RSS Output
French    German    Spain    Italian    Arabic    Chinese Simplified    Russian

Letters by a modern St. Ferdinand III about cults

Gab@StFerdinandIII - https://unstabbinated.substack.com/

Plenty of cults exist - every cult has its 'religious dogma', its idols, its 'prophets', its 'science', its 'proof' and its intolerant liturgy of demands.  Cults everywhere:  Corona, 'The Science' or Scientism, Islam, the State, the cult of Gender Fascism, Marxism, Darwin and Evolution, Globaloneywarming, Changing Climate, Abortion...

Tempus Fugit Memento Mori - Time Flies Remember Death 

Back

GlobaloneyWarming/Climate Hooey - Recent Articles

ClimateGeddon, Greenhouse Gas Myths and 'Fossil Fuels' propaganda

Scientism and Fake Science

Bookmark and Share

Hot, Hotter, Hottest | KQED

Scientism and Siberia or would it be Climate Hell?

Scientism is simply a religious devotion to using methods and technology, to understand and manage the material elements of our world.  Scientism as a religious doctrine espouses that only the material exists, and that metrics, mathematics, calibrations, and application technology should be used to understand, manage and control the world and humans.  No other doctrine, point of view, spirituality, faith dogma, emotionality, or Christian observance of the world of the 5 senses and beyond, is allowed.  Everything must be measured, categorised, labelled, using technology and ‘science’.  That is all which matters in life.  Further, the human is not unique according to scientism.  You are simply a node on a system, part of the cybernetics, and the ‘Internet of Things’ and in the ‘things’ on the network of surveillance and control, you the human, are not even the most interesting or worthy.  Far from it.  You are a pestilence, a consumer, an eater, a burden.  Your humanity must be changed, upgraded, hacked and replaced by a post-human, transhumanism.

If ‘science’ is so ‘precise’ why so many failed predictions dating back to 1880 on ‘climate’ and ‘weather’?  Or is science just another viewpoint, prone to egocentricity, fraud, money and lust for power like all other doctrines and systems?

Remember the ‘science’ in 2004 declared that unless action was taken ‘immediately’, Britain would become Siberia by 2024. 

A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer, warns that major European cities will be sunk beneath rising seas as Britain is plunged into a ‘Siberian’ climate by 2020. Nuclear conflict, mega-droughts, famine and widespread rioting will erupt across the world.

The document predicts that abrupt climate change could bring the planet to the edge of anarchy as countries develop a nuclear threat to defend and secure dwindling food, water and energy supplies. The threat to global stability vastly eclipses that of terrorism, say the few experts privy to its contents.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver

The ‘experts’ of course. ‘Abrupt climate change’, from plant food.  2024 is one year away.  The ‘science’, settled and consensus based, has already moved on to the raging fires of climate-hell, with unstoppable increases in temperatures of say 0.5C, resulting in the liquidation of Gaia.  What happened to the 2004 fixation on Siberia for the UK?  Wasn’t the science ‘settled’ back in 2004?

But the ‘science’ was also unequivocal just a few years later, when the former Prince of Wales, now King Charles III famously predicted in 2009 that the world would end in July of 2017.  He assured the peasants that the ‘science’ fully supported his view.  We went from the UK becoming Siberia to a warming hell in just 5 years. 

Capitalism and consumerism have brought the world to the brink of economic and environmental collapse, the Prince of Wales has warned in a grandstand speech which set out his concerns for the future of the planet.

The heir to the throne told an audience of industrialists and environmentalists at St James's Palace last night that he had calculated that we have just 96 months left to save the world.

And in a searing indictment on capitalist society, Charles said we can no longer afford consumerism and that the "age of convenience" was over.

Notice the conflation of unrelated factors.  Capitalism with environmental collapse.  The most modern societies are the most environmentally aware.  A former Prince, now a King, who flies in private jets, sails in private and quite massive yachts, has enormous palaces and estates kitted out with the latest and most expensive technology, is hectoring people over their lifestyle and ‘consumerism’ because of ‘climate’.  Why would anyone put up with this charade?  When King Climate sells his assets, dons the hairshirt and goes shoeless into nature, maybe then his declarations might carry some validity. 

