Well I can answer it, and it's a prompt for him to let others know.
Result: Only when the average thickhead suffers PERSONALLY the extreme hardship has been inflicted by Green, and the destruction of power grids, transport systems that affect food and personal mobility.
To regress to the Green Nirvana has already cost TRILLIONS of dollars, and we are only 20% to the end - and when the end comes and people finally are forced to get off their arses, THEY will need fund not only the undoing of the Green experiment but the full reconstruction of energy and transport - the total cost being unfathomable.
But that's what people want. The masses WANT that because they are collectively so stupid that they continue voting not for those who can make the major parties accountable- but for those parties that have and are condemning us all.
The recent elections in the former East Germany are encouraging in that regard: Germans have been royally screwed by the climate catastrophist policies, and they're now pushing back hard against the parties that are implementing the deindustrialisation and emiseration of their country.
What is the quickest way to deprogram climate change believers? What's the impact of geo-engineering? Aren't we heading into an era of colder temperatures, not hotter?
Good question ..... how do we encourage friends and family to ask questions instead of absorbing the propaganda? I have friends fully awake about the Covid scam yet they still believe whatever ABC or SBS have to report on climate change. They still trust them despite knowing how they lied these past 3 years and continue to lie.
There’s no such thing as an investigative reporter anymore, huh ..... maybe there never was .... hmn
Thank you for giving us the chance to get some answers about this narrative, which is being used to justify countless initiatives, ranging from counterproductive to draconian.
When preachers of failed outcomes are publicly humiliated instead of given accolades, when financial investors penalized at 2x the loss for failed predictions instead of given bailouts and bonuses to continue failing. When purveyors of false guilt for profit go to proportional financial ruin for abusing public policy and deprived of future policy making. When the unrighteous do not suffer the consequences that they cause, they normally will not relent, while they may not change their self love, their voices are not amplified via well intentioned.
The believers you refer to, are people don't have the time, the aptitude, the influence, the access, to test every claim (in every area of life) mendacious or not, then respond without resources against a fully formed orgy of theft from organized government on local, state and federal level, organized media, organized labor, organized educational systems, k-12, plus college and supported by falsification in presentation, prioritization, obfuscation, and hierarchically referenced to prior lies as truth, research papers.
The more interesting question is, why are there so many unbelievers, independent of most sociological, economic and intelligence factors, some other part of the person?
I've been intrigued by your question - why are some people highly resistant to propaganda - for a very long time. It's an unsatisfactory answer, to be sure, but based on my understanding of personality psychology, I believe it does come down to inherent personality factors. With reference to the Big 5 schema of personality, I would characterise the 'unbelievers' as more open, more conscientiousness (primarily the Industriousness aspect), higher in extraversion (primarily the assertiveness aspect), lower in agreeableness (especially the politeness aspect) and lower in neuroticism.
This adept description of psychological traits, appear to me to be tools of how the soul's desire interacts with knowledge, in that the something left missing dramatically changes how the tools of the 'psyche' search for different outcomes self select which knowledge is magnified for a result. There are both positives and negatives in each trait.
In the first paragraph, I hint at motive, what is honored, at transactional
interaction and what are the responses, and profit held in the hands of intent, which becomes generational influence.
Something in the human psyche is can be motivated by abject unfairness, yet simultaneously unfair. Then also, is one who is untouched by others unfairness, neither have I seen that one to be fair. To find one that is fair with oneself and others, how is this decision made, as it must be a decision.
I have my suspicions, but I would like to know whether all these floods, fires, earthquakes etc. that are taking up so much of the media spotlight, are, in fact, being geo-engineered by governments and other corporations to convince the general public that our 'climate' issue is worsening.
Also, how many stations are there across the world that monitor CO2 levels, because I've heard that there's about 2, and how is this an accurate representation of global CO2 levels? Oh, right, the media don't need accurate numbers, as long as they have something for their propaganda...
And lastly, as a young person who is awake to the climate change lie, as well as the Covid lie, how can I have rational conversations with my friends who are still snoozing? As Claudia in this thread asked, how can I 'deprogram climate change believers'?
Thank you for helping us get our questions answered!
