Global Warming What If The Foundation Of The Climate Scare Was A Calculated Lie?

Issues & Insights ^ | 18 Jun, 2025 | I & I Editorial Board

[hal ogen]

What do you mean “what if”??? It was BS from the start to increase funding to various “connected” charlatans.

[SuperLuminal]

Yes indeed...
Just as I stated...

[Glad2bnuts]

Bing bing bing, we have a winner. Broad point of view and absolutely on point.

[Glad2bnuts]

Do you really think so? I live in between Rainier and St Helens, and I am more worried about the Cascadia fault. Of course, if Seattle/Tacoma’Olympia are buried by a tsunami, would Washington be a better place to live?

Just kidding, but if I wasn’t old, trapped by circumstance, I would live in Idaho.

[Glad2bnuts]

The interglacial age we live in is why the sea levels are higher than in millenia past. We are at the point of peak sea levels. The rise in sea levels will be incrementally higher, then begin to fall.

[Glad2bnuts]

Overfishing, the bane of the West Coast Fishing industry. Add in allowing Sea Lion populations to explode.

I am thinking that there should be a Sea Lion harvest season of 365 days a year.

[Retain Mike]

Turn a blank sheet of paper sideways. On the left write “weather event” in small letters, draw a circle around the words, and then draw a small arrow pointing to the right side. On the far right, write the words "manmade climate change” in small letters, draw a circle around the words, and then draw a small arrow pointing to the circle.

Is there not a large blank space in the middle? Have you ever seen a story which fills in this area? Have you ever read a story that uses words like sun and ocean, which are the two enormous engines determining temperature? Cannot the stories that you have seen be inserted into one or the other circles?

I will submit there is no evidence of man-made global warming because no adherent to the popular mythology will acknowledge the existence of the sun and oceans. All I have ever seen are fraudulent to accurate comments on weather events or physical phenomenon involving temperature followed by an assertion man-made global warming is the cause.

In the hard sciences of Math and Physics, the earth’s climate is known as an open system, meaning all influencers are probabilistic and not deterministic. Any assertions must be less than certain, but we are always treated to infallibility statements like those for the boiling point of water. Popular reasoning requires a complete disconnect between events and conclusions and is no more rigorous than Middle Age alchemy.

I have yet to find any article which attempts to measure the influence of the sun and ocean and then ascribe an increment to human activity. It was only since the late 70’s that it was possible to attempt to confirm changes in the sun’s radiance independent of earth. Without a rigorous solution involving those two enormous engines, models created provide outcomes no more elegant than what is left behind when a brand new puppy is turned loose in a house decorated with white carpets and white furniture.

Even before that time any true scientist would have said data collected could not be analyzed, because people had known for centuries the sun was a variable star and it was not possible to separate influences for any mathematical computations. Now that it might be possible to separate the influence of the sun but not the oceans, the analysis of such a complicated interaction is still highly problematic. Therefore, political rhetoric must be substituted for application of the scientific method.

[bert]

The plain fact of the matter is I don’t know.

I have viewed current concerns on multiple pod casts raising the same concerns about an abundance of new and current seismic activity in the Mt Ranier complex