*I got a freebie for you Sheldon - I was thinking - I just read a Substack on this same topic - um, no, I had just started writing one about a news article I had read this morning. A whistle-blower type MD revealing details about a study when she was younger that never got published and left her suspicous of money motives in the health industry. It seems the insurance company involved squelched the study with her superiors instead of making improvements that would save patient's lives. She is not recommending it, she is revealing it. “Perverse Economies: Who Is Worth Saving? — It's often cheaper to let people die”, by Judy Melinek, MD January 5, 2023, (https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/second-opinions/102515)
In Canada, our answer to looking for effective treatment has become Medically Assisted Suicide.
When our legacy pharmacures fail...we off people with different drugs.
And people keep lapping this shit up like a saucer of fresh cream to a kitten.
Just came across an interesting thread by Dr. Joseph Lee, lungvirus.com. He's actually posted a plethora of amazing information but his thread from yesterday focuses on less=more...in that instead of adding more shit to our bodies when they are trying to heal, fasting is the better solution.
I recently watched a video where Russell Brand interviewed Graham Hancock. Mr. Hancock is a journalist who has studied archeology and perhaps ancient history a lot. He talked about the last ice age, which I think was called the Younger Dryas and occurred around 14,000 years ago. At the end of this age, about 12,000 years ago, the temperature rose very quickly - according to the NOAA - about 10 deg C in 1 DECADE. The result was a drastic rise in sea levels and a near extinction event including humans. I personally think that this is the Great Flood from the biblical Noah story. Watch the video, it fits.
I don't know specifically what the population of the earth was 12,000 years ago but I think we can assume it was lower than today. I also don't think that 'fossil fuels' were used much at the time.
Any rational person can see that the climate can change catastrophically (or wonderfully) and we humans have absolutely nothing to do with it. Nada, zilch, nothing.
What may be going on right now is a combination of gross financial mismanagement, greed, control freaks/narcissists, hubris etc. Not to mention the cult of Malthus and Machiavelli.
Gross financial mismanagement because the entire global financial system is a huge mess that keeps getting kicked down the road. It may even be that the people in charge of central banks see the mess and are trying to take steps to make the collapse less painful. Those steps however involve draining money from wherever they can find it, i.e., your pocket and mine.
Greed and control because the very rich and powerful probably think they can only remain where they are by keeping us on a very short leash.
Narcissists & hubris because they won't admit error.
Malthus & Machiavelli because that's where the theories of (1) too few resources and too many people and (2) the end justifies the means came from at least they were the originators in the recent past.
I am going to try again Sheldon as my main point seems to have been missed - your 'decarbonizing' theme and questions are VERY GOOD and VERY IMPORTANT - and having a significant science error in your concluding statement weakens the whole thing. I do think this is worth going back and editing - by you. Strong points overall - get rid of the weakness in the wrap-up. My other comment: "the 2.4 vs some other small number is about an average increase in the global average temperature. Like 2.4'F increase from 60'F. *not sure if Celsius is used. Took MOOCs on this a few years ago." **Celsius is used, a reply factchecker took umbrage to my saying something without the accurate 'C. The point is larger - it is an average rate of change rather than a total temperature as your text suggests/claims. There is a culling on. That is a big point that it seems we could all share concern over. And depopulation for 'climate crisis' is part of the culling goal, it seems.
The climate of our planet has NEVER stopped changing...and does so in cycles that span longer than we have recorded temperature and weather history on.
5.5 Billion years of Climate...
We are using data from the last 150 to find trends...
Where over the last 100 years of forecasting, not 1 of the forecasts have been true.
I may be off on this bc I no longer live in AB and correct me if I'm wrong, but my sense is that Danielle has rural Ab locked up and that Edmonton is an irretrievable Dipper wasteland. That leaves Calgarians as the ones on whom the election may turn. Presumably Danielle can appeal to them on the basis that the Trudeau/ Gag-me/ Notley coalition is overtly set on destroying even more of Calgary's prosperity (oil and gas) base.
