We were unable to load Disqus. If you are a moderator please see our troubleshooting guide.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago


We have 800,000 to 1,000,000 years of pristine samples of Earths Climate to study, to base our scientific opinions on.
As observed & Measured in detail over decades, by several nations' satellites & 40,000 ground based Digital Stations, High Energy Solar Radiation is transmitted THRU Earth's Atmosphere, 'largely Non-Reactive' to those gases which science calls atmosphere...though some is reflected, nearly all reaches the Earth.

(( This is Observed & Measured in detail by numerous satellites, tens of thousands of Balloon Launches w/Digital packages, and 1,000's upon 1,000's of ground stations around the world. ))

https://youtu.be/h6eswiI3KL... Energy heats the Earth. ..without our atmosphere retaining much of this heat energy, Earth would become an ice planet when sun sets...rendering life-on-earth impossible.
(( This Too, is Observed & Measured in detail ))
The Earth then emits this warmth as a " Lower Energy IR Heat Emissions " toward the cold of space. (according to the laws of Thermodynamics)
"This" form of energy ( Infra-Red Thermal Radiation) is ' HIGHLY ' reactive with our atmospheric gases.
(( This, too, is Observed & Measured in detail over decades ))
Scientists around the world, Worry about the Current 'Global Warming' Phenomenon BECAUSE it is Coinciding with Earth's Most POWERFUL NATURAL CYCLES ( the Milankovitch cycles ).
1. Earth's CURRENT orbital swing has been farther away from the sun for 6,500 to 7,500 of years.
Away from our source of heat.
( we should be COOLING! )
2. Similarly, Scientists worry because the Northern Hemisphere of Earth's Axis is also tilted away from the Sun.
Away from our source of heat.
( we should be COOLING! )
3. Earth's wobble is similarly conducive to COOLING!
4. THESE, Earth's MOST POWERFUL NATURAL CYCLES, are Coinciding with the CURRENT Solar Cycle which has been decreasing in energy output, for 50 Years.

