Politics

History Is Full Of Climate Change Myths That Were Used To Control Human Behavior

317 Comments

This is the most important issue of our time. Our world’s climate is at urgent breaking point! The planet is warming, the oceans are rising and the flood is inevitable! Civilized man is the villain knowingly committing this crime! His carbon footprint is his greatest sin and his mythological worldview compels him to expect the planets retribution! But hope exists in the form of a culture hero. Leonardo DiCaprio is not only warning people of their impending doom, he is also the champion of the crusade against it.

Before the Flood is documentary about man-made climate change currently making waves in South Africa. It was produced, narrated and elucidated by DiCaprio who presents this myth as though his voice is the first to do so. About 300 deluge narratives can be counted throughout the world. Five of them are significant for Western civilization because they contain the same formula used by the modern disseminator of this propagandistic tale.

The flood myth is basically this: the gods decide to wipe us out because we’ve degraded and destroyed paradise. The great flood is their preferred method though they do occasionally use plagues and droughts. Under divine, or inspirational instruction, the righteous hero mitigates mankind’s course in time. He is divinely rewarded for his achievement.

Conceptualizing the mythic narrative.

The Israelite Flood

The Genesis 6.5 – 8.22 version is certainly the most well-known. Our modern conception of sin is derived from an education in Biblical, and therefore Hebrew history and morality. So it’s worth noting the wickedness of man, and how every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. There is no ambiguity, man and all that he has done in the process of living on earth is deemed corrupt and violent. So all life has to end with the exception of the perfect man who walks with God—Noah.

The Greek Deluge

The human race renewed by the bones of Gaea.

In the Greek tradition, the degenerate age of mankind is described as a period when men respect neither their vows, nor justice, nor virtue. Zeus wants to annihilate the human race, but Prometheus warns his son Deucalion. He and his wife Pyrrha survive the flood and change mankind’s course by appeasing Zeus. The descendants of Deucalion, the Hellenes, become humanity’s new perfect form.

The Gilgamesh Epic

I will say hidden things to you and make known a secret of the gods.

The eleventh tablet of the Akkadian epic of Gilgamesh was inserted into The Epic of Gilgamesh around 1200 BC. In this famous work of cuneiform literature, Ut-napishtim is the hero concerned with ensuring life under the threat of god-controlled climate change. No reason is given for the gods decision to drown humanity but one of them Ea, warns Ut-napishtim, thereby preventing total destruction. The gods show remorse and gift the hero with immortality.

The Atrahasis Epic

Hearken to the message that he shall make known to you.

In an earlier copy, from around 1600 BC, the all-wise and pious king Atrahasis is warned to build the ark and prep for the deluge. Here the weather god Enlil wants to eradicate city-dwelling man. He apparently does this every 1200 years—alternating between plagues, droughts and floods. But on this occasion it’s our dense urban overpopulation and the associated noise pollution that triggered him.

The Sumerian Flood

All the devastating winds and storms came, and the flood storm swept over the great cities.

The Sumerian myth, copied around 1900 BC, has Ziusudra as the original form of the Noah character. The gods grow hostile to mankind for the perceived noise and general disturbance we cause. The divine solution is a cleansing by water. The humble and obedient hero is warned by the god Enki, he builds a ship, saves the seed of mankind and is ultimately given life like a god in the new phase of human moral evolution.

Why Some Are Inclined To Believe The Myth

Flood narratives are the result of folk memory. Various local disasters were experienced by some societies who then transmitted their story to others. For instance local flooding was frequent in Mesopotamia but there just aren’t any rivers capable of it in the Canaanite region. So it must have been borrowed by the Israelite tradition from a particularly authoritative disseminator of culture.

Politicizing the myth.

The purpose of these myths was to regulate human behaviour by convincing people that successful urban life is contemptible and annoys the planet to the extent that divine retribution should be expected. Moralized climate change is understandable for the ancients. These were religious texts after all. People believed the dogma because they had faith in its authoritative source.

Moralizing the narrative.

Today, the disseminator of the new version expects you to dogmatically believe it based on his faith in the people who told him about modern science, the scientific method, and empirical truths. An actor was enlisted to spread these “truths,” hoping to convince you based on personal authority.

Feed scrap to dogs and they’ll wag their tails.

Conclusion

Western culture has a long and interconnected literary tradition of the climate change narrative, and all versions are better than Before the Flood. Fossil fuel emissions, greenhouse gases, CFC’s, overpopulation and deforestation are just recent echoes of the same familiar themes we’ve always associated with the success of civilized life. Climate change and its apparently inevitable floods are simply a part of the experience. But maybe our sanctimonious Hollywood hero, with his concern for all life, is aware of some great truth that has managed to escape the minds of all history’s greatest thinkers.

Read more on the three Mesopotamian Flood Myths in: Beyerlin, W (ed) 1975. Near Eastern Religious Texts Relating to the Old Testament. Philadelphia: The Westminster Press.

Read More: 60 Myths On Memory, Learning, Sleep, And Creativity

317 thoughts on “History Is Full Of Climate Change Myths That Were Used To Control Human Behavior”

  1. You want mankind to die in Great Flood? Throw all fatties in the ocean!
    What do you call a guy who never pulls out? A Cum-in-u-nist!
    What do you call a gangbang? Cumintern!

  2. I think the real environmental issue of our times is the over consumption of Earth’s resources (i.e. consuming them faster than they can be replenished). Ironically, the climate change narrative adds to this problem by encouraging consumerism in its own way (i.e. buying the “eco-friendly” version of everything). Tesla cars are a great example of this in action. I do not mind people owning Teslas as long as they honestly admit that those cars are simply status symbols.
    Of course, it is true that the Earth has been getting warmer in recent times. Personally, I think this is caused by increased energy output from the sun combined with a small human contribution in the form of increased emissions.

    1. Insofar as the power used to charge the car comes from a nonrenewable resource, e.g. coal. If renewable energy was used to charge Teslas or other electric cars, then that would be great.

      1. I was more focused on the resources spent on actually producing Tesla cars. Of course, a good electric car that has a long range and is affordable for the masses would be a good thing. However, something like that is not going to come from Tesla despite what Elon Musk promises. I don’t think America has enough capital (i.e. physical, financial, social and other forms of capital) to transition to large-scale electric car usage.

      2. The advantage to electric cars (in the very long term) is that the source of energy can be very flexible. Gas can only come from petroleum, and once burned is gone forever. If fossil fuels become scare, we can generate electricity by many other means, some renewable and some nuclear. We can then continue our transportation intensive economies uninterrupted.

    2. That greater solar output would also explain why Mars is heating up too. Maybe there is an as yet undiscovered means where the CO2 from Earth is being transmitted to Mars.

  3. Climate change is real though. Can’t deny that fact. There’s certainly a human element and there’s certainly a natural element. Glaciers are receding at an alarming rate. There is flooding going on in various places throughout the world.

      1. There is a distinction to be made between climate and weather. Weather is part of the larger climate.

    2. “There’s certainly a human element”
      Is there? We’ve yet to see any hard science that proves as much, so how do you know?

      1. It’s all circumstantial of course. But think of it this way, if someone is on trial for a crime and there is evidence that he/she had possession of the weapon, was at the scene of the crime, and has no credible alibi, then how much more evidence is needed? Anecdotally I can say that weather patterns in my area are not what they used to be when I was a kid, even including El Nino and La Nina.

        1. Science works on evidence that is real, not circumstantial.
          Do you even know the basics of the scientific method?

        2. Yes I do know the scientific method. Circumstantial evidence is real evidence. There’s a difference between direct and circumstantial evidence, but both are real.
          The question now is do you know what constitutes evidence?

        3. I prefer to think of the science. And there is no peer-reviewed scientific evidence supporting the claims of any climate change zealots. None. Zero.
          Your flowery sentences that ultimately say absolutely nothing (apart from worthless anecdotes) are emblematic of the entire climate change scam, lol.

        4. The analogies are simply illustrative. I do look at the science, and the science does indicate warming and a strong correlation with human activity.

        5. Feel free to link the peer-reviewed study that shows “a strong correlation with human activity.”
          I’ll wait.
          And btw, predictive models don’t count.

