Climate Scientists Laugh at Global Warming Hysteria
1000frolly | 15.V.2013
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C35pasCr6KI
I recall my earlier reading of a French book:
Ichtiaque Rasool, Système Terre - "pas terrible ..."*
http://hglundahlsblog.blogspot.com/2010/09/ichtiaque-rasool-systeme-terre-pas.html
The huge problem is not whether we should cut down transports and high energy productions to avoid causing climate change.
We could use some less in order to have a more decentralised production and cutting down on heating for persons has very little to do with it.
The huge problem is, some want us to keep having same or roughly same consummation of for instance fossil fuels or its alternative uranium, and perhaps other alternatives, but fix the "carbon problem" by there being fewer of us.
Here is a short bio of the now deceased author of the book:
S. Ichtiaque Rasool 1930-2016
https://dps.aas.org/news/s.-ichtiaque-rasool-1930-2016
As I recall the reading, he was insecure about scientific certitudes on what impact carbon has, but he made a very deep reverence to Malthus, about how many we are. And Demography was not even his speciality - not sure he would have made a saner comment if it had been so - so, while his book started off the kind of hysteric wave of "climate's wild and we're to blame" it did not support it. Not quite. Neither do these men in the video. BUT he bolstered that uncertainty with an appeal to Malthus:
Si les scénarios sur le futur climat de la planète sont plutôt incertains, celui sur la croissance démographique est plutôt sinistre. (My quote in my article, from p. 105)
If the scenarios on the future climate of the planet are rather uncertain, that of the demographic growth is rather sinister. (My translation now.)
What about scientists after Rasool?
The description of the video has this comment:
Comments on the 97% 'consensus' claims; The "97% consensus" claim is pure fiction, there never was and isn't a 97% consensus. See Legett et al;
Leading to this link:
Climate Consensus and ‘Misinformation’: A Rejoinder to Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change
David R. Legates • Willie Soon • William M. Briggs • Christopher Monckton of Brenchley
http://www.climaterealists.org.nz/sites/climaterealists.org.nz/files/Legatesetal13-Aug30-Agnotology%5B1%5D.pdf
From whence I get this table:
That said, if more grain was baked or brewed where it grew, if more apples were cidered or pied or just munched where they grew, if more people lived where the food grew, the world would be a better place. But this doesn't mean in any way shape or form we need to be fewer people.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St Nicanor Deacon**
10.I.2019
See also : YouTube's Stasi (Thought Police) attack 1000Frolly
1000frolly | 9.XII.2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxZ8bo4M1XE
* L'article est en français ... ** See Acts 6:5
No comments:
Post a Comment