Haironyourchest

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/01/01/ipcc-silently-slashes-its-global-warming-predictions-in-the-ar5-final-draft/ The IPCC have actually admitted that their models have been wrong. (going beddie byes now)

examples?

Ok, but we cant reduce the temperature without going carbon zero, and crashing our economies. The only way to avoid mass starvation in a global economic collapse would be global communism = more suffering. Either way, you can't avoid the suffering. Thats assuming your climate model prediction are correct. If they are incorrect, then you would be trading the most abundant and free period in human history for global communism - "just in case" The third option is let all the peoples of the world experience economic freedom in their lifetime in the 21st century, and let the chips fall where they may. If climate catastrophe happens, then we work and build our way out of it with hive cities, floating cities, whatever. If it doesn't happen, then we embark on the golden age. If its a bit of both, then we just roll with the punches, like we've always done. If someone can figure out a practical way to sequester CO2 that doesn't cost three times the GDP of Earth, then I'm all for it, why not? It's not like future generations can't produce all the CO2 the earth needs by vaporising limestone with solar energy as and when the atmosphere needs a top-up.

Oh come on now, that's like something a politician would say. Give me some specific solutions - and solutions that don't just shift the suffering onto someone else, like wealth distribution.

What do you propose we do about the suffering?

Of course I have. It's called synthesis, the weaving together of disperate prices of information to for a whole. Thanks to the intellectual freedom and abundance of free information granted me by our modern, fossil fueled culture. Most, if not all, great scientific discoveries were arrived at by the same principle...let's be clear, I laid out a worst case scenario, which I very much doubt will happen. Actually go and look at the evidence on the other side - really look at it, make a genuine effort to research the debunking of catastrophic global warming, just as a mental exercise. Yes, the material is funded by oil interests - who else is going to fund it? Who else would dare to challenge the pop culture, the mainstream media? Look at how the alarmists have changed their data, cherry picked where and when they take their measurements, the terrible flaws in the computer models. Even the Intergovernmental panel on climate change or whatever they're called, recently published a white paper admitting their models were wrong. The media won't report it. The whole thing is being used as a scare tactic by certain groups on the political left to usher in communism. It's not a conspiracy theory, they're openly stating that's their platform! Have you watched AOC? And there are a LOT of young people out there who are all for it. It's not an orchastrated conspiracy, it's a organic political confluence of like minded people with more or less the same ideology.

Yeah for sure. My position is this: 1. CO2 = good for the planet. Massive amounts may possibly cause warming, and if so, this is good thing. A warm planet is better at supporting life than a cool planet. 2. Mankind created/evolved as a mechanism to liberate sequestered CO2, for the benefit of the planet. 3. We also need fossil fuel at this time in history, in order to develop our species spiritually. What I consider "spiritual" is quite different to the generally accepted definition of the word. To me, collective spiritual development means every individual experiencing personal freedom and self-actuation on a worldwide scale. It also means competing wills, tribalism, wars, famines, mistakes and so on. It is not disconnected from the physical body. At this time, modern western culture, with a foundation of Judeo-Christian morality, offers the best road forward, for everyone. This may change in the future. 4. We do not know the outcome of liberating CO2 in the short term. In the long term, it is definitely a good thing. 5. If the alarmists are correct, and CO2 will cause catastrophic damage in the short term, then we have to ask some more questions: A - Catastrophic enough to sterilise the planet? B - catastrophic enough to kill off most of humanity but the planetary ecosystem will recover in a few thousand years. C - catastrophic enough to kill some of humanity but survivable by technically advanced nations with infrastructural planning. D - not really catastrophic at all. 6. If the outcome is human extinction, then I would rather go extinct then allow a communist NWO to emerge. If this were to happen, it would spell the end of spiritual development and freedom for all mankind. This is my belief. 7. The planet exists to serve our spiritual development. By developing mechanisation at this time, we are also serving the planet. It may seem like we are damaging it, but we are actually feeding it. I take the million year view, not the hundred year view. 8. We do not need 8 or 9 billion people on earth for man to continue to develop. The current spike in population is a temporary state. This brief era - lets call it the machine freedom era - won't continue forever. So all the souls that are normally without bodies, are now incarnating to experience it and advance their personal development. Its a once in a blue moon opportunity. When this era is finished, the world population will shrink to a billion or so again. 9. Nothing we do can kill the earth or nature. Life developed out of molten rock. 90% of all species that have ever existed have gone extinct. That's the natural way, new things replace the old. Most people see things in terms of a human lifespan, or a few generations. I see things in terms of tens of thousands of years. Millions of years. Humanity is immortal, we have immortal spirits and souls. The freedom we experience in this 21st century, and the insights we gain thereby, we will carry with us forever, and will form the basis for future civilisations. The CO2 we release now, will also form the basis for life for future civilisations. Its a win/win.