Consensus fraud and making a sausage

Why the litany of climate-geddon forecast failures?   Fake models, faker data, and philosophy parading as factual science for starters.  Then we have the operational aspects of producing reports outlining the impending climategeddon of the week, month or year, all of which are akin to making a sausage, and all which must use the most ‘extreme’ language possible to get ‘attention’ with each year battling the year previous for outrageous statements of doom and gore.  And in each case the well paid, comfortable, upper middle class and elite which write such reports, happily imbibing almost every minute of their lives the benefits of hydrocarbon energy, mightily declaim against ‘capitalism’ and ‘consumerism’ as they work on $1000 laptops, sitting in upholstered chairs, warm in their heated and quite large homes, overlooking their BMWs and Land Rovers parked outside.

These well clothed Prophets of Climate doom all agree that the end is nigh due to ‘capitalism’ or ‘consumerism’ which somehow has destroyed climate.  Usually, they give us 12 years.  The 12 years charade dates to 1988.  Sometimes the religious intensity is so powerful that 5 years is given, or as a recent UK Prime Minister intoned, the one-minute-to-midnight imagery is invoked.  This has an old history dating back to the 1990s.  Apparently, it takes a very long time for that minute to expiry.  As with most fake-news reporting on ‘climate’, a large part of the material and sermons on the end times, are simply recycled from previous announcements and declarations, many of those can be found as far back as the 1920s (peak oil for example).  A reading from the Old Testaments of Climate as it were, interspersed with some new gospels from the New Testament of Climate such as a recent weather event, or a warmer or colder season than usual. 

The climate true in their righteous Jihad against Satanic Co2 and the ‘climate-denying’ heretics who believe not; also believe that they have the overwhelming power of ‘consensus’ on their side.  Real science however is not a game of numbers.  Einstein’s theories were denounced by hundreds of Nazi scientists.  Copernicus was opposed by hundreds of academics whose power and livelihoods were based on Ptolemy’s universe.  Abiogenesis was supported by most post ‘enlightenment’ science.  Semmelweis was murdered for challenging ‘the science’ which disagreed with his views on hospital hygiene, clean sheets and the washing of hands to reduce infection and death.  It is even worse for the climate cult.  They had to invent their consensus, creating yet another fraud.

In 2014 John Cook and some Australian university researchers conducted a search of 11,944 peer reviewed papers on ‘climate change’.  They evaluated the papers position on the same and concluded quite implausibly, that 97% agreed on AGW or anthropocentric global warming which was causing the climate to change for the worse.  But none of it is true.

Richard Tol lead author in the 2014 IPCC report, analysed the data and found quite the opposite.  His research found that only 64 papers out of the 11,944 supported AGW (Energy Policy 73, October 2014 p. 709).  Antony Watts, a meteorologist who runs the world’s most viewed site on Climate Change (Wattsupwiththat.com) asked Cook for his data and was refused most of it.  What he did receive was full of errors, poor data quality, and inconsistent ratings.  This is nothing new with the climate cult, it is famous for fraudulent data.

Englishman Andrew Montford of the Global Warming Policy Foundation analysed Cook’s data commenting on the data errors and that, ‘The survey methodology therefore fails to address the key points that are in dispute in the global warming debate’ (thegwpf.org 2013 ‘What Consensus’).  Another Englishman Sir Christopher Monckton analysed Cook’s data and found that only 41 of the 11,944 endorsed the claim that more than half of recent global warming was anthropogenic.  This means that only 0.5% of the papers analysed by Cook’s team actually supported the idea of AGW. 

A consensus means nothing in science.  However, the fraud of the 97% claim that ‘thousands of scientists’ support AGW or climate change is nonsense and irrelevant anyway.  Very few support AGW and those who do may do so more to get grant money or funding from vested interests, than supporting an objective analysis using a scientific method (there are variations on said method).