      1. That site you linked itself said that 90% or so of the glaciers are receding, and even admitted at the end of the article that the recent advances of some glaciers is only temporary in the face of climate change… So it actually helps my point.

        1. In certain places perhaps and in others growing. Everything the cult has been chanting has not been true to date and you can alter old data sets all you want.
          https://realclimatescience.com/2016/12/100-of-us-warming-is-due-to-noaa-data-tampering/
          “Updated data from NASA satellite instruments reveal the Earth’s polar ice caps have not receded at all since the satellite instruments began measuring the ice caps in 1979. Since the end of 2012, moreover, total polar ice extent has largely remained above the post-1979 average. The updated data contradict one of the most frequently asserted global warming claims – that global warming is causing the polar ice caps to recede.”
          https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/#1e9fdfde2892
          Hamster away, but normally people don’t care what you believe. However as your beliefs are attached to demanding others choices be limited and stealing their income to Support your cultish beliefs, you andy our ilk should be thrown into a volcano (to save the earth, natch.)

        3. I am aware of the difference, just showing you another bit of evidence that the climate change alarmists have ignored (though claimed in the past the ice caps “were melting”).
          During the last ice age had about a mile of pack ice were I currently call home, but not really worried what happened 10,000 years ago or the next.
          I really don’t care what you think you know, it is just how it is weaponized in the political realm. Capiche?

        4. There is ample evidence on the historical record of times when the glaciers were much smaller than they are now. The north west passage around North America to Asia by going north of Canada was well documented. During the Medieval Optimum vineyards were in production in Scotland. These were times that led to human flowering, and expansion of populations. Why must it be a disaster now?

    4. The climate has always changed. Floods have always happened. Glaciers are not receding, they ebb and flow depending on the season. Two summers ago ice cutting boats got trapped by the enormous amounts of ice in the South Pole and had to be rescued and the rescue ships also got trapped.
      There is no evidence of a human element affecting a somewhat fictitious global “climate”.

      1. Yes of course they ebb and flow. But each time they recede they are going farther in. The overall size, including ebb and flow, is shrinking.

    5. What makes the retreat of glaciers alarming. Not so long ago, when glaciers were expanding rapidly, and threatening whole villages in the Alps, that was alarming. What is being threatened by the retreat of glaciers?

      1. I’am freelancing using the web, working on simple jobs which demands from you computer or laptop as well as internet service access and I couldn’t be delighted… 6 months have passed on when i started this and also i attained so far overall $36k… Basically i gain about 80 dollars/h and work for three to 4 h on a regular basis.And excellent thing about this job opportunity is that you can decide when to do the job by yourself and also for how long and you get compensated after the end of each week.>>>> http://s.coop/25urz

      2. “Looks like they want everything white to disappear from the world.”
        Quote of the fucking day, good sir.

  5. All the Liberal Globalists have today is Fear and Class Warfare to preach and hope more people will still naively believe just as the Czar of Russia preached there was a Global Jewish Conspiracy in the hope his starving peasants would refrain from overthrowing him and his fat nobles.

  6. “Flood narratives are the result of folk memory. Various local disasters were experienced by some societies who then transmitted their story to others. For instance local flooding was frequent in Mesopotamia but there just aren’t any rivers capable of it in the Canaanite region. So it must have been borrowed by the Israelite tradition from a particularly authoritative disseminator of culture.”
    This is just dismissive conjecture, you have less evidence of word of mouth cultural appropriation (sorry to steal a sjw term) than there is evidence for an actual biblical flood. The crux is this that you say: “well there couldn’t have possibly been a flood so cultures must have adopted myths from other people.” But this is not scientific at all, the only evidence of cultural spread is that universal myths are shared between cultures. That is to say the proof for your theory is you restating your theory. “Different cultures share a common flood myth therefore this myth was spread from one culture to another because different cultures share a common flood myth”
    This theory was invented because if not you are faced with a situation where cultures with no possibility of a catastrophic flood actually have an organic mythos with one, which leads to some rather uncomfortable questions.

  7. Thanks for a terrific article.
    About 15 years ago, a brilliant man made a documentary about climate change, “An Inconvenient Truth.” You may remember him as Vice-President and Presidential hopeful, Mr. Al Gore.
    Basically, all this bullshit is just different covers of the same ol’ song, “The Sky Is Falling,” by Chicken Little; the REAL King of Rock ‘n Roll!
    In 1984, while stationed in Japan, I saw a documentary on Armed Forces Television about climate change. The narrator stated that by 1993, NYC would have the climate of Palm Beach, Florida, and Palm Beach would be underwater.
    I be damned, but it’s a quarter century since then and that climate-change prediction has yet to occur.
    In 1980, Hal Lindsey, in his landmark book and accompanying LP, “1980s: Countdown To Armageddon,” stated that sometime in the early 1990s, the Anti-Christ would appear and we would have Armageddon and the Rapture and the Judgement by 2000 A.D.
    I be damned, I’m supposed to be in Heaven, already. At least, according to Hal Lindsey.
    Some of you may recall in the mid-70s, 2 British scientists wrote a book. In it they stated that when all the planets align in February 1982, the strain of all that gravity would tear Earth apart. End of the world. I do not remember the name of that book.
    I be damned. I’m still here. So is Earth.
    Does anyone recall the Mayan Calendar, 21 December 2012?
    Yeah? So do I!
    Okay then…Why are we still here to recall ANYTHING?
    Leonardo DiCaprio….
    Instead of whoring for attention with an unoriginal line of “boo-game”, why not make another movie or 2?
    Plenty of idiots will believe your shit. But is that the height of fame and fortune?

    1. How are people so gullible to believe any of this nonsense? The climate change intelligentsia have been saying the exact same thing for close to 40 years and nothing has happened

      2. “It was the hottest year on record…”
        What they never tell you is, they only have records of temps going back to the 1880s or so….

        1. A claim that they make every year, and then around 3 months later a small retraction of the “fact” appears in section G, page 29, of one paragraph.

        2. some are worried we will entire a mini ice age in a few years(it last happened in the early 1800s)

        3. That happened because of the huge volcanic eruption of Mount Tambora in the Dutch East Indies in 1814; 1816 became known as “the year without a summer”.

        4. Well, you also have to adjust temps down in the 1930’s to make the last few warmer.

        8. Lol right? Damned depressing. And if I head to Edinburgh it’s the same only colder. Summer – damp, Autumn – damp, Winter – Damp, Spring – really damp. On the bright side, the job of meteorologist in the U.K. is a sweet gig.

        9. I’d love if we had real global warming. I want my farm acreage to become beachfront properties AND the New England area would be wiped out. I can see no downsides.

  8. The climate has always been in a state of change.
    If the gov’s solution is a “carbon tax” then you know we’re being manipulated

  9. We ought to reject that which is not truthful, on principle. I further believe vigilance is necessary to protect against opportunistic attacks by detractors. It is in this spirit that I offer that the lead picture of the Time magazine covers is a hoax. At least, the version on the left is an altered version of a 2007 cover:
    http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/2007/1101070409_400.jpg
    For reference, the fake version used in the lead picture:
    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CAL7DEJUUAEWscl.jpg
    Unfortunately these sorts of things don’t die easily. It’s been a number of years since first seeing it.

    1. I mentioned this in another comment. The article is one of ROK’s best, but this graphic is definitely faked. See my comment for the breakdown.

  10. While I agree that the evidence for man driven global warming is not so great, I also absolutely believe that pollution is a huge problem.
    And the cause for this pollution, for the most part, is due to overpopulation. Overpopulation in 3rd world countries and the 3rd world underclasses of 1st world countries. The very worst things we can do for the environment are
    – Feed, clothe, house, medicate and give crop technologies to the 3rd world.
    – Give welfare, food stamps, medicaid, head start, hot lunch, and public housing to the 3rd world underclasses of the first world.
    The herd needs to be culled. Big time. It is the only way to save the environment and the planet.

    1. It may help if Trojan would make a video to teach people how to roll on a condom. Apparently, people are too dumb to figure it out for themselves. Then the biggest problem would be making enough dick-rubbers for everyone to use year-round. Then again, as the population ages and young people become scarce, sells of Trojans would ‘go down’.
      I agree with your comment. Good to hear from you again, bro.

