I welcome all criticism on this substack, but I would appreciate if you disagree with anything or find offense to make a cogent argument as to the reason(s) for your dislike(s).
Heller has to date not offered a single misleading statement or dataset that I could find. He has been on point about everything, irrespective of his political leanings.
Whether Heller is a jerk or not, he points out the common statistical fraud used by the 'warmists', that of ignoring historical context. And it really is fraud, going back 20 years and more. Climategate was the self admission by the climate researchers that they were having trouble hiding the temperature decline, so they had to fudge the historical data to make their political masters happy. Hide the Decline then became a meme, and a catchy song on youtube.
Yes we do all need 'some truth' for sure, but it sounds like you just started looking at the climate thing. Fair enough, but your contention that climate change is not a fraud needs some nuance. The climate does change, but the phrase lazily refers to man made or 'anthropogenic' climate change. The climate was predicted to change along cooler lines, in the northern hemisphere, about 30 years ago by some people like Robert Felix, in his book, "Not by Fire, but by Ice". HIs contention was that we are long overdue for a cold spell in countries like Canada, and Europe. He aggregated across many scientific disciplines the concept that solar changes drive climate change, and in the last 20 years we have seen the solar cycles drift towards what we now seem to be in - a grand solar minimum. As Felix described, the waning magnetic fields from the Sun are causing similar here on Earth, which causes the climatic shifts in the jet stream and a large increase in underwater volcanic activity - which warms oceans, which increases precipitation in some areas where increased snowfall pushes ice age activity. Crop losses are a standard feature of a GSM but the politicos have worked to reinforce that eventuality.
One of the sublime concept of climate change chatter is the concept of a greenhouse gas, of which water we are told is the major contributor. Only thing is, there needs to be a greenhouse effect in order to have greenhouse gases. The GHE breaks a few rules of physics, and someone forgot to tell the climate researchers doing their computer models. CO2 is closely related to O2, one could say they are mutually reinforcing. Look to the Sun Richard, that's where the future will be determined. Meanwhile, don't forget to pay the carbon tax, because for sure that will correct the climate.
Wonderful response. They have been forecasting the apocalypse for decades or more. Here is a selection to support your contention - of course it's the sun cycle - I never listen to the 'experts' because, my trainers, many years ago quipped: "An 'ex' is a has-been, and a 'spirt' is a drip under pressure"
Richard, if you read Robert Felix's book, he was an architect who amassed data over many disciples, the fundamental incongruity that novices like we humans are unaware of - is that Ice Ages that primarily affect the northern hemisphere start with a warming of the Arctic. As the arctic warms, caused by geo magnetic affects (the underwater volcanoes), the bulk of Canada starts to see colder snowier winters. When the ice sheet measuring a few kilometers high and extending to Seattle existed, Alaska was habitable. Alaska has trees, northern Quebec does not.
Richard, the arctic is an ocean, correct? Take a look at the Antarctic, is there evidence of it getting colder and snowier year after year?
It's a good book to get, a fairly small paperback called, Not by Fire, But by Ice, referring to a an old Scandinavian saying. He published 2 paperbacks which are shown and briefly discussed in this video. Are you familiar with Dubyne of Adapt 2030? Dubyne interviewed John Casey who wrote a few books worth learning about as well. I bought and read both of Felix's books, he died last year so it may be harder to find copies, both are interesting with many footnotes. The underwater volcano 'theory' was proven true by NASA.
Excellent article thank you RS. I can see that you are well informed. I am not on a mission to challenge the climate warming fraternity - my focus is as I publish per my links to you which you will note when you have the chance. However I am inevitably drawn into the conversation. This little snippet came into my inbox a few months ago which is relevant perhaps:
Thank you RS, this is news to me but not a surprise. I guess many Lefties get into climate issues - a bit like the 'ban-the-bomb' lot I remember in the 1960s. They eventually went away as they grew up so maybe......
I would not argue against the evidence of potential warming but my question is how far is this caused by humans. And looking at what appear to be irrational targets like animal methane makes me wonder how much political energy is driving this agenda.
I prefer to attend to ways of adapting to climate changes as they occur but there are other drivers causing much more damage to the planet - such as our industrial processes dependent on hydrocarbon fuels:
I welcome all criticism on this substack, but I would appreciate if you disagree with anything or find offense to make a cogent argument as to the reason(s) for your dislike(s).
Heller has to date not offered a single misleading statement or dataset that I could find. He has been on point about everything, irrespective of his political leanings.
