Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
drbubb

CLIMATE HOAX? Or just a Cheap Oil High

Recommended Posts

CLIMATE HOAX? Or just a Cheap Oil High

Jeremy Clarkson tells 'mad and dangerous' 16-year-old Greta Thunberg to 'go back to school' and 'shut up'

The television presenter, who was in Australia promoting the latest season of The Grand Tour, doubled down on his criticisms of the climate change campaigner.

'She's mad and she's dangerous and she's causing young children sleepless nights with her idiocy,' he said.

'I think she needs to go back to school and shut up.'

Clarkson's comments come just days after slammed Ms Thunberg in an interview with The Independent in which he branded her a 'stupid idiot.'

He said her speech at the United Nations - where she accused leaders of stealing her 'dreams and childhood' - offered no solutions.

'I think she's a weird Swede with a bad temper. Nothing will be achieved by sailing across the ocean in a diesel-powered yacht, and then lying about the diesel engine, he told the publication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

GLOBAL WARMING?

Snow falling in the Alps on second day of summer

It's the first week of summer and rather than sunshine and heat, it's snowing.

Many parts of Victoria have shivered through a cold and wet start to the hotter months, with snow blanketing the alps, leaving Victorian's reaching for their winter woollies.

Falls Creek and The Hotham Alpine Resort in Victoria and Perisher Ski Resort in New South Wales all saw significant dumps of snow this morning, with falls of between 15cms-30cms recorded.

===

Or this?

Arctic has warmed up by 1.35 degrees Fahrenheit in just a decade - the same temperature increase that the rest of the planet has experienced in 137 YEARS, study claims

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NUTCASES are PROTESTING...

...and blaming banks (for everything, rather than for just the damage they do)

Watch Live: Leftists March to Shut Down D.C. Banks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AGW, Global Warming. Probably all BS.

This has been a topic that pops up over and over again, it basically went away for a decade, mostly because everyone who was actually paying attention at the time realised they were really being lied to.

A long, long thread on one of the sites I used to frequent (now sadly passed away) I documented my efforts to recreate the science behind the “Man Made Global Warming” claims (before the hadley CRU debacle),  and how I went through the phases of skeptic, to “huh maybe they are right” to, “omg this is all BS”.

A recent push to claim “AGW is a real thing” inspired this post, everything I post is available to people who want to try it for themselves, I will assist anyone who wishes to do so. I’m not a climatologist, no one is funding this, it was a pet (Christmas) project, that went a bit to far. (although that will need me to update it to use the new, incredibly undecipherable temperature dataset, since the NOAA changed the file format from highly undecipherable format they were using when I made the graphs below, and for that you will have to pay me)

An anonymous poster on one of the comments sections really summed up my current feeling, I recreate that comment here in full, because it is really an excellent summary of my current feelings on the matter:

The only people I have seen deny climate change are the AGW idiots who think the climate has ever been stable, and who demand global action to try to put it into some sort of climatic stasis.
The rest of us have always accepted the SCIENTIFIC FACTS that:
(a) The Earth’s climate has always changed and always will.
(b) The Earth’s climate is EXTREMELY COMPLEX and cannot currently be accurately modeled in a computer.
(c) While humans, like EVERYTHING ELSE, have SOME effects on climate, there are plenty of other causes of change including many we probably do not know/understand. Some of these other sources, like the sun, have a far greater impact than humans.
(d) The Earth has been both significantly hotter and extremely cold many times in the past before there were enough humans to have had ANY effect on any of those previously very extreme changes.
We ALSO embrace things like the laws of economics, the record of human history, and accept basic human nature – so we:
(a) Believe humans will continue to advance technologically and thus we as a species become better able to deal with climate change with every passing decade, making it retrograde to go nuts trying to offset it now – even if we could, and if we could afford it, and if its happening.
(b) Know that far more people are dying today from other sources than from climate, and that reducing some of the deaths and suffering of people TODAY is achieved using some of those fossil fuels people like you want eliminated or made too expensive because YOU claim it will save some future persons from some imagined future horror.
(c) WE actually believe a pet theory should be PROVEN before we implement policies that have a negative impact on the lives of millions of people in the name of “solving” the supposed problem. In fact, we’d like to not only see the problem PROVEN to exist, but we also want to see that the proposed solution will actually work, will be the most cost-effective option, and will have the least impact upon the lives and liberty of the people who are alive today.
So… who are the REAL “deniers”? You guys need to drop the quasi-religious fervor-driven propaganda and start persuading with REAL SCIENCE and not with slogans, bitter accusations, suppression of persons with opposed opinions, rigging of the peer review and paper publishing business, data hiding, data manipulation, etc. Your side could make a tiny start by dropping the “denier” and “paid for by big oil” accusations and not hurling expletives like ornery pubescent teenagers.

