New Video : The War On Science

Posted on October 27, 2020 by tonyheller

https://newtube.app/user/TonyHeller/g9ovxWZ

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to New Video : The War On Science

  1. Billyjack says:
    October 27, 2020 at 11:58 am

    I canceled my subscription to Scientific American when they gave Jeffrey Sachs a monthly column to espouse communism as if it had anything to do with science.

    Reply
  2. Robert says:
    October 27, 2020 at 12:11 pm

    Please please get a better microphone the audio quality is horrible, sounds like a cheap radio

    Reply
    • D. Boss says:
      October 28, 2020 at 11:45 am

      Robert: may I suggest you get a better set of speakers! Tony’s sound quality is fine, no I’d say excellent regards clarity and frequency response.

      The highs are crisp and clean and the bass in his voice is smooth and steady. The audio on his videos is without discernible distortion from cheap microphones.

      However if you have a lousy laptop with 1/2 inch speakers – it will sound like crap! Likewise if you play it on a smart phone, it will sound worse than a laptop. Both of these sound sources are in fact far worse than a “cheap radio” in terms of sonic fidelity!

      Using either my desktop with run of the mill sound card and a decent set of speakers; or playing his videos on my smart TV with a high end sound system – his sound quality is comparable to broadcast or cable TV shows.

      Distortion bothers me immensely – and Tony’s audio is clean. I cannot stand it when people put their idiot boxes (smart phones) on speaker and attempt to hear the other person speak.

      If you think Tony needs a new mic, send him money! But first I’d listen to his videos with a decent sound system before judging harshly. (then send him money anyway ;)

      Reply
  3. James O'Donnell says:
    October 27, 2020 at 7:19 pm

    Dear Tony,

    You do god and much needed work.

    Is there a postal address I can use to send you a check? PO Box or something? I don’t like to do online donations.

    Thank you,

    Reply
  4. Mike says:
    October 27, 2020 at 8:07 pm

    I just re posted your graph of sea-ice coverage (attributed to Tony Heller) on FaceBook.

    They locked me out for 24 hours, saying it did not conform to community standards!

    Does this happen to others?

    Reply
  5. Robert Gipson says:
    October 28, 2020 at 1:55 am

    “Our algorithms are working as designed.”

    Love it, Tony. Great work.

    Btw, somewhat unrelated, but Astra Zeneca has just tacitly admitted that their “COVID vaccine” … is not really a vaccine after all. Holy cow.
    Then …what is it, really?

    https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2020/10/27/covid-vaccine-trials.aspx?cid_source=dnl&cid_medium=email&cid_content=art1HL&cid=20201027Z1&mid=DM692979&rid=997479777

    Excerpts:

    “Shockingly, preventing infection with SARS-CoV-2 is not a criterion for success in these vaccine trials. The only criterion for a successful COVID-19 vaccine is a reduction of symptoms shared by both COVID-19 and the common cold.

    “In AstraZeneca’s case, the interim analysis includes 50 vaccine recipients. The vaccine will be a success if 12 or fewer develop symptoms after exposure to SARS-CoV-2, compared to 19 in the 25-person control group.

    “If the vaccine cannot reduce infection, hospitalization or death, then it cannot end the pandemic, which means everyone who takes the vaccine will be doing so in vain.”

    People, do the math.

    Why are they pushing a *mandatory injection* that they now even tacitly admit:

    – is not even a true “vaccine” after all;
    – will not prevent infection, was never intended to;
    – can have devastating side effects…for which Congress has insured that they cannot be sued.

    Sorry, this is not “conspiracy theory.” It’s their own admission.

    At the very least, let’s all do ourselves a big favor, and start being honest with ourselves. Let’s stop calling this a “COVID vaccine” and start calling it what it really is:

    A forced injection.

    More specifically, a mandatory forced injection, true purpose unknown.

    Reply
  6. Stuart Hamish says:
    October 28, 2020 at 12:14 pm

    The Scientific American’s assertion that NOAA recorded the ” second lowest Arctic sea ice minimum” is demonstrably false … Ocean sediment cores analyzing the PIP -25 biomarker combination for gauging Arctic sea ice extent in the Holocene show the Chukchi , East Siberian and Laptov Seas were mostly ice free – even at times during the winter maximum – 8000 – 6500 years ago during the Holocene Optimum when atmospheric carbon dioxide hovered around 270 ppm …Judith Curry published a graph based on the research results of Stein , Fahl et al [ ‘ Holocene Variability in Sea Ice Cover , Primary Production and Pacific Water Inflow and Climate Change in the Chukchi and East Siberian Seas [ Arctic Ocean , Journal of Quaternary Science , Feb. 27 ,2017 ] on her blog in a 2017 article ” What do we know about Arctic sea ice trends ” ?

    https: //curryja.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/slide7.png

    https://judithcurry.com/2017/08/16/what-do-we-know-about-arctic-sea-ice-trends/

    Reply
  7. aido says:
    October 28, 2020 at 5:10 pm

    The melting and re-growing of the Arctic ice has been going on for ever. Melting, growing, melting , growing, though in recent times never getting back to the all-over ice cap during the last glaciation.