Fossil fuels as an example of scientism

Fossil Fuels is a chimera or lie, set up to give the impression of limited supply.  Fossils are only made from a rush of water (a flood) and sand mixing to form a cement.  That has nothing to do with ‘hydrocarbon’ fluid which is the second most plentiful fluid on the planet.  Oil and gas are self-regenerating resources, and we have hundreds of years of supply if not more.  ‘Peak oil’ has been a failed forecast every year since 1920.

Hydrocarbon formation is abiotic not organic:

Oil comprises 85% carbon, 13% hydrogen and 0.5% oxygen with traces of sulphur and nitrogen. Most chemists used to believe it originated from the decomposition of organic matter – layers formed from the remains of dead animals. Hence the name ‘fossil fuel’.

Oil comes from ‘basement rock’, a mile underground, and is well below the fossil layer. Despite conventional wisdom around fossil fuels, the argument for non-biologically produced oil was not a new one.

In 1951, the Russian scientist N.A Kudryavtsev, announced the theory that deep petroleum was produced abiotically. His theories were consolidated with the exploration of the oil fields of Dneiper-Donets in the early 1990s.

World-renowned geologist, C Warren Hunt’s ‘Anhydride’ theory of 1996, asserted the idea of biogenesis from living microbial forms, as opposed to fossilized forms. If oil is constantly replenishing, why should it run out?

The bottom line is that using the term ‘fossil fuels’ is anti-science and irrelevant but is employed for a reason to give the impression of great scarcity and long ages.

Greenhouse Myth

Another pernicious and quite obvious lie is the idea of a ‘Greenhouse’ ceiling, or effect.  In 2007 Philip Stott, emeritus professor of biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London, said climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2 or clouds.  He said: "The system is too complex to say exactly what the effect of cutting back on CO2 production would be or indeed of continuing to produce CO2 and …It is ridiculous to see politicians arguing over whether they will allow the global temperature to rise by 2c or 3c."  Indeed.

The Earth’s climate has undergone some big changes, from global volcanism to planet-cooling ice ages and dramatic shifts in solar radiation. And yet life, for the last 3.7 billion years, has kept on beating.

A recent study by MIT researchers in Science Advances confirms that the planet harbours a “stabilizing feedback” mechanism that acts over hundreds of thousands of years to pull the climate back from the brink, keeping global temperatures within a steady, habitable range.

Just how does it accomplish this? One mechanism is “silicate weathering” — a geological process by which the slow and steady weathering of silicate rocks involves chemical reactions that ultimately draw carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and into ocean sediments, trapping the gas in rocks.

Scientists have long suspected that silicate weathering plays a major role in regulating the Earth’s carbon cycle.  But not much is known about it until recently.  In any event it is ridiculous that any serious person poses the view that Co2, a trace chemical, which falls out of climate processes, is somehow acting as a blanket or ‘greenhouse’ and smothering Gaia with heat. 

Much of the propaganda around GHG is simply junk science, based on a proposition that feedback loops are only positive and multiply at a high rate based on trace chemical accumulation. This theory is simply not backed up by historical records or common sense.  There is much myth and little fact with this argument including the inconvenient truth that 75-90% of ‘greenhouse gases’ is water vapour.  Co2 is maybe 6% of the total, methane 3 or 4%.  There is simply little to no impact from rising Co2 levels.  Also, in the physical, real world, neither water vapour, nor Co2 ‘trap heat’.  It is an outrageous non-science claim to say they do.

Consider your backyard greenhouse.  It works by physically blocking heat transfer (by convection) from inside to outside - the same effect that heats the inside of your car when it's parked in the sun on a hot day.  Opening the doors and windows allows air currents to flow and the heat to dissipate. Neither the atmosphere nor "greenhouse gases" block convection, so there is no atmospheric "greenhouse effect."  Currents and flows are allowed to occur and this naturally would dissipate any ‘heating’.  How does the atmosphere actually work?