Not sure if this is due to a larger union presence in Edmonchuk, or a stronger OG presence in Calgary that shows this much of a political spectrum differentiation in 2 citys, 3 hours apart in the same province.
I just found this fella on Twitter who's set out to make sure that NDP don't get anymore traction in Calgary...going to see if I can find him, reach out to him...maybe get him into a town hall, just to help him in his efforts.
The solution to this non-problem is, and always has been, planting trees. Which turns it into oxygen as any public school student who ever attended a science class would know. Canada’s boreal forests already have 10x the trees necessary to cover every single Canadian carbon footprint. I can’t remember the specifics of what I read, but the captured carbon is used in the production of something, and can be bought and sold.
Everybody forgets about grass...and the fact that it does the same as trees.
This is upsetting.
Where most people can't go ahead and plant enough trees personally to offset their own Carbon Foot Print...if this was their concern, they also don't take 10 minutes per year to water their fucking lawn!
When politicians find it difficult to maintain their power, they stir up problems, suppress them, and pretend to be righteous.
Don't worry, in abt. 1.5 billion years there will be no water, and in 4-5 billion years the earth will be swallowed by the sun due to the expansion of the sun.
Politicians will say that they can solve even this if they leave it to them.
This is off-topic, a bit, but ultra-important, so hope you don't mind.... The WHO has cooked up this international treaty that seems to be aimed at stripping us of everything.
asking for help spreading the word to alternative media outlets. His readers have posted emails for many, and there's a prepared press release to copy and paste. It's more-the-merrier time!
I've been seeing these posted for the last year - give or take...and agree that more information on this needs to be shared.
Issue is...if we don't tackle the current problems we have, what chance do we have at fixing something that isn't even in place yet?
Still trying to put the horse before the cart...will most likely get to this over the next year but congratulate those who are pioneering a movement on this information.
Business as usual. Same Trio UN/WEF/WHO depopulation agenda.
But.
Don't despair:
According to ThirdParadigm, our side lists at least 27 victories!
Of course, the Deep State Monster possesses technology . . . but we have the number: We, The People outnumber these monsters by an outstanding 8 billion souls.
* science editor comment - the 2.4 vs some other small mumber is about an average increase in the global average temperature. Like 2.4'F increase from 60'F. *not sure if Celsius is used. Took MOOCs on this a few years ago.
Yep, that was my guess but I had already written an example in 'F because I am in the US. So, I added the correction in advance - 'C was more likely.
This is kind of silly. It is just a fact that was quite wrong, so I tried to say something. Facts should matter more than some hurt feelings over a slight correction. I was just trying to be funny with the 'science editor' - many news shows today need better science editors on staff.
but I am not a science editor - that was my point - the 2.4/60 comparison by Yakk is too wrong - looking into it would be a good idea. Not my job to edit his article. "Excuse me, Yakk, your slip is showing."
If you are not a science editor, do not post “science editor comment” in your reply. That is dishonest and undermines the point you are making. I actually agree that the 2.4 vs 60 is an over simplistic comparison, but so is the entire theory of there being any meaningful information to be gained from promoting the idea of a “global average temperature”. That is hokum of the highest order.
It's about a variable that we have absolutely zero control over, where climate zealots believe that 2.4°C is too great of a variance when average temperatures range by 60°C. This same thing has happened since long before the last 150 years of actually recording temperatures, in Canada.
The Highest Temperature recorded for Alberta was 37°C...in 1937. The Lowest recorded temperature for the province was -48.2°C - December 2022 - AKA, less than 1 month ago.
The hottest recorded temperature on the planet was recorded in 1913...untouched in over 100 years.
The metrics they are defining are as much bullshit as calculating the number of lives saved by mRNA vaccines based on Projections that were wrong 100% of the time.
There is simply no way they can forecast the weather, with any accuracy, past 10 days. To think that we can do this over years, decades or centuries and adjusting for it through a tax is complete lunacy.