( we should be COOLING! )
In fact Earth Was behaving in a Normal/Typical way (based upon tens of millions of years in records) for MANY thousands of years...COOLING!
This Inter Glacial Warm Period PEAKED in temperatures roughly 6,500 to 8,000 years ago and WE HAD BEEN COOLING since then.
As we have done for many millions of years...a natural cycle of Long Coolings (60,000 to 100,000 yrs) with brief warmings (15,000 to 25,000 yrs.).
THAT is an average 100,000 year cycle / the Milankovitch Cycles.
You & Science should question
(( WHY IS Earth NOT COOLING...why is it WARMING!))
( What’s Changed to Over-Power Earth's Natural Cycles? )
Many Detailed Observations and many Scientific Experiments have gone into WHY Temperatures are Warming contrary to Earth's Most Powerful Natural Cycles ((The Milankovitch Cycles)).
"....summary of 10 direct, measured lines of empirical evidence that point to human-induced climate change.
In some cases,
I have added layman's references in addition to the more rigorous citations.
1. Burning Fossil Fuels Correlates with Rising CO2. Humans are currently emitting around 30+ billion tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (CDIAC(Oak Ridge National Laboratory (http://ornl.gov))).
Human Activities produce over 100+ Times MORE CO2 than all of the Volcanoes on Earth Combined/year!
( 0.3- billions tons by volcanoes versus 30+ billion tons by mankind.
Of course, it could be coincidence that CO2 levels are rising so sharply at the same time so let's look at more evidence that we're responsible for the rise in CO2 levels.
The proportion of Carbon-12 is increasing. (a distinct Burning-Fossil-Fuel isotope)
When we measure the type of carbon accumulating in the atmosphere, we observe more of the type of carbon that comes from fossil fuels (Manning 2006 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (http://noaa.gov))).
How do we know that recent CO<sub>2</sub> increases are due to human activities?
(RealClimate (http://realclimate.org))]
Oxygen Levels Dropping.
This is corroborated by measurements of oxygen in the atmosphere. ( at over 150 locations world wide )
Oxygen levels are Dropping.
In line with the amount of carbon dioxide rising, just as you'd expect from fossil fuel burning which takes oxygen out of the air to create carbon dioxide
(Manning 2006 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (http://noaa.gov))).
Coral Also Confirms They are Fossil Carbons.
Further independent evidence that humans are raising CO2 levels comes from measurements of carbon found in coral records going back many centuries.
These find a recent sharp rise in the type of carbon that comes from fossil fuels.
( Pelejero 2005 ( Science | AAAS (http://sciencemag.org)) ).
More Heat is Being Trapped at the precise CO2's wavelengths ( & nearly 2dz. other gasses ).
So we know humans are raising CO2 levels.
What's the effect?
Multiple Satellites ( multiple nations ) measure LESS Earth emissions of heat actually escaping out to space, at the Precise wavelengths that CO2 absorbs heat (and nearly 2 Dz. GH gasses as well) , thus finding
"direct experimental evidence for a significant increase in the Earth's greenhouse effect".
(Harries 2001 (Nature (http://nature.com)),
(Griggs 2004 (American Institute of Physics (http://aip.org)),
(Chen 2007 (http://eumetsat.eu (http://eumetsat.eu))).
More Downward Infrared Radiation.
Since less heat is escaping to space (because of greenhouse gases), > > where is it going?
MUCH of it is Back to the Earth's surface.
Surface measurements confirm this, observing more downward infrared radiation
(Philipona 2004 (Welcome to AGU (http://agu.org)),
(Wang 2009 (Welcome to AGU (http://agu.org))).
A closer look at the downward radiation finds more heat returning at CO2 wavelengths
(----------than entering the atmosphere---------),
leading to the conclusion that
"this experimental data should effectively END the argument by skeptics that
'no experimental evidence exists
for the connection between greenhouse gas increases in the atmosphere and global warming'."
(Evans 2006 (Event Management (http://confex.com))).
It's Not the Sun----Solar activity and climate - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
If an increased greenhouse effect is causing global warming, we should see certain patterns in the warming.
For example, the planet should warm faster at night than during the day.
This is indeed being observed
( Braganza 2004 (San Jose State University (http://sjsu.edu)), Alexander 2006 (Koninklijk Nederlands Meteorologisch Instituut (http://knmi.nl)) ).
Human Fingerprint on Climate Change:
Nights ARE warming faster than days (Global Warming and Climate Change skepticism examined (http://skepticalscience.com))
Nights Are Warming Faster Than Days. Here’s Why That’s Dangerous. (https://www.nytimes.com/int...
the Stratosphere
is Cooling Since the Heat Is Being Trapped in the lower layer of our atmosphere, called the Troposphere.
2013 State of the Climate: Stratospheric temperature (https://www.climate.gov/new...
Another distinctive pattern of greenhouse warming is cooling in the upper atmosphere, otherwise known as the stratosphere.
This is exactly what's happening (Jones 2003 (Welcome to AGU (http://agu.org))).
The Tropopause is Rising.
With the lower atmosphere (the troposphere) warming and the upper atmosphere ( the stratosphere ) cooling,
another consequence is the boundary between the troposphere and stratosphere, otherwise known as the tropopause, should rise as a consequence of greenhouse warming.
This has been observed ( Santer, 2003 (http://nyu.edu (http://nyu.edu))).
The Ionosphere is Contracting.
An even higher layer of the atmosphere, the ionosphere, is expected to cool and contract in response to greenhouse warming.
This has been observed by satellites (Laštovi?ka 2006 (Akademie ved Ceské republiky (http://cas.cz))).
In addition to the 10 indicators proposed by Skeptical Science, there are many other empirically demonstrated lines of evidence for the rapid warming the earth is undergoing that should also be considered.
Here are two such items.
Species are headed to the poles and/or higher elevations.
According to published research in the journal Science from August 2011, species are heading toward the poles and/or higher elevations.
(Source: Rapid Range Shifts of Species Associated with High Levels of Climate Warming)
(The Lowly Pine Beetle, confined by COLD Temps. for millennia, to Southern Latitudes
… is now found routinely north of Fairbanks Alaska and across near Artic Canada.
Canadian Forestry Officials complain that this beetle
NOW fells more Lodgepole Pines than Logging & Forest Fires Combined.)
Plants are blooming far earlier each year.
NASA research supports this
(Source: Decades of Data Show Spring Advancing Faster Than Experiments Suggest)
as well as a 2011 University of California-San Diego study of Arctic blooms of phytoplankton
(Source: Researchers discover arctic blooms occurring earlier)
Antarctica has its first invasive species!
Volcanic carbon dioxide emissions helped trigger the Tumultuous Triassic climate change
Posted: 14 Apr 2020 09:57 AM PDT
A new study finds volcanic activity played a direct role in triggering extreme climate change at the end of the Triassic period 201 million year ago, wiping out almost half of all existing species.
Finally, I leave you two excellent data points to consider:
Wide Spread Scientific Agreement.
(1) Called Scientific Consensus.
No scientific organization of national or international standing opposes the Widespread SHARED UNDERSTANDING ( consensus } regarding human-induced effects on climate change.
(Source: Scientific opinion on climate change)
For those who may allege conspiracy, consider the sheer number and diversity of the organizations listed here, representing diverse scientific backgrounds from Western and non-Western nations alike.
(Besides, if this were a conspiracy, how did they get plants and animals to collude?
For That Matter, how did they get Muslims, Jews, Atheists, and Christians to agree)
(2) Independent Analyses and Converted Skeptics:
In 2012, a Berkeley physicist completed an independent research project, funded in part by fossil fuel billionaires (the Koch brothers), to evaluate raw global temperature data and come to its own conclusions.
The result?
The Conversion of a Climate-Change Skeptic
The ASTRONOMIC COSTs of doing Nothing about Global Warming
If You Think Fighting Climate Change Will Be Expensive, Calculate the Cost of Letting It Happen (https://hbr.org/2017/06/if-...
What's Really Warming the World? (https://www.bloomberg.com/g...
https://cleantechnica.com/f... (https://cleantechnica.com/f...

Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago


The rush to return to the Dark Ages must be fought with every fiber of our being.

The use of imagination to explain the natural world is superstition and shamanism.

Technically, it fell under the name of ALCHEMY as a far broader term than just converting led into gold. Alchemy grew to be a superstition-based conspiracy theory of the natural world far broader than that.


explicitly and specifically to REJECT the superstition and speculation that the Left now wants to drag the world back into.

The Dark Ages were dark because people IMAGINED things without TESTING them by hard-core empirical experiments.

That is where we got ideas like mice and rats are spontaneously generated from dirty, oily rags, because people observed that mice and rats are often seen hiding in dirty, oily rags.

Look up "spontaneous generation" pseudo-scientists and BE ASHAMED -- BE VERY ASHAMED. The idea of spontaneous generation FIT THE OBSERVABLE DATA -- but it was wrong. It was laughably wrong. Superstitious "alchemists" (as they called themselves, BROADER than just manufacutring gold, it grew to an entire cult of secret knowledge -- the knowledge secret, not the practitioners) OBSERVED mice and dirty, oily rags co-incident in the same place.


Be ashamed pseudo-scientists. Be very ashamed.

The kind of ahem -- "analysis" used by today's pseudo-scientists is how we got the use of leeches to cure people and bloodletting as a medical cure. Those things made perfect sense, BUT THEY WERE TOTALLY WRONG.

DESIRE (to know things we do not know or believe in things unproven) has now corrupted the world into superstitious pseudo-science, and humanity is returning to the Dark Ages once again.

Oh, we do engineering well enough. We can build a DVD player or a computer printer.


Before the DVD player is shipped out the door, it is TESTED to make sure it works.

But the world of science (as distinct from applied engineering) is now officially dead.

There is no more science. You can buy a lab coat on Amazon. But we have returned to the Dark Ages when it comes to science.

Scientia Praecepta • 1 year ago

Eschew prolixity and pleonasm when you write a garrulous jeremiad of gallimaufry and unscientific logorrhea based on your meaningless prejudiced feelings. BTW you are a great alchemist.

Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

A QUESTION for all the gullible and naive people who believe in man-made climate change:

WHY do you want to believe in fear porn so much?

Is it a rush of adrenaline to be afraid?

Why do you like to be afraid?

Why are you so fiercely determiend to believe in things that are not true?

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

How many people died from the London smog in 1952?
In 1952 London, 12,000 people died from smog
((industrial output...the same that has created threatening climate change))
- here's why that matters now 18 Clean air regulations save lives By Alessandra Potenza @ale_potenza Dec 16, 2017, 9:00am EST
In 1952 London, 12,000 people died from smog - here's why ...


Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

Pollution has nothing to do with climate change.

THey are completely unrelated.

Liar Leftists try to FOOL people by saying they are connected.

They'r not.

Efforts to fight pollution are mutually exclusive with controlling CO2.

Technology to reduce pollution are mutually contradictory with technology to reduce CO2 output.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

CO2, in every scientific lab on earth and in US courts...including the Supreme Court ... CO2 is Pollution!

Your Ignorance is showing.....zip it up!

Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

Not even in the US Supreme Court is CO2 pollution.

Hint: I read the US SUpreme Court opinion.

You clearly did not

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

Only YOU Know Nothing, See Nothing, Hear Nothing!!

Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

READ the US SUpreme Court opinion.

I did.

It DOES NOT say that CO2 is a pollutant.

It says that under the terms of the Clean Air Act's very broad language the artificial emission of CO2 COULD affect the air under the broad terms of the Clean Air Act.

The courts have NEVER said that CO2 is a pollutant.

The courts have said that the EPA has the authority to regulate CO2 emissions, and therefore is required to provide a reasoned, fact-based analysis of whether to do so or not.

