With their climate scam funding getting cut off, academics are now saying they want to do some actual science.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- “What If CO2 Is Not the Real Problem?”
- Answers from the Borg
- Liz Cheney’s Warning To The GOP
- The Democrats’ Leading Experts
- The Siberian/Mediterranean UK Climate
- Escaping Carbon Dioxide
- Melting Greenland Update
- Disappearing Ice Causing More Ice
- Climate Misinformation From AI
- Record Heat Of 1941
- Expert Forecasting
- Manhattan To Drown Again
- Structures On Mars
- Illinois 1953 Vs. 2024
- Data Made Simple – Cold January
- Farewell To Climate Warrior Toto
- Data Made Simple – Stock Prices II
- Arctic Ice-Free By 2030
- Corals To Disappear Soon
- Earth To Become Too Hot For Humans
- Defending Misinformation
- Data Made Simple – Stock Prices
- Billionaires Buying Doomed Property
- First Female President
- “not supported by the scientific consensus”
Recent Comments
- Bob G on “What If CO2 Is Not the Real Problem?”
- Bob G on “What If CO2 Is Not the Real Problem?”
- Bob G on “What If CO2 Is Not the Real Problem?”
- Disillusioned on “What If CO2 Is Not the Real Problem?”
- MLH on Liz Cheney’s Warning To The GOP
- Bob G on The Democrats’ Leading Experts
- Bob G on The Democrats’ Leading Experts
- Bob G on Liz Cheney’s Warning To The GOP
- Russell Cook on The Democrats’ Leading Experts
- Russell Cook on The Democrats’ Leading Experts
“….the real problem.”?
There is no real problem. Except for those looking for ‘the real problem.’ They should look in the mirror. They are the problem.
Minnesota had a real problem… in 1886. I think CO2 at that time was under 300. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1886_St._Cloud%E2%80%93Sauk_Rapids_tornado_outbreak
is there more of the story than three paragraphs? I went to msn.com and I can’t find the story.
I found this interesting and it’s a little bit off topic but… this is a bit of a WOW, you’ve got to be kidding… for me. I’m sure many of us have heard that the Panama canal was restricting passages in 2023 maybe 2024 also because of a drought which was obviously caused by climate change haha. funny how the experts play on our ignorance. I live in Minnesota and a drought in Minnesota is considered maybe 15 to 23 in of rain. A wet year might be 32 in of rain. so when you hear there’s a drought in Panama, which is restricting the number of vessels that can traverse the canal, isn’t it reasonable to think, oh my goodness, it’s not raining there much, maybe they’re only getting 20 in of rain, how awful. I’m shocked to learn tonight that a drought in Panama is considered 80 in of rain. Hhmmmm. maybe the problem is it takes 50 million gallons of water for only one ship to traverse the canal. https://www-cnbc-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2024/11/12/panama-canal-cargo-container-trade-rebound-record-drought.html?amp_gsa=1&_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=17387286411906&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&share=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnbc.com%2F2024%2F11%2F12%2Fpanama-canal-cargo-container-trade-rebound-record-drought.html. bottom line that was never a drought in Panama. what there was was a year or two of below average rainfall