As always, we are extremely grateful for your comments. We are always touched by your kind words of praise and encouragement, and strive to learn from your constructive criticism. I (John Leake) am especially grateful for the extremely informative feedback to this particular post. I'm heartened to see how many now understand the the Climate and Vaccine Cults are closely related, as are the high priests running them.
“I am a skeptic on climate change. I know the climate is changing, and it always has been. I've studied this intensively over many years. I started what I call the Carbon Project here in British Columbia back in 1989 in order to bring everybody together to discuss this subject and figure out the facts behind it. Since then, I have watched as hysteria has grown, as if the whole world is going to come to an end and civilization is going to die because of humans causing this climate change. I don't buy that, and I certainly know we don't have any proof of it. I'm not denying that we might be playing some role, but the natural factors that have always caused climate change have not suddenly disappeared. I'm very skeptical of the alarmist nature of climate campaigning.” –
Moore, an ecologist and the co-founder of Greenpeace, also has said “We are dealing with pure political propaganda that has nothing to do with science,” while returning to Dr. Will Happer physicist at Princeton Univ, who has stated “Policies to slow CO2 emissions are really based on nonsense,” at a Texas Public Policy Foundation meeting. Happer, Dr. Richard Lindzen of MIT and others at this meeting said claims of the hottest year on record are “nonsense” because there’s so much uncertainty surrounding surface temperature readings — especially since scientists often make lots of adjustments to weather station readings
In 2014, famed astronaut Walt Cunningham went to that year’s global warming UN climate Summit and called the whole AGW gambit "one of the biggest frauds in the field of science."
John Coleman, founder Weather Channel during interview on CNN: "I resent you calling me a denier, that's a word to put me down." Like holocaust denier..."There is no consensus in science. Science is not a vote. Science is about facts. And if you get down to the hard cold facts, there is no question about it: climate change is not happening, there is no significant man-made global warming now and there hasn't be any in the past and there is no reason to expect any in the future. There is a whole lot of baloney and yes it has become a big political point of the democratic party and part of their platform and I regret that this issue has become political instead of scientific. But the science is on my side. The 97% of scientists that claim there is global warming is a political figure. The government puts out 2.5 billion dollars directly for climate research every year. It only gives that money to scientists who will produce scientific results to support the global warming hypothese of the democrat party position. So they don't have any choice, if you gonna get the money, you got to support their position. Therefor 97% of the scientific reports published support global warming. Why? Because those are the ones the government pays for, that's where the money is. It is really simple. That doesn't mean it is right. That doesn't make it true. That only makes it bottom paid for. The money goes in circle….Please stand back from this issue and let the two sides be on the air. There are 31,000 scientists who signed the petition that says it is not valid, that my position is correct and we will keep battling and we will prevail in time…."I hope you go to the websites that present the papers that show that none of this alarmism about ice, and heat waves and drought, "sky falling", none of this is happening…."The weather channel has bought in to it. They drank the cool aid. But so is all the media, that's not big surprise….Many programs they put on on tv... They are not reasonable. They put on their climate geeks, those are not scientists, those are nuts. They never put on a real skeptical scientist. They don't give us any spot on their channels…."I am terribly disappointed. I created a channel to give people their weather, where they live, in their region, and keep them posted on the weather and serve a real purpose. And that channel has been totally distorted and become stranger it can be."
It's all about the money. The WORST thing is cutting down forests, which take in CO2 and generate oxygen, and replacing them with "green energy" solar fields; acres and acres and acres. How stupid is that?
Actually, the solution would be to build modern and safe nuclear power plants. There are designs that allow for automatic safe shutdown in case of a failure. And these new power plants should use thorium, which can be almost completely 'burnt', instead of the enriched uranium. This will give us time to develop fusion, which still is a thing of the future. CO2 is plant food, not a pollutant. The planet is greening, we will harvest more food. Then we should invest in reforestation, clean the ocean and rivers, invest in biodegradable plastics. It is not that difficult, but the powers to be are not interested in that.