But the courts NEVER designated CO2 as pollution or a pollutant.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

The Clean Air Act is designed to control pollution...the court gave the EPA the right, under the law, to control pollution...CO2 etc. "CO2 Emissions'.

Scientia Praecepta • 1 year ago
Pollution has nothing to do with climate change.

SCOTUS clearly ruled that your are FoS.

• *Human induced from fossil fuels* CO₂ is a pollutant, not natural CO₂. In Massachusetts v. EPA (April 2007), the Supreme Court held that the Clean Air Act had a “capacious” definition of “air pollutant,” and that due to climate change, man made GHGs are “air pollutants” for regulatory purposes.

The finding has already withstood court scrutiny. A coalition of states and industry groups sued the EPA over the 2009 finding, and it was upheld by the DC Court of Appeals in 2012. SCOTUS declined to take the case.
• 99.9% of extant life exhales CO₂ because it's a TOXIC by-product from consuming/metabolizing energy supplied from food sources.

It's a pollutant with respect to:
• the enhanced greenhouse effect and changing pH of water bodies.
• acidifying the oceans and lakes (30% increase in H+ ions) which prevents microorganisms from producing biogenic carbonate for survival. Plankton at the bottom of the food chain is one of the microorganisms being impacted.
• greening of the planet as there are two main types of natural vegetation, C₄ and C₃, the latter grows faster and bigger causing the former to decline or go extinct which impacts biodiversity that has a knock on effect through our habitat.
• greening of the planet causes albedo to decrease which causes additional secondary warming feedback.
• increased rates of COPD, asthma, leukemia and many other cancers are also bad outcomes, all caused by burning fossil fuels. 57 EPA and other science papers at this site:


• Increasing pCO₂ causes people to become dumber. Our science-deniers are evidence of that and here's the research showing how increasing CO₂ is making us dumber:


R. Kooi • 1 year ago

Where was the smog that killed 20 people in 1948?
The 1948 Donora ((industrial output...the same that has created threatening climate change)) smog killed 20 people and caused respiratory problems for 7,000 of the 14,000 people living in Donora, Pennsylvania, a mill town on the Monongahela River 24 miles (39 km) southeast of Pittsburgh. The event is commemorated by the Donora Smog Museum .
1948 Donora smog - Wikipedia


Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

Pollution has nothing to do with global warming.

Global warming has nothing to do with pollution.

This is a common area of intentional confusion that climate change evangelists prey upon.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

A: Global warming occurs when carbon dioxide (CO2) and other air pollutants and greenhouse gases collect in the atmosphere and absorb sunlight and solar radiation that have bounced off the earths surface. Normally, this radiation would escape into spacebut these pollutants, which can last for years to centuries in the atmosphere, trap the heat and cause the planet to get hotter. That's what's known as the greenhouse effect.
See more on nrdc.org
These natural causes are still in play today, but their influence is too small or they occur too slowly to explain the rapid warming seen in recent decades. We know this because scientists closely monitor the natural and human activities that influence climate with a fleet of satellites and surface instruments. Scientists theorize that there may be a multi-decadal trend in solar output, though if one exists, it has not been observed as yet. Even if the Sun were getting brighter, however, the pattern of warming observed o…
See more on earthobservatory.nasa.gov

Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago
"Normally, this radiation would escape into spacebut these pollutants, which can last for years to centuries in the atmosphere, trap the heat and cause the planet to get hotter."

See how completely confused Leftists are?

The laughable idea of global warming that you describe

that the CO2 remains nailed in place.

But it doesn't

CO2 air RISES.

So when CO2 absorbs heat energy, it MOVES and RISES up to outer space.

From the edge of space, the CO2 radiates heat energy out into space.

The error -- the fatal error -- in the global warming scam is shown by your summary.

You assume that the air containing CO2 remains in place.

It doesn't.

Hot air rises.

So CO2
trap heat because CO2 TRAVELS up towards outer space.

And there the scam dies.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

Once again, your ignorance is showing!
Your Intellectual Shortcomings have no equal....zip it up.

CO2 is 60% heavier than dry air...

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

THESE NUMEROUS INDUSTRY CREATED Catastrophes are indicators of what damage we were doing and continue to do to our atmosphere.
..in thousands of cities/industrial centers around the world for CENTURIES!!
"Not only did air pollution incur a severe economic price, it also resulted in significant health costs. Air pollution deaths throughout this period rose steeply; in London, mortality from bronchitis increased from 25 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants in 1840 to 300 deaths per 100,000 in 1890.
What the history of London’s air ... - Our World in Data

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
THERE IS NO INTENTIONAL CONFUSION on the part of Main Stream Science....unless we are talking about YOUR RIGHT WING POLITICAL AX to grind.
WELL OVER 3/4 and up to 1 million Scientists around the world are speaking out as if with a single voice!

The following are the legitimate scientific organizations that hold
the position that Climate Change has been caused by human action
(by majority votes of their memberships, or by repeated votes of the boards of directors elected by said memberships):

Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile
Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal
Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana
Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela
Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala
Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico
Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia
Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru
Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Académie des Sciences, France
Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada
Academy of Athens
Academy of Science of Mozambique
Academy of Science of South Africa
Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)
Academy of Sciences Malaysia
Academy of Sciences of Moldova
Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt
Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand
Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science
African Academy of Sciences
Albanian Academy of Sciences
Amazon Environmental Research Institute
American Academy of Pediatrics
American Anthropological Association
American Association for the Advancement of Science
American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
American Astronomical Society
American Chemical Society
American College of Preventive Medicine
American Fisheries Society
American Geophysical Union
American Institute of Biological Sciences
American Institute of Physics
American Meteorological Society
American Physical Society
American Public Health Association
American Quaternary Association
American Society for Microbiology
American Society of Agronomy
American Society of Civil Engineers
American Society of Plant Biologists
American Statistical Association
Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
Australian Academy of Science
Australian Bureau of Meteorology
Australian Coral Reef Society
Australian Institute of Marine Science
Australian Institute of Physics
Australian Marine Sciences Association
Australian Medical Association
Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
Botanical Society of America
Brazilian Academy of Sciences
British Antarctic Survey
Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
California Academy of Sciences
Cameroon Academy of Sciences
Canadian Association of Physicists
Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
Canadian Geophysical Union
Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
Canadian Society of Soil Science
Canadian Society of Zoologists
Caribbean Academy of Sciences views
Center for International Forestry Research
Chinese Academy of Sciences
Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia)
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences
Crop Science Society of America
Cuban Academy of Sciences
Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters
Ecological Society of America
Ecological Society of Australia
Environmental Protection Agency
European Academy of Sciences and Arts
European Federation of Geologists
European Geosciences Union
European Physical Society
European Science Foundation
Federation of American Scientists
French Academy of Sciences
Geological Society of America
Geological Society of Australia
Geological Society of London
Georgian Academy of Sciences
German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina
Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
Indian National Science Academy
Indonesian Academy of Sciences
Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand
Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK
InterAcademy Council
International Alliance of Research Universities
International Arctic Science Committee
International Association for Great Lakes Research
International Council for Science
International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
International Research Institute for Climate and Society
International Union for Quaternary Research
International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
Islamic World Academy of Sciences
Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities
Kenya National Academy of Sciences
Korean Academy of Science and Technology
Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts
l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
Latin American Academy of Sciences
Latvian Academy of Sciences
Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences
Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology
Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts
National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina
National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
National Academy of Sciences, United States of America
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
National Association of Geoscience Teachers
National Association of State Foresters
National Center for Atmospheric Research
National Council of Engineers Australia
National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Research Council
National Science Foundation
Natural England
Natural Environment Research Council, UK
Natural Science Collections Alliance
Network of African Science Academies
New York Academy of Sciences
Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences
Nigerian Academy of Sciences
Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters
Oklahoma Climatological Survey
Organization of Biological Field Stations
Pakistan Academy of Sciences
Palestine Academy for Science and Technology
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Polish Academy of Sciences
Romanian Academy
Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain
Royal Astronomical Society, UK
Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
Royal Irish Academy
Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
Royal Scientific Society of Jordan
Royal Society of Canada
Royal Society of Chemistry, UK
Royal Society of the United Kingdom
Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Russian Academy of Sciences
Science and Technology, Australia
Science Council of Japan
Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research
Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics
Scripps Institution of Oceanography
Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Slovak Academy of Sciences
Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
Society for Ecological Restoration International
Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
Society of American Foresters
Society of Biology (UK)
Society of Systematic Biologists
Soil Science Society of America
Sudan Academy of Sciences
Sudanese National Academy of Science
Tanzania Academy of Sciences
The Wildlife Society (international)
Turkish Academy of Sciences
Uganda National Academy of Sciences
Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Woods Hole Research Center
World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
World Federation of Public Health Associations
World Forestry Congress
World Health Organization
World Meteorological Organization
Zambia Academy of Sciences
Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences

Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

Exactly. Man-made global warming is RELIGION for you, in which you hate humanity and want to make humans atone for their sins.

Nevertheless, pollution and climate change have nothing to do with each other.

The technology to reduce CO2 is at odds with the technology to reduce pollution.

