eliot jacobson calls For Violence and protests on climate change

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

I understand you Climate Change, Covid Vaccine Drones though.

“If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle.
It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken.
Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
- Carl Sagan -

---

Keith Briffia, who advised the IPCC regarding climate change, had his e-mails hacked (along with others).
Check out what he wrote in one of his e-mails:
"I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1000 years ago" (there were men back then, but no factories, LOL).
and then Malclom Hughes (also an IPCC shill):"I tried to imply in my e-mail, but will now say directly, that although a direct carbon dioxide effect is still the best candidate to explain this effect, it is far from proven. In any case, the relevant point is that there is no meaningful correlation with local temperature.
These are both IPCC alarmists caught red-handed when there e-mails were hacked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

I understand you Climate Change, Covid Vaccine Drones though.

“If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle.
It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken.
Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
- Carl Sagan -

---

Keith Briffia, who advised the IPCC regarding climate change, had his e-mails hacked (along with others).
Check out what he wrote in one of his e-mails:
"I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1000 years ago" (there were men back then, but no factories, LOL).
and then Malclom Hughes (also an IPCC shill):"I tried to imply in my e-mail, but will now say directly, that although a direct carbon dioxide effect is still the best candidate to explain this effect, it is far from proven. In any case, the relevant point is that there is no meaningful correlation with local temperature.
These are both IPCC alarmists caught red-handed when there e-mails were hacked.

---

lulz... I mean two years ago they were telling us that we need to shut the entire world down because 50% of the population would die from Covid if we didn't. Now they want to say that we are all going to die from global warming. Always Fearmongering with these powers that be so they can scare the populace into more tax dollar scams. But that aint good enough for them. They now want us to pay 12 dollars for a dozen eggs, 8 dollars for a pound of poison hamburger and 5 dollars for a gallon of gas not to mention five dollars for a gallon of milk. These prices will never go down now that they know we will pay.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

I understand you Climate Change, Covid Vaccine Drones though.

“If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle.
It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken.
Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
- Carl Sagan -

---

Keith Briffia, who advised the IPCC regarding climate change, had his e-mails hacked (along with others).
Check out what he wrote in one of his e-mails:
"I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1000 years ago" (there were men back then, but no factories, LOL).
and then Malclom Hughes (also an IPCC shill):"I tried to imply in my e-mail, but will now say directly, that although a direct carbon dioxide effect is still the best candidate to explain this effect, it is far from proven. In any case, the relevant point is that there is no meaningful correlation with local temperature.
These are both IPCC alarmists caught red-handed when there e-mails were hacked.

---

Why are you so stuck on them and wish to ignore all the subsequent data that has come out? (in additional to empirical data) Always wanting to explain it away as some 'man behind the curtain' sort of thinking. Who is the scarecrow, who is the tinman? and who is the lion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

I understand you Climate Change, Covid Vaccine Drones though.

“If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle.
It’s simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we’ve been taken.
Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.”
- Carl Sagan -

---

Keith Briffia, who advised the IPCC regarding climate change, had his e-mails hacked (along with others).
Check out what he wrote in one of his e-mails:
"I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1000 years ago" (there were men back then, but no factories, LOL).
and then Malclom Hughes (also an IPCC shill):"I tried to imply in my e-mail, but will now say directly, that although a direct carbon dioxide effect is still the best candidate to explain this effect, it is far from proven. In any case, the relevant point is that there is no meaningful correlation with local temperature.
These are both IPCC alarmists caught red-handed when there e-mails were hacked.

---

lulz... I mean two years ago they were telling us that we need to shut the entire world down because 50% of the population would die from Covid if we didn't. Now they want to say that we are all going to die from global warming. Always Fearmongering with these powers that be so they can scare the populace into more tax dollar scams. But that aint good enough for them. They now want us to pay 12 dollars for a dozen eggs, 8 dollars for a pound of poison hamburger and 5 dollars for a gallon of gas not to mention five dollars for a gallon of milk. These prices will never go down now that they know we will pay.

---

I don't recall people saying 50% were going to die but sure if you say so. The biggest reason I wasn't so against lockdowns and such was that so the medical community doesn't become overrun.

A few years ago "they" (hey, it'll always be they.. you know.. they meaning NOT me..) kept telling us how bad medical care was in socialized countries. A female friend of mine has a cancer scare going on. *2* months to see a specialist and she has insurance. God only knows how many people would have left medical establishment after being slammed with a infectious disease and so many people not giving a fuck. At some point, lots are just going to say "peace out and fuck this". This is in a highly educated pricey town.. Not some shithole.

