While people in Pakistan struggle with their devastation, the UN chief has burned some fossil fuel to make sure he doesn’t miss an advertising opportunity. The poor of Pakistan need homes, medicine and food, but he wants to sell carbon schemes and solar panels. You rich sinner, you. Give us your money! The Almighty, I mean Nature itself (!) is striking back and if we don’t pay the UN enough and send more tithes to Big-Government supporters like the Renewables Industry then more people will die!
In a new scientific discovery Professor-cum-Saint-Guterres also declared 100% flood attribution to man-made CO2. This is not something the glorious Experts of the UN have ever announced, and nor will they, because it’s scientifically preposterous — but they will not correct him, because their role was never about getting the science right, just about being the window-dressing for the money grab.
Pagan witchdoctors never had it so good:
In flood-hit Pakistan, Guterres appeals for ‘massive’ global support, tougher action on climate change
“[We] have all seen media images of the extraordinary destruction. I can only imagine the power and ferocity of the water as it bore down on villages, roads, bridges and everything else in its path. It was clearly terrifying – a wall of water.” Mr. Guterres said, adding: “No country deserves this fate, but particularly not countries like Pakistan that have done almost nothing to contribute to global warming.”
If you disagree with my estimate of climate sensitivity you are not even human:
Indeed, the UN chief stressed that Pakistan and other developing countries – from the Horn of Africa to the Sahel – are paying a horrific price for the intransigence of big emitters that continue to bet on fossil fuels, in the face of science, common sense and basic human decency.
Fire and brimstone will raineth down on your suicidal cult, says man holding a windmill up to stop the storms, and telling his followers they can survive winter under snow covered solar panels:
Even today, emissions are rising as people die in floods and famines. “This is insanity,” stated the Secretary-General. “This is collective suicide,” he added, calling for an end to the “war with nature” and urging more investment in renewable energy.
Doom is all around us, and this is caused by your car. I will stop the floods!
‘Nature is striking back’
Speaking next directly to the international community, Mr. Guterres said: “Pakistan needs massive financial support to respond to this crisis that have costed, according to some estimates that I’ve heard today, about $30 billion and counting.”
The Secretary General warned that loss and damage from the climate crisis is not a future event, “it is happening now, all around us,” and he urged governments to address this issue at COP 27 with the seriousness it deserves.
He warned that “we are heading into a disaster…we have waged war on nature, and nature is striking back, and striking back in a devastating way.”
Guterres is utterly shameless. The people of Pakistan need real help not solar panels and windmills.
Why don’t we offer to buy Pakistan’s nukes at a good price?
430
I am sure I will not be the only one to comment that since independence Pakistan has grown from 40 million people to 240 million today. Add in the infrastructure that goes with this vast increase, many of whom will be living in vulnerable areas, deforestation, change of land use, new dams etc etc and the potential for flooding disasters is unfortunately huge.
If Pakistan can spend money on Nuclear arms then it can divert money to safeguard its rapidly rising population.
Pakistan would have to enjoy the best climate ever in order to accommodate the changes, human and the built environment, since achieving independence.
670
Are there any countries not already deeply in debt?
250
Yes – there are some seriously wealthy nations:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_international_investment_position
If you include Hong Kong and Taiwan in China then Chine is top of the pile.
Then Japan just pips Germany for second.
US is by far the highest debtor nation. That is the benefit of being the global banker for more than half a century. You can never go broke while you crate the global currency. It is the reason the BRICS alliance was formed so they could trade with each other without the US taking its cut.
The US will be in for a shock when they are eventually forced to live within their means:
https://www.bea.gov/system/files/intinv122-mainchart.PNG
61
By nature of geography, a subject which used to be taught in schools back in the day, southwest Pakistan is subject to a monsoon season and flooding. Some years are worse than others. This happens to be a “bad” year with heavy rain, made worse by the La Niña weather pattern.
If people want to live in flood-prone areas that is up to them, but being flooded will ALWAYS be the expectation, it is not “climate change”.
Pakistan has:
1) a nuclear weapons program.
2) five commercial nuclear power reactors.
3) a space programme.
Australia has none of those.
Pakistan doesn’t need our money.
Perhaps send the money to us instead.
Donald Trump recognised the above and stopped sending them US taxpayer money because obviously they no longer need it if they can afford 1, 2 and 3 above.
This is an attempt to reinstate the funding that President Trump rightly stopped.
750
It’s time the UK also stopped sending £££billions foreign aid to Pakistan & India.
The one’s as bad as the other.
It’s also high time that China’s claim to developing nation status + all the benefits was canned as well.
Those opinions however clash with the Globalist narratives which are aimed at the demolition of the Western economies!
550
UK foreign aid to India is only £50 million. Pakistan is £200 million.
614
“Pakistan is £200 million.”
Is that to help pay for the nuke weapons.. or does it all end up in oligarchs’ coffers..
… because basically NONE of it reaches where its needed.. eg flood mitigation.