You need coal plants to run your electric cars

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

jonathonmosely Schultz-----I See Nothing
---------------------------------------I Hear Nothing
---------------------------------------I Know Nothing

classicalmusiclover • 1 year ago

I have an interesting question for you. Who has the better understanding of viral transmission and science in general: Anthony Fauci, or Donald Trump?

9.8m/ss • 1 year ago

I've known scientists all my life and occasionally worked with them. Our time together has given me a good understanding of their motivations. I've worked in the grants office at a Federal science agency and I know the rules for funding scientific research. This experience gives me confidence that no conspiracy to present a body of false climate science would survive scientific competition.

The elementary school version of the scientific enterprise that you've described in this column omits the main motivation behind quite a lot of scientific inquiry, professional rivalry and competition. Your conspiracy of false science would be torn to bits by post-docs busting the greybeards to make a name. There are far too many players and things move too fast for the widely alleged global groupthink to persist. That's why I trust the physical sciences to report the truth more than I trust any other societal institution.

Thanks for asking.

Lee Bertie • 1 year ago

Climate Science is a multi billion dollar industry that makes all its money from Governement grants. The NEED climate change to be caused by man or their money will dry up. They have all the incentive in the world to keep the lies going.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

You have missed the historical FACTS!
The massive redistribution of wealth
(( which you are NOW blaming on the SCIENTISTS & the Renewable Industries ))
has been ongoing by the GLOBALIST Fossil Fuel Deep-State Energy monopoly AND their GLOBALIST BANKERS!!.
Despite their enviable profitability
they started getting Subsidies & Supports After several years of generous political donations in 1918!
Those Supports/Subsidies have done nothing BUT GROWN.
19 years ago, worldwide subsidies & supports to the fossil Fuel Billionaire Industrialists (( and their globalist bankers ))
had grown to 1% of the entire world's GDP...trillions of dollars.
In 2016,
Paul Ryan gave a Lengthy Lamentation about the fact, that by that year's end,
"Supports/Subsidies/Free Infra Structure Construction and Maintenance/wage supports/ Foreign Aid to reimburse nations for the Subsidies they are required to give OUR fossil Fuel Industries, etc.

That same year,
2016, worldwide the Globalist Fossil Fuel Deep-State and their ultra nationalist bankers were
SUCKING ABOUT 6 to 6.5% of world GDP.........many trillions of dollars!!
IT IS IN THEIR BEST INTEREST to keep you pointing in other directions!
... at welfare, at Green Energy programs, at Illegal Immigration,
at other peoples claim of Redistribution of wealth etc.
Point at anything but their nefarious INTENT!

But if you follow the money...and all the tax breaks, Deferred Taxes
...it flows overwhelmingly toward The DEEP STATE Fossils & Their GLOBALIST Bankers.

9.8m/ss • 1 year ago

The company that is now Exxonmobil hired teams of climate researchers in the 1970s, to investigate possible risks to the business from climate change. They concluded the risk to the company's business was significant, both from climate effects on the company's infrastructure, and from the inevitable public policy response. They warned senior management about the risks in 1978, ten years before Hansen's testimony. It doesn't matter who pays the scientists, the result is the same.

9.8m/ss • 1 year ago

The Koch family foundation hired a team of physicists to bust the science published by academic and government scientists. (Yes that Koch family, the one that founded all those "conservative think tanks.") They confirmed it instead. You can follow their ongoing research at Berkeleyearth.org. It doesn't matter who pays the scientists, the result is the same.

Scientia Praecepta • 1 year ago

Bullschitt and logorrhea at its best from an ignorant cretin with a hard on for biosphere destruction.

classicalmusiclover • 1 year ago

If that were true, you'd be able to point to climate scientists who have grown disproportionately wealthy beyond executing their salaried research, teaching, and administrative duties.

As it stands, climate scientists are not even among the highest paid faculty on their own campuses and could easily make a lot more money taking their skills, knowledge, and credentials to the private for-profit sector.

Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

The real question is WHY do Leftists fall for this rubbish?

WHAT is it about Leftists that you want to believe in such utter laughable malarkey?

Why are Leftists so gullible?

WHY do Leftists fall for fear porn?

Do you really believe in this fear pron?

Or do you suppose that ordinary people are so dumb they will fall for such silliness?

Is it that Leftists are gullible?

Or are you hoping that I will be?

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

YEP....you are 12 years old going on 11.

classicalmusiclover • 1 year ago

Here he is (no kidding): https://www.linkedin.com/in...