    If the Arctic ice were all to melt, sea-levels would not be affected. You can prove this with a simple experiment you can do at home.

    Take a jug, fill it half-full of warm water and put a large ice cube in the water. Mark on the jug the top level of the water. Now wait. The ice will melt, becoming water and will mix with the other water in the jug. Eventually, the ice cube will melt. Look at your mark. The water level won’t have changed. How come?

    The answer is simple science. When an ice cube floats in water, 90% of it is under the water and 10% is above the waterline. To understand what happens next, remember that when water freezes, it expands. ( That’s why pipes burst when the water in them freezes. ) The opposite is also true: when ice melts, it contracts to a smaller amount of water. So the 90% of the ice cube under the water will actually lower the waterline as it melts.

    Let’s not forget the 10% of the ice cube that’s above the waterline: when that melts, it contracts too. However, the melted ice – now water – adds to the water in the jug to bring the water level back to the mark on the jug. So, no change in the level.

    But what if the Arctic ice were to melt completely? From our little experiment with the jug and the ice cube, we’ve seen that the sea level wouldn’t rise at all. The Northwest Passage would be permanently open to shipping, saving shipping lines massive amounts of time and money. The polar bears would migrate south and perhaps revert to being the black bears they once were. We’d have no more daft people trekking to the North Pole and getting frostbite; no intrepid sailors trying to sail to the North Pole and getting stuck in the ice half-way. Finally, the several nations who lay claim to the North Pole would see their flags floating away, removing a source of potential conflict. A win-win, I’d say.

    The alarmists say that the loss of Arctic ice would mean less sunshine reflected back into space and more absorbed by the seas, generating more Global Warming. Since Arctic ice is less than 1% of the total ice on Earth and half to three-quarters of it now melts every Summer and there’s no Sun to melt it for six months of the year, that’s just another alarmist false scare.

    Reply
  8. rah says:
    October 29, 2020 at 9:13 pm

    Did a team run down to Nogales, AZ on the border and then picked up in Oro Valley in Tucson. We took the route I like traveling US 54 from Wichita, KS down to the junction with US 70 to Santa Cruz where we catch I-10 west.

    On the way down we hit freezing rain, sleet, and light snow in Texoma. We switched drivers south of Vaughn, NM and I took over. The ice on the truck began to melt there. There was a howling wind and the temp was 45 deg. F where I took over. My team partner said “I Love you man, but F you” when I told him the temp was 70 deg. only 38 miles after I took over. We had beat the southern tip of the cold front going south.

    We took the same route coming back. My team partner was driving and hit blizzard conditions in I-10 in AZ several miles before he reached the NM border. Blowing snow so hard he could only do 35 mph and most the four wheelers were pulling over and stopping.

    I awoke as we approached the ridgeline and steepest climb on the route just east of Santa Cruz. There was 8″ of snow on the road at the top of that climb. Very treacherous coming down the other side. We never got over 15 mph until it flattened out. A little later after it got light we came across a car carrier that was slightly jack knifed on the edge of the road. Next to him was a four wheeler. We stopped to check on them and the truck driver said he stopped to check on the four wheeler driver and his rig just slid sideways off the road when it was stopped. Everyone was ok. I gotta feeling he was there for a long time before a tow truck got to him because we didn’t see any before we got to Santa Rosa.

    I took over in Vaughn, NM and I-40 from Santa Rosa to Tucumcari was a mess. One lane plowed for much of it. Conditions gradually got better the further north I went on US 54 from Tucumcari.

    Blizzard like conditions in the high deserts of AZ and NM not that far from the Mexican border is not something I ever expected to encounter in October. And on that long isolated US 54 it was a bitch because no plows were working. I bet we had well over 500 lbs of black frozen crude built on up the landing gear and bumper of the trailer. I beat a bunch of it off with a hammer once we got far enough north that it was warming up. Big hunks like that falling off a trailer at highway speeds can do some real damage to following vehicles.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to rah Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *