance against those eco terrorists
jaydenluke 2 years ago
The proof is in the science. CO2 does not cause global warming nor is it a pollutent. It is less than .04 of 1% of our atmosphere it is food for plants. Tax and trade will not save the planet. It will not help anything. It will only put a hardship on us all. But there's hope people a waking up and there are more prominent scientists with real research speaking out against this leftwing political scam.
eezyone 2 years ago 2
There's hope. More and more people are learnig the truth and waking up to fight this misguided attempt to save the planet. Many scientists of high standing are speaking out read the U S senate minority report on global warming.
eezyone 2 years ago
Ausies, you guys are the smartest men in the room. Thank you.
Alvin691 2 years ago 3
it would be: Faeraentch Meeshkoltche.
Green sectarians wouldn't even want to listen...
and if they would... thay wouldn't understand that COMPLICATED formula ;-)
grraadd 2 years ago 2
Great stuff, keep up the good work.!
itsabomberscope 2 years ago 2