Portland Guardian – 11 April 1867
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
Recent Comments
- arn on Up Is Down
- Bob G on Up Is Down
- arn on Climate Change In Spain
- conrad ziefle on The Clock Is Ticking
- conrad ziefle on Climate Change In Spain
- conrad ziefle on Climate Change In Spain
- conrad ziefle on “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- arn on The Clock Is Ticking
- Mike Peinsipp on The Clock Is Ticking
- arn on The Clock Is Ticking
All the alarmist must be out partying like it’s 1999 tonight before school starts err something
In mid september 1186 there was a very tight conjunction of the sun, moon and all the major planets. I guess this is what got their knickers in a twist back then.
In those good old days, as per article, the sun was still going around the earth and the earth was flat. Our planet was still at the centre of the universe, imagine, those were the days.
If there would have been computers back then they would have created climate models based on that “fact”. They would have found that the warm spell they were in was caused by the burning of all those heretics. But life was good and food plentiful so why stop it.
You were put on the stake and burned if you said anything different, it is almost the same again.
As they say ” the rest is history”.
According to Philip K. Dick, it’s currently 72AD & we’re all just living in a fantasy created to delude us . . . oh, I can’t explain it all, just read Valis & Radio Free Albemuth. Also reading Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said would fill you in on his exegesis. 😉
The modern version is????
😆
OK, the latest and greatest version?
Ha, “modern version”. I like it.
No, it’s all the same deceit, by the same deceiver.
LSM is one…..
Now I understand:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARJK0MWAITM&feature=player_embedded
10-15 years ahead seems to be the agreed upon timeframe to put the end of the world by hoaxers and fraudsters throughout history to make a nice killing and then disappear without bearing any consequences.
A nice killing? How EXACTLY, I repeat, how exactly do climate scientists profit by creating a a climate hoax? Now remember that there are hundreds of climate scientists plus earth scientists, astronomers, statisticians, etc. and that these co-conspirators live under every form of government on this planet. So your answer(s) must accommodate ALL these players in the hoax game.
I want to know is how much do climate scientists make for pushing this hoax, who pays them to perpetuate this hoax and how these “sponsors” benefit from paying climate scientists to corrupt their studies.
Are you daft? According to the BBC this is a $100 billion per year industry.
Are you saying that falsifying studies is a 100 billion dollar industry? Now that is daft. Who would pay for that? Do astronomers get paid more than geologists? Do they get paid per study?
How EXACTLY is this $100 billion divided up Steven?
You are completely daft. Government and the insurance industry see global warming alarm as a huge money maker. Taxes and increased premiums.
Once again Steven, HOW does the insurance companies make money or the government make money from falsified studies? Is this every government in the world we are talking about? What is the tax called? Is this a local government tax we are talking about? State? Federal? UN?
Is there a slush fund in the every insurance company’s budget that they pass out to climate scientists? How does it work in China? Does each provincial governor appoint a slush fund manager?
If you publish in NATURE do you get more money than if you only make it into GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH? Is there a criteria for getting paid? An extra thousand dollars for each time you mention “Anthropogenic” and $500 for each “global warming”?
Surely, someone who has published 10,000 blogs should have some hard FACTS and some solid EVIDENCE by now.
So I ask YET AGAIN: How much do scientists get paid to falsify their work, who EXACTLY pays them and how PRECISELY would this benefit their sponsors?
Quit being dense. The University of Colorado received $700,000 to study the effect of global warming on Prairie Dogs, in a place where there has been no warming.
Professors jobs depend on bringing money in. Get a clue.
Oh, shut up, you fat, cheeto-peckered wank mop. Nobody owes you an explication.
If you aren’t on board the AGW gravy train, you will never receive funding, have publishing access to journals or get hired to a responsible position. Your papers will never see the light of day. In addition, you will not be invited to attend or speak at any lavish conferences . I don’t think this is very hard to imagine how skeptics are ostracized and mistreated.
So now it is not insurance companies or the government but it is actually university professors that get the real money. At $700,000 a pop they must be living large. So what does the U of C get for this $700,000? How could a bogus study of prairie dogs be of any benefit to the university? It surely seems mighty strange that they would part with such a large sum of money knowing that the study they paid for will be falsified.
Crazy really.
How much do the Austrians get paid to lie about glacier retreat? Or the Australians and the “bleaching” of the Great Barrier Reef? who pays them for making up stuff about those things?
YET AGAIN Steven, you haven’t answered the questions. Surely, you must admit it is lunacy to suggest that a world-wide conspiracy exists in order to fool the public in regards to climate change. The shear size and scope of such a thing is beyond reckoning. And then throw in the fact that there is no purpose to the hoax and there are no beneficiaries makes the entire concept sound as if it comes from the rantings of a mental patient.
insurance premiums in aus have gone up massively under totally UNproven risk assumptions made and proliferated by morons, try a 300 a yr hit jumping to over 1k for renewal in coastal areas. who have NO sea rises no floods nothing at all eventful.
same huge increase in fees charges and tech advice for any new homes IF? they allow them at all in certain areas. people being forced OFF land and homes due to same.
huge sums charged to “assess” homes for ways to limit power use.
try a grand for some totally inept person who did a one day govvy paid course to become a “advisor” making 3k a day..to advise to put foam weather strips in doors, , weather seals under em, and go sit in one room with more clothes on. oh and use useless curly lights..
masses of goreites making money on green scams.
peiople doing studies on roo gut bacteria transfer to sheep to cut methane.
yeah
LOTS of money in green eco scammery.
inc entire new Govt buildings depts and employees to push a fairytale.
I don’t believe a thing you say. Show me proof. Which insurance companies have tripled their flood insurance rates for home owners who have not experienced a flooding event in the past 10 years? What do you mean huge fees to limit power use? I suspect you mean consultants who charge a fee for showing home owners how to save on energy use. I guess you prefer to pay more for energy than necessary. How clever of you.
One of the first printed books in western history, the Nuremberg Chronicle was published in 1493 and contained this uplifting prose-
“Then will be fulfilled the whole screed of the Apocalypse: flood, earthquake, pestilence and famine; crops will not grow nor fruit ripen; the springs will dry up and waters flow with blood and bitterness.”
“True to its general theme, the Chronicle concluded by prophesying the immediate end of the world.”
From Stewart and Stewart, ‘The miracle of freedom: 7 tipping points that saved the world’, page 225-226.
Those were the salad days of 280 ppm CO2, a benign climate and world peace.
Was science based on empirical methods back then? What studies was this screed based on? What observational data was used? How many years of study did the author have and what were his qualifications?
Maybe ye can tell us thar? But ya know Wharever!
Do you need pictures Whatever?
Factual evidence is always useful Eric.
I wouldn’t describe this as a “hoax” but if I could get grant money to research something that the public and policy makers are fixated on, and it would just go to someone else to do the research if I knocked it back, it would very very challenging not to go along with it.
Just a thought to share .. it’s interesting !!!
Year 2012 is also a year that is said to be end of life. What is worths mentioning is that Oct 2012 has five mondays, five Tuesdays and five wednesdays .. this only happens every 823 years … 2012-823=1189 !! 🙂