I would add to that, that from the numbers I have seen, taking the assumption man is adding heat to the earth as true – this may very well be keeping us from entering another ice age – NO THANKS!!!

I’ll start my part with one of the most compelling graphs (the only one here not made by me) I ran into during those discussions that really hit a home run:

Sea_level_temp_140ky.gif?zoom=2.625&w=840

That is a graph, made by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrationfrom 2006, that documents the sea level over the last few hundred thousand years, light yellow on the zoomed in lower graph are the ice ages.

My questions to AGW proponents

Why were sea levels 10 meters higher than they are now if this is the hottest we have ever been?

We are [hopefully still] coming out of an ice age, why are you in such a hurry to send us back into one?

___

How did I get here?

Well, back in 2007/2008 everyone around me was in an AGW frenzy, governments were slapping huge taxes on energy consumption, every week was some new story, that I personally had a very hard time believing in (NASA releasing pictures comparing like winter 1997 with summer 2007 getting posted by her majesties Big Black Cock media (BBC) really got my BS meter screaming), and saying “I’m not sure I believe it” was heresy, there’s zero debate they said.

So I broke the “AGW problem” into three steps.

  1. The earth is getting warmer
  2. We are causing the earth to get warmer
  3. The earth getting warmer is a problem that can and should be fixed.

->Can’t have three without one and two.

Well, I’ve a ton of data science under my belt, I don’t need to take anyones word for it that the earth is getting warmer, I can go to the data and see for myself. At the same time I was developing a load of financial analysis tools (made good money on the financial crash thanks to them, so in that sense you can say this research paid dividends, even though the graphs I am about to put here never made it out of the little bubble we were discussing them in)

I’ll skip the various revisions I went through, and just go straight to the end.

First, I downloaded the temperature global station readings dating back to 1877.

Next, I used a delauney tool to interpolate the temperatures between the stations, this has the benefit of minimising the rising temperatures from urbanisation, but in the end I don’t think I used this – too hard to get an average….

What I did instead was put all the stations into small “bins” by latitude, this gave me, for each month, the “average” temperature of a sliver of a latitude, (ring around the earth), this worked well and produces the (highly detailed) graph:

sun_temp_raw.png?zoom=2.625&w=840

Here the vertical axis is latitude -> from -90 to 90 and the horizontal axis is month, one pixel wide for a month, one pixel high for 1 degree of latitude. red is hot, blue is cold, and green is no stations in the bin.

Notice how there is a lot of missing data at the poles early on, the temperatures at the poles have simply never been recorded, more on this later.

There is to much missing data there to really do much with, but we can make some assumptions to fill in the gaps. By treating each month as a single data set, we can fit a curve to the data to estimate the temperatures we dont have. That looks like this:

fitting.jpg?zoom=2.625&w=840

vertical axis is tenths of a degree (i.e. 100=10 degrees Celsius), horizontal axis is latitude

This gives us a near perfect dataset to work with.

sun_temp_fitted.png?zoom=2.625&w=840

This is the same format as the raw data, with one addition, the spots around the middle are the estimate of the sun azimuth (the latitude the sun is highest in the sky, the point on the curve where rate of change equals zero)

This then went through various stages that basically agreed with much of the “earth is getting warmer” hypothesis (the “huh maybe they are right” phase), until I got to that sun azimuth in more detail.

The northern hemisphere has more land than the southern hemisphere. Therefore when the sun is shining down on the northern hemisphere, global temperatures are hotter.

So after much effort to improve the results, I finally ended up with this graph

sun%20angle.jpg?zoom=2.625&w=840

That is the change in latitude of the azimuth in the sun “predicted” by everything you just saw…..

i.e. the sun moved from -4 degrees south in 1877, to 1.5 degrees north in 2008.