      1. Thanks Mr. Double E!
        You’re right. Birth control would go a long way into solving these issues. Then maybe I wouldn’t be such a Scrooge — for the folks that actually would do something positive with a little help!

    2. Indeed. While the sky may not just yet be falling, I still recognize the atmosphere is of a finite volume and we should take aims not to put too much crap into it. Same goes for the oceans – big, but not limitless.

      1. theres an area of the pacific filled with plastic. its about the size of texas…fish swallow the plastic bits, we eat the fish..

        1. Right – and people are looking at Garbage Island all wrong – they see pollution, I see development opportunities!

  11. Believe in GW, don’t believe in it, contribute to it, or don’t contribute to it, whatever your position, it doesn’t matter.
    The amount of pollution coming from the developing world makes all of the ass-patting by developed countries irrelevant.

    1. The per capita pollution in China/India is nowhere near the levels in the US.

      1. Source? Of course, the green cult will peddle their gia-worshipping tripe wherever they can and it’s always 1st wolrd countries that “need to pay hommage” on their alters.
        Al Gore is asking a measely $15 trillion after all.

        1. 1st world countries !!??
          Yah, causing religious, cultural, social, economical and political de-stabilization in other Countries (or 2nd world, 3rd world !!) and looting them out !!
          Preventing growth in every possible way by controlling local media, businesses and enterprises !!
          Destroying nations and/or governments that doesn’t head to the “vested interests” and their manipulations !!
          Killing hundreds & thousands of other people and crying out “innocent & in-human”; when one person of their own gets killed !!
          1st world countries !!??
          Yah, pussies walking bare chested, doing slut-walkes, pink saturdays, political correctness, pussies & sections of media spewing venom against the President and talking about mid-term elections; right from the First day after elections, MEN being humiliated & belittled on a daily basis, pussies imitating MEN & MASCULINITY, Mass shootings in Universities & Shopping malls, More and more number of people are (becoming) drug addicts, People always living in sense of fear and doubting every other person !!
          Indeed, 1st world countries !!

        3. Hardcore facts & realities often appear to be “dramatics” ! until they hit “Hard” !!
          That said, I understand that common people can only see “superficial” layer. They either ignore or not bothered about (especially when they are not effected or don’t have to face !!) various factors, conditions and dynamics, including but not limited to; Environment/Climate, Habitats, Availability of Natural Resources, Religions, Culture, Traditions, Opportunities, Commerce, Consumption, Interactions, Emotions, Feelings, Values etc.

        5. Not surprised ! what I can expect from people who can’t (I bet don’t want to !) see their own ghetto culture but happily point out others !! As I said, this goes “until it hits Hard” !!

        7. Point is proven: “One should not appease fools” !!
          Pity, always thinking of pussies ! always pampering pussies ! and now facing the consequences !!! Just like the pussies, blaming others for their own inability and incapability. Go on, write more articles on how to date 2nd world & 3rd world pussies !! maniacs !!!

      2. Have you BEEN to Asia? Fucking bullshit, sir.
        I’m not even in China, I’m hundreds of kilometers from it, but the pollution from their coast still makes the city I’m in have worse air pollution indexes than almost any city in America or Western Europe.

        1. Burn!
          These idiots just spout whatever they’re told. To them investigation is hard, like math.

      4. Thats crazy talk. The whole reason manufacturers flocked to china is BECAUSE of the dearth of environmental regulation.
        And India? They’re in the fukkin stone age – life is cheap.

        1. Hey! I find your comment to be extremely anti-Indian and demand that you apologize to all Indians on behalf of the entire White race!
          /sarc

        3. India is in stone age !? Life is cheap !!?
          Guess there is no point in arguing here !
          I am Not specifically targeting anyone but there is a saying in my Father tongue (Err! is it Mother tongue !?) that roughly means:
          “One should not appease fools” !!!

        4. I know right? Just because I’m black I can’t be racist once in a while? It’s a fucking travesty!

      5. WTF does “per-capita” have to do with anything? They outnumber Americans many times over. Many of them are living like animals.

    2. And that doesn’t take into account of the TONS of carbon dioxide and sulphur dioxides released by the typical volcanic eruption. In comparison, all the ‘carbon and sulfuric gases’ released by First World industry is a ‘fart in the wind’.

  12. I’m puzzled why actors are given facetime with actual Important People like the Pope or the President.
    They’re *actors.* Actors!
    Think about it.
    Actors create nothing, achieve nothing. They’re employees. Directors and producers boss them around. They get paid to pretend to be other people by mouthing lines written by others. That’s it. I guess you could call it *art* in a way.
    Deep down, I think actors know they’re nobodies. They glom on to pet political causes to virtue-signal and give meaning to their empty lives.

    1. Hence why our ancestors would cast them in the same class as prostitutes and vagrants, they contribute nothing to a healthy society.
      Their time will come, and there won’t be a third civilization for actors to wreck. The fact that this society elevates them among many other facts already means its dead.

      1. It will be ‘interesting’ to see how the Muslims treat them when ‘their time’ comes…

        2. nah, being a harem slave boy isn’t a punishment to Leo as he’d love being one to much. forced hard labor sounds much better, no?

    2. Because they know that these actors have fans that worship the ground they walk on so they use them as puppets to convince the gullible into whatever sca-uh, I mean enviromental crisis they have on their hands.

    3. when you take someone and dress them up and put them in a position where every word and action they make is perfectly scripted, recorded and directed – with armies of hair, makeup, acting coaches, and months of training and time to prepare to record that one 5 second take – you create a living persona in that individual that lives the ‘dream life’.
      he always has the right line for the girl, he always has the last bullet ready for the evil enemy, his hair is just perfectly dishevelled and his wounds never too hard to manage even after the worst fight…
      it’s a total, total lie…. and because it’s not done live on stage any more, but on camera, it appears quite real…. even in Stalone type movies which are very camp and exaggerated, it still appears quite real to the passive viewer
      thus these people are not seen for who they really are – but as the heros they appear to be. in the absence of culture and real ‘gods’ actors fill the moral and cultural gap.

        1. Thank you. I’m not alone in this.

      3. She is russian after all, so why are you surprised at the sheer contrast of beauty and ugliness?

    5. They are all ACTOR’s, even the drag Queen in his white Robe and honourable politician….

    6. I agree..They’re just dancing monkeys. Their only job is to entertain us.

      1. The job of Celebrities is to persuade the masses to accept the Globalist Agenda. That is why Globalist Media encourages the masses to worship the “idols”.

        1. I’am freelancing over the web, completing simple projects that only demands from you PC or simply laptop and internet access and so I couldn’t be more satisfied… Half a year have crossed since i initiated this and also i obtained up till now in whole 36 thousand dollars… Basically i benefit about 80 dollars every hour and work for three to four h on daily basis.And incredible point regarding this work is that you can actually decide when to work yourself and also for how long and you get paid at the end of each week.>>>> http://vzturl.com/bni14

    8. The Media builds up Actors/Celebrities who in turn endose the Globalist Agenda. Federal Government has dumbed down Americans so they can’t understand politics – but if their “idols” endorse the DemocRATS then so do the masses.

    9. Because a large portion of humanity are unthinking dolts who use actors and living vicariously through movies and media to escape and repress the soul crushing psychological problems caused by living in modern society?

    10. Back in the day, actors were despised and viewed in contempt, now thanks to Hollywood they’re put on a pedestal…

  13. I believe theres some truth behind ancient myths, I believe our ancestors witnessed some extraordinaire things.

  14. In the late 70s there was a bit of climate change hysteria — a new Ice Age is coming!
    Can you guess what the cause was?
    The original sin of human carbon production!
    And you’ll never guess that their solution was…
    Less carbon, fewer cars, less energy production!
    Same as now.
    This is all a money-making and power scam.

    1. yes, i recall this one and it did actually have a geological basis to it – even if the media did get itself into a frenzy at the time…
      the fact of the matter is that if you read the most basic book on the geological history of the planet you will soon find that icesheets used to come down past London and New York only 10-20 thousand years ago…
      what’s more is that going back just a little bit further around 100,000 years, most of the UK and northern latitudes were a tropical swap with alligators and the like – and that’s before we dig a bit deeper into millions of years back with dinosaurs that apparently died off due to a cooling incident – and MANY MANY MANY more fluctuations….
      there’s evidence that the entire planet was frozen over at one point – there’s also evidence that the entire planet was basically tropical.
      the geological record is measured in tens of millions of years as a ‘short’ period of time…..
      these twats want to take some data from the last 100 years and extrapolate it into some doomsday scenario – it’s beyond perverse. you need millions of years of data to be correct- and all you will find is that the planets climate fluctuates all the time on quite regular (but very long) cycles – all evidence of which appears to point to celestial factors including but not limited to the fluctuation of the sun’s output.

