European Green Energy

tomi01 said:
I'm in London and this whole green "shift" is a complete hoax and nightmare. Bills are out of sight and small businesses struggle. People struggle, middle class nightmare, because they carry most of the costs, as those on income support get some subsidy from the gov.
How can you have business expansion, factories and a thriving economy when the most absurd "renewable" sources of energy are forcing everyone into compliance?

Look at what is happening now across Europe, the farmers and truckers have blocked cities and borders. Trucks and farm vehicles by the thousands. People are sick of this nonsense.

It is a way of disempowering people and the soverignity of countries, while enriching those who are vested in this "green transformation". Which is anything but green. What these monstrosities like windfarms and solarfarms do to the environment and offshore ecology is horrific. All for a hoax.. Because CO2 is the "culprit", (which is unproven if you listen to debates between senior scientists who have been embroiled in this madness for decades), they are now insisting that herds of sheep and cattle be halved, that city transport be geared for 15 minute walking commutes, vehicles driving outside or inside are fined. You even have some people here so brainwashed by the fear mongering over CO2 that they say.. "You have no right to own a car". Well who died and left these globalists boss? This green nonsense is a phase that has to be busted and it can't come soon enough.
More...

No climate models yet can predict future temperature let alone climate. Furthermore the models are useless for proving whether CO2 increases are causing significant warming because these models are all predicated on CO2 causing warming. So when Hansen's early models showed no appreciable warming, they built positive feedback into the models so that they would show some temperature response to CO2. Fortunately our climate system responds to perturbations with overall negative --- not positive! --- feedback. (see for example the brilliant work of Miskolczi, http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Ferenc.pdf Miskolczi was formerly in Hansen's GISS group but left when GISS tried to suppress publication of his research results showing climate responds to perturbations with negative, not positive, feedback. If correct, and I personally accept Miskolczi's results as correct, then his results invalidate Hansen's foundational hypothesis.

The climate "science" of James Hansen and his lab at GISS has been hopelessly botched. The problem now is that it is very difficult to get someone to agree with something that is true when their livelihood depends on their believing it is isn't. And it is doubly difficult when the media picks up on preliminary scientific results and promotes them as established fact among the non-scientific public. James Hansen is to blame for this. He will someday be infamous, just as Lysenko became infamous:
) .

See especially Nir Shaviv, and also the work of William Happer, Murry Salby, Freeman Dyson, Richard Lindzen, and on and on. There isn't even total agreement among climate experts on whether the Earth's Troposphere temperature is rising, although the consensus seems to be that it is. If it is rising, no one is certain why, by Nir Shaviv seems to have offered the most promising hypothesis to explain very long term changes in Earth's climate. As a scientist I would think not enough attention is being paid to anthropomorphic thermal pollution. The one thing that the science is very clear on now is that CO2 is incapable at it's present concentration of causing a warming problem. All of the efforts to curb CO2 output will be for naught, as time will prove.* Nevertheless, as a scientist I welcome the efforts diversify away from fossil fuels. It would be nice to get the science right though, so Greta Thunberg could stop worrying. Maybe someday.
_______________
* We are actually in a period of historically low CO2 concentration and some scientists have expressed the view that we might be getting dangerously low in CO2.
 
Last edited:
piezoe said:
No climate models yet can predict future temperature let alone climate. Furthermore the models are useless for proving whether CO2 increases are causing significant warming because these models are all predicated on CO2 causing warming. So when Hansen's early models showed no appreciable warming, they built positive feedback into the models so that they would show some temperature response to CO2. Fortunately our climate system responds to perturbations with overall negative --- not positive! --- feedback. (see for example the brilliant work of Miskolczi, http://ruby.fgcu.edu/courses/twimberley/EnviroPhilo/Ferenc.pdf Miskolczi was formerly in Hansen's GISS group but left when GISS tried to suppress publication of his research results showing climate responds to perturbations with negative, not positive, feedback. If correct, and I personally accept Miskolczi's results as correct, then his results invalidate Hansen's foundational hypothesis.

The climate "science" of James Hansen and his lab at GISS has been hopelessly botched. The problem now is that it is very difficult to get someone to agree with something that is true when their livelihood depends on their believing it is isn't. And it is doubly difficult when the media picks up on preliminary scientific results and promotes them as established fact among the non-scientific public. James Hansen is to blame for this. He will someday be infamous, just as Lysenko became infamous:
) .