Now, there are many ways to interpret this graph, maybe the earth really is wobbling, and that wobble is changing average temperatures, maybe the lack of temperature readings  at the poles is biasing the results (my preferred explanation), but the conclusion is clear to me at this point, the errors we have here are to big to measure tenths of a degree or even a degree change over 200 years, and any trend is never going to be statistically significant. And this is “the best data there is”, there are other data sources but they are even more unreliable and unproven than this.

So yeah, there is debate, Hadley CRU manipulating the data to hide the medieval warm period was a real thing, and scientists chasing grant money from the oil companies invested in alternative energy, and governments wanting more reasons to tax the hell out of everything we do have almost certainly corrupted this field to the point where the truth is indiscernible from the BS.

Since then, Australia had some fun, introducing, then abandoning carbon taxes, and all the corruption that went with them, and China ignored it all and catapulted itself to be the new world leader in everything.

WELL DONE.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Greta may have a tough TIME In 2020

Trump Jr: TIME Magazine Picks ‘Marketing Gimmick’ Greta Over Hong Kong Protesters For ‘Person of the Year’

ELgcBrYXUAAIfJ1?format=jpg&name=small

So PC, and so Globalist !  I am disgusted!

Greta: So young, so angry... so Brainwashed !

/ 2 /

TIME's Carbon Footprint?

  • Time magazine named activist Greta Thunberg its Person of the Year and is promoting the 16-year-old while not addressing questions about its carbon footprint. 
  • One similarly sized magazine — Discover Magazine — fleshed out its carbon footprint and found that producing and distributing each edition produces more than 170 tons of emissions. 
  • Time magazine was also considering House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, President Donald Trump and an anonymous whistleblower for the honor before landing on Thunberg. 

Time magazine named Greta Thunberg its 2019 Person of the Year, yet the legacy outlet is being cagey about its overall carbon footprint as the 16-year-old activist advocates for stricter climate policies.

The magazine awarded Thunberg the honor Wednesday after she spent 2019 warning government officials about what she believes is a climate crisis. Time, for its part, has not responded to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for information about its carbon output.

Other media outlets have been more forthright about what they are doing to address climate change. Discover Magazine, for instance, published a lengthy article in 2008 fleshing out how the magazine’s supply chain affects the environment.

Discover, which had a total circulation of about 580,000 as of 2012, noted in the piece that each month’s issue in this process released the equivalent of 170 tons of carbon dioxide. As a point of contrast, Time had a circulation of more than 2 million in 2017, The Wall Street Journal noted.

> https://dailycaller.com/2019/12/11/greta-thunberg-time-person/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think climate change is a hoax - although it is being used by attention-seekers like Greta Brat as a platform. 

That said, I doubt climate change is much of a threat to our societies relative to financial delusion combined with what used to be called Peak Oil.

I have a private suspicion that the elite of the world are growing increasingly exasperated at overcrowding due to hedonistic consumption of affluent societies. There was a time when wealth bought you the exclusive peace of the Caribbean, or Bermuda, or the Pacific islands, the classical empty world prior to WW2 as described by Somerset Maugham. Those days are largely gone. The Fatted Masses seethe from their urban nests to despoil the beauty of the world with their sunbathing, scooters and banal gawping at ancient ruins. 

Of course, the Fatted Masses are living on time borrowed from the future in a tower of debt. The supply of conventional oil largely maxed out about 15 years ago. Most of the increase in supply since then has been from expensive, unconventional oil that has caused sharp price spikes, which in turn have forced economic growth back. If the world economy continues to borrow to challenge the physical limit of the oil supply, it does not take a genius to predict who will win. 

There will be a collapse. It will be worse than the Great Depression or the collapse of the USSR. That's when the global elite will dart in to buy out nation states and become private sovereign power. The elite will subjugate the masses to prevent them ever rising back to affluence.

Ludicrous fantasy? Perhaps. But if I thought of it, you can bet the top-dogs have thought of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Most of the increase in supply since then has been from expensive, unconventional oil that has caused sharp price spikes, which in turn have forced economic growth back.

If the world economy continues to borrow to challenge the physical limit of the oil supply, it does not take a genius to predict who will win..."

Okay.  I Buy some of that...

FEAR of Peak Oil - brought massive investment in the Oil Patch & alternative energy

+

$146 Oil collapsed Oil demand, and shifted some of that into other Energy sources

+

The collapse in Demand, brought years of Cheap Oil

+

Yes, The global economy has boomed, and the Public began to believe in unlimited Free Resources

+

This is Triggering crazy demand for Free and Cheap this, and a massive formation of debt - which will collapse

====== Time to Draw the Line ======

The OIL BULL May be back in 2020 - with a weaker USD - Get Ready for it !!

