A brilliant new doco on the Climate hoax, called Climate Hustle, 2016 and for $8 you can stream it (or buy it for $17.) It pulls together many of the threads of material that are already well known, into the one 75 minute unit.
For example the Vostock ice cores which demonstrate that the heat comes first followed by the co2 with a lag of some 800 years or so. (the exact opposite to what you’ve been told.)
Also the myth of 97% of scientists agree etc (there were only 77 scientists ever polled and some of those were and still are sceptics that had been lead authors for the IPCC and responded to some very vague questions like the loaded “do you believe in climate change” the answer of course is yes. There have been a number of Ices Ages(s) after all. Then there’s Michael Mann’s Hockey Stick graph that used to be the emblem of the IPCC until it was exposed as a fraud and of course the fraud and bias by omission of Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth and what he didn’t show and didn’t say, when he used the scissor lift for the over egged and very much hyped visual impact and effect to make his point.
All of this prompts me to ask: When are Climate Alarmists and climate catastrophists going to stop feeling guilt, and humiliation. Stop feeling so ashamed and embarrassed about being so gullible and naive for tumbling into all of this and get on with their lives.
It’s happened before over the years, happens every day. Nigerian Bank Scams, Ponzi Schemes, The Dutch Tulip bubble madness of 1636/37. When the history books are written, anthropogenic climate change will be a standout as to how easily the most wired, connected, educated and intelligent generations ever, in the history of mankind, were so easily scammed and conned.
And of course now people are starting to see the scam reflected in their energy bills because of the secondary spin off swindle and fraud of renewable energy as a replacement for base load coal generated electricity…
Dear Jim,
Thank you for inviting comments to your blog site. While the latest chunk the Larsen C ice sheet in the Antarctic ice broke off long after the documentary was made, I wish to make two points on the recent news of this event.
First the pro-climate-change/pro-global warming media are doing their cause a disservice. They have misrepresented the cloudy emissions from the chimneys and cooling towers of coal-fired power stations as pollution when it is in fact steam. Today it’s no different. They have described the latest shear of a large chunk of Antarctic Ice as melting. Time magazine describes this in detail, http://time.com/4745827/antarctica-water-climate-change/. Unless the laws of science have changed, ice does not melt at below zero degrees. According to our own government website, the average temperature is between -10 and -60 degrees celsius, source http://www.antarctica.gov.au/about-antarctica/environment/weather . Ice does not melt at below zero temperatures.
However, where there is a difference in temperature between the top of the ice sheet and the bottom of the ice sheet, the ice sheet will stress, fracture and break off. The phenomena has been reported in 1995 when the Larsen B segment broke off. According to Scientific America, Professor Adrian Luckman of Swansea University said that it was a natural occurrence and it cannot be automatically attributed to climate change/global warming. Sources, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-does-the-antarctic-ice-shelf-break-really-mean/ and http://www.swansea.ac.uk/staff/science/geography/a.luckman/ . Even the SMH says that opinion is divided as to whether there will be further breakages or reforming. http://www.smh.com.au/world/one-trillion-tonne-iceberg-breaks-off-antarctic-peninsula-20170712-gxa273.html. But the SMH fails to explain that “warmer” in the context of Antarctic weather is relative to other below zero degrees celsius temperatures. It’s not talking about warm as in Cairns Qld. Source: http://www.smh.com.au/world/one-trillion-tonne-iceberg-breaks-off-antarctic-peninsula-20170712-gxa273.html. However the presence of icebergs produced as the result of the Larsen C shelf may pose a threat to shipping. Remember the Titanic crashing into ice and ripping the ship’s iron hull?
Second, according to Professor Luckman should completely melt, the most the oceans will rise at most 0.1mm which is not detectable, source https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/5-things-to-know-about-the-trillion-ton-iceberg/ !
Since the rise in sea levels is not detectable, it goes back to basic science. Drop an ice cube into a cup of water. The ice melts but the volume of the cup does not rise. Similarly the Larsen C segment is a pure ice and as it drifts and the trillion tonnes of ice melts in warmer water, we will not be able to detect a rise in sea levels. The story may be different if the ice was on a land mass and drifted to the sea. But this is about a pure ice sheet which floated on water.
In sum, ice does not melt in sub zero temperatures but may break off due to temperature differentials causing stress, fracturing and breaking off of ice. The pro climate change/global warming media have done their cause a disservice. Moreover the scientists supporting global warming/climate change should be actively responding to the misrepresentation by the pro global warming/climate change media, especially by our ABC which is silent on the issue.
Regards
Anthony of Belfield
At most the as the ice drifts and moves towards warmer above zero
Dear Jim, I apologise for two errors.
(1) where I said “Second, according to Professor Luckman should completely melt”, it should read “Second, according to Professor Luckman, should the Larsen C ice segment completely melt”
(2) The sentence at the bottom “At most the as the ice drifts and moves towards warmer above zero” should be disregarded. This is a drafting error.
Apologies
Anthony of Belfield