I vividly remember, not long after my husband and I began questioning the climate narrative, our teenage daughter coming home from school, and being aghast that we were not worshiping at the climate cult altar. Her teachers had been filling her head with climate catastrophe propaganda. She couldn't conduct a rational argument with us based on facts, but instead resorted to expressing disgust at us. That's when alarm bells really started ringing for me - I realised that kids were being indoctrinated into apocalyptic thinking, largely because adults were somewhat more resistant to the narrative (having lived long enough to remember many blisteringly hot summers, terrible droughts and catastrophic bushfires, not to mention the 'global cooling' scare of the late 70s!). Fortunately our daughter woke up to the scam after she finished high school and was no longer subject to daily brainwashing.
Should have also told her that Greta Thunberg was wrong in many ways, especially when she said the world should forget about net zero and go for absolute zero!! Nuts!
The Germans - just like us - have knowingly elected people to lead a respective nation down the green path to destruction.
They might revolt in some way, but THEY did it to themselves and the nation.
What we have seen and are seeing are the stupid finally waking up to reality.
As time passes, they will remain STUPID!
BTW: You are doing good work to spread solid and sensible information. I lack the time to sign in to this and that and pay for this and that because I'm already spending some $50 per week on doing just that ... and that's in addition to memberships to CIS, IPA and so on. So please pardon my non financial contribution ... that's the reason.
I agree that the German people (and others going down this path) initially voted in the (mis)leaders who are doing this to them, but it does seem that some of them (especially those who lived under Communism) are waking up.
Please don't apologise for not being a paid subscriber. I make all my posts available to everyone, whether they pay or not, trusting that those who can afford it will subscribe. I hope that all my readers are sharing my articles far and wide. The more people who get themselves better informed, the better for us all.
What is the impact of solar minimums and solar maximums? And what is the difference between a grand minimum and a normal minimum? What is the impact of these on Earth's weather and temperatures?
In Australia, I've been noticing that the solar minimums correspond to hot summers - and bushfires. The lower they go (closer to zero) and the flatter the minimum, the worse the heat/bushfires.
Of course, there is not enough data here, even though it goes back to the mid-1700s (and you've got to wonder how accurate that really old data is?!) - but it's all we've got for now.
Don't you love the red line on the graph, like they're trying to predict that it's going to be a low solar cycle again?! Of course the sun has other ideas and it's not complying with their fear-mongering! :-D
A high solar cycle means LOTS of sunspot activity. But please remember that sunspots are COOLER areas of the sun, so lots of sunspots = cooler weather. That's the peak of each cycle. And the higher it goes, the less hot it is - at least in Australia.
Not many/no sunspots = hot weather. That's the trough at the bottom. The longer it goes on, and the lower the number and the flatter it is, the hotter/drier it is.
I like to think about the solar cycle as putting your stove's hotplates on. You start by putting one on, just after the peak of the cycle. Then, as you come down the slope, heading towards zero, you gradually put ALL the hotplates on. When you get to the bottom, you've just had all your hotplates on, on maximum. It's pretty nasty. That's why droughts often happen (at least in Australia) towards the bottom of each cycle. It gets too hot, too dry, and then we get bushfires.
The solar cycle affects different places on earth differently, but this is what I've figured out it means for (the east coast of) Australia, where I live, so it's relevant for me!
Hope this helps somewhat if your Q doesn't get answered by the interviewees.
We all know why there are excess deaths...that's too easy.
But sunspot activity changes every year; there is no 'baseline' as such because it can vary so greatly from cycle to cycle and humans haven't yet figured out the pattern - if any - that exists regarding sunspots! Any 'average' would be entirely useless IMO. But of course they still like to PRETEND they know things by fabricating big red curves...
Some say that Wind Turbines produce much, much less power than they are reputed to do and have to have base load power running all the time. If we don't have coal, gas or Nuclear as a base load backup it will be a disaster! How true is this?
It has been said that with no CO2 in our atmosphere, the average temperature of the globe would be 33 Deg C colder. The present concentration of CO2 is about 400ppm, if it got to 800ppm why wouldn't the temperature be much hotter than now?(66 Deg C Warmer). In other words, is there a sort of linear relationship between CO2 concentration and temperature? I don't think there is, I'm playing devils advocate; I'm with you guys.
You're right - the relationship is NOT linear. There's a saturation effect, such that increasing the CO2 concentration has a diminishing effect on temperature.
Thanks for the reply. I have an Australian written book called "Taxing Air" and there's graph showing exactly what you have said, only I don't know why it is not used more often to dispel the "Climate Crisis!". Also on the Mallen Baker show he states that only certain frequencies of our suns light are absorbed by the CO2. When more CO2 is produced it is already at saturation point so the heating effect tails off.