They should try being concerned that approximately 40,000 birds are killed each year by wind turbines in the U.S. alone (Environment and Climate News, Sept., 2010, estimated 75,000 killed by 2010, and Dr. Mark Perry at http://www.thedailycrux.com/Article/38489/Green_energy states a “2009 estimate from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (reported on the American Bird Conservancy website), those bird fatalities happen more than 1,200 times every day (440,000 deaths annually and 50 deaths every single hour of the day on average).).” Of course, endangered whooping cranes, condors and golden eagles – possibly up to 500 per year! - are all fair game, with nary a peep from the greens. During three decades of wind power usages, not a single wind energy producer has been prosecuted. London’s Telegraph also notes that wind power is killing large numbers of birds, including eagles (read that DDT that kills eagles bad, wind power that makes Al Gore rich good), and noted “The world’s largest and most carefully monitored wind farm, Altamont Pass in California, is estimated to have killed between 2,000 and 3,000 golden eagles alone in the past 20 years. Since turbines were erected on the isle of Smola, off Norway, home to an important population of white-tailed sea eagles, destruction is so great that last year only one chick survived. Thanks to wind farms in Tasmania, a unique sub-species of wedge-tailed eagles faces extinction.”
Meanwhile, the LA Times reported that according to federal wildlife authorities wind farms - with turbines that, while appearing to spin leisurely, actually travel at up to ~ 300 MPH at the tips - kill about 440,000 birds each year. Although a search of the web failed to identify a source for the claim Fish and Wildlife reported that in the year following the Gulf Oil Spill it found 2,308 dead birds with visible oil. Read that: oil killing birds bad, Big Green connected wind farms killing ten thousand times more birds good.
Oh yes, one more: In a summary of avian impacts at wind turbines by Benner et al. (1993) bird deaths per turbine per year were as high as 309 in Germany and 895 in Sweden.” See 2022 article U.S. Wind Energy Company Pleads Guilty for Killing At Least 150 Eagles; Ordered to Pay $8M in Fines with videos discussing this at https://youtu.be/hofs0FTz0_E The book and film Bright Green Lies expose several examples of technology that are promoted as eco-friendly but aren’t necessarily so. This includes wind farms which can be devastating for birds and other wildlife. Offaly Express discusses more on the issue to birds here, with videos on this at https://youtu.be/RtgBWNKwBkE, https://youtu.be/CEersoJLtRw, https://youtu.be/VAO-hWOaXW4, https://youtu.be/ugVkpS9EGl0 and a 52 min one here https://youtu.be/4EYiNDob_7o?t=3 . The American Bird Conservancy, which predicts there will be 1.4 million annual turbine-caused bird deaths by 2030, has filed numerous lawsuits opposing wind projects and has advocated for stricter siting laws for wind developers. Similarly, local fishing industry and wildlife groups have filed multiple lawsuits opposing offshore wind development. In August 2021, a group of “environmentally-concerned citizens” filed a lawsuit opposing wind development off the coast of New England over concerns it would reduce endangered whale species and fishing groups filed their own lawsuits opposing projects in Massachusetts and New York. “Offshore wind is by far the most expensive way to get zero-emission electricity and is probably the most environmentally damaging way to do so,” Dave Stevenson, the director of the Center for Energy Competitiveness at the Delaware-based free market think Caesar Rodney Institute. “It just is the worst option we could come up with.”
And what is the actual presence of CO2 in the atmosphere? Just over 400 ppm, or around 0.04%, up from 320 ppm, or 0.032% 50 years ago. Of the remaining percentages, nitrogen amounts for 78%, oxygen 21%. Of the 1% that then remains, 90% of that is argon, with less than 4% of that 1% being carbon dioxide (these percentages exclude highly variable water vapor, which is usually around 1 – 4% of the atmosphere – and a much more major contributor to global warming, estimated at being 50-90% of the greenhouse effect). Of course the logarithmic effect of CO2 means each additional increase has less impact that the prior, same sized increase. Even more, about 96 to 97% of carbon dioxide comes from natural sources, such as animals, plant decay and volcanoes.