See especially Nir Shaviv, and also the work of William Happer, Murry Salby, Freeman Dyson, Richard Lindzen, and on and on. There isn't even total agreement among climate experts on whether the Earth's Troposphere temperature is rising, although the consensus seems to be that it is. If it is rising, no one is certain why, by Nir Shaviv seems to have offered the most promising hypothesis to explain very long term changes in Earth's climate. As a scientist I would think not enough attention is being paid to anthropomorphic thermal pollution. The one thing that the science is very clear on now is that CO2 is incapable at it's present concentration of causing a warming problem. All of the efforts to curb CO2 output will be for naught, as time will prove.* Nevertheless, as a scientist I welcome the efforts diversify away from fossil fuels. It would be nice to get the science right though, so Greta Thunberg could stop worrying. Maybe someday.
_______________
* We are actually in a period of historically low CO2 concentration and some scientists have expressed the view that we might be getting dangerously low in CO2.
More...
Not to mention Michael Mann and his (hide the decline) hocky stick..
 
tomi01 said:
Errm... the "fascists" were socialists. Authoritarianism is what socialists do, otherwise they couldn't give to the have nots, which like vampires they suck from the hard work and enterprise of anyone who isn't their corporate sponsors. And if you know anything at all over the years of what is going on in the Trump campaign it is to restore the freedoms and increase the prospect of thriving for the poor minority and black communities the Dems have decimated with their insane policies. Charity begins at home and personal freedom and freedom of speech is a core tenet of Trump's policies and those who follow them.

If you think "white supremacy" is believing in character cultivation and not twisting people's minds with critical race theory.. then you might be a democrat.. :)
More...

You might want to reread your history. Socialist and communist workers fought the brown and black shirts in Germany and Italy. However, I don't want to differentiate the extremes; dictators use any convenient political party or create them to gain power and establish their dictatorship.
Thankfully America is strong enough to prevent your little orange muppet from doing the same here. Soon enough he will be in prison, but first he will be forced to give up his bil..millions to all those he defamed.
Freedom of speech is a populist illusion promoted by the fascists to empower the fringes into thinking their extreme views are just as valid as those of the social majority.
 
VicBee said:
You might want to reread your history. Socialist and communist workers fought the brown and black shirts in Germany and Italy. However, I don't want to differentiate the extremes; dictators use any convenient political party or create them to gain power and establish their dictatorship.
Thankfully America is strong enough to prevent your little orange muppet from doing the same here. Soon enough he will be in prison, but first he will be forced to give up his bil..millions to all those he defamed.
Freedom of speech is a populist illusion promoted by the fascists to empower the fringes into thinking their extreme views are just as valid as those of the social majority.
More...

spoken like a true demon-cratic communist.... bravo
 
VicBee said:
You might want to reread your history. Socialist and communist workers fought the brown and black shirts in Germany and Italy. However, I don't want to differentiate the extremes; dictators use any convenient political party or create them to gain power and establish their dictatorship.
Thankfully America is strong enough to prevent your little orange muppet from doing the same here. Soon enough he will be in prison, but first he will be forced to give up his bil..millions to all those he defamed.
Freedom of speech is a populist illusion promoted by the fascists to empower the fringes into thinking their extreme views are just as valid as those of the social majority.
More...
Freedom of speech is the bedrock of the democratic process and progress within western culture. Without it you have fascism or haven't you read your history?

Also, attacking your political opposition with frivolous lawfare, corrupting the justice system and relentlessly creating scenarios where there is a constant barrage of lies and hoaxes to feed to the media to try to extinguish him from public favor isn't working so great is it? :)
 
Last edited:
tomi01 said:
Freedom of speech is the bedrock of the democratic process and progress within western culture. Without it you have fascism or haven't you read your history?

Also, attacking your political opposition with frivolous lawfare, corrupting the justice system and relentlessly creating scenarios where there is a constant barrage of lies and hoaxes to feed to the media to try to extinguish him from public favor isn't working so great is it? :)
More...
There is zero correlation between freedom of speech and the bedrock of the democratic process and progress within western culture.
The democratic process began when individuals were given voting rights. It's a powerful expression of speech but I'm sure that's not what you're referring to by free speech.
America's most fundamental expression of speech, one person one vote, was subjugated from the start by the wealthy barons who recognized early on that popular vote would take away their dominance. But your fight for free speech doesn't extend to voting rights does it?
Progress came about when not just the wealthy but all men could vote, then women, then people of color. Am I wrong?
Your orange clown is going to prison, get used to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top