Why would it be different this time?

First a little science. Data Models vs. empirically measured temperature:


Why doesn’t temperature increase when CO2 increase? According to the red line it should. Because CO2 doesn’t produce energy (heat), in fact it cools the planet’s atmosphere .. Here’s how:

Physics Proves Radiating Gases Decrease Global Temperature It Can Quantify How Much, About -0.086C/Doubling


Decarbonization “gross nonsense”

“On the endeavor to “protect the climate” through cutting CO2 emissions, something often called decarbonization, Lüdecke calls it “gross nonsense” and tells us that a changing climate is “a law of nature“. He adds that there is no evidence that CO2 is “harmful to the climate” and that it strongly warms it”.

Lüdecke tells the DAV that strong warming is found only in models that use dubious assumptions and effects:

Whether or not these effects are based on reliable data is of no interest to the modelers. This is how one gets the temperature rise that one desires. The only problem is that these models have not been able to reproduce the past. The climate models simply don’t work. They are wrong. Amazingly that does not bother the climate alarmists.”

The retired German professor also slams the media for uncritically blaring out every alarmists claim, no matter how foolish it may be, and shutting out reasonable voices. Whenever an alarmist prediction fails to appear, “a new one such as ocean acidification gets paraded out in the public“.

On Germany’s trillion-euro attempt to curb CO2 emissions, Lüdecke calls the effort “absurd”, claiming that the country’s share of global CO2 is only a tiny fraction of the total emitted globally, and that the government’s target would result in a temperature difference of “only a few thousandths of a degree over the next 20 years“. He calls it a “purely political agenda“, summarizing:

Factually it is therefore totally idiotic what we are doing.”

On sea level rise and ice melt, Lüdecke reminds us that sea level rise is happening at a perfectly normal range of 1 to 3 mm per year, depending on the data source, and that there is no evidence of anything alarming happening. To put things into there proper context, he tells the readers that it would take Greenland ice 5000 years to melt even if the temperature rose 5°C. “By then we’ll likely be already well into another ice age.”

Greenland temperature has dropped 2.5°C

A warming of Greenland is very unlikely, according to Lüdecke:

A scientific publication using data from ice core analyses show that the mean temperature of Greenland has fallen 2.5°C over the past 8000 years.”

Brutal dictator

On what is driving the climate alarmism, Lüdecke tells the DAV:

It’s all an ideology, a mixture of well-known Marxism, Nature Romanticism and the interests of powerful investors and politicians. […] not at all about good, but rather about a brutal dictator that wants to tell us which lights to use, that we’re no longer allowed to eat meat – in short, how we are to live.” […]

The aim of the eco-ideology is in reality another society – undemocratic and dictatorial. Ecology here is only an instrument. […]

Climate change is a dangerous undemocratic ideology.”

Naomi Klein admits global warming is not about science but destroying capitalism

UN climate chief candidly admits goal is not to help environment but to end capitalism

EPA Chief concedes no climate impact from ‘climate rule’: It’s about ‘reinventing a global economy’

Climate Movement Drops Mask, Admits Communist Agenda 

Naomi Klein, The Heartland Institute, and Are We Blind, Too? 

Venezuela Runs Out of Toilet Paper, Achieves True Socialism

“New Socialism” looks and feels just like the old kind

And why would this Agenda 21 “new order” – socialist-type of world government be any different from the historical ones, the kind we saw in USSR., China, Cuba etc.?

And why does the media support it?

The Daily Caller: Journalists love to deny their liberal bias but this week the Obama White House confirmed it. The President’s top advisor on the Iran deal actually bragged at length about how he would dupe liberal journalists to do his bidding. In his own words, “the average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and … they literally know nothing.”

It wouldn’t!

Man made global warming doesn’t exist, it’s not about that at all, that is the reason empirical data, measurements, facts and logic doesn’t have any impact when discussing climate science with alarmists, but really? Do they really want a world government?

If you think i am wrong, if you find errors, point to the errors, tell me how it is wrong and please document it!

As always, all comments will be allowed, you do not have to agree with me on anything. Debate is good!


Marxists Explain Freedoms In Socialism To Former Soviet Citizen Then Force Stop Filming, Assault Him 



One thought on “Why would it be different this time?

  1. Reblogged this on Climatism and commented:
    “The aim of the eco-ideology is in reality another society – undemocratic and dictatorial. Ecology here is only an instrument….”

    “Climate change is a dangerous undemocratic ideology.”

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s