      1. Weathering of rocks by mosses may explain climate effects during the Late Ordovician
        Date:July 7, 2016Source:Stockholm UniversitySummary:During the Ordovician period, the concentration of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere was about eight times higher than today. It has been hard to explain why the climate cooled and why the Ordovician glaciations took place. A new study shows that the weathering of rock caused by early non-vascular plants had the potential to cause such a global cooling effect.
        https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/07/160707101029.htm

    2. Indeed – I remember being traumatized as a kid in the 70s by “Soylent Green”. Then in school they were already preaching the total depletion of fossil fuels by “the turn of the century”.
      Yet in real life people were tripping over each other to by hummers in 2001….

      1. As a kid, lavar burton told me id have to wear special clothes and sunglasses to protect from horrible things due to human activity warming the planet and destroying the ozone layed.

    3. I remember it quite well, and, in case i forget, I still have the stored food on my waist to remind me, dammit!

  15. I believe theres some truth behind ancient myths, I think our ancestors witnessed some extraordinaire things.

  16. “How Climate Change is Behind the Surge of Migrants to Europe”: http://time.com/4024210/climate-change-migrants/
    Of course, climate change is responsible. The civil war is totally not the cause!
    Increased temperatures = Heavy rains = Flooding = Migration = White genocide!
    Alternatively:
    Increased temperatures = Droughts = Failing crops = Famine = Migration = White genocide!
    All roads lead to Rome, bitch!

    1. Quick!
      Make a documentary about that and cash in. My God, Champion, you can get RICH!

        1. Don’t let that stop you. Make the documentary. Tell the world those migrants did not get the memo….Thus, they are swarming into Europe!

        2. Here’s another article I found a while ago.
          “THE “BIG BANG” IS JUST RELIGION DISGUISED AS SCIENCE”: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/bang.php
          What this shows is the modern science is no longer a quest for truth, but a means to peddle an agenda. Most people don’t try to fact-check scientists, so they accept whatever they are told.
          Science that cannot answer basic common sense questions is not science at all. And if they can’t answer those questions, then they cannot peddle it as fact.

        3. The survey the author cites isn’t “scientists” as stated in the title of the op-ed, it is a survey of the Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta. That’s like surveying tobacco company CEO’s about the dangers of smoking. It would be a reasonable piece about the opinion of petroleum engineers in Alberta if that was made clear, instead that was hidden. I wonder why?

        4. FACT.
          DDT has never been proven to harm humans or plant-life or animals. Yet it’s banned for killing mosquitos that carry malaria. Is that junk science or what?

        8. That link is the definition of woo. Every single one of those ludicrous claims has been destroyed.

        10. That graphic is fantastic! Saved.

        11. Crusades are fun and a great way to spend a few years abroad. Don’t put them in the same bag as globohomo’s mondialist religion.

  17. My mother can remember back in the early ’70s reputable scientists telling everyone that there was an ice age coming. Ice age or global warming which is it science?

    1. Both. Global warming will eventually cause another Ice Age. The water trapped as Ice at the Poles melts due to global warming then it floods into the oceans, stopping under surface warm water conveyors from circling the planet (mainly due to salinity). Look at this way, Ireland and Moscow are roughly at the same latitude, the only reason Ireland is not a block of ice is due to warm water flowing from the east coast of the US via what is known as the North Atlantic Conveyor going across and under the sea. Once this stops Northern Europe becomes a BIG icebox.

      1. You really don’t understand what the difference is between an open and closed system do you?

      2. “Global warming will eventually cause another Ice Age. ”
        Haha, I knew it that “the scientists” will make this statement eventually.

        2. Good for you champ, big words for you but you will work them out eventually!

      3. The same thing which caused past ice ages will cause the next one. Variations in the suns output, which have a much closer correlation with the temperature variations on earth than CO2 levels. In fact, increased CO2 levels appear to lag the cold periods.

        1. Nope, the Sun doesn’t explain shit when it comes to GW. Only Carbon increase in atmosphere does, Nada else.

        2. In fact, a number of independent measurements of solar activity indicate the sun has shown a slight cooling trend since 1960, over the same period that global temperatures have been warming. Over the last 35 years of global warming, sun and climate have been moving in opposite directions. An analysis of solar trends concluded that the sun has actually contributed a slight cooling influence in recent decades

  18. This has got to be the most unscientific article I’ve seen on RoK.

    1. Most articles which details myths from the past are not what we’d technically call “scientific”.

      1. Good point. I’m not bothering to waste my time explaining how Climate Change works to a bunch of retarded tinfoil hat brigadiers.

    3. You’re happy for the West to cough up €15,000,000,000,000 from new taxes just to feel better about saving “muh planet”? Ah wait, maybe you are from one of the countries the West will have to pay money TO? Or maybe you’re a self-loathing liberal white? Frankly, I really can’t understand the leftist obsession with wanting to listen to the official AGW Narrative as it is total self-flagellation to do so.

      1. Nope, don’t care in the slightest. It’s too late anyway (even though it’s true).

  19. This article is pathetic. Your lack of knowledge of science and regression analysis is excruciating.. Every man should understand at least a basic level of maths and statistics.

      1. I don’t know his work.. but if he didn’t see/understand the clear correlation between CO2 emissions and rising temperatures in his data, he deserved to be fired (not that I would expect you to understand what a statistical correlation is).

        1. I been to a couple of his seminars. The guy knows what he is talking about . Things things like urbanization around existing weather stations, other natural causes and such have more to do with it. Global cooling…sorry, global warming…sorry…..”Climate Change” is about politics, not science.

        2. great..you “have been to a couple of seminars” ..i have a masters degree in econometrics, and have worked with GW-data on multiple occasions… there is no discussion..but – as usual – the ignorant like to discuss shit they don’t understand (i.e. the maths is too hard, so let’s just ignore it and form opinions).
          ..from the article you link to, it appears that the professor was fired for GW-discussions of local effects in Oregon..I have no idea about those..but that CO2 emissions raise global temperatures is indisputable.

        5. 2 secs..will try to find an (unpublished) paper I did in grad-school.

        8. and? you regurgitated all the political talking points that we all have heard. Good for you.

        9. this discussion is pointless given your lack of understanding of maths and statistics.. what I refer to is hard data and has absolutely fuck all to do with politics (I personally couldn’t care less about politics..do what you want with the information, just accept it is there).

        11. yeah..and now I earn about 3x as much as the US average, so I’ll survive.

        14. this discussion is pointless given your lack of understanding of maths and statistics.. what I refer to is hard data and has absolutely f*ck all to do with politics (I personally couldn’t care less about politics..do what you want with the information, just accept it is there).

        15. I don’t know what you do, or how your income comes into play with “science”, but I will take a shot and assume it is coupled with “public service?”

        16. ..and even for the unscientific mess you link to, my points still stand..CO2 emissions and temperature have a positive correlation…that is all I say.

        19. brilliant..with no knowledge of how a regression analysis works, I am sure.

        22. Try me, I am a Civil Engineer, not some egghead who obviously does not look at data or conclusions objectively. Do you even know what I was talking about when I mentioned the heat island effect? Being I have a lack of understanding of “maths”, let me explain it to you on my level so you understand……. Since weather data has been recorded in the mid 1800’s weather stations have been installed at airports or close to towns for convenience. That is fine, but over time, urbanization has caused a shift in the temperature readings of these stations. Paved areas tend to warm up more than unimproved areas.
          Carbon Dioxide does hold heat, but we are at a concentration of about 410 ppm, not significant. Most of the greenhouse effect is caused by water vapor. There are dozens of natural cycles, some that have not been discovered yet. Anything from how the Earth orbits, to hydraulic cycles within the oceans, to fluctuations in the sun’s output cause variability. Yes, it is warmer than average, but not unheard of. The 1930’s, the 1300’s and the time of Christ all had warmer periods.
          “But it is all changing so fast!” Really?, they were predicting Ice ages when I was a little kid, then “global warming”. Now they don’t know, so they call it “climate change”……whatever it is, it must be cataclysmic. That way we can get the government dollars.