You missed the °C...and may be feeling a little defensive for being called on that...don't make it my issue. I was clear in my posting.
I do agree that the tax is a money scam and likely is adding to pollution more than helping and that lies are happening.
That wasn't really my point - humans are being decarbonized. My sister was one of them. Bigger picture is important here.
"Climate change" is a cover-up for industrial and agricultural pollution and the planet magnetosphere and crust are changing. There are bigger issues here and 2.4 and 60 seem so different because they represent very different things.
Not feeling defensive about the 'C/'F thing at all and I was just trying to be nice. No skin off my nose, I just thought your article is strong otherwise. For my point it doesn't matter what the units are because it is about what the number represents. You are comparing an average increase in average temperature of the whole planet (estimates) with a localized range of temperature extremes. Those two things are not comparable numbers.
*I got a freebie for you Sheldon - I was thinking - I just read a Substack on this same topic - um, no, I had just started writing one about a news article I had read this morning. A whistle-blower type MD revealing details about a study when she was younger that never got published and left her suspicous of money motives in the health industry. It seems the insurance company involved squelched the study with her superiors instead of making improvements that would save patient's lives. She is not recommending it, she is revealing it. “Perverse Economies: Who Is Worth Saving? — It's often cheaper to let people die”, by Judy Melinek, MD January 5, 2023, (https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/second-opinions/102515)
In Canada, our answer to looking for effective treatment has become Medically Assisted Suicide.
When our legacy pharmacures fail...we off people with different drugs.
And people keep lapping this shit up like a saucer of fresh cream to a kitten.
Just came across an interesting thread by Dr. Joseph Lee, lungvirus.com. He's actually posted a plethora of amazing information but his thread from yesterday focuses on less=more...in that instead of adding more shit to our bodies when they are trying to heal, fasting is the better solution.
https://twitter.com/leelasik/status/1611912491436773376
Hard to argue the costs over treatments if the most effective treatment is actually free.
I'll check out the link you posted, Jennifer.
Thanks!
EXCELLENT article.....thanks, Jennifer....I also subscribed...... :)
I recently watched a video where Russell Brand interviewed Graham Hancock. Mr. Hancock is a journalist who has studied archeology and perhaps ancient history a lot. He talked about the last ice age, which I think was called the Younger Dryas and occurred around 14,000 years ago. At the end of this age, about 12,000 years ago, the temperature rose very quickly - according to the NOAA - about 10 deg C in 1 DECADE. The result was a drastic rise in sea levels and a near extinction event including humans. I personally think that this is the Great Flood from the biblical Noah story. Watch the video, it fits.
I don't know specifically what the population of the earth was 12,000 years ago but I think we can assume it was lower than today. I also don't think that 'fossil fuels' were used much at the time.
Any rational person can see that the climate can change catastrophically (or wonderfully) and we humans have absolutely nothing to do with it. Nada, zilch, nothing.
What may be going on right now is a combination of gross financial mismanagement, greed, control freaks/narcissists, hubris etc. Not to mention the cult of Malthus and Machiavelli.
Gross financial mismanagement because the entire global financial system is a huge mess that keeps getting kicked down the road. It may even be that the people in charge of central banks see the mess and are trying to take steps to make the collapse less painful. Those steps however involve draining money from wherever they can find it, i.e., your pocket and mine.
Greed and control because the very rich and powerful probably think they can only remain where they are by keeping us on a very short leash.
Narcissists & hubris because they won't admit error.
Malthus & Machiavelli because that's where the theories of (1) too few resources and too many people and (2) the end justifies the means came from at least they were the originators in the recent past.