BULLISH ON OIL...

(could be great timing, since we are now in Tax Selling season)

Mark Gordon / with Keith McCullough of HedgeEye

Mark Gordon: Unprecedented Opportunity in Oil Markets

/ 2 /

Mark Gordon: Why the age of oil abundance is about to end.

Erik Townsend and Patrick Ceresna welcome Mark Gordon to MacroVoices. They discuss why inventory is not what drives the price, the regime change from the age of peak oil to the age of oil abundance and possible impacts the recession will have on oil prices and more.

==

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2019 at 10:09 PM, mSparks said:

AGW, Global Warming. Probably all BS.

"The northern hemisphere has more land than the southern hemisphere.

Therefore when the sun is shining down on the northern hemisphere, global temperatures are hotter. "

This has been a topic that pops up over and over again, it basically went away for a decade, mostly because everyone who was actually paying attention at the time realised they were really being lied to.

A long, long thread on one of the sites I used to frequent (now sadly passed away) I documented my efforts to recreate the science behind the “Man Made Global Warming” claims (before the hadley CRU debacle),  and how I went through the phases of skeptic, to “huh maybe they are right” to, “omg this is all BS”.

A recent push to claim “AGW is a real thing” inspired this post,...

A useful post by Sparks

But I have banned him for the rest of 2019.

I do hope he will be back with more useful posts in 2020, and LESS TROLLING

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, drbubb said:

President Trump On Brainwashed Teen Climate Commie Greta Thunberg Being Awarded TIME’s ‘Person of the Year’: ‘So Ridiculous; Greta Must Work on Her Anger Management Problem, Then Go to a Good Old-Fashioned Movie With a Friend! Chill Greta, Chill!’
 

Greta Thunberg causes Twitter meltdown for winning Person of the Year - ‘Is this a joke?'

“She offers no practical solutions for the governments on how to save the Earth. Why is she the person of the year?”

Make Dice asked on Twitter: "Is this a joke?"

Lisa posted: “When is this gonna end with Greta? I wanna talk about other things.”

Carole J commented: “There are many more, other, deserving people and groups.”

Jason Self shared on Twitter: “They keep giving that crap to people who haven’t earned a thing. (esp. females)

“That brat is on a vacation and that is all. She has someone writing her little tantrums for her.”

Dwight Paulson added: “I’ve forgotten more about climate change than this teen knows. I’ve got socks older than her.”

Another social media user posted: “What exactly did she do again that earned her person of the year?”


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do have time for those who challenge the consensus about climate change, due to having had in-depth involvement in certain "road safety" policies that were based on nothing more than political cynicism, institutional dishonesty and academic delusion. Although hard data proved the policies wrong, this had no effect on institutional, media or public attitudes. Lies answered hard data and lies won. In the end, objectors got tired of being a futile minority, shrugged, and went on to do other things. Public health and quality of life suffer, but long-standing political expediencies endure. The basic problem is that politics is a mix of cynicism (by rulers) and emotional tides amongst "the people". Since the end of WW2, the rise of affluence has necessited a degree of degeneracy, but the reward has been "kicks" for the people. The people like their "kicks" (fast cars, foreign holidays, witnessing spectacular crashes). Just try taking them away from the people... 

My problem with efforts to dispute climate change is that they never address the central results of the "hockey stick". If Mann et al's paper is wrong, then it can readily be shown to be wrong in straightforward language. But I have never seen this done.

Maybe this guy Soon has a point. I have consciously steered clear of taking a deep interest in climate change science, knowing that such a fascination can devour one's life to no good result. If climate change is a hoax, no amount of "proof" will shift the tide of popular emotional/hysterical support for it. What is the root of that emotional support? Perhaps suppressed exasperation about overcrowding, suppressed guilt about the consequences of affluence (as affluence is currently practised), dismay at the disappearance of wilderness under container ports and cities... Who can say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, malco said:

IWhat is the root of that emotional support? Perhaps suppressed exasperation about overcrowding, suppressed guilt about the consequences of affluence (as affluence is currently practised), dismay at the disappearance of wilderness under container ports and cities... Who can say?

