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 Sun, 24 Nov 2024, clams casino wrote:   
      
   > On 11/24/2024 3:37 AM, D wrote:   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> 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-   
   o2-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.   
   >>>>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)