        23. I am doing a governmental project on incentivising students to work harder on maths at the moment, though.. You know, so they do not grow up to understand f*ck all about how the world works.

        25. It has everything to do with politics. Follow the money. Control the energy, and you control the people. That is why I started of with that piece about George Taylor.

        27. Government project (on a worthless project that will achieve fuck all)? Shocker.
          “..so they do not grow up to understand f*ck all about how the world works.”
          Hope the tax payers get their money back, because you are definitely not up to that task.

        28. I got to hand it to you, even though you suck at backing up your premise, you are awesome at name calling.

        29. “actually, finance..I sold out.”
          Translated: You had to get a real job.
          No worries. Once your meaningless government sponsered employment ends, you can go back to scripting narratives for nothing.

        30. yeah..and that works both ways..do you not think OPEC countries have a massive incentive to convince you GW is not real?

        31. I don’t see OPEC running commercials and writing books for our 5 year old children.

        32. I’m British, so maths is the correct spelling. And there is no way in hell you are a civil engineer.

        34. No, you are right..they have absolutely no influence whatsoever (no lobbyists, nothing).

        35. The license on my wall says different. I went to school long enough to get the degree, not long enough to get indoctrinated.

        36. If you are as certain about Mr. Jim’s profession as you are about everything else, I’m afraid your credibility has just gone down the crapper, mate.

        37. ..for the sake of argument, say science is wrong.. do you want to live in a smog and pollution hellhole they do in Chinese and Indian cities?

        42. No….that is the one premise that pisses me off more than anything. Liberals like you think that because I am a conservative, I could care less.
          Who do you think created the EPA? Nixon, a Republican. We do not hate the environment, but there is a balance. Shutting off the source of energy shuts off the ability to create a decent place to live. Sudan has about the smallest energy usage, do you think they care one iota about the environment? No, they care about feeding themselves so they don’t die.
          Only when there is a abundant energy source is the public wealthy enough to prioritize the environment over the necessities of life.
          Let me ask you this….what is your opinion on nuclear energy? I took a class in school about energy production, and wrote a paper about it. The reason I ask, is you can tell the true caring environmentalists from the socialists using environmentalism as a ruse to expand government power on this one issue. If you are against carbon as an energy source, and against nuclear (solar, wind and the like are useless) you are a socialist shill and I have no time for you.

        43. Not only do we need nuclear power if we ever hope to de-carbonise (due to oil running out, not AGW, mind you) the economy but I think we should re-explore thorium and molten salt reactors as long-term sustainable energy source. The only reason we use uranium and high pressure water reactors is the Cold War and the necessity at that time to mass produce weapon grade material as well as civil nuclear power and thorium took the back seat.

        44. That is so true, thorium is by far the best bang for our buck where it comes to energy development. Bombard a thorum atom with a neutron and it becomes a fissile uranium 233. Couple that with a molten salt reactor, and you have aan excellent design, proven at Oakridge in the 1960s, but eliminated because of politics.

        45. You’ve just shot yourself in the foot, hoss. Jim is one of the most credible and honest people on this site. I’d take his word on anything sight unseen before I’d ever trust you to give me the correct time of day.

        47. I am not a liberal, don’t jump to conclusions. Nor did I ever say you don’t care about the environment.
          With regards to nuclear energy, I believe it is one of the cleanest and most efficient energy sources available.

        49. I know neither of you, so how should I have an opinion about his credibility, given the amount of tripe on the internet? (Read: Bayes’ Theorem)

        50. Heck- can he show the data, the original sources for the entire timeline they cover, show the adjustments to the raw data, what sources changed over time, what extrapolations or other methods were used to account for the changes?

        51. There have been huge scandals, with hacked evidence, which resulted in the climate change panels in the UN being totally discredited as creating faked data. None of the models used by the alarmists can be validated by starting at some time sufficiently in the past, and then predicting a future climate change that we have observed. If none of their models would have worked in the past, why do you cling to the belief that they are accurate for the future?

        52. You say science has decided that AGW is a decided fact? You are either totally ignorant or knowingly lying.

        53. We were headed in that direction until Jimmy Carter, may his name be written in the devil’s book of death. For breeder reactors to be practical we would have to reprocess fuel. The US committed to the rest of the world that we would reprocess all their fuel forever (thereby controlling the potential diversion into weapons programs.) But good old boy Jimmy decided to renege on that and stiff the world, as Amy told him that nuclear proliferation was the number one danger to the world. Of course his acts led to incredible increase in nuclear proliferation. It seems like our moral posturing would not lead to the rest of the world slitting their economic wrists.
          I firmly believe that all evil in the world today can be traced back to Jimmy Carter. And the humiliating fact is I voted for that bastard/idiot, once.

        54. Jimmy was before my time, but it is plainly obvious that the dude had a serious case of white guilt and Western society suffered as a result.

        55. Tell us what your educational background is, so we can evaluate your standing to tell us that we don’t understand science and maths. I have an undergraduate degree in Mechanical Engineering, a masters and then a PhD in statistics. So I feel I am well qualified to dispute your take on the statistics of AGW.

        56. Your knowledge of statistical modeling appears to begin and end with knowing the phrase regression analysis. I have taught regression analysis to PhD candidates at a University.

        57. But the CO2 concentrations are a lagging indicator not a leading indicator. Also, as Jim said above, the weight of scientific evidence is that water vapor is a much more significant factor in the regression analyses you take such stock in.

        60. “You are either totally ignorant or knowingly lying.” Right back at you.

        61. Extroardinary claims require extroardinary evidence. Let me see your sources.

        62. lagging if you look 5-10,000+ years back, yes..but you cannot say that spikes during the 2nd world war and from the 70s onwards are lagging indicators…again, i refer to your earlier comment: “You are either totally ignorant or knowingly lying.”

        65. “on a worthless project that will achieve fuck all”..please tell me more on your insights in the project.
          ..but don’t worry your tiny brain about your useless blue-collar taxes (if you even have a pathetic, soon-to-be obsolete job, that is)..the project is heavily backed.

        66. “you are definitely not up to that task.” ..a critical job evaluation from someone who couldn’t pass 8th grade maths.. I wonder if I’ll ever recover.

        67. cheers…it is hard taking on multiple mindless sheep at the same time.

        68. Those projects are heavily backed by debt. You may think you work in finance, but it is clear you never studied nor worked in an actual industry that generated a net gain.
          You’re a parasite feeding off others.

        69. Fucking worthless pom. LOL. If you ever find yourself interviewing for a job in the private sector in “finance” before an American in London, be sure to bring your thesis and ensure the potential employer knows your stance on “climate change.”

        70. And yet you offer opinions about Jim as if you know him.
          Catch-22, you’ve been had. Go home faggins.

        71. I work in the states a lot and work for an american institution..don’t worry, when you surpass a certain level of brain capacity, everyone knows “climate change” is real (they might not enclose said information to mindless sheep like yourself, of course..many gain from your ignorance), so “my stance” on “climate change” is hardly controversial. ..wrt to your brilliant quotation marks about “finance”, it is completely standard for consultancies to work on government projects.
          ..I sometimes offer investment advice on this page, when a (terrible) finance article shows up .. (basic insights to the CAPM and APT mostly..people are so f*cking clueless here..sad and funny at the same time..I have even given advice to a few of the sheep insulting me in this thread…of which they seemed pretty thankful at the time)..you should check it out sometime..I may even tell you why debt isn’t “bad” (hint: optimal capital structure).

        72. If you knew Bayes’ theorem, you would accept that the possibility is by far the greatest.

        73. “..everyone knows “climate change” is real”
          False. Everyone knows a subset of self proclaimed experts in positions of some authority and certain government institutions are promoting it, but the science isn’t backing that up despite the multiple fallicies, such as you are using, to advocate an opinion that the actual facts do not support.
          “..completely standard for consultancies to work on government Projects.”
          So– you work in finance, having “sold out”, after wasting your time perusing a graduate degree (at tax payer expese I assume) in an unaffiliated field where you currently work on a heavily funded government project that is, I quote, “incentivising students to work harder on maths?” Also you occassionally dole out unsolicited investment advice on blogs to people, you would probably consider inferior, when you feel the need?
          Is that correct?