270
One of the reasons that Asian countries can support large populations is that they do live on flood plains that are frequently inundated by waters and silt from the Himalayas. Free fertilizer has a cost but the benefits are massive. Look for comparison with the effects of building the Aswan High Dam which stops the nutrient rich silt carried by the Nile from reaching the fertile flood plains along the river and in the delta. Egypt now spends a fortune to buy artificial fertilizers which don’t contain the minerals in silt. No flood but no free fertilizer either.
00
All the more reason to stop funding terrorist-supporting, nuclear armed, space faring, nuclear powered Pakistan.
Once again, President Trump was spot on with his decision to stop giving them money taken from US taxpayers.
I don’t see India as a major threat to the West as is Pakistan.
400
Well said Simopn. 50 and 100million too much!
00
evil colonial power send billions in foreign aid!
now how much of that do you think ends up in the hands of the people who actually need it?
00
Plus, I forgot to mention perhaps the most important matter of all.
Pakistan is a major funder of terrorism.
610
Given half a chance the ALP would also be funding terrorism thru their “aid” to the Palestinian “State “.
350
The ALP don’t need to fund overseas operations, they just implement ALP policies in Australia.
240
LOL…just behind the #1 record holder USA…
919
It was roughly 8% of the land flooded, not a third, and there have been periodic worse inundations in the past and far greater loss of life, despite there being many more people now.
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2022/09/05/pakistan-floods-is-a-third-really-submerged/
510
The UN has outlived its usefulness and become a bloated, troublemaking talking shop. It should be disbanded.
560
“The UN has outlived its usefulness and become a bloated, troublemaking talking shop. It should be disbanded.”
This seems to have escaped attention here as far from seeking money from Pakistan, the UN is engaged in giving money to Pakistan
A $160 million emergency plan to help Pakistan deal with devastating flooding has been launched by the United Nations, aiming to reach “5.2 million of the most vulnerable people in the country”.
https://news.un.org/en/story/2022/08/1125752
“Pakistan 2022 Floods Response Plan: 01 Sep 2022 – 28 Feb 2023 (Issued 30 Aug 2022)
https://reliefweb.int/report/pakistan/pakistan-2022-floods-response-plan-01-sep-2022-28-feb-2023-issued-30-aug-2022
112
Really?
The UN has no money to give anyone, except what it receives from other countries populace, which is obtained by taxation.
Essentially, the UN “redistributes wealth” according to political whim.
That Pakistan is poor may relate to their expenditures on weapons, graft, corruption, and funding of terrorism.
That the Pakistani poor populate flood plains is a function of planning and allowance by Pakistan, not the UN.
Is the UN somehow responsible to pay for the poor choices of global nations that see the UN as a bottomless piggy bank to bail out the results of their own poor choices using sociological and psychological blackmail? Pakistan chose what to fund and what to allow. That is their problem, not mine.
230
“A $160 million emergency plan ”
So, basically nothing !
And yet they want $100 billion or so for wind and solar and other “net zero” scams..
How about they spent that climate con money on something that will actually help.!
80
Aren’t all the “good” countries already sending everything to Ukraine to support there UN puppet comedian?
282
Why aren’t the UN concerned with similar monsoon flooding in India and Bangladesh?
Is it because those countries are not a direct threat to the West via nuclear weapons and terrorism as Pakistan is?
And who gave refuge to bin Laden?
The UN is trying to support a direct enemy of the West, as you would expect the UN to do.
And how about the China-Pakistan bioweapons co-operation?
https://m.economictimes.com/news/defence/china-pakistan-enter-secret-deal-to-expand-bio-warfare-tools-says-an-australian-investigative-journalist/articleshow/77164486.cms
SEE LINK FOR REST
310
Nature is Striking Back!” Fake Saint Guterres exploits Pakistan’s pain to sell his climate religion and ask for money
This headline and the article it heads berates the UN Secretary General for “exploiting Pakistan’s pain and asking for money”
On the other hand your comment states:
“The UN is trying to support a direct enemy of the West, as you would expect the UN to do.”
It seems that whatever stance the UN takes it will be wrong.
08
Wrong.
30
” It seems that whatever stance the UN takes it will be wrong ” .. Jo never made any such argument and you take no position on Antonio Guterres ridiculous sermon
30
“And that’s where the moral dilemma brick wall pops up for Christians in particular, since within the Bible’s 10 Commandments, there is one that forbids making false accusations about others.
Which is the bigger sin? Failing to act in stopping global warming, or prompting others to ignore skeptic climate scientists by telling them that those skeptics are immoral industry-paid ‘liars for hire’?”
(My emphasis)
More at
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/09/11/the-religious-moral-dilemma-that-drives-the-moral-imperative-to-stop-global-warming-into-a-brick-wall/
150
It’s not the only violation. 1st of the Ten: “No other gods before Me.” That means gaia/nature/the earth/the environment/themselves.
Moreover, many scriptures also prohibit priest craft. Priest craft is where men set themselves up as priests in order to get money and the praise of the world. All the virtue signalling. All that money. Trillions.
Is that not what this is all really about?
91
In the USA, at least, a state religion, or a religion supported by taxation and Gov. is also unconstitutional. CAGW is a religion as far I can see.
171
The Northern Hemisphere summer is maybe a little hotter than average.
But why is the Southern Hemisphere so much colder than average.