How about we remove the true epidemics: glyphosates and EMF radiation.
https://open.substack.com/pub/inugo/p/electromagnetic-poisoning-the-true?r=qx9b5&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post
I am going to try again Sheldon as my main point seems to have been missed - your 'decarbonizing' theme and questions are VERY GOOD and VERY IMPORTANT - and having a significant science error in your concluding statement weakens the whole thing. I do think this is worth going back and editing - by you. Strong points overall - get rid of the weakness in the wrap-up. My other comment: "the 2.4 vs some other small number is about an average increase in the global average temperature. Like 2.4'F increase from 60'F. *not sure if Celsius is used. Took MOOCs on this a few years ago." **Celsius is used, a reply factchecker took umbrage to my saying something without the accurate 'C. The point is larger - it is an average rate of change rather than a total temperature as your text suggests/claims. There is a culling on. That is a big point that it seems we could all share concern over. And depopulation for 'climate crisis' is part of the culling goal, it seems.
The climate of our planet has NEVER stopped changing...and does so in cycles that span longer than we have recorded temperature and weather history on.
5.5 Billion years of Climate...
We are using data from the last 150 to find trends...
Where over the last 100 years of forecasting, not 1 of the forecasts have been true.
It's all bullshit...
It's a tough choice but this might be one of your best, Sheldon. Excellent distillation.
Taking a break from being solely posting on COVID helps cleanse my creative palate.
It's kinda fun too...
Thanks, Camilla.
I may be off on this bc I no longer live in AB and correct me if I'm wrong, but my sense is that Danielle has rural Ab locked up and that Edmonton is an irretrievable Dipper wasteland. That leaves Calgarians as the ones on whom the election may turn. Presumably Danielle can appeal to them on the basis that the Trudeau/ Gag-me/ Notley coalition is overtly set on destroying even more of Calgary's prosperity (oil and gas) base.
Seems pretty accurate.
Not sure if this is due to a larger union presence in Edmonchuk, or a stronger OG presence in Calgary that shows this much of a political spectrum differentiation in 2 citys, 3 hours apart in the same province.
I just found this fella on Twitter who's set out to make sure that NDP don't get anymore traction in Calgary...going to see if I can find him, reach out to him...maybe get him into a town hall, just to help him in his efforts.
https://twitter.com/TariqElnaga
He's got some great comments, great posting and is hell bent on keeping the NDP out of the Province.
Agreed, I follow him on Twitter. He's on the money.
The solution to this non-problem is, and always has been, planting trees. Which turns it into oxygen as any public school student who ever attended a science class would know. Canada’s boreal forests already have 10x the trees necessary to cover every single Canadian carbon footprint. I can’t remember the specifics of what I read, but the captured carbon is used in the production of something, and can be bought and sold.
Everybody forgets about grass...and the fact that it does the same as trees.
This is upsetting.
Where most people can't go ahead and plant enough trees personally to offset their own Carbon Foot Print...if this was their concern, they also don't take 10 minutes per year to water their fucking lawn!
My neighborhood at least.
When politicians find it difficult to maintain their power, they stir up problems, suppress them, and pretend to be righteous.
Don't worry, in abt. 1.5 billion years there will be no water, and in 4-5 billion years the earth will be swallowed by the sun due to the expansion of the sun.
Politicians will say that they can solve even this if they leave it to them.
Notley Destructive Pandering
This is off-topic, a bit, but ultra-important, so hope you don't mind.... The WHO has cooked up this international treaty that seems to be aimed at stripping us of everything.
James Roguski posted this yesterday:
https://jamesroguski.substack.com/p/alternative-media
asking for help spreading the word to alternative media outlets. His readers have posted emails for many, and there's a prepared press release to copy and paste. It's more-the-merrier time!
I've been seeing these posted for the last year - give or take...and agree that more information on this needs to be shared.
Issue is...if we don't tackle the current problems we have, what chance do we have at fixing something that isn't even in place yet?
Still trying to put the horse before the cart...will most likely get to this over the next year but congratulate those who are pioneering a movement on this information.
Thanks for the share, Shelagh!
Western elites saving the planet is White Man's Burden 2.0
Reminds me of the memes; "You and I are the carbon they want to reduce!"