It's frustrating to me that there are such obvious, gaping holes in the anthropogenic climate change narrative, but these are assiduously concealed, largely by the corporate-whore media.
When will blackouts start ? Should I buy a diesel or petrol backup Gen ? And was it anthropogenic climate change that allowed the Roman’s to grow grapes in Britain and cause the Rhine to dry up in the Middle Ages ?
Yes, the medieval warm period (and other periods of warming waaaaaay before industrialisation) are a bit of a fly in the ointment of the anthropogenic climate change narrative, aren't they?
Given that the so called "United" Nations has been and is the hub of the old Agenda21 and now AG21 on steroids is AG2030,. and UN "Member States" that commit to such complex (and dangerous) agreements are required to progressively change internal laws and processes to effect the undertakings ...a question:
As we are all impotent to resist the imposts of politicians and bureaucrats that dismiss questioning their direction - at approximately what point will the damage to economies and people be so obvious that the Green infection be recognised for what it is and be discarded?
Well I can answer it, and it's a prompt for him to let others know.
Result: Only when the average thickhead suffers PERSONALLY the extreme hardship has been inflicted by Green, and the destruction of power grids, transport systems that affect food and personal mobility.
To regress to the Green Nirvana has already cost TRILLIONS of dollars, and we are only 20% to the end - and when the end comes and people finally are forced to get off their arses, THEY will need fund not only the undoing of the Green experiment but the full reconstruction of energy and transport - the total cost being unfathomable.
But that's what people want. The masses WANT that because they are collectively so stupid that they continue voting not for those who can make the major parties accountable- but for those parties that have and are condemning us all.
The recent elections in the former East Germany are encouraging in that regard: Germans have been royally screwed by the climate catastrophist policies, and they're now pushing back hard against the parties that are implementing the deindustrialisation and emiseration of their country.
What is the quickest way to deprogram climate change believers? What's the impact of geo-engineering? Aren't we heading into an era of colder temperatures, not hotter?
Good question ..... how do we encourage friends and family to ask questions instead of absorbing the propaganda? I have friends fully awake about the Covid scam yet they still believe whatever ABC or SBS have to report on climate change. They still trust them despite knowing how they lied these past 3 years and continue to lie.
There’s no such thing as an investigative reporter anymore, huh ..... maybe there never was .... hmn
Great questions!
Thank you for giving us the chance to get some answers about this narrative, which is being used to justify countless initiatives, ranging from counterproductive to draconian.
A wind farm in Sydney Harbour should do the trick
Don't give them any ideas!
When preachers of failed outcomes are publicly humiliated instead of given accolades, when financial investors penalized at 2x the loss for failed predictions instead of given bailouts and bonuses to continue failing. When purveyors of false guilt for profit go to proportional financial ruin for abusing public policy and deprived of future policy making. When the unrighteous do not suffer the consequences that they cause, they normally will not relent, while they may not change their self love, their voices are not amplified via well intentioned.
The believers you refer to, are people don't have the time, the aptitude, the influence, the access, to test every claim (in every area of life) mendacious or not, then respond without resources against a fully formed orgy of theft from organized government on local, state and federal level, organized media, organized labor, organized educational systems, k-12, plus college and supported by falsification in presentation, prioritization, obfuscation, and hierarchically referenced to prior lies as truth, research papers.
The more interesting question is, why are there so many unbelievers, independent of most sociological, economic and intelligence factors, some other part of the person?
I've been intrigued by your question - why are some people highly resistant to propaganda - for a very long time. It's an unsatisfactory answer, to be sure, but based on my understanding of personality psychology, I believe it does come down to inherent personality factors. With reference to the Big 5 schema of personality, I would characterise the 'unbelievers' as more open, more conscientiousness (primarily the Industriousness aspect), higher in extraversion (primarily the assertiveness aspect), lower in agreeableness (especially the politeness aspect) and lower in neuroticism.
This adept description of psychological traits, appear to me to be tools of how the soul's desire interacts with knowledge, in that the something left missing dramatically changes how the tools of the 'psyche' search for different outcomes self select which knowledge is magnified for a result. There are both positives and negatives in each trait.
In the first paragraph, I hint at motive, what is honored, at transactional
interaction and what are the responses, and profit held in the hands of intent, which becomes generational influence.
Something in the human psyche is can be motivated by abject unfairness, yet simultaneously unfair. Then also, is one who is untouched by others unfairness, neither have I seen that one to be fair. To find one that is fair with oneself and others, how is this decision made, as it must be a decision.