In fact, relative to volcanoes, former FDA investigator Dr. Arthur Evangelista, noted that the 2010 eruption of Eyafjallajokull in Iceland *********emitted, in four days, enough CO2 in four days to negate every single effort mankind made that year to reduce CO2.*************
But this volcano was a piker compared to Mt. Pinatubo, which when it erupted in the Philippines in 1991 “spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in its entire 40 MILLION YEARS on earth.” (of course, the Laki eruption starting in Iceland in 1783 spewed out an An estimated 120,000,000 long tons (120,000,000 t) of sulphur dioxide, about three times the total annual European industrial output in 2006, equivalent to six times the total 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption!) And this doesn’t include that fact that, as he notes the “bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.”
And for COP 27 AGW conference in 2022? See Elite Fly 400 Private Jets to COP27, Sponsored by Largest Plastic Polluter in World, To Lecture YOU About Climate, where “The average private jet emits roughly 2 metric tons of carbon for every 60 minutes of flight. To put this into perspective, these same people flying on these jets want you to leave only a 2-metric ton carbon footprint for the entire year. Given that these folks likely spent many hours in the air to make it to the summit, they single-handedly emitted more carbon in 24 hours than many folks will emit in the next decade.”
The promotion of the Climate change apocalypse follows the same basic playbook as the government vaccine program. Though it is a more recent development and I was not subjected to this propaganda when I was in school.
The basic strategy is to use phony science and 24/7 fearmongering to convince young people that the world would come to an end if we didn't give governments unlimited resources and control to fight the alleged danger. And kids, being impressionable and not knowing any reason to distrust what they are being taught, are traumatized into embracing dangerous agendas.
They don't know enough to realize that, even if climate change is something that we should be concerned about, the so-called solutions will in all likelihood make matters worse, not better, not to mention what they will do to our liberties.
And too many will never really reassess what they learned, carrying their misconceptions with them for the rest of their lives.
Farley Mowat, the noted Canadian leftist and Greenpeace activist, and whose house my wife used to walk by regularly as a kid in Port Hope, ON., wrote in his book West Viking (written while we were still in the global cooling scare) that there were probably at least dwarf forests growing in Greenland when the Vikings arrived in 985 AD and the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History reports “… Erik the Red discovered two areas of southwest Greenland which were suitable for farming, with grasslands and small stands of alder and birch.”
You will note that it is too cold today for any type of forests to grow in Greenland, and there is zero ability to farm, unless modern technologies are utilized – and even then, crop selection is very minimal. Mowat also reported the Arctic pack ice was much less in that Viking discovery era than today. Dr. Fred Singer writes that when the Vikings first settled Greenland, they grew vegetables, and it was warm enough to allow the population to grow to 3,000 people and by 1100 AD the place was thriving enough that they had their own bishop and twelve churches. Nature reported in a 2010 article that clamshell studies also confirm Norse records.
Meanwhile, the Archeological Survey of Canada has also noted around “A.D. 1000, a warmer climate resulted in the tree line advancing 100 kilometres north of its present position.” The results of this? Especially in northern Europe, “the period between 1150 and 1300 was truly a flowering period, for population reached unprecedented levels that were never to be seen again until the late 18thcentury in many countries; the English population experienced a staggering threefold increase in its population during the last century since the Domesday Survey in 1086”.
All I can say is that I grew up on a farm in the midwest and we had cousins that grew up in the suburbs of Chicago. When we got together we knew that we were from different cultures and saw things differently. We country people knew how to work the land, forests, streams,and take care of it. Our cousins from the city looked down on us thinking they knew more than us country people because they thought they were better educated and more sophisticated. I believe that our environmental problems are because of the disconnection from information about the land from our indigenous communities who have worked the landscape for centuries vs. intellectuals who have not.
Love this article, John. A very good friend of mine told me that the “hole in the ozone” scare back in the late 80’s was totally bogus. Since he was a chemical engineer at a national laboratory with awesome credentials, I trusted him that the environmental scare tactics and all the rules and regulations based on it were a scam. Nothing in the last 40 years has made me change my mind.
Would that more of the idiots would be taught by your teacher and experience. I've already lived through over 50 climate catastrophe predictions, and can list them. From global freezing to global warming, neither worked out so now it's just climate change. Duh.