R. Kooi • 1 year ago


R. Kooi • 1 year ago

Jonathonmosely Schultz:

Sergeant Schultz
I See Nothing
I Hear Nothing
I Know Nothing

9.8m/ss • 1 year ago

Strange. There's nothing in his brag page at Linkedin about his amazing scientific accomplishments. He's singlehandedly destroyed climate science right here in this column. But he's too modest to talk about it where his professional peers might see.

classicalmusiclover • 1 year ago

Don't forget his singlehanded destruction of astrophysics, evolutionary biology, the relevance of knowledge and expertise, and the very definition of science. "If leftists understood science, they'd be conservatives."

His work with Judicial Watch is, however, mentioned, and his comments here are fully consistent with that august organization. His Amazon page is even funnier, particularly his book about the "China Virus," telling us all about how Trump handled the virus better than the scientists, owning the libs.

I see my comments to his as a kind of bear-baiting, giving him opportunity to say the most absurd and self-revealing things. It is clear to me that when he tried to take a physics class at UMass/Amherst (a campus I know well, actually), he failed miserably, instilling a life-long resentment of the difficulties and mind-bending challenges of scientific inquiry.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

" Dr David Evans, a former climate modeller for the Government’s
Australian Greenhouse Office, says global warming predictions have been vastly exaggerated in error.
The academic, from Perth, Australia, who has passed 'six degrees'
(levels of training, not university degrees)
in applied mathematics, has analysed complex mathematical assumptions
widely used to predict climate change
HE is predicting world temperature will "STAGNATE" UP UNTIL '2017'
before COOLING dramatically,
We'll be KNEE DEEP in a ‘mini ice age’
by 2020--thru--2030.

"...One of the world’s "leading climate change experts"
((---according to Propaganda sites: Daily Caller/Breitbart/New American, PJ Media, Twitchy, Townhall---))
claims to have discovered mathematical anomalies which effectively
‘ DISPROVE ’ global warming."

Dr. Evans is not a climatologist but rather a PHD in Electrical Engineering, with a Math undergraduate degree.
((Electrical engineering like Tony Heller
((aka Steven Goddard...why does he need an alias...like a gangster??))
also routinely wrong about predictions ))

(( THIS PRECISE Prediction was made in the 70's by SKEPTIC Scientists & DENIERS, & THIS PRECISE Prediction was made in the 1990's & again for 2007-2009 by SKEPTIC/DENIERS CHRISTY & SPENCER ))

Now here it is again
.....up until 2017 temperatures are supposed to stagnate and then decline. (?)
20 of the 21 WARMEST YEARS on record have ALL occurred since 2000.

was EARTH'S Warmest year in recorded history...
was EARTH'S Warmest year in recorded history...
was EARTH'S Warmest year in recorded history...
is right behind 2016 in record RISING temperatures...
2019 & 2018
just snuggled in with 2016 & 2017.
..Record Ocean Warming too!
sets a high temperature record...nearly identical to 2016 world record.
The temperature rise has been more dramatic for winter months,
with the average thermometer reading for the cold season 4 degrees warmer than five decades earlier.

WINTERS are about 2 weeks shorter...SUMMERS are about 1 week longer.
This trend is far more apparent, the farther North or South you go.
Alaska, Canada, Russian Siberia...all HAVE ALREADY WARMED
for decades at TWICE the world atmospheric temperature increase.
A very good summary of the science the US National Academy of Science & UK Royal Society - the two premiere scientific bodies in the world Climate change:
evidence and causes | Royal Society https://royalsociety.org/to...... < WEB SITE

http://nas-sites.org/americ...... < DOCUMENT

classicalmusiclover • 1 year ago

The real question is why you reject the findings from climate science, a non-political discipline in the physical sciences, as "leftist."

Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago
"The real question is why you reject the findings from climate science, a non-political discipline in the physical sciences, as "leftist.""

Because it is unscientific fear porn that violates all the laws of science.

WHY don't you buy snake oil from Dr. Trust Me to cure what ails ya?

Because it is B.S.

it is a scam to try to impose government control to solve a "crisis" that does not exist

R. Kooi • 1 year ago
Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

"WHY is 2015 the hottest year on record?"

EASY... It's not

And "the record" only goes back at the earliest to 1850.

So not much of a record.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

2015 WAS the warmest Year in history...
2016 WAS the warmest Year in history....
...tied with 2016 as a record breaker warm year.

In fact,
the last 10 year period has been the warmest 10 year period in many thousands of years!!
These Years are substantially above the Holocene Inter Glacial Maximum temps.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

BASED ON 800,000 years to 1,000,000 years of pristine data...

R. Kooi • 1 year ago
Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

First, nobody knows the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere until around 1950.

The machine for measuring CO2 in the air did not work until around 1930 -- then there was World War II.

Also, CO2 is a good.

Plants have a party when CO2 goes up. The plants go wild and turn the CO2 into oxygen.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

We have pristine atmosphere samples 800,000 to 1,000,000 years.

EPICA Dome C and Vostok Station, Antarctica: approximately 796,562 BCE to 1813 CE Lüthi, D., M. Le Floch, B. Bereiter, T. Blunier, J.-M. Barnola, U. Siegenthaler, D. Raynaud, J. Jouzel, H. Fischer, K. Kawamura, and T.F. Stocker. 2008. High-resolution carbon dioxide concentration record 650,000–800,000 years before present. Nature 453:379–382. www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pub... Dome, Antarctica, 75-year smoothed: …
See more on epa.gov

EPICA Dome C and Vostok Station, Antarctica: approximately 796,562 BCE to 1813 CE Lüthi, D., M. Le Floch, B. Bereiter, T. Blunier, J.-M. Barnola, U. Siegenthaler, D. Raynaud, J. Jouzel, H. Fischer, K. Kawamura, and T.F. Stocker. 2008. High-resolution carbon dioxide concentration record 650,000–800,000 years before present. Nature 453:379–382. www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pub... Dome, Antarctica, 75-year smoothed: …
See more on epa.gov

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

And again, I remind you that YOU ARE NOT A TURNIP!

You are an animal...and animals EXHALE (dispose of) CO2 because it is a toxic by product of our bodies.

And NO! plants do not go wild for CO2!
"The Goldilocks Concentrations for CO2 (for Human Life, Animal Life, Plant Life) is 180ppm to 285ppm...based on millions of years of flourishing life.
It is a shameful expression of man's arrogance that we are MINDLESSLY changing those numbers upon which OUR Creation & Entire Physiology are based..." The last time there was as much carbon in the atmosphere as there is today, there were palm trees in the arctic.

"This is what gives rise to the idea of the “Goldilocks zone” — a term used by astrobiologists to describe just what kind of climate conditions would be necessary for the rise of intelligent life, and which suggests both how rare and how precarious such conditions are. But the authors of the “human niche” paper have gone further, examining not just planetwide climate conditions but regional ones, and both investigating the past to see how many kinds of climates could support large human populations and projecting the future to see how many of those kinds there would be under climate conditions like this century. Looking back, the answer is, not many kinds of climates can support the kind of life we’ve gotten used to—indeed evolved and developed human civilization under. “Humans have concentrated in a surprisingly narrow subset of Earth’s available climates, characterized by mean annual temperatures around ~13 °C,” the authors write. ))))
"CO2 now exceeds levels (417ppm) higher than any point since the creation & evolution of humans -


"May 13, 2019
- There is more CO2 in the atmosphere today than any point since well before the evolution of humans.
Our entire physiology evolved and adapted to these CO2 (atmospheric gas levels) of 180ppm - 285ppm.

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

We have actual thermometer readings around the world that date back centuries.
The earliest form of temperature measuring instrument was a primitive type of thermoscope which is mentioned by the Greek Physicist – Hero of Alexandria – in the second century BC. The thermometer is first mentioned by Leurechon, in his book “Recreation Mathematique” written
in 1624.


See all results for this question
Who created the thermometer?
The Greeks had simple thermometers in the first century BC. Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) Italian physicist, invented a basic air thermometer. Daniel Gabriel Fahrenheit (1686-1736) was the German physicist who invented the alcohol thermometer in 1709, and the mercury thermometer
in 1714.
Who invented the thermometer - Answers.com

See all results for this question
We have Proxy readings that date back thousands and thousands of yearsl

Sorry you hid behind the door while your High School Science Teacher was giving this lecture!

Jonathon Moseley • 1 year ago

"We have actual thermometer readings around the world that date back centuries."


We have TOYS going back to the ancient Greeks.

But the temperature SCALE was not invented until the 1700s.

We have no systematic measurements of temperature -- calibrated to a standard of professional quality (not toys) -- earlier than 1850, probably not until 1880.

Remember -- the temperature record must be kept in at least 100 cities distributed around the world to have any value for planetary temperature (and even that is not good enough).

The temperature must be recorded meticulously EVERY DAY at THE SAME TIMES OF DAY.

It can't be a hobbyist who oops forgot today or went on vacation and there is missing data.

We do not know the temperature of any place on Earth on a scientifically valid basis earlier than 1850

R. Kooi • 1 year ago

The 1700s are 300 years ago!!!!


R. Kooi • 1 year ago

Funny how you had to go back a thousand PLUS years to the ancient Greeks to find some evidence that YOU MAY ACCIDENTALLY BE RIGHT!!