XPost: rec.food.cooking, alt.global-warming   
   From: nospam@example.net   
      
     This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,   
     while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.   
      
   On Sat, 23 Nov 2024, clams casino wrote:   
      
   > On 11/23/2024 2:43 PM, D wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> On Sat, 23 Nov 2024, Coogan's Bluff wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:   
   >>>> As if universities are the entire world.   
   >>>   
   >>> where do their students/leaders migrate off to?   
   >>>   
   >>>> As we know, the conflicts   
   >>>> in academia are so bitter because the stakes are so small.   
   >>>   
   >>> You really are one of the dumbest cunts I have ever seen!   
   >>>   
   >>> Peer grant herding and the climate change hoax  - learn!   
   >>>   
   >>> https://thehighwire.com/editorial/new-peer-reviewed-study-co   
   -has-zero-impact-on-climate-change/   
   >>>   
   >>> A powerful peer-reviewed scientific study delivers substantial evidence   
   >>> that carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the atmosphere have zero impact on   
   >>> the Earth’s global temperatures. The study concludes that even though   
   most   
   >>> publications attempt to depict a catastrophic future for our planet due to   
   >>> an increase in CO2, there is serious doubt that this is, in fact, the   
   >>> case. Instead, the study authors deduced that their research unequivocally   
   >>> means that the officially presented narrative that human activity is   
   >>> causing a detrimental CO2 increase on Earth’s climate is merely a   
   >>> hypothesis rather than a substantiated reality.   
   >>>   
   >>> The study, published in Science Direct in March 2024, confirms that the   
   >>> warming effect of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is naturally limited,   
   >>> with the limit having been reached decades ago. The study also confirms   
   >>> what climatologist Dr. Judith Curry has stated, which is that the   
   >>> “manufactured consensus of scientists at the request of policymakers”   
   >>> regarding climate change is all a ruse to push an agenda that has nothing   
   >>> to do with climate change. She insists that “Earth has survived far   
   bigger   
   >>> insults that what human beings are doing.”   
   >>>   
   >>> In a 2022 interview, Curry remarked that the basic facts of the climate   
   >>> situation are clear—global temperatures have been warming, humans emit   
   CO2   
   >>> into the atmosphere, and CO2 has an infrared emission spectra that,   
   >>> overall, acts to warm the planet. However, after that, there is much   
   >>> disagreement over the most consequential issues propagated to fuel the   
   >>> climate change narrative, such as how much of the warming has been caused   
   >>> by humans and how significant is human-caused warming relative to   
   >>> solar-variability, ocean circulation patterns, and so on?   
   >>>   
   >>> Why are politically active scientists exaggerating the truth for political   
   >>> objectives? Many are now certain that, like the COVID-19 pandemic, the   
   >>> massive climate change scheme is about greed, power, and control. Curry,   
   >>> Professor Emeritus and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric   
   >>> Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, has become known as an   
   >>> outspoken scientist who doubts the “scientific consensus” on climate   
   >>> change. Unsurprisingly, akin to the doctors who dared speak up about the   
   >>> deadly mRNA COVID-19 shots, Curry was “academically, pretty much finished   
   >>> off” and “essentially unhirable.” But that has not stopped her from   
   >>> speaking up. When asked how far from reality the picture of doom and gloom   
   >>> painted by those pushing the climate agenda really is, Curry stated:   
   >>>   
   >>> “It’s very far from gloom and doom. People are being sued left and   
   right   
   >>> over bad weather. Governments, oil companies, and everything because   
   >>> they’re not doing enough.   
   >>>   
   >>> People who think that they can control the climate… It’s just a pipe   
   >>> dream. Even if we went to net zero, we would barely notice. It would be   
   >>> hard to detect any change in the climate. The climate is going to do what   
   >>> the climate’s going to do. And there’s a lot of inertia in the system.   
   >>>   
   >>> If the carbon dioxide that we’ve put in is as important, as bad as some   
   >>> people seem to think, those effects are going to be with us for a very,   
   >>> very long time. And stopping now isn’t going to change that trajectory   
   >>> very much.   
   >>>   
   >>> So, we must look forward and try to understand what’s happened. But   
   >>> thinking that we’re going to control the climate by going to net zero   
   very   
   >>> quickly is not good.”   
   >>>   
   >>> Curry remarked that even when you look more recently at the weather in the   
   >>> United States, for example, it was much worse in the 1930s by any measure   
   >>> than it is now. When you look at the data, she insists that period was   
   >>> inundated with forest fires, droughts, heat waves, and hurricanes. It   
   >>> makes no sense to rapidly revamp our entire energy infrastructure to rely   
   >>> on wind turbines and solar energy, which require a massive land and water   
   >>> footprint.   
   >>>   
   >>> According to Curry, the most significant danger is if “we do really   
   stupid   
   >>> stuff like destroy our energy infrastructure before we have something   
   >>> better to replace it with.” She believes the biggest climate risk right   
   >>> now is a so-called transition risk, the risk of rapidly getting rid of   
   >>> fossil fuels. Dr. Curry is right. Even if society transitions to all wind   
   >>> and solar, massive amounts of fossil fuels will be needed to do all the   
   >>> mining, establish the supply chains, transport, and everything else. So,   
   >>> in the near term, even if the plan is to use all renewable wind and solar   
   >>> energy, we will need large amounts of fossil fuels to get there. “People   
   >>> just repeat these mantras without any thought,” Curry said, adding,   
   “It’s   
   >>> not a good place.”   
   >>>   
   >>> And now, following Dr. Curry’s sound advice and insight, we have the   
   >>> Science Direct study reaffirming the madness bestowed upon humanity by a   
   >>> despicable cohort of greedy souls. Conducted by researchers from the   
   >>> Institute of Optoelectronics, Military University of Technology in Warsaw,   
   >>> Poland, the study authors found that even if we dug up all the world’s   
   >>> coal, extracted all the world’s oil, and burned it in one giant pyre, the   
   >>> CO2 emissions from that endeavor would not heat up planet Earth. Indeed,   
   >>> this is because carbon dioxide does not cause the Earth to warm up   
   >>> indefinitely.   
   >>>   
   >>> As reported by Slay News, much like a sponge, the Earth’s atmosphere can   
   >>> only hold so much, meaning that carbon dioxide cannot increase   
   >>> temperatures anymore since the saturation point was reached a long time   
   >>> ago. The study uses a hypothetical concept of a fire inside a greenhouse   
   >>> consistently emitting heat. The glass walls and ceiling can contain only   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)