        74. Spot on, I would say.. I generally like this site (good game advice, alpha advice, and some good philosophical articles every now and then), which is why I visit it occasionally. And about every six months comment on articles..it very rarely ends in heated debates like this one.

    2. This article does not presume to discuss science. See, this author knows the difference between journalism/communications and actual science.

      1. I know..he discusses a scientific topic as a journalist..completely oblivious to the fact that the maths crushes his “point of view”.

    3. I disagree and I am a statistician by profession. A very large bank pays me quite well to perform statistical modeling. And I can tell you that most of the climate models are garbage and can’t be validated. Without validation, they are just someone’s guess. Anyway, where we should be putting our money is in mitigating the effects of global warming, not in trying to control the planetary weather.

      1. “And I can tell you that most of the climate models are garbage and can’t be validated”. Spoken as a true statistician (if you really are one, you will understand my reservations..you know, given Bayes’ rule and all).

  20. Science has gone from being about character to being about knowledge.
    Yes yes we all know things change, and one can put in the WORK to make them predictable again. But obviously that would be harder than to spread hysteria.

  21. This is a great article and finally put the hysterics into historical perspective. But…the photo contains an error. That Time Magazine cover on “The Coming Ice Age” is faked. Someone created it later on in the digital era. It was never a Time cover. Here is their info on it being fake: http://science.time.com/2013/06/06/sorry-a-time-magazine-cover-did-not-predict-a-coming-ice-age/
    But on the off-chance you don’t believe them, here are all their covers from 1977, and this one doesn’t appear: http://time.com/vault/year/1977/
    The SJWs on the left “always lie,” as the saying goes. Let’s not fall into that same trap. There is enough evidence to discredit SJWs without having to fake it.

  22. The weaknesses in this article are glaring. If you want to refute the hypothesis that climate change is man made you need to address the evidence that supports that hypothesis. The fact that the ancients believed some ridiculous guff is completely irrelevant, as is that fact that you don’t like Hollywood.

    1. There’s no evidence of an actual significant anthropomorphic cause, and there never will be. You’re just shaking and quivering before the shaman who promises you that the weather gods will harm you if you don’t give up your freedoms and money. Nothing shamans like more than an all day sucker.

      1. I wonder do people actually look up how they perform these experiments to determine global warming is man made or not. Most people don’t and just believe

        1. Actually some have investigated and when they get down to sources they find, every single time, fake data and fudged math. Not accidental “oops, meant to do this” but clearly fraudulent data, sometimes accompanied by emails stating it was fake data. The amount of gullibility that people still have over this, especially after the reveal at East Anglia, is disappointing.

        2. When Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitted they were looking at criminal prosecuting people who challenged their beliefs, you know it is pure political fraud aligned witht shaking down the public and limiting their freedoms. People who believe this tripe need to be challenged and called out.
          http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-hunter/

        3. Not to mentioned if people were truly concerned why not put all options on the table instead of only the carbon tax option what about the free market

        4. or, geee, I dont know…..maybe NOT promote a consumption-based lifestyle in the media?

        6. Threatening and persecution of the “disbelievers” of your pet political beliefs has LONG been a tactic and practice of Leftists.

        7. CA’s diesel emissions regulations– which resulted in the closure of hundreds of business and the loss of thousands of jobs were based on one ‘study’ done by a government employee.
          Turns out he faked his data and lied about his credentials and the college he attended. He was caught by someone who actually attended that college and looked at the study. This all came to light prior to CA implanting the regulations.
          They still went ahead with them, and the government worker is still employed by the state.

        9. Yeah, it’s pretty damn simple. They take the average global temperature (various select places) and Carbon concentration data from Mauna Loa in Hawaii (middle of nowhere in the ocean so no cars around to make the carbon look artificially high), and they compare them to see if there is correlation. The next step is to find causation, and absorbing heat happens to be one of the fundamental properties of carbon.

      2. Firstly that’s not what I said. Secondly when I look there does seem to be a lot evidence and quite compelling evidence too. Up to you if you don’t believe it. But I’d question which of us is the irrational one.

        1. There is only evidence of change, there is no evidence of man made. Climate change aka Global Warming (Change the name because planet is not getting warm as fast as they predict) is like talking about the holocaust in Europe, don´t look, don´t ask, the thing is as it is and if you question it you are a denialist and will be sent to jail

        2. There’s evidence that the climate changes, sure. It’s always in flux. But humans causing it? Um, no, there isn’t, chief.

        3. You need to go and look at every single data set being used in every single study. How that data set has changed over time in terms of sources, how they then inserted extrapolations to account for the dropped sources and what those extrapolations were based on, how data was adjusted and the justification given and then determine if the adjustments actually line up with those justifications.
          Truth is- you’ll find an apples to oranges comparison in order to show an increase. Even then, with all the manipulations to create an increase- they are far less than anthropogenic models predict, and well within natural variation.

        4. Ok, so we are looking at wide range of scientists in all kinds of disciplines, well known scientific organisations, and the most respected scientific publications falsifying their data. A conspiracy of epic proportions. Why are they doing this?

        5. Different folks/organizations have different reasons. I’ve worked in government, you want the grant money or the increased budget- give the boss what he wants to hear to justify the action he’s going to take. You don’t you find your budget cut. Don’t know if you saw my post about CA.
          Others fall so in love with their theory they keep trying to make it work. Adjustments, adjustments… they convince themselves they’ve missed something. Climate is complex, even the methods we’ve measured temps have changed with different sources having different margins of error/accuracy. Placements have changed, local environments change— very easy to convince oneself or conveniently find reasons to adjust. I noted though, that a researcher went through a number of sites and found the adjustments for heat island affect were the opposite of what they should have been. I.e to account for local heating, they increased the temps more vice decreasing them.
          Others like the prestige of being able to influence people, some just can’t admit when they’re wrong. Others see an opportunity for graft or making money.
          Interesting stuff in the climate gate emails showing how they suppressed having any articles published countering the anthropogenic global warming theory. Some very good scientists run out as heretics. AGW has become a religion vice science.

        6. I was listening to a climatologist being interviewed on NPR once. The interviewer eventually asked, “If we stopped all carbon emissions immediately, would we be able to prevent Global Warming?” The answer was an unequivocal NO. I always wondered if he counted exhaling as a carbon emission. I kind of think most of them do. As in, we need to kill off about 90% of the human population to prevent global warming.

        7. Which is, not surprisingly, one of their agenda items.

        10. An infographic with no source?
          We are exiting an Ice Age earth is been warming since then.

    2. The author is focusing on the agenda behind perpetuating the (questionable) science, not the science itself. Again, our good author does not pretend to be a scientist, as do all the apostles of the Hollywood Climate Regulation Machine.

  23. Tax?
    religious/political agenda?
    shrieking from deranged leftists?
    fake news

      1. I donthave tv/cable
        Watched it this morning at gf place
        The fuck???
        Nonstop nonsense…
        2 minutes, my head explodes.

  25. I’ve lived near the Texas southern coast all my life. The beach water line is still about where it was when I would go out there as a child in the late 70’s. GW is laughable to say the least. Funny how the only solution to this alleged problem is robbing the working class of money via taxes and giving it to a government. CO2 as a pollutant is a joke especially with that big fire hold still burning in Ukrain for over 40 years.
    Now, there are plenty of other environmental issues to resolve. I like gasoline for my car and lawn mower, but I does not mean I want toxic industrial waste from the production to be improperly dumped.

    1. Just because Oceans aren’t rising doesn’t mean climate change isn’t happening.

      1. So what is your point? The climate changes all the time on earth whether we drive an SUV or not. Listening to the GW idiots talk, this was one of their signature points they always trot to the public. If it were true, Padre Island should have been a shallow sandbar by now, but it’s not.

        2. But that is not from man made GW or rising sea levels. There are some issues with wetland loss along the Gulf Coast. Show me that to be the case. My skepticism is more from the wealthiest shills who use more energy and live a bigger home than I’ll ever have keep making these asinine claims.
          I would agree wetland habitat loss is an important environmental issue and in my area there has been some serious money spent to rebuild it.
          You are yourself are using a system that uses a hell of lot of energy so we can have this conversation.

