XPost: rec.food.cooking, alt.global-warming   
   From: cc@invalid.cc   
      
   On 11/24/2024 2:21 PM, D wrote:   
   >   
   >   
   > 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   
   co2-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.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)