·        Incoming solar radiation is partly absorbed by the Earth's surface, partly absorbed by various atmospheric gases (particularly oxygen and ozone) and partly reflected back out to space.

·        Solar radiation isn't significantly absorbed by greenhouse gases in the lower atmosphere and so doesn't directly cause the greenhouse effect.

·        The ‘greenhouse effect’ is largely caused by energy emitted by the Earth's surface, most of which is subsequently absorbed by greenhouse gases and clouds.

·        The greenhouse gases and clouds transform that absorbed energy into heat that warms the lower atmosphere and into energy that is radiated back to space and also back to the Earth's surface.

These radiative processes, if they acted alone, would warm the Earth's atmosphere to about 77 degrees Celsius.  Fortunately, other atmospheric processes including updrafts and circulation carrying heat upwards and toward the poles facilitate energy escape into space so that our atmosphere cools to around 15 degrees Centigrade.  The earth’s average temperature in 2022 is still under 15 C.  Without these complex negative and positive feedback loops and systems, we would indeed be fried on Gaia’s tender, delicate skin.  In essence the idea that humans and our eco-system live in a greenhouse which uses Co2 to grow plant life in controlled conditions, is to be diplomatic, ignorant.

NASA even admits that the most abundant GHG is water vapour….yet Co2 is the trace chemical that controls ‘all climate’ and is ‘blanketing’ poor little Gaia in endless heat.  The nonsense overwhelms.  But scientism is primarily a religion of blind and ignorant dogma.  Worse, it lies and deceives to push its anti-human agenda. 

Climate-Geddon and outrageous fraud. What is climate?

And why is Co2 a Satanic toxin?

Bookmark and Share

 

 

What is climate

National Geographic, one of the cheerleaders of the doom mongering climate cult defines climate:

“Climate isn't the same thing as weather. Weather is the condition of the atmosphere over a short period of time; climate is the average course of weather conditions for a particular location over a period of many years.

One of the factors that influences climate is the angle of the sun's rays.

Climate is also controlled by wind, oceans, and mountains.”

There is no such thing as ‘global climate’ if you read the above carefully.  It is local.  In many regions there are ‘micro-climates’.

Cyclical variations in the Earth’s climate occur at multiple time scales, from years to decades, centuries, and millennia. Cycles at each scale are caused by a variety of physical mechanisms. Climate over any given period is an expression of all of these nested mechanisms and cycles operating together.  https://www.fs.usda.gov/ccrc/education/climate-primer/natural-climate-cycles

Climate is entirely a natural phenomenon, based on natural cycles, immune to the output of a trace chemical and industrialisation. (Link)

Every textbook had the above graph in 1990.  Now the cult is trying to cool the medieval warm period, which was not industrialised, and which did not produce CO2; and add ‘adjustments’ to recent temperature data to get a ‘hockey stick’.  We exited an ice age in 1850.  It would be expected that temperatures today are somewhat warmer than in 1750.  This is a natural variation in temperature. 

 Climate Change as a religious cult

 

 

A common definition of a cult:

1 a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious (see SPURIOUS sense 2)

also: its body of adherents the voodoo cult, a satanic cult: a system of religious beliefs and ritual, also: its body of adherents, the cult of Apollo

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cult

If we use the above definition there is something very wrong, very pagan, even Satanic about Climatism.  The Climate cult is in the main, anti-science, anti-human, and anti-progress.  It is a primitive neo-pagan cult.  It references ‘science’ as its foundation, but it perverts every idea of the scientific method and corrupts factual truth.

Historically, we find climate and nature cults in pre-Roman and pre-Christian societies.  The Druids in Gaul and Britain.  The animist nature worship of Germania and the Baltics.  The storm gods and Baal cults of the very ancient near East.  Gaia worship is nothing new nor unique.  The end of society due to nature’s forces has long been preached.  For man’s sins God wrought the flood and cleansed the earth leaving only Noah and his family.  I wonder what this Old Testament God would make out of the modern world rampant with Sodom and Gomorrah, war and suffering, and nature worship.  Since when does the Catholic Church reject its own liturgy and veneration of the one true God and kneel down and flagellate to Gaia, climate and the odourless, tasteless rounding error chemical that is carbon dioxide? 