I have my suspicions, but I would like to know whether all these floods, fires, earthquakes etc. that are taking up so much of the media spotlight, are, in fact, being geo-engineered by governments and other corporations to convince the general public that our 'climate' issue is worsening.
Also, how many stations are there across the world that monitor CO2 levels, because I've heard that there's about 2, and how is this an accurate representation of global CO2 levels? Oh, right, the media don't need accurate numbers, as long as they have something for their propaganda...
And lastly, as a young person who is awake to the climate change lie, as well as the Covid lie, how can I have rational conversations with my friends who are still snoozing? As Claudia in this thread asked, how can I 'deprogram climate change believers'?
Thank you for helping us get our questions answered!
I vividly remember, not long after my husband and I began questioning the climate narrative, our teenage daughter coming home from school, and being aghast that we were not worshiping at the climate cult altar. Her teachers had been filling her head with climate catastrophe propaganda. She couldn't conduct a rational argument with us based on facts, but instead resorted to expressing disgust at us. That's when alarm bells really started ringing for me - I realised that kids were being indoctrinated into apocalyptic thinking, largely because adults were somewhat more resistant to the narrative (having lived long enough to remember many blisteringly hot summers, terrible droughts and catastrophic bushfires, not to mention the 'global cooling' scare of the late 70s!). Fortunately our daughter woke up to the scam after she finished high school and was no longer subject to daily brainwashing.
Should have also told her that Greta Thunberg was wrong in many ways, especially when she said the world should forget about net zero and go for absolute zero!! Nuts!
Taking advice on climate policy from a girl who skipped most of high school, makes as much sense as taking medical advice from Bill Gates.
Thanks for your anecdote, Robyn! You always have a wonderful way of writing ;-) I'm glad your daughter woke up to the scam!
I eagerly await this interview. Being relatively newly awakened to this scam I want to learn as much as possible.
INDEED ... but remember in all this:
The Germans - just like us - have knowingly elected people to lead a respective nation down the green path to destruction.
They might revolt in some way, but THEY did it to themselves and the nation.
What we have seen and are seeing are the stupid finally waking up to reality.
As time passes, they will remain STUPID!
BTW: You are doing good work to spread solid and sensible information. I lack the time to sign in to this and that and pay for this and that because I'm already spending some $50 per week on doing just that ... and that's in addition to memberships to CIS, IPA and so on. So please pardon my non financial contribution ... that's the reason.
I agree that the German people (and others going down this path) initially voted in the (mis)leaders who are doing this to them, but it does seem that some of them (especially those who lived under Communism) are waking up.
Please don't apologise for not being a paid subscriber. I make all my posts available to everyone, whether they pay or not, trusting that those who can afford it will subscribe. I hope that all my readers are sharing my articles far and wide. The more people who get themselves better informed, the better for us all.
The aluminium that is dropped upon us from the weather altering chemtrails, contributes to more intense bushfires?
The outrageous increase in bushfires and/or floods are able to be created and manipulated deliberately, but under the guise of 'climate change'?
Just who is responsible for manipulating our weather in order to contrive there is 'climate change'?
Geoengineering has gone from a tinfoil hat conspiracy theory to an openly acknowledged practice!
Like over the Darling Downs today. Is there an ionosphere heater run by a foreign entity based in Australia manipulating our weather.
Lack of preventative backburning probably contributes too.
For the fonetic dummies, of witch there are many; read up on fotosinthesis or you will run out of breath, that is all.
CO2 = plant food!
Only need to read summary about climate change in this submission to the US EPA, by 2 US Physics professors.
https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Happer-Lindzen-EPA-Power-Plants-2023-07-19.pdf
CO2 Coalition is an excellent resource.
Thank You. I've only skimmed it, but I like :
"600 million years of data prove that today’s CO2 level of 420 parts per million (ppm)
is very low, not high".
"600 million years of data show that higher levels of CO2 do not cause or even correlate
with higher temperatures."
Unfortunately, it's 45 pages long so I doubt blackout bowen would be able to read it
What is the impact of solar minimums and solar maximums? And what is the difference between a grand minimum and a normal minimum? What is the impact of these on Earth's weather and temperatures?
Jan
https://www.swpc.noaa.gov/products/solar-cycle-progression
In Australia, I've been noticing that the solar minimums correspond to hot summers - and bushfires. The lower they go (closer to zero) and the flatter the minimum, the worse the heat/bushfires.