Convenient. Climate's gonna change.
Those people don't understand why Christians don't believe them nor worry about climate catastrophes they promote. It's because believers know the world ends only one way and only when God decides it's time.
The truth is, there has been global warming recently – but it started around the time of the Revolutionary war, and today we are still BELOW the average of the past 3,000 years. And this is not just for Europe, Greenland and North America, yet another red herring that has recently been thrown out by the desperate global warmers. The universality of the Viking and Mediaeval climatic optimums is written about by Kegwin, who wrote in Science, 1996:274:1504-1508, the mean surface temp of the Sargasso Sea (which lies roughly between the West Indies and the Azores), which was obtained by readings of isotope ratios in marine organism remains in sediment, shows we are, today, **********below the three thousand year average, and far below the Medieval Climatic Optimum,******** albeit far above the LIA. Civil Defense Perspectives, Mar. 2007, Vol. 23, #3, p. 1, notes that evidence for this climatic optimum has been found in all but 2 out of 103 locations where it was examined for, including Asia, Africa, South America and the western U.S. The graph of temperature in the Sargasso Sea if you web search for the Kegwin study tells you all you need to know (note: that big horizontal line running across the page is the 3,000 year average!), Interestingly, the warmer times coincided not only with the best harvests, but also the least amount of major storm activity.
Given that lithium is used to treat bipolar disorder your maternal uncle is ahead of the curve. Ask him to look into substances that prevent or treat hysteria, hypocrisy, dishonesty, stupidity, egocentrism and Wokeism. Thank you.
I suspect many of us have trodden the same path. I volunteered for Greenpeace - helped with the Save The Whale campaign and generally classed myself as an eco-warrior. The thing is I still really care about the environment but the whole climate alarmism scam is about nothing more than power and control and green energy is an environmental assault.
Dear Readers,
As always, we are extremely grateful for your comments. We are always touched by your kind words of praise and encouragement, and strive to learn from your constructive criticism. I (John Leake) am especially grateful for the extremely informative feedback to this particular post. I'm heartened to see how many now understand the the Climate and Vaccine Cults are closely related, as are the high priests running them.
Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, http://www.theenergyreport.com/pub/na/11079 and whose boat I have personally been on in Vancouver Harbour in the 1980s.
“I am a skeptic on climate change. I know the climate is changing, and it always has been. I've studied this intensively over many years. I started what I call the Carbon Project here in British Columbia back in 1989 in order to bring everybody together to discuss this subject and figure out the facts behind it. Since then, I have watched as hysteria has grown, as if the whole world is going to come to an end and civilization is going to die because of humans causing this climate change. I don't buy that, and I certainly know we don't have any proof of it. I'm not denying that we might be playing some role, but the natural factors that have always caused climate change have not suddenly disappeared. I'm very skeptical of the alarmist nature of climate campaigning.” –
Moore, an ecologist and the co-founder of Greenpeace, also has said “We are dealing with pure political propaganda that has nothing to do with science,” while returning to Dr. Will Happer physicist at Princeton Univ, who has stated “Policies to slow CO2 emissions are really based on nonsense,” at a Texas Public Policy Foundation meeting. Happer, Dr. Richard Lindzen of MIT and others at this meeting said claims of the hottest year on record are “nonsense” because there’s so much uncertainty surrounding surface temperature readings — especially since scientists often make lots of adjustments to weather station readings
In 2014, famed astronaut Walt Cunningham went to that year’s global warming UN climate Summit and called the whole AGW gambit "one of the biggest frauds in the field of science."
John Coleman, founder Weather Channel during interview on CNN: "I resent you calling me a denier, that's a word to put me down." Like holocaust denier..."There is no consensus in science. Science is not a vote. Science is about facts. And if you get down to the hard cold facts, there is no question about it: climate change is not happening, there is no significant man-made global warming now and there hasn't be any in the past and there is no reason to expect any in the future. There is a whole lot of baloney and yes it has become a big political point of the democratic party and part of their platform and I regret that this issue has become political instead of scientific. But the science is on my side. The 97% of scientists that claim there is global warming is a political figure. The government puts out 2.5 billion dollars directly for climate research every year. It only gives that money to scientists who will produce scientific results to support the global warming hypothese of the democrat party position. So they don't have any choice, if you gonna get the money, you got to support their position. Therefor 97% of the scientific reports published support global warming. Why? Because those are the ones the government pays for, that's where the money is. It is really simple. That doesn't mean it is right. That doesn't make it true. That only makes it bottom paid for. The money goes in circle….Please stand back from this issue and let the two sides be on the air. There are 31,000 scientists who signed the petition that says it is not valid, that my position is correct and we will keep battling and we will prevail in time…."I hope you go to the websites that present the papers that show that none of this alarmism about ice, and heat waves and drought, "sky falling", none of this is happening…."The weather channel has bought in to it. They drank the cool aid. But so is all the media, that's not big surprise….Many programs they put on on tv... They are not reasonable. They put on their climate geeks, those are not scientists, those are nuts. They never put on a real skeptical scientist. They don't give us any spot on their channels…."I am terribly disappointed. I created a channel to give people their weather, where they live, in their region, and keep them posted on the weather and serve a real purpose. And that channel has been totally distorted and become stranger it can be."
Bravo! More people need to wake up to the climate scam that is using our own tax dollars to fund the globalists - and thereby our own demise.
It's all about the money. The WORST thing is cutting down forests, which take in CO2 and generate oxygen, and replacing them with "green energy" solar fields; acres and acres and acres. How stupid is that?
Anyone who tries to ban natural gas stoves is going to have to contend with my wife, and I'd hate to be in his/her shoes.
Actually, the solution would be to build modern and safe nuclear power plants. There are designs that allow for automatic safe shutdown in case of a failure. And these new power plants should use thorium, which can be almost completely 'burnt', instead of the enriched uranium. This will give us time to develop fusion, which still is a thing of the future. CO2 is plant food, not a pollutant. The planet is greening, we will harvest more food. Then we should invest in reforestation, clean the ocean and rivers, invest in biodegradable plastics. It is not that difficult, but the powers to be are not interested in that.
They should try being concerned that approximately 40,000 birds are killed each year by wind turbines in the U.S. alone (Environment and Climate News, Sept., 2010, estimated 75,000 killed by 2010, and Dr. Mark Perry at http://www.thedailycrux.com/Article/38489/Green_energy states a “2009 estimate from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (reported on the American Bird Conservancy website), those bird fatalities happen more than 1,200 times every day (440,000 deaths annually and 50 deaths every single hour of the day on average).).” Of course, endangered whooping cranes, condors and golden eagles – possibly up to 500 per year! - are all fair game, with nary a peep from the greens. During three decades of wind power usages, not a single wind energy producer has been prosecuted. London’s Telegraph also notes that wind power is killing large numbers of birds, including eagles (read that DDT that kills eagles bad, wind power that makes Al Gore rich good), and noted “The world’s largest and most carefully monitored wind farm, Altamont Pass in California, is estimated to have killed between 2,000 and 3,000 golden eagles alone in the past 20 years. Since turbines were erected on the isle of Smola, off Norway, home to an important population of white-tailed sea eagles, destruction is so great that last year only one chick survived. Thanks to wind farms in Tasmania, a unique sub-species of wedge-tailed eagles faces extinction.”
Meanwhile, the LA Times reported that according to federal wildlife authorities wind farms - with turbines that, while appearing to spin leisurely, actually travel at up to ~ 300 MPH at the tips - kill about 440,000 birds each year. Although a search of the web failed to identify a source for the claim Fish and Wildlife reported that in the year following the Gulf Oil Spill it found 2,308 dead birds with visible oil. Read that: oil killing birds bad, Big Green connected wind farms killing ten thousand times more birds good.
Oh yes, one more: In a summary of avian impacts at wind turbines by Benner et al. (1993) bird deaths per turbine per year were as high as 309 in Germany and 895 in Sweden.” See 2022 article U.S. Wind Energy Company Pleads Guilty for Killing At Least 150 Eagles; Ordered to Pay $8M in Fines with videos discussing this at https://youtu.be/hofs0FTz0_E The book and film Bright Green Lies expose several examples of technology that are promoted as eco-friendly but aren’t necessarily so. This includes wind farms which can be devastating for birds and other wildlife. Offaly Express discusses more on the issue to birds here, with videos on this at https://youtu.be/RtgBWNKwBkE, https://youtu.be/CEersoJLtRw, https://youtu.be/VAO-hWOaXW4, https://youtu.be/ugVkpS9EGl0 and a 52 min one here https://youtu.be/4EYiNDob_7o?t=3 . The American Bird Conservancy, which predicts there will be 1.4 million annual turbine-caused bird deaths by 2030, has filed numerous lawsuits opposing wind projects and has advocated for stricter siting laws for wind developers. Similarly, local fishing industry and wildlife groups have filed multiple lawsuits opposing offshore wind development. In August 2021, a group of “environmentally-concerned citizens” filed a lawsuit opposing wind development off the coast of New England over concerns it would reduce endangered whale species and fishing groups filed their own lawsuits opposing projects in Massachusetts and New York. “Offshore wind is by far the most expensive way to get zero-emission electricity and is probably the most environmentally damaging way to do so,” Dave Stevenson, the director of the Center for Energy Competitiveness at the Delaware-based free market think Caesar Rodney Institute. “It just is the worst option we could come up with.”
And what is the actual presence of CO2 in the atmosphere? Just over 400 ppm, or around 0.04%, up from 320 ppm, or 0.032% 50 years ago. Of the remaining percentages, nitrogen amounts for 78%, oxygen 21%. Of the 1% that then remains, 90% of that is argon, with less than 4% of that 1% being carbon dioxide (these percentages exclude highly variable water vapor, which is usually around 1 – 4% of the atmosphere – and a much more major contributor to global warming, estimated at being 50-90% of the greenhouse effect). Of course the logarithmic effect of CO2 means each additional increase has less impact that the prior, same sized increase. Even more, about 96 to 97% of carbon dioxide comes from natural sources, such as animals, plant decay and volcanoes.
In fact, relative to volcanoes, former FDA investigator Dr. Arthur Evangelista, noted that the 2010 eruption of Eyafjallajokull in Iceland *********emitted, in four days, enough CO2 in four days to negate every single effort mankind made that year to reduce CO2.*************
But this volcano was a piker compared to Mt. Pinatubo, which when it erupted in the Philippines in 1991 “spewed out more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than the entire human race had emitted in its entire 40 MILLION YEARS on earth.” (of course, the Laki eruption starting in Iceland in 1783 spewed out an An estimated 120,000,000 long tons (120,000,000 t) of sulphur dioxide, about three times the total annual European industrial output in 2006, equivalent to six times the total 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption!) And this doesn’t include that fact that, as he notes the “bush fire season across the western USA and Australia this year alone will negate your efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two to three years. And it happens every year.”
And for COP 27 AGW conference in 2022? See Elite Fly 400 Private Jets to COP27, Sponsored by Largest Plastic Polluter in World, To Lecture YOU About Climate, where “The average private jet emits roughly 2 metric tons of carbon for every 60 minutes of flight. To put this into perspective, these same people flying on these jets want you to leave only a 2-metric ton carbon footprint for the entire year. Given that these folks likely spent many hours in the air to make it to the summit, they single-handedly emitted more carbon in 24 hours than many folks will emit in the next decade.”
The promotion of the Climate change apocalypse follows the same basic playbook as the government vaccine program. Though it is a more recent development and I was not subjected to this propaganda when I was in school.
The basic strategy is to use phony science and 24/7 fearmongering to convince young people that the world would come to an end if we didn't give governments unlimited resources and control to fight the alleged danger. And kids, being impressionable and not knowing any reason to distrust what they are being taught, are traumatized into embracing dangerous agendas.
They don't know enough to realize that, even if climate change is something that we should be concerned about, the so-called solutions will in all likelihood make matters worse, not better, not to mention what they will do to our liberties.
And too many will never really reassess what they learned, carrying their misconceptions with them for the rest of their lives.