Read esoteric philosophy for fifteen years and you'll understand. The guilt of polluting, of being an eco "sinner". The warmists/alarmists are keen to conflate the skeptics skepticism with religious belief, but they don't cotton on to the religiosity of their own position - which is probably greater. Judeo-Christian: Man committed the original sin, its the cause all our problems. Climate Alarmist: Man started using fossil fuel, and now the damage is done, its the cause of all our enviro problems. Judeo-Christian: We are all sinners. To save our eternal souls we must repent and endure penance. Climate Alarmist: We are all polluters. To save the planet we must sacrifice our lifestyle. Judeo-Christian: If you're a rich sinner, you can reduce the penance with a monetary donation (indulgence) Climate Alarmist: If you're a rich country you can buy carbon credits. If you're a rich person you can buy social credit by doing "good works" (making a documentary about global warming) Judeo-Christian: The world and man is well and truly fucked, we are in the end times...any day now.... Climate Alarmist: The world and man is well and truly fucked, we are in the end times...any day now... Judeo-Christian: The only way to save yourself is to repent and hope to be resurrected on judgement day. Climate Alarmist: The only way to save yourself is for the whole species to repent and go back to the stone age. Judeo-Christian: By denying yourself small pleasures (meat of Friday, chocolate for lent, booze on weeknights etc) you can feel better about being a sinner, because at least you're making an effort. Go to confession every now and then and tell the priest what a filthy hypocrite you've been. Feels good, doesn't it? Climate Alarmist: By denying yourself small pleasures (holidays in Spain, avocados, not buying plastic crap) you can feel a bit better about all the other polluting you do. At least you're making an effort. Judeo-Christian: All this is true because men in robes and hats (who are much more intelligent than you) said so. But don't listen to the other men in different robes and hats - they work for the Devil! Climate Alarmist: All this is true because men with white coats and graphs - who are much more intelligent than you - said so. Don't listen to the other men with graphs - they work for the oil companies! (tried to format but couldn't)

Because "God" isn't a two-dimensional cartoon character. God is a word for a concept that is beyond most people, at an intellectual level. To put is simply, Man is God fragmented. Our disembodied collective consciousness, in the distant past, formed this planet, and all life on it. All life, plant and animal, is an aspect of Man. We are the centre of the universe. Man/God is self conflicted though, there is confusion about the way forward, hence debates like this. I let go of the guilt and life is so much better now.

Man was created by God (or nature) to burn all the fossil fuels and restock the atmosphere with CO2 to restore the earth to its proper state - warm, wet, and nutritious to plants, ensuring life on earth continues. It's our destiny to use fossil fuels to drive civilization and our own collective development, with personal freedom, enhanced by cheap energy, being the most important tool to this end. It doesn't matter if we mess up the earth in the process, it survived a comet strike, etc, it can handle it. Elements in governments in the West want to set up a communist style NWO. They realised that this will never be possible while people have access to cheap energy, so they want to ration the energy sector, thereby controlling the economy. They use compliant "experts" to write up papers with tweaked data, who rely on funding and research grants that don't come unless they are on board with the warmest ideology. The liberal media are part of this cabal as well. The real NWO have no intention of actually reducing CO2 emissions, they just want control over the supply.