The best thing is how you types always thump your chest and talk about "them". How "they" is like one big group of scientists all out to get you so they can be paid their grand money and live in that oh so typical middle class lifestyle. It helps you rationalize your views. You know, you're the independent thinker !!! Not a follower!! Then these Youtube grifting fucks pander to that thinking. Always so indepedent. As if being a contrarian about everything in life somehow makes you smart.

Where are all those people who were to die from the Vax? Oh yea.. a guy had a heartattack on a football field. MUST HAVE BEEN THE VAX! WE HAVE PROVEN IT NOW! they say.. hahahahahahaha..

These same scientists now want Monet to pay more for eggs!! Yea, avian flu isn't a real thing either!! Nothing is. Haha..

I'll say this - Monet has cured me of racism .. you look at him and think.. geeezz.. how can I be racist when we got white guys like this !?!?

It is a clown fucking world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Why are you so stuck on them and wish to ignore all the subsequent data that has come out?

---

Because they sat on the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and informed government policy on Climate Change. No doubt future data was never doctored either. These guys learned their lesson - don't send e-mails or chat texts. Discuss in person or not at all. I guess if gravity works now, future data might suggest it won't in the future - we might not have the theory down pat yet. They had the tech back then to show the correlation between CO2 and local temperature - future data won't change that and neither will fraudsters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Why are you so stuck on them and wish to ignore all the subsequent data that has come out?

---

Because they sat on the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and informed government policy on Climate Change. No doubt future data was never doctored either. These guys learned their lesson - don't send e-mails or chat texts. Discuss in person or not at all. I guess if gravity works now, future data might suggest it won't in the future - we might not have the theory down pat yet. They had the tech back then to show the correlation between CO2 and local temperature - future data won't change that and neither will fraudsters.

---

Government has done relatively little. This is why I only post stuff that is currently going on. As some point it'll be apparent.

I do believe you are right in that IPCC have a strong incentive to not be straight-forward about all funded studies. For non-selfish reasons which are almost never comparable to other scientific fraud but you can basically use this argument for all science. Some scientists lied therefore all subsequent research can't be trusted. So I guess you work from the default point that science is false? What is the burden of counter evidence needed? How do you segregate scientists to trust vs those who you can't?

The original alarmists worked for oil companies. You think that was the right approach for guys who wanted continued funding? Or did they see the potential for money from future grants not coming from oil companies? Did they know oil companies would pay them off if they just shut-up and retired?

From this perspective you can't trust oil companies anymore than climate scientists. Exact same thing. Hide inconvenient studies.

If you remove the oil companies out of the equation for lying, then you're only left with pretty much conspiracy theorists.

When the loons who are leading the denial stuff decide there is no more money in their grifts, it will be beyond too late.

It is a bit like Pascal's wager but meant for the global and future global populations.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05517-z

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Why are you so stuck on them and wish to ignore all the subsequent data that has come out?

---

Because they sat on the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and informed government policy on Climate Change. No doubt future data was never doctored either. These guys learned their lesson - don't send e-mails or chat texts. Discuss in person or not at all. I guess if gravity works now, future data might suggest it won't in the future - we might not have the theory down pat yet. They had the tech back then to show the correlation between CO2 and local temperature - future data won't change that and neither will fraudsters.

---

Government has done relatively little. This is why I only post stuff that is currently going on. As some point it'll be apparent.

I do believe you are right in that IPCC have a strong incentive to not be straight-forward about all funded studies. For non-selfish reasons which are almost never comparable to other scientific fraud but you can basically use this argument for all science. Some scientists lied therefore all subsequent research can't be trusted. So I guess you work from the default point that science is false? What is the burden of counter evidence needed? How do you segregate scientists to trust vs those who you can't?

The original alarmists worked for oil companies. You think that was the right approach for guys who wanted continued funding? Or did they see the potential for money from future grants not coming from oil companies? Did they know oil companies would pay them off if they just shut-up and retired?

From this perspective you can't trust oil companies anymore than climate scientists. Exact same thing. Hide inconvenient studies.

If you remove the oil companies out of the equation for lying, then you're only left with pretty much conspiracy theorists.

When the loons who are leading the denial stuff decide there is no more money in their grifts, it will be beyond too late.