Farley Mowat, the noted Canadian leftist and Greenpeace activist, and whose house my wife used to walk by regularly as a kid in Port Hope, ON., wrote in his book West Viking (written while we were still in the global cooling scare) that there were probably at least dwarf forests growing in Greenland when the Vikings arrived in 985 AD and the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History reports “… Erik the Red discovered two areas of southwest Greenland which were suitable for farming, with grasslands and small stands of alder and birch.”
You will note that it is too cold today for any type of forests to grow in Greenland, and there is zero ability to farm, unless modern technologies are utilized – and even then, crop selection is very minimal. Mowat also reported the Arctic pack ice was much less in that Viking discovery era than today. Dr. Fred Singer writes that when the Vikings first settled Greenland, they grew vegetables, and it was warm enough to allow the population to grow to 3,000 people and by 1100 AD the place was thriving enough that they had their own bishop and twelve churches. Nature reported in a 2010 article that clamshell studies also confirm Norse records.
Meanwhile, the Archeological Survey of Canada has also noted around “A.D. 1000, a warmer climate resulted in the tree line advancing 100 kilometres north of its present position.” The results of this? Especially in northern Europe, “the period between 1150 and 1300 was truly a flowering period, for population reached unprecedented levels that were never to be seen again until the late 18thcentury in many countries; the English population experienced a staggering threefold increase in its population during the last century since the Domesday Survey in 1086”.
All I can say is that I grew up on a farm in the midwest and we had cousins that grew up in the suburbs of Chicago. When we got together we knew that we were from different cultures and saw things differently. We country people knew how to work the land, forests, streams,and take care of it. Our cousins from the city looked down on us thinking they knew more than us country people because they thought they were better educated and more sophisticated. I believe that our environmental problems are because of the disconnection from information about the land from our indigenous communities who have worked the landscape for centuries vs. intellectuals who have not.
Love this article, John. A very good friend of mine told me that the “hole in the ozone” scare back in the late 80’s was totally bogus. Since he was a chemical engineer at a national laboratory with awesome credentials, I trusted him that the environmental scare tactics and all the rules and regulations based on it were a scam. Nothing in the last 40 years has made me change my mind.
Would that more of the idiots would be taught by your teacher and experience. I've already lived through over 50 climate catastrophe predictions, and can list them. From global freezing to global warming, neither worked out so now it's just climate change. Duh.
Convenient. Climate's gonna change.
Those people don't understand why Christians don't believe them nor worry about climate catastrophes they promote. It's because believers know the world ends only one way and only when God decides it's time.
The truth is, there has been global warming recently – but it started around the time of the Revolutionary war, and today we are still BELOW the average of the past 3,000 years. And this is not just for Europe, Greenland and North America, yet another red herring that has recently been thrown out by the desperate global warmers. The universality of the Viking and Mediaeval climatic optimums is written about by Kegwin, who wrote in Science, 1996:274:1504-1508, the mean surface temp of the Sargasso Sea (which lies roughly between the West Indies and the Azores), which was obtained by readings of isotope ratios in marine organism remains in sediment, shows we are, today, **********below the three thousand year average, and far below the Medieval Climatic Optimum,******** albeit far above the LIA. Civil Defense Perspectives, Mar. 2007, Vol. 23, #3, p. 1, notes that evidence for this climatic optimum has been found in all but 2 out of 103 locations where it was examined for, including Asia, Africa, South America and the western U.S. The graph of temperature in the Sargasso Sea if you web search for the Kegwin study tells you all you need to know (note: that big horizontal line running across the page is the 3,000 year average!), Interestingly, the warmer times coincided not only with the best harvests, but also the least amount of major storm activity.
Given that lithium is used to treat bipolar disorder your maternal uncle is ahead of the curve. Ask him to look into substances that prevent or treat hysteria, hypocrisy, dishonesty, stupidity, egocentrism and Wokeism. Thank you.
I suspect many of us have trodden the same path. I volunteered for Greenpeace - helped with the Save The Whale campaign and generally classed myself as an eco-warrior. The thing is I still really care about the environment but the whole climate alarmism scam is about nothing more than power and control and green energy is an environmental assault.