Lol. Reduced plastic bags and utensils, and then added millions of face diapers and PCR tests to the environment... 🙄
https://www.bitchute.com/video/I2GIKV6XZeEt/
6:20 Mark!
These people are all lunatics indeed. Thank you, Sheldon!
Business as usual. Same Trio UN/WEF/WHO depopulation agenda.
But.
Don't despair:
According to ThirdParadigm, our side lists at least 27 victories!
Of course, the Deep State Monster possesses technology . . . but we have the number: We, The People outnumber these monsters by an outstanding 8 billion souls.
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-reset-and-ukraine-same-or-different
* science editor comment - the 2.4 vs some other small mumber is about an average increase in the global average temperature. Like 2.4'F increase from 60'F. *not sure if Celsius is used. Took MOOCs on this a few years ago.
It is Celsius that is used. The UN and most of the world, except the USA, uses Celsius.
It’s also literally •C in the image Sheldon shared.
Yep, that was my guess but I had already written an example in 'F because I am in the US. So, I added the correction in advance - 'C was more likely.
This is kind of silly. It is just a fact that was quite wrong, so I tried to say something. Facts should matter more than some hurt feelings over a slight correction. I was just trying to be funny with the 'science editor' - many news shows today need better science editors on staff.
Seriously, as a “science editor” this is basic stuff you ought to know. This is a Dumb Free Zone. Please don’t Dumb here.
but I am not a science editor - that was my point - the 2.4/60 comparison by Yakk is too wrong - looking into it would be a good idea. Not my job to edit his article. "Excuse me, Yakk, your slip is showing."
If you are not a science editor, do not post “science editor comment” in your reply. That is dishonest and undermines the point you are making. I actually agree that the 2.4 vs 60 is an over simplistic comparison, but so is the entire theory of there being any meaningful information to be gained from promoting the idea of a “global average temperature”. That is hokum of the highest order.
How is a comparison of 2.4 to 60 too wrong?
It's about a variable that we have absolutely zero control over, where climate zealots believe that 2.4°C is too great of a variance when average temperatures range by 60°C. This same thing has happened since long before the last 150 years of actually recording temperatures, in Canada.
The Highest Temperature recorded for Alberta was 37°C...in 1937. The Lowest recorded temperature for the province was -48.2°C - December 2022 - AKA, less than 1 month ago.
The hottest recorded temperature on the planet was recorded in 1913...untouched in over 100 years.
The metrics they are defining are as much bullshit as calculating the number of lives saved by mRNA vaccines based on Projections that were wrong 100% of the time.
There is simply no way they can forecast the weather, with any accuracy, past 10 days. To think that we can do this over years, decades or centuries and adjusting for it through a tax is complete lunacy.
You missed the °C...and may be feeling a little defensive for being called on that...don't make it my issue. I was clear in my posting.
The only thing wrong is that 2.4 of global average change is absolutely meaningless. Where as 60 change in a specific location is a reality.
"Future of Climate Change" | Climate Change Science | US EPA
US Environmental Protection Agency, now a 404 page https://www.dropbox.com/s/97zv6jzurhg3dq7/scenariotempgraph_0%20US%20EPA%20Climate%20Change.jpg?dl=0 Their bullsh!t numbers are the ones being discussed - "Global Surface Temperature Change" - is an average of the global average - not a localized place. And yes, Celsius.
I do agree that the tax is a money scam and likely is adding to pollution more than helping and that lies are happening.
That wasn't really my point - humans are being decarbonized. My sister was one of them. Bigger picture is important here.
"Climate change" is a cover-up for industrial and agricultural pollution and the planet magnetosphere and crust are changing. There are bigger issues here and 2.4 and 60 seem so different because they represent very different things.
Not feeling defensive about the 'C/'F thing at all and I was just trying to be nice. No skin off my nose, I just thought your article is strong otherwise. For my point it doesn't matter what the units are because it is about what the number represents. You are comparing an average increase in average temperature of the whole planet (estimates) with a localized range of temperature extremes. Those two things are not comparable numbers.