It is a bit like Pascal's wager but meant for the global and future global populations.

---

I already wrote that the tech to make the determinations was advanced enough to reach definitive, accurate conclusions in this regard, but you ignored that point. Tree ring sampling was already a well-established, mature science when the fraudsters decided to withhold critical information regarding the informing of climate policy. In this case that tree ring data showed that there was a rapid heating event 1000 years ago that matched the present industrial age. Feel free to continue to conflate this well-developed tech with less developed technology followed by the usage of such conflation to make the garbage non-points you make above. No one can stop you from doing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Because they sat on the Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and informed government policy on Climate Change. No doubt future data was never doctored either. These guys learned their lesson - don't send e-mails or chat texts. Discuss in person or not at all. I guess if gravity works now, future data might suggest it won't in the future - we might not have the theory down pat yet. They had the tech back then to show the correlation between CO2 and local temperature - future data won't change that and neither will fraudsters.

---

Government has done relatively little. This is why I only post stuff that is currently going on. As some point it'll be apparent.

I do believe you are right in that IPCC have a strong incentive to not be straight-forward about all funded studies. For non-selfish reasons which are almost never comparable to other scientific fraud but you can basically use this argument for all science. Some scientists lied therefore all subsequent research can't be trusted. So I guess you work from the default point that science is false? What is the burden of counter evidence needed? How do you segregate scientists to trust vs those who you can't?

The original alarmists worked for oil companies. You think that was the right approach for guys who wanted continued funding? Or did they see the potential for money from future grants not coming from oil companies? Did they know oil companies would pay them off if they just shut-up and retired?

From this perspective you can't trust oil companies anymore than climate scientists. Exact same thing. Hide inconvenient studies.

If you remove the oil companies out of the equation for lying, then you're only left with pretty much conspiracy theorists.

When the loons who are leading the denial stuff decide there is no more money in their grifts, it will be beyond too late.

It is a bit like Pascal's wager but meant for the global and future global populations.

---

I already wrote that the tech to make the determinations was advanced enough to reach definitive, accurate conclusions in this regard, but you ignored that point. Tree ring sampling was already a well-established, mature science when the fraudsters decided to withhold critical information regarding the informing of climate policy. In this case that tree ring data showed that there was a rapid heating event 1000 years ago that matched the present industrial age. Feel free to continue to conflate this well-developed tech with less developed technology followed by the usage of such conflation to make the garbage non-points you make above. No one can stop you from doing it.

---

Good answer for me backing you into a hole with your bullshit rationalizations. I'm impressed.

The fact is this has been measured many times over but you think we should have a global instrastructure put into place from what I gather. As if that is going to make a difference. It will just be a new conspiracy theory. Total fucking lock.

Quote:

---

Because the authors of the Science paper averaged their data over 40 years to smooth out year-to-year fluctuations, their temperature curve does not reflect the most recent warming.

''They've kind of smoothed out of the record,'' Dr. Mann said. ''It doesn't support the conclusion that the medieval warmth was comparable to the latter 20th century warmth.''

Rather, the peak temperatures in the Medieval Warm Period are similar to those seen in the first half of the 20th century, and that warming, most scientists agree, was induced naturally, by a brightening of the sun.

---

Not sure if this has been studied in the past 20 years or not as this info comes from 2002.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by accountinquestion

Good answer for me backing you into a hole with your bullshit rationalizations. I'm impressed.

The fact is this has been measured many times over but you think we should have a global instrastructure put into place from what I gather.

---

You didn't back anyone into a hole. Climatologists in the IPCC withleld and manipulated data and the e-mails are there to prove it. Fuck off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Fuck off.

---

A documentary about leaving Earth.

https://www6.f2movies.to/watch-movie...-78061.8167102

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheGrimReaper

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Fuck off.

---

A documentary about leaving Earth.

https://www6.f2movies.to/watch-movie...-78061.8167102

---

The authors of the Nature paper Accountinquestion linked to cherry pick the time window 2001-2011 to compare to 1000AD to 1800AD Bill. They fail to explain why 1991-2000 modern industrial data is omitted and they give the excuse that data after 2011 is too sparse to be included while failing to provide the mean temperatures of this sparse data so that the reader just assumes it's down to only the sparseness. Sparseness is typically dealt with by weighting the data less than the less sparse data rather than omitting it Bill. The authors even admit that there is pronounced natural variability and I excerpt this in the screenshot below.