Thanks! You see, I used to think the same as you. My position was "force everyone back to the land - at gunpoint if necessary!" I was in my late teens then. In my twenties I got a car and a job and decided, "Fuck it, I don't want to go back to the land, why should anyone else have to? Let's just keep burning till it's used up then we'll figure it out or die." Then I decided to actually look at the opposing side, and hear what they were saying. My whole view of reality changed. I now see things in a completely different light..

Neither do I. If some countries decide to take it seriously, and make the necessary CO2 reductions, according to the experts, their economies will crash. The populace will revolt aftercare taste of the real deal, and either return to fossil fuels or be repressed by totalitarian authority. If they stay CO2 neutral, growth will effectively stop, and they will be economically or militarily dominated by the countries that have continued to use fossil fuel - ie. China, Russia, India. The other option is to throw away all pretence at equality and liberalism and provoke a war with the East, and wreck their economies so they cannot pollute anymore. For a few Brits, or even all Brits, to cut back on beef and holidays will not make an iota of difference. The money you do not spend on beef and holidays will be spent on something else that creates CO2, imports, stuff, more children, etc. The money you spend is spent again by the entity you traded with, and they will spend it on beef and holidays. See the problem? It's the global economy itself that drives CO2, every time currency changes hands, it pollutes. Story: I worked for a guy who wanted to atone for his sins and easily acquired wealth, by reforesting. He employed several people to do the planting. The bare rooted trees were transported on a deisel truck, which was made in a factory that polluted, with metal that was mined by a mine that polluted. He paid us money, and we spent it on petrol, imports, products etc. Some of us invested the money in machinery which runs on petrol, to make our work easier and more productive, and more polluting. The people we paid the money to did the same thing, and on and on it goes. Making less polluting purchases does not really make any difference unless the entire human race is singing from the same hymn sheet. Problem: being Green puts you at an economic disadvantage, and no one wants be be left holding the baby, no one wants to be the last to sign up the the pyramid scheme. It's like with atom bombs - if one nation has them, everyone has got to have them, or one nation dominates the world. But once they exist, you can't agree to disarm, because the knowledge is there and any tin pot dictatorship can build them in secret. Same with fossil fuel, it's there. Someone, somewhere is going to use it, and doninate, so we all have to use it or get left behind.

Village Idiot, let me just ask you straight up: are you for global governance? No more nation states, no more elections? No more free market?

There are chemical wash-in products you can buy from hiking shops that supposedly stay in the fabric for weeks, even after washing again, that work, so they say. Can't remember the name of the chemical, but it's synthetic chrsanthymum extract, I think. Same chemical is in Spot-On, cattle and sheep treatment, much much cheaper. Also same chemical is in fly spray. You could try an aerosol can of fly spray and just spray your trouser cuffs, or wherever the ticks get in, and see if it works?

They move it all the time, spent fuel rods to secure waste facilities inside mountains in desert areas. Obviously moving active rods would be a problem, but they don't need to - just use up the current fuel (weeks, months?) don't add any more, then decommission the reactors. This assuming sea levels don't suddenly swamp the power stations overnight. There is no problem here. A quick Google search will tell you everything you need to know about radiation and nuclear power stations. The reason Fukushima is "underreported", as you say, is simply that it's old news, there is nothing to report. It's still leaking, still not fixed, and maybe never will be. But it's so diluted it's actually not doing much harm, if any. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sciencefocus.com/science/head-to-head-fukushima-vs-chernobyl/amp/

I use a Humboldt for that too, never squashed a fence yet. If it's a really valuable fence, couldn't you chain the butt above the cut to something in the fall-zone, to guarantee the butt end can't come back? I see they have 1ton chain hoists in Lidl for €40 at the moment.