        5. If you can already exclaim that it isn’t the sea level rise, that it is something else, and then turn around and ask where it is, then I can’t even argue with you. You clearly have an already built in opinion that will not be changed though rational discourse. Hopefully someday you will open your mind, good day. Sea level isn’t even something hard to measure.

        6. You are the one incapable of rational discourse. I asked you a simple question, and you can’t tell me where that location is in the world, but want me to believe in something as idiotic as sea level rise and GW. I even linked to an article to scientist that disagree with the concept of sea level rise. Maybe the land is subsiding because of natural causes or man made like over pumping the water table. That’s happening in some parts of the US.
          What are you personally doing about it though? Like most, you are probably use climate control and like a warm or cool house, and your damn computer to post here (server farms are huge electrical energy sinks) yet you want me to believe in an asinine idea that will cost me money while the zero negro president flew around at my expense on unnecessary trips.

        7. You admitted you don’t know the location, yet already declared that it CANNOT be from global warming, how am I supposed to argue with someone who already has an opinion before they even know what they are discussing? By the way, it’s the coast of Louisiana. Tell me, how exactly could a sea level rise be faked? Any fucking person can measure it by sticking a meter stick in the beach. Now, the Al Gore style claims of 20 feet are bullshit, no scientist will ever defend that, nothing Mörner said said denies that sea levels rise, as he even said, in the past fifty years it’s risen 4 inches. In the fifty years before that, it also rose 4 inches, which puts it at a total of 8 inches. That doesn’t seem like a lot, and certainly isn’t enough to effect most human habitats, put this absolutely has the ability to effect areas like Florida and Louisiana.
          “What are you personally doing about it though?”
          “personally” doing stuff is green-washed bullshit. Housing only makes up a small percentage of US emissions, whereas about three fourths comes from Industrial, Transportation, and Electricity generation. So if you want to know what a society can do (particularly American), then the Answer is to build more nuclear, ramp up fusion research, continue to promote micro generation, and start building our cities for people to walk and bike like they used to be build instead of for cars as they are currently built, invest in rail expansion instead of highway expansion, and of course let efficiency technology naturally improve.
          “that will cost me money”
          Feel free to explain to me how any of those will cost you money.

        8. I’m for newer nuclear reactors as well but still ok with fossil fuels. Your other stuff has no free market solutions since people prefer a car to walking. Not that I would not mind having a small community to walk around in and such. You might consider the idea that suburbs were created because the cities at one time were filthy and dirty and thanks to the federal government’s asinine program of spreading ‘duh-versity’ everywhere, people prefer the suburbs. You might blame the federal government for the creation of the national highway system which was originally intended for national defense. I do find it even in my area the amount of dead space in the older areas of the city.
          I figured the pic was of coastal LA, but a bit of internet searching would have yielded this gem from the USGS. Note that there is not a word about GW:
          https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/la-wetlands/

        9. “people prefer a car to walking.”
          Well first off, we must ask WHY people prefer cars to walking? Humans are made to walk, and the answer is really that our cities are again, built for cars instead of people. But there is something that neither republicans nor democrats will ever say because it’s political suicide: cars are HEAVILY subsidized by taxpayers. Drivers haven’t “payed their way” since the 1940’s, and the subsidization is only growing through the decades
          http://www.frontiergroup.org/reports/fg/do-roads-pay-themselves http://www.uspirg.org/sites/pirg/files/reports/Who%20Pays%20for%20Roads%20vUS.pdf
          I am perfectly fine with a free market model, but that means that the state should only be giving as much transportation funding to cars is it is to the other methods, while right now automobiles receive more subsidies than all traditional methods of transportation combined. Not to mention, cities FORCE businesses and people to put excessive amounts of parking, they FORCE people to have a certainly minimum floor area ratio, they create draconian rules on land use that if attempted by the Federal Government, would be rightfully labeled as communist economic planning.
          “You might consider the idea that suburbs were created because the cities at one time were filthy and dirty and thanks to the federal government’s asinine program of spreading ‘duh-versity’ everywhere”
          I can agree with you on that, but that ins’t an inherent problem with cities, if the Feds decided to do the same thing with suburban areas they could just as easily do so.
          “You might blame the federal government for the creation of the national highway system which was originally intended for national defense.”
          The National defense thing was pretty much symbolic. There is nothing a highway can carry that rail can’t. In fact, rail is still how the military transports a lot of it’s stuff.
          As for the USGS thing, they do in fact reference sea level changes. And again, the sea level changes are not the only externality of temperature change.

        10. Yes, roads are heavily subsidized and it is certainly not a free market there. Local government in Dallas in the late 40’s and early 50’s already had built toll roads before the federal government came around, so we still would have had highways without federal government help at some point.
          You are right about cities forcing businesses and such, but that is due to city ordinances that were not thought through over the decades. Certainly not a good system and you are right about it being a communist hell.
          Yes, USGS referenced sea level, but the bigger issues were those toward the top with less sediment being brought to the delta, dredging, agricultural runoff which are far more of an issue. Only the stupid think there is GW and a sea level rise.

        11. River flood control and dredging has stopped / slowed the replenishment of silt. The coast is constantly settling (subsistence) as the sediments compact. This will continue unless the flood control measures are removed and the silt again flows into the delta.
          When you look at tide gauge data and adjust for rise / fall of the local land (via GPS) you get a sea level rise of about 1.8 to 2.3 mm per year, with no signs of acceleration.
          Satellite data shows 3.3 mm a year or so, but that is the ‘adjusted’ data, which is not supported by the tide gauge data. The raw satellite data shows less than 3.3 mm per year.

    2. Yes, because your tiny piece of earth is a barometer for the rest of the planet. Okay….

  26. How the hell does DiCaprio have authority on this mythical Climate change ? Dude travels around the world in private jets with model groupies and he has the nerve to prance around preaching about climate change…The level of avarice and pomposity in “celebrity” actors is breathtaking

    1. DiCaprio has a PHD in Environmental Science and has worked as a climatologist for over twenty years. He is considered the foremost expert on climate change next to former VP Al Gore.

  28. anyone got info on health insurance?
    went to emergency room on saturday for minor issue, found insurance had canceled in December.
    was useless anyway – so tried to pay for better insurance – issue with FL -> NY move…
    Apparently I cannot apply until January 2018
    WTF?
    seems the same tax against middle class as global warming/cooling/freezing hoax…

  29. OT: Environment related
    Why didn’t Obama approve pipelines in ND, which would have been a boon for US citizens, during his tenure?
    “Buffett pocketed $3 a barrel from transporting 1 million barrels of oil a day on his railroad. Obama did not care about the environment or the danger of mile-long trains carrying crude oil. Obama was TCB — taking care of Buffett.”
    Follow the money.

    1. “Under my plan, gas prices will necessarily skyrocket” – Obama
      He was wrong though, he forgot that when the economy collapses under him, it caused a loss in demand for oil. The socialists like him think we have some sort of static, “slice of the pie” type economy.

      1. Which is why they ignore arguments to “increase the size of the pie” by doing things that will ‘GROW the pie’, like cutting taxes.

      2. Uhh when did the economy collapse under Obama? Am I from a different Universe? It happened in 2007 last time I checked…

    2. Why the fuck after existing for 100 years does a car still get only around 20 m/gal and our power production is still so damn dirty and inefficient?
      Don’t hate on Obama/Buffet because they took advantage of the warped system. Follow the money.

      1. Because technology isn’t inevitable. You tell me – what should be done to make the internal combustion engine more efficient?

  30. You wonder what these wealthy people who talk about “climate change” are doing in their personal lives for the environment. DiCaprio was in a fancy steakhouse, gorging on a pound of prime steak. Beef production is well known for its effect on pollution. If he cares so much, he would be a vegetarian or a vegan.

  31. Wasn’t “global warming” used before there was a proven DROP in global temperatures in the late 90’s/early 2000’s? And didn’t that usher in the use of “climate change”?

    1. Climate Change and Global Warming are two related phenomenon but they aren’t the same thing. Climate Change is, well, change in climate. Anthropogenic climate change is the theorem that human activity has a causal relationship to climate change. Global Warming is the OBSERVATION that average temperature on earth is on average, increasing.