THE HOAX, if it is one, has been carefully developed and promoted by the LIE STREAM MEDIA, and virtue-signaling celebrities

(I think the Virtue-signaling may well be a bigger danger to our Planet than Climate change & "man-made global warming", which is not happening):

Michelle Obama Defends Greta Thunberg After Trump Mocks: ‘Ignore the Doubters’

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Europe's AOC?

3cbfmn.jpg

A dangerous little bitty. Another poster child for toxic (whining, unaccountable) Femininity

Brainwashed Teen Climate Commie Greta Threatens to Put World Leaders ‘Against the Wall’ if They Don’t Obey Her Demands

x

GENDER DIFFERENCE?

One is utterly obnoxious, whinny and knows zip.  The other did nothing

Covington’s Nick Sandmann and Greta Thunberg. My, what a contrast in media’s treatment of them.

EFO_uh9UcAQxxze.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dan Britt - Orbits and Ice Ages: The History of Climate

"What is normal for Earth?"

"i took that data" . An entertaining look at some important Data

Another lecture in IHMC's award winning lecture series. http://www.ihmc.us

Climate change has become a major political issue, but few understand how climate has changed in the past and the forces that drive climate. Most people don't know that fifty million years ago there were breadfruit trees and crocodiles on the shores of the Arctic Ocean, or that 18,000 years ago there was a mile-thick glacier on Manhattan and a continuous belt of winter sea ice extending south to Cape Hatteras.

The History of Climate provides context of our current climate debate and fundamental insight how the climate works. Dr. Daniel Britt is a Professor of Astronomy and Planetary Sciences at the Department of Physics, University of Central Florida. He was educated at the University of Washington and Brown University, receiving a Ph.D. from Brown in 1991. He has had a varied career including service in the US Air Force as an ICBM missile launch officer and an economist for Boeing before going into planetary sciences. He has served on the science teams of two NASA missions, Mars Pathfinder and Deep Space 1. He was the project manager for the camera on Mars Pathfinder and has built hardware for all the NASA Mars landers. Britt currently does research on the physical properties and mineralogy of asteroids, comets, the Moon, and Mars under several NASA grants. Honors include 5 NASA Achievement Awards, election as a Fellow of the Meteoritical Society, and an asteroid named after him; 4395 Dan Britt. He is currently President of the Division for Planetary Sciences of the American Astronomical Society. He lives in Orlando with his wife Judith. They have two sons, ages 16 and 21.

==

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How brainwashed are we??

Greta seems to have been BRAINWASHED INTO a serious depression

Michelle Obama, Greta Thunberg Among Gallup’s Most Admired Women

/ 2 /

svante-thunberg-greta-dad-SCREENSHOT-620

The Father of Greta Thunberg, Who Missed a Year of School Due to Depression:

'She is Happy.' But He's Worried

Is sixteen-year-old Greta Thunberg happy?

According to her father, yes.

Svante Thunberg recently spoke to the BBC and said as much, although he expressed worry over what she’s doing with her life.

Mr. Thunberg told the network he was “not supportive” of her skipping school for a climate strike.

If he wasn’t supportive, how was she able to do it?

When I was 16, I wanted to spend $5,000 on clothes, drive a Ferrari to Malibu, hop a plane to Hawaii, and stay in a 5-star resort for a month.

Sadly, my parents were “not supportive.”

Back to Svante, he also explained that — before Greta was missing class to prevent Armageddon — she was kept out of school for a year because she suffered greatly from depression.

She became mute:

“She stopped talking…she stopped going to school.”

And not only that, she stopped eating — “for three months, or two-and-a-half months” — which was the “ultimate nightmare for a parent.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/12/2019 at 11:24 AM, drbubb said:

Greta may have a tough TIME In 2020

Trump Jr: TIME Magazine Picks ‘Marketing Gimmick’ Greta Over Hong Kong Protesters For ‘Person of the Year’

ELgcBrYXUAAIfJ1?format=jpg&name=small

So PC, and so Globalist !  I am disgusted!

Greta: So young, so angry... so Brainwashed !

Karma is coming - Greta will pay the Price... and David Hogg is paying

Political Groups Exploit Children Like Greta Thunberg And David Hogg Then Discard Them

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Greta Thunberg is not a scientist... Things are taken for granted"

The Incredible Hypocrisy of the Left Attacking Meat Loaf for his Thunberg Comments

"They say Meatloaf is a washed up singer..."  has no qualifications.  What Irony !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×