Ok, let's say the ice caps melt and sea levels rise. Is it going to happen overnight? Don't you think they will move the plutonium to higher ground? Fukushima was a freak accident. The radioactive isotopes from Fukushima are also different than the ones from Chernobyl, and not as bad. Pripyat, and even the Chernobyl plant, is actually teeming with healthy wildlife now. The elephants foot, the most toxic object on earth, has actually lost about half of its lethality since the event. It takes five minutes to kill you instead of 30 seconds...nature is pretty resistant to ionising radiation, it's humans that are particularly sensitive to it. And also, the normal state of the planet earth is to have zero ice at the poles, it has been this way for most of planetary history, we are technically still in an ice age at the moment.

Look what happened to Macron when he tried to raise the diesel tax to subsidise electric cars. I've just chosen to act independently by going outside to gratuitously burn a gallon of petrol in an old barrel in your honour.

Damn, I'm well triggered now. I'll just say more thing, and then leave it alone: humans have always had a foreboding of the apocalypse. And yes, as some point in time, our species will cease to exist in a physical form, at least. The problem is trying to predict the date, and so far the pseudo scientists have got the global warming - sorry, climate change - apocalypse date wrong time and time again. Its just the same old psychological trope being played out now, with a veneer of modernity. Here's a list of failed doomsday prophesies in history. Often the same prophets kick the can down the road... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_dates_predicted_for_apocalyptic_events

Its a plot for governments to seize control of national economies by controlling the energy sector. If you really believe the media hype then I have to say I view you as brainwashed. The same crowd, in the seventies, eighties, predicted New York City streets under water by 2000. The climate has always changed. The Maunder Minimum, the medieval warm period, Vikings in greenland, etc etc. The hysteria is just bunkum. Hollywood clowns telling us we are being naughty while jetting around the world and consuming twenty times what a normal person does. Alexandria Occasio Cortez telling Americans they shouldn't reproduce, but still wants open borders. Al Gore, Mr rising sea levels himself, living in a mansion on the beach. It's crap dude, don't worry about it and live your life. Edit: And I used to believe in it as well, by the way. Until none of the doomsday scenarios I had ben told in my childhood came true, then I starting looking at the opposing evidence, including my own eyes.

Download The Fundamentals Of General Tree Work by Bereneck, from the link below. It's cheap, will give you an understanding of what it's about. The pay link is right at the bottom of the page https://www.educatedclimber.com/beranek-fundamentals/

I was watching an interview with him just the other day, his campervan lifestyle, diet, etc. He claims he wasn't a strong climber as a kid, and says he's not talented. His ability is solely the result of dogged determination and constant training. Incredible guy.

When women in their sixties start looking good...I smoked a pipe at 14 though, so I have a head start..

True! Quite right too, who wants an increased risk of death on the motorway? A "Sacred" fairy bush in Co Clare will not after all have to be destroyed in the building of a new bypass motorway, much to the relief of those who attach superstitious beliefs to such features of the Irish landscape. There had even been a warning from a folklorist of a curse on the new roadway and of motoring fatalities if the fairy bush was to fall victim to the £100 million plan to bypass Newmarket-on-Fergus and Ennis. One of the State's best known folklorists and story-tellers, Eddie Lenihan, had warned that the destruction of the fairy thorn bush or "sceach" at Latoon outside Newmarket-on-Fergus to facilitate the bypass plans could result in misfortune and in some cases death for those travelling the proposed new road. According to Mr Lenihan, the bush is a marker in a fairy path and was the rendezvous point for Kerry fairies on their way to do battle with the Connacht fairies. Under the bush, Mr Lenihan claims, the Kerry fairies would regroup and consult on what might be the best tactics in battle. He said their white blood has been seen on a number of occasions on the surrounding grass. He warned of terrible consequences if the fairy bush was destroyed, saying that the site in 10 to 15 years' time may have a higher than usual casualty list, including fatalities. He said: "It is sacred ground, it doesn't revert to being a normal place." During the last couple of months, the council has been carrying out archaeological works on lands surrounding the bush as part of preparatory work for the Newmarket bypass. However, the bush has remained untouched. Yesterday, the county engineer, Mr Tom Carey, confirmed that after surveying the fairy thorn bush in the detailed plans and drawings prepared, the council has found that it would now be able to incorporate the "sceach" into the proposed bypass.