We shouldn't be worrying about climate change so much.
We should be worrying about the massive decline in birth rates around the world.
That is going to cause collapse and kill us much faster compared to any excessive heat.
But you know, everyone wants to be gay and change their gender identity, these days, so, you can forget about people having enough children.
Which is what is actually needed to maintain our industry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

We shouldn't be worrying about climate change so much.
We should be worrying about the massive decline in birth rates around the world.
That is going to cause collapse and kill us much faster compared to any excessive heat.
But you know, everyone wants to be gay and change their gender identity, these days, so, you can forget about people having enough children.
Which is what is actually needed to maintain our industry.

---

Indeed - as only a single individual, Seedvalue can only do so much to rectify the situation. BTW, Baldwin got charged for manslaughter, so I fully expect an interesting drop from America's Untold Stories tomorrow, complete with appearances from Viva and Barnes as podcast guests I would guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

We shouldn't be worrying about climate change so much.
We should be worrying about the massive decline in birth rates around the world.
That is going to cause collapse and kill us much faster compared to any excessive heat.
But you know, everyone wants to be gay and change their gender identity, these days, so, you can forget about people having enough children.
Which is what is actually needed to maintain our industry.

---

Indeed - as only a single individual, Seedvalue can only do so much to rectify the situation. BTW, Baldwin got charged for manslaughter, so I fully expect an interesting drop from America's Untold Stories tomorrow, complete with appearances from Viva and Barnes as podcast guests I would guess.

---

lol at your seedvalue comment, and yeah, can't wait for that drop!
Even though I am starting to think that Mark is way too sensitive on certain subjects.
It's like he can dish out all the jokes and bashing but he has a really hard time in taking any jokes or criticism and he admitted to this in a couple of his videos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tableplay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

We shouldn't be worrying about climate change so much.
We should be worrying about the massive decline in birth rates around the world.
That is going to cause collapse and kill us much faster compared to any excessive heat.
But you know, everyone wants to be gay and change their gender identity, these days, so, you can forget about people having enough children.
Which is what is actually needed to maintain our industry.

---

Indeed - as only a single individual, Seedvalue can only do so much to rectify the situation. BTW, Baldwin got charged for manslaughter, so I fully expect an interesting drop from America's Untold Stories tomorrow, complete with appearances from Viva and Barnes as podcast guests I would guess.

---

lol at your seedvalue comment, and yeah, can't wait for that drop!
Even though I am starting to think that Mark is way too sensitive on certain subjects.
It's like he can dish out all the jokes and bashing but he has a really hard time in taking any jokes or criticism and he admitted to this in a couple of his videos.

---

That's a very good point. What's interesting to me about that fact, is that he is thick-skinned with respect to his enemies (woke libtards and such), but a bit thin-skinned with some of his friends' jokes like Hunley's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by monet

you can forget about people having enough children.

---

Maybe married men should want to fuck their wife, when their wife wants to fuck them too.

I recall AxelAss claiming that he didn't want to have children.

LOL...that's code for impotent.

Quote:

---

Now that the old gang is back together, I can't get out of here fast enough. A few well placed posts. Lol lol lol. Ha.

---

--->

Now That's What I Call Power Ballads: Total Eclipse of the Heart.

https://anagram-solver.net/Now%20tha....?partial=true

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob.Singer

After all, they both crave attention, and isn't everyone sitting on the edge of their seats waiting to see which one came in 1st place in this month's NAMBLA ratings?

---

Actually, the same as the last time Singer took off, to GF's, when I posted up a snippet of a post of his over here, back then. Got the convo going, again, especially with Druff, Druff.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcOxhH8N3Bo


TheGrimReaper
TheGrimReaper is online now
Gold
TheGrimReaper's Avatar

Join Date
Sep 2022
Posts
124 -----------> Hmm, don't know this one. Have to wait until next time, for it to make sense to me. [God, and Dan, willing.]

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/06/w...er-africa.html

First "heat officer" in Africa. I expect the ny times to play it up a bit but people already having a rough time regulating their bodies at the higher temperatures. Just wait til it starts a cookin' even more.

Gawd glad I was born in the US. Those people never even got to enjoy the lifestyle that will cause future people an incredible amount of suffering.

It looks like Jordan not only cleaned up his addiction problem but put some dough into his podcast as well...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=reaABJ5HpLk