  32. If one goes back a century and a half, one finds alternating doomsday prophecies of global warming, new ice age, back to warming, and so on. All the doomsaying is worth less than fart-gas.

  33. One thing is certain: starting about 15 years ago, global climate started to get weird everywhere. Some places warmer, others colder. Some places drier, others wetter. More wind everywhere. Seasons are fucked and have been for over a decade. Unpredictable and often bizarre weather, especially for people who have lived in the same local for decades and have the perspective.
    Indigenous peoples around the world reporting that rising and setting of sun out of whack with seasons in terms of positioning on horizon and angles in sky.
    Animal / bird / insect populations in flux and seemingly confused at times.
    Phases of moon looking different — “wet moon” in places and times it shouldn’t be, for example.
    Only logical explanation is that the angle / tilt of Earth has changed — no longer 23.5 degrees — likely 15 degrees change at least. Global GPS coordinates had to be reset about 12-15 years ago to accommodate and cover it up.
    NASA and other government / military entities have been working OVERTIME to cover up and scrub the internet and “manage” internet searches of this phenomenon.
    Professional pilots, meteorologists and other related professions have had to sign “non-disclosure” agreements for years, which are ultimately enforced / monitored by the NSA — because it truly is a national security issue.
    Did Earth tilt change naturally as part of a repeating cycle or was it artificially induced, either intentionally or accidentally?? How manipulated / fake is data related to extreme weather? Apparently, earthquakes and volcanic activity at all-time highs.
    If people can’t even comprehend / acknowledge that “chemtrails” have been sprayed overhead since the mid-90s over most of the planet — a program that has cost hundreds or thousands of billions by now and is right out in the open for anyone to see with functioning eyes — then the potential axial shift of Earth cannot feasibly be on their intellectual radar. Most people are just too dumbed down and fearful of the implications of what’s REALLY going on all around us.
    Logical and rational discussion of this topic is virtually impossible — always hijacked by those using terms such as “debunked”, “tin foil hats”, “impossible to keep the secret”, “conspiracy theorists” etc.

    1. How is the earth suddenly changing tilt compatible with the first law of thermodynamics?

      1. How was / is Earth at a 23.5 degree tilt according to the first law of thermodynamics, professor??? Maybe your textbook physics need revising or less over-simplification…

        2. Relative to it’s orbit (ecliptic plane). The earth actually doesn’t have an exact tilt, it wobbles. It reaches 23.4 at it’s peak, but during the equinox it’s at 0 degrees.

    2. Not the chemtrail bullshit again. FFS. If it was true and it’s not..
      1, Why wouldn’t they just spray at night
      2, Why use a really shit delivery system (aerosol)
      3, Where is the massive ground operation backing this up?Huge chemical tanks et cetera
      4, What’s its purpose?
      5, Why would all the pilots voluntarily spray their own family/friends/countryfolk?
      I could go on and on about how its utter bollocks but it won’t convince you, you appear to believe the Earth tilted and nobody noticed, forgetting that GPS satellites would be completely out of whack also.
      As Kryten would say “Tinfoil hat on standby sir”

  34. Disagree. The sheer number of flood myths indicate that there was in fact an ancient deluge, and in more primitive societies, what other explanation than the gods would be adequate? Of course a deadly natural disaster would be indicative of divine punishment to people who don’t understand science. The great flood and climate change have nothing to do with each other, what a ridiculous premise.

    1. Even if they understood the science, it still leaves the — why me? why now?
      Religion isn’t so much an explanation of how things occur, it seems to be a resistance to it all being random, and an explanation for why it isn’t. A desire to put a purpose behind the how.

  35. In all Totalitarian Governments the Actors (and all celebrities) must preach the party line – or be blacklisted. America is increasingly Totalitarian and Politicized Hollyweird is one symptom of tyranny.

  36. Ugggghhh, is it so fucking tough to write an environmental article that admits we pollute that shit out of the environment while also stating there is no direct evidence of anthropomorphic climate change (but a fuck ton of indirect/collaborative evidence)? Why does everything have to be either militantly A or B? Goddamn lefties do this shit all the time and its just as retarded.

  37. Today’s climate change/global warming narrative is of course a hoax. But THE FLOOD that is recorded in the Bible did in fact happen, and God used it to judge mankind. The fact that almost every culture has a flood “myth” is obviously because a worldwide Flood DID occur and all peoples descend from Noah. The true story of the Flood has just been co-opted to push the climate change narrative. The Flood was an act of God and it’s part of history.

  38. The only thing I want to see Leo doing is hopping in my bed and riding me like a rodeo bitch. What is his man pill? I can’t imagine how many bimbos wanted to be his baby mama.

    1. He`s very boyish, sure you don`t want a real man, with a hairy chest?

      1. I always thought he was kind of girlish.
        Looked like a girl in “The Beach”.

      2. Hell no!! He’ll do just fine, thank you. Yes, I like a hairy type, but really, why be so fussy.

        1. If you think he`s gonna ride you like a rodeo bitch you`re sorely mistaken:)
          He might request you do that to him though, wearing a strap-on.

  39. On of my favourite quotes of all time, that bears repeating;
    ‘Emergencies’ have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded.
    Friedrich August von Hayek

  40. Alarmist “climate change” infers that it should be “climate same”. So they want weather to stop. They aren’t called libtards for nothing.

  41. All the climate idiots are saying the world is getting hotter, but for the last several years I had to wear a jacket in July where I am located.

  42. The Hunger Games movies have been the biggest climate change brainwash propaganda of all. If anyone ever read or followed it, the story is about a nation called Panem that was created after North America collapsed. The writer does not say what catastrophe caused the collapse but she mentions the “seas rose”, so it clearly wasn’t nuclear war like the Mad Max movies, it was “climate change”. The movies and books were so popular its gotten an entire group of people believing in climate change.

  43. There is NO man made climate change, the only climate change that occurs is due to the giant ball of fire in the sky. Rather than typing it all out, just search for 2030’s Maunder Minimum and/or Dr. Zharkova. The panic in the 1970’s may have been more in line with what’s possible a little over a decade away, with the sun taking a bit of a nap like Hilda needs to. The prediction is that it’s possible that the sun spot activity will be reduced by up to 60%. This would be similar to the period of 1645 – 1700 known as the “Little Ice Age”. The MSM is busy out there trying to discredit this already saying there’s so much more CO2 now. BS, our measly SUV driving and industry can NOT over power the sun. The only way man could change the climate is something that hopefully never happens… nuclear war. Even with that, when one were to put together all nukes going off, and compare to a large caldera volcano erupting, nature trumps man by a power of 10 to the 22. The MSM will claim there’s no documentation about a Maunder Minimum affecting climate. There’s plenty actually… Like all predictions, nature has a way of letting us know there are larger factors at play than our insignificant existence can understand, so even with this sun spot reduction it may not necessarily play out like it did during the 17th century, but that’s what is fun and why I do research like this. In the grand scheme of things, man is VERY insignificant in the ability to affect climate or weather, no matter how much the alarmists think that we can. Lastly, I’m an actual scientist (20 years experience and a Masters in Meteorology), not like Billy Nye or other political “consensus” talking heads. Want an opinion of a real scientist about Earth’s climate changes through history? Here ya go: https://patriotpost.us/opinion/48675

    1. Direct energy from the sun is only one factor, and the atmosphere plays a much larger part. part. For comparison, the average temperature at 250 km in space is over 500 Celsius. You as a meteorologist should know this, which means you are either purposefully giving misleading information or falsely claiming to be a scientist.

  44. I mean I can agree with this on the merit that climate alarmist are crazy, but the conclusion is just fucking insane. “greenhouse gases, CFC’s, overpopulation and deforestation are just recent echoes of the same familiar themes we’ve always associated with the success of civilized life.”
    What? Does the author realize the implications of CFC emissions? Well, no ozone layer, which means solar radiation which means you will be dead. This isn’t alarmist, this is a easily verifiable fact.
    What do you do with deforestation when you have no more trees? Where will society get wood.

  45. How has the flood myth been “used to control human behavior”? What do you think happened at end of the ice ages?

Comments are closed.