Whether Heller is a jerk or not, he points out the common statistical fraud used by the 'warmists', that of ignoring historical context. And it really is fraud, going back 20 years and more. Climategate was the self admission by the climate researchers that they were having trouble hiding the temperature decline, so they had to fudge the historical data to make their political masters happy. Hide the Decline then became a meme, and a catchy song on youtube.
https://youtu.be/tIQ70is-RPM?list=TLPQMTkwODIwMjKg3K8EN0jovw
Yes we do all need 'some truth' for sure, but it sounds like you just started looking at the climate thing. Fair enough, but your contention that climate change is not a fraud needs some nuance. The climate does change, but the phrase lazily refers to man made or 'anthropogenic' climate change. The climate was predicted to change along cooler lines, in the northern hemisphere, about 30 years ago by some people like Robert Felix, in his book, "Not by Fire, but by Ice". HIs contention was that we are long overdue for a cold spell in countries like Canada, and Europe. He aggregated across many scientific disciplines the concept that solar changes drive climate change, and in the last 20 years we have seen the solar cycles drift towards what we now seem to be in - a grand solar minimum. As Felix described, the waning magnetic fields from the Sun are causing similar here on Earth, which causes the climatic shifts in the jet stream and a large increase in underwater volcanic activity - which warms oceans, which increases precipitation in some areas where increased snowfall pushes ice age activity. Crop losses are a standard feature of a GSM but the politicos have worked to reinforce that eventuality.
One of the sublime concept of climate change chatter is the concept of a greenhouse gas, of which water we are told is the major contributor. Only thing is, there needs to be a greenhouse effect in order to have greenhouse gases. The GHE breaks a few rules of physics, and someone forgot to tell the climate researchers doing their computer models. CO2 is closely related to O2, one could say they are mutually reinforcing. Look to the Sun Richard, that's where the future will be determined. Meanwhile, don't forget to pay the carbon tax, because for sure that will correct the climate.
Wonderful response. They have been forecasting the apocalypse for decades or more. Here is a selection to support your contention - of course it's the sun cycle - I never listen to the 'experts' because, my trainers, many years ago quipped: "An 'ex' is a has-been, and a 'spirt' is a drip under pressure"
https://www.theburningplatform.com/2022/07/17/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions/
Richard, if you read Robert Felix's book, he was an architect who amassed data over many disciples, the fundamental incongruity that novices like we humans are unaware of - is that Ice Ages that primarily affect the northern hemisphere start with a warming of the Arctic. As the arctic warms, caused by geo magnetic affects (the underwater volcanoes), the bulk of Canada starts to see colder snowier winters. When the ice sheet measuring a few kilometers high and extending to Seattle existed, Alaska was habitable. Alaska has trees, northern Quebec does not.
Richard, the arctic is an ocean, correct? Take a look at the Antarctic, is there evidence of it getting colder and snowier year after year?
It's a good book to get, a fairly small paperback called, Not by Fire, But by Ice, referring to a an old Scandinavian saying. He published 2 paperbacks which are shown and briefly discussed in this video. Are you familiar with Dubyne of Adapt 2030? Dubyne interviewed John Casey who wrote a few books worth learning about as well. I bought and read both of Felix's books, he died last year so it may be harder to find copies, both are interesting with many footnotes. The underwater volcano 'theory' was proven true by NASA.
https://youtu.be/6G6wqiZQtYA
I can agree RS that the sun has a major effect and maybe climate change is beyond out control? Thus adaption might be the best strategy?
We are entering a grand solar minimum which is the real climate control knob.
Excellent article thank you RS. I can see that you are well informed. I am not on a mission to challenge the climate warming fraternity - my focus is as I publish per my links to you which you will note when you have the chance. However I am inevitably drawn into the conversation. This little snippet came into my inbox a few months ago which is relevant perhaps:
https://dailysceptic.org/archive/the-climate-change-paper-cancelled-by-the-british-hydrological-society/
I always enjoy markets, local economies will be the future for me at least living in the heart of rural SW England! Enjoy WBW
Thank you RS, this is news to me but not a surprise. I guess many Lefties get into climate issues - a bit like the 'ban-the-bomb' lot I remember in the 1960s. They eventually went away as they grew up so maybe......
Can you suggest anything better?
I would not argue against the evidence of potential warming but my question is how far is this caused by humans. And looking at what appear to be irrational targets like animal methane makes me wonder how much political energy is driving this agenda.
I prefer to attend to ways of adapting to climate changes as they occur but there are other drivers causing much more damage to the planet - such as our industrial processes dependent on hydrocarbon fuels:
https://austrianpeter.substack.com/p/the-financial-jigsaw-part-2-the-end?s=w
And a proposal for adaption:
https://austrianpeter.substack.com/p/the-financial-jigsaw-part-2-localisation?s=w