Of course, there is not enough data here, even though it goes back to the mid-1700s (and you've got to wonder how accurate that really old data is?!) - but it's all we've got for now.
Don't you love the red line on the graph, like they're trying to predict that it's going to be a low solar cycle again?! Of course the sun has other ideas and it's not complying with their fear-mongering! :-D
A high solar cycle means LOTS of sunspot activity. But please remember that sunspots are COOLER areas of the sun, so lots of sunspots = cooler weather. That's the peak of each cycle. And the higher it goes, the less hot it is - at least in Australia.
Not many/no sunspots = hot weather. That's the trough at the bottom. The longer it goes on, and the lower the number and the flatter it is, the hotter/drier it is.
I like to think about the solar cycle as putting your stove's hotplates on. You start by putting one on, just after the peak of the cycle. Then, as you come down the slope, heading towards zero, you gradually put ALL the hotplates on. When you get to the bottom, you've just had all your hotplates on, on maximum. It's pretty nasty. That's why droughts often happen (at least in Australia) towards the bottom of each cycle. It gets too hot, too dry, and then we get bushfires.
The solar cycle affects different places on earth differently, but this is what I've figured out it means for (the east coast of) Australia, where I live, so it's relevant for me!
Hope this helps somewhat if your Q doesn't get answered by the interviewees.
Couldn't help myself, but it looks a LOT like the excess deaths graph (where it's totally above the '5 year' range).
Ha ha.
We all know why there are excess deaths...that's too easy.
But sunspot activity changes every year; there is no 'baseline' as such because it can vary so greatly from cycle to cycle and humans haven't yet figured out the pattern - if any - that exists regarding sunspots! Any 'average' would be entirely useless IMO. But of course they still like to PRETEND they know things by fabricating big red curves...
These questions are top of my list too!
Some say that Wind Turbines produce much, much less power than they are reputed to do and have to have base load power running all the time. If we don't have coal, gas or Nuclear as a base load backup it will be a disaster! How true is this?
Kevin did discuss this in the interview.
It has been said that with no CO2 in our atmosphere, the average temperature of the globe would be 33 Deg C colder. The present concentration of CO2 is about 400ppm, if it got to 800ppm why wouldn't the temperature be much hotter than now?(66 Deg C Warmer). In other words, is there a sort of linear relationship between CO2 concentration and temperature? I don't think there is, I'm playing devils advocate; I'm with you guys.
You're right - the relationship is NOT linear. There's a saturation effect, such that increasing the CO2 concentration has a diminishing effect on temperature.
Thanks for the reply. I have an Australian written book called "Taxing Air" and there's graph showing exactly what you have said, only I don't know why it is not used more often to dispel the "Climate Crisis!". Also on the Mallen Baker show he states that only certain frequencies of our suns light are absorbed by the CO2. When more CO2 is produced it is already at saturation point so the heating effect tails off.
It's frustrating to me that there are such obvious, gaping holes in the anthropogenic climate change narrative, but these are assiduously concealed, largely by the corporate-whore media.
When did the human caused climate change narrative begin and who started it?
Excellent question, which we did cover in the interview (coming soon!!!!!).
Thanks!
This is a topic I haven't paid much attention to, since there's so many other issues where the impact is more apparent.
What I'd like to have spelled out, is how this scam works.
- I'm sure there's a multitude of tiny taxes that always trickle down.
As well as changes in policy that are invisible to the average person.
And where is it heading?
What's happening with SCoPEx - are they still planning to pollute our skies with their solar geoengineering?
When will blackouts start ? Should I buy a diesel or petrol backup Gen ? And was it anthropogenic climate change that allowed the Roman’s to grow grapes in Britain and cause the Rhine to dry up in the Middle Ages ?
Yes, the medieval warm period (and other periods of warming waaaaaay before industrialisation) are a bit of a fly in the ointment of the anthropogenic climate change narrative, aren't they?
Given that the so called "United" Nations has been and is the hub of the old Agenda21 and now AG21 on steroids is AG2030,. and UN "Member States" that commit to such complex (and dangerous) agreements are required to progressively change internal laws and processes to effect the undertakings ...a question:
As we are all impotent to resist the imposts of politicians and bureaucrats that dismiss questioning their direction - at approximately what point will the damage to economies and people be so obvious that the Green infection be recognised for what it is and be discarded?
I would like to know this too!