Former UN IPCC lead author Richard Tol and among the most cited climate researchers, had this to say about the climate cult at a 2014 US Congressional hearing: ‘The climate has become a new religion, and that people who disagree would be treated as heretics’ (May 29, 2014).  Tol has often commented that there are 25 government ‘agents’ for every researcher in the IPCC meetings to formulate ‘policy’.  An Englishman James Lovelock, who was an ardent true believer in climate penning the usual catastrophic vision of Gaia destruction in his ‘The Revenge of Gaia’, has now apostatised after studying the ‘models’, which are largely useless and produce fake results.  He is now a vigorous critic and describes the green-movement and climate change as ‘a religion, and religions don’t worry too much about facts’ (register.co.uk May 24 2012).

There are thousands of researchers and scientists who have recanted the dogma of the cult of climate and have signed various covenants affirming their heresy.  An example is the World Climate Declaration signed by well over 1100 eminent practitioners.  There is no consensus of anything, except that a consensus that the climate cult is a cult with religious intensity with a ferocious disregard for truth and reality.

https://clintel.org/world-climate-declaration/https://euroweeklynews.com/2022/08/18/scientists-professionals-world-no-climate-emergency/https://www.climatedepot.com/?s=Richard+Tol

Co2 as Satan

 

 

For a trace gas, 0.04% of total atmospheric gas by weight, and necessary for life, Co2 is a busy demonic presence.  Gaia only emits 95% or more, of the 0.04% trace gas.  Apparently, the real issue, the most pressing problem, the great emergency is over the 5% human emission of the 0.04% gas necessary to make oxygen and known as plant food.  Is this something a sensible person would offer as a crisis?

In the context of scientism and the cult of climate it is clear that Co2 is a replacement for the demonic powers found in Christianity, namely Satan and his cohorts of devils.  Co2 is now the new evil power that will destroy man and must itself be destroyed in a battle of good and evil, where Gaia is the virgin innocent, being raped and assaulted by the Satanic Co2. Ride on St. George.  Do your chivalric duty and slay the Satanic dragon before he consumes and devours poor Gaia.  To control Co2 the climate cult proposes de-industrialisation and a world governance model and the complete control by government, of all sources of energy, only allowing what they incorrectly call ‘green energy’, which is nothing of the kind.   

In this new eco-biblical war against the Satanic and demonic Co2 we must commit to our rituals, sacrifices and climate oblations.  In the ancient world, the entrails of animals, astrological signs, the movement of stars, an eclipse, human sacrifices, animal sacrifices, the scape goat offering, ordeals with cold and hot water, the erection of monoliths and the ceremonies at solstice within; along with many other devices were used to either perceive what the nature Gods demanded or were enacted to propitiate the various nature Gods with blood and death.  Historians often refer to such pagan cult civilisations including the Greek and Roman as ‘golden ages of classical learning’.

To ward off the demonic trace chemical, the climate cult has its own sacrifices (the industrialised world).  Co2 is not just a gas but a magical force, always looking to destroy and maim.  This power can cause anything and everything.  From fewer hurricanes to more.  From fewer polar bears to fat happy quintupling populations of bears.  The Satanic powers of the gas extend to oceanic warming or cooling, El Nino, La Nina, the Atlantic gulf stream which may be stronger, weaker or in danger of dying depending on the year, the calving or expanding of Antarctic ice sheets, volcanoes erupting or doing nothing, the expansion or reduction of the Arctic, violent storms, earthquakes, weather events, hot summers, cold summers, cold winters, more snow, less snow, mild winters, a pending Ice Age, a pending climate hell of heat, windy days, days without wind, too much rain, a lack of rain, the population variations and migrations of butterflies, armadillos, bees, badgers, foxes, song birds, puffins and deer. 

The demonic black magic of Co2 is breath taking.  It rivals God in its immensity.  And there is no scarcity of the climate Elijah’s, Isaiah’s, and Nehemiah’s, or modern Druids, to proclaim the end of the world unless repentance and penance are adopted by the mass who must sacrifice and fight against the greatest Satanic evil in history - Co2.

What is Co2

1.      A colourless, odourless, incombustible gas, CO2, that is formed during respiration, combustion, and organic decomposition, is an essential component in photosynthesis, and is used in food refrigeration, carbonated beverages, inert atmospheres, fire extinguishers, and aerosols.

2.      The normal oxide of carbon, CO2; a colorless, odorlessgas formed during respiration and combustion and consumed by plants during photosynthesis.

3.      a heavy odourless colourless gas formed during respiration and by the decomposition of organic substances; absorbed from the air by plants in photosynthesis

https://www.wordnik.com/words/carbon%20dioxide

Co2 is a trace chemical, 0.04% gas by weight within the atmosphere.  It falls out of climate convection systems.  Mother earth emits 95% of Co2.  If we eliminated all of mankind (a goal of many Green Communists), nothing would happen to the temperature.  Nothing.

  

 

Nature absorbs 98.5% of the CO2 that is emitted by nature and man. As CO2 increases in the atmosphere, nature causes plant growth to increase via photosynthesis which is an endothermic (cooling) reaction.  Therefore there is not a uni-directional ‘heating’ process from CO2.  For every pound of biomass formed some 10,000 Btu are removed from the atmosphere. CO2 is absorbed, and oxygen is produced. Further, a doubling of CO2 will increase the photosynthesis rate by 30 to 100%, depending on temperature and available moisture.  Improving the output of oxygen is hardly a ‘crisis’ or a reason to de-industrialise. 

The climate cult has also violated the second law of thermodynamics by saying a cooler atmosphere can warm a warmer earth.  We heard this for 2 decades with the ‘coming Ice Age’.  You still hear it today when there is a cold winter.  The cult will say, ‘of course the changing or warming causes it to be colder’, by referencing the endothermic aspects of CO2 interacting with the atmosphere.  This seems rather inconsistent with the ‘climate hell’ of massive heating which the cult also proclaims.  In general there is no ‘greenhouse’ ceiling as given by the propaganda.  Heated particles can rise and escape the upper atmosphere.  There are complex systems of positive and negative feedback loops giving lie to the simplistic idea that a linear relationship exists between Co2 and temperature.

https://energycentral.com/c/gn/man-made-co2-global-warming-fraud

Pearch, R.W. and Bjorkman, O., "Physiological effects", in Lemon, E.R. (ed.), CO 2 and Plants: The Response of Plants to Rising Levels of Atmospheric CO2, (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1983), pp 65-1055.

 
What emergency?

A recent Fairleigh Dickinson Univ Poll was conducted (Autumn 2022), of 400 individuals with a background and expertise in meteorology, climatology, and closely related fields. Interviews were carried out online in September and October of 2022.  Over half of those surveyed said there was no emergency. 

46 percent say such events have increased slightly. An additional 10 percent believe there has been no change, or there has been a slight decrease in the severity of weather events.  Age plays a key factor in perceptions. Across 4 of the 5 key measures, those 50 and older are less likely than those 30 and under to believe the effects of climate change is or will be severe. https://www.heartland.org/_template-assets/documents/FDU-Poll-Climate-Scientists-Heartland-Institute-2022.pdf

The younger ‘scientists’ are quite susceptible to the propaganda.  The older and more experienced are sceptical.  Why should I trust a 30-year-old with anything to do with ‘science’, ‘models’, or ‘predictions’?  What do they know? There are thousands of scientists and practical experts and practitioners who do not buy into the hysteria that plant food or ‘carbon’ is killing Gaia.  Apparently, the warming was dead and buried in 2012.  At that point the cult moved on to ‘climate change’ and have spent billions propagating this to the young and impressionable.