Unite the temperatures and you may find the global average is normal.
Is there a slight tilt?
270
No tilt, La Nina cools Australia with an increase in H2O, warmer nights and cooler days. Also blocking high pressure, too far south for this time of year, is bringing chilly winds from Antartica.
http://www.bom.gov.au/fwo/IDY65100.pdf
In the Northern Hemisphere blocking has caused the heatwaves, fires and increasing temperatures.
111
There is more than a slight tilt. Ive mentioned this before but timely for a rerun. We have lived in current house for 24 years facing east. The balcony has a great view and we have numerous trees spaced between and behind the lower level houses over which we can survey the horizon. From about year 5 I started to notice during the winter months that the rising of the sun was getting further and further past where I had previously noticed it rising during winter. This arc has continued to increase and now (using the clock face as the easiest example) ranges from 1 oclock during summer to 10 oclock at the height of winter. The arc used to be something like 1 oclock to just before 11 oclock. In fact this winter the sun got slightly past the 10 oclock marker tree and is now racing back and is already close to 11 oclock.
It will be interesting to see if it goes any distance past the 1 oclock tree this summer.
20
I was going to say that the post stood by itself as a brilliant statement: then after reading the comments above had to include them: the whole thread really takes off!
And looking over all of that is Jo’s very appropriate depiction of a Gretanuerreic figure; go the U.N.
230
The UN is awash in other people’s money so why not spend some of that? I am sure Guterres could find the dough if he rescheduled some of his other wasteful practices. After all the UN has not stopped any of the wars it was formed to prevent.
240
The UN is awash with Gates’s money; second largest contributor after the US. But there is no profit in stopping poor people in far away places drowning.
10
Of course, it will surprise no one that António Manuel de Oliveira Guterres is or was:
1) a member of the Portugese Socialist Party.
2) president of the Socialist International from 1999 to 2005.
300
Piers Corbyn saying it like it is. What astounds me is how obvious it is that it’s a weather pattern that has happened before with no evidence that link it to human emissions, and yet it’s The Science.
360
The interviewer didn’t like what he was hearing.
Must have gotten Piers confused with his brother.
100
Piers did very well. He has to actually earn his living from his weather forecasts, unlike the carpetbaggers, parasites and alarmists of the climate change movement. The latter rely on the UN and govts to provide money, which they corruptly do, no strings attached. No problem to see here though according to our press, move on…
40
A more nuanced view can be found here: https://theconversation.com/pakistan-floods-what-role-did-climate-change-play-189833
In context, August rainfall was an unprecedented 500-700% higher than normal.
238
There’s that word again, “unprecedented”. it get used a surprising amount when talking about subjects for which the “science is settled”.
For an event so massive, there has been remarkably little in blogs and the media about the effects or potential effects of Hunga-Tonga on weather, and indeed climate, It was, after all, the most energetic volcanic eruption since Krakatoa.
270
Quoting the conversation as a credible source is laughable considering its philosophy is the same as the UN. Politically, it is a trash bag of far left eco lunatic types who may have PhD after their namesbut unfortunately are the product of our poor education system. Making assertions is not science. but that is what they do.
201
There has been a lot of discussion about Hunga-Tonga if you know where to look. It increased the amount of water vapour in the stratosphere by something like 50% and yes, that will have a warming effect. Very different from your ‘typical’ large volcanic eruption which throws aerosols into the atmosphere (short-term cooling) and maybe lots of CO2 (long-term warming).
122
“CO2 (long-term warming).”
There is absolutely no scientific evidence for that baseless propaganda conjecture.
The Warmist’s continued inability to produce anything evidentiary and factual that proves the validity of their point, is proof that their protestations are nothing but cult mantra.
[wee edit. – LVA]
191
srsly?
What is your basis for these remarks?
017
Seriously?
We are still waiting !
So far zero science.
Just links to the nebulous non-science mantra of WG1.
10
There is none. He’s a stuck record, repeating something over and over again in the vain hope that one day it might be true.
116
“There is none”
Yes, I know that.. No evidence at all.
Thanks for finally realising that fact.
Still waiting for the scientific evidence.
Repeating over and over because I know you will never actually be able to produce any. 🙂
Balls in your court.. and we are still waiting for actual science.
Dodge and weave 😉
110
For the record, Simon and Peter, everyone here can see that you don’t respond with evidence to b.nice’s requests.
The evidence for CAGW is overwhelming right? it’s just that neither of you can find it, despite thousands of professors to help you. It’s your religion…
No more bluster on this point, and maybe both of you would like to explain whether you have any financial conflicts of interest in this discussion.
230
“financial conflicts of interest in this discussion.”
Or past financial conflicts of interest in this discussion.
e.g. Employment relying on adherence to the CO2 CAGW meme, or contract work dependent on that area.
70
on the contrary, we have responded with links to literally thousands of published papers proving the the mechanism, I have yet to see anything to disprove those papers, and certainly not here.
As to financial links. I am funded by Heartland.
19
“Thousands of papers” — yet you can’t name the instrument that shows a cause and effect link between man-made CO2 and temperatures on Earth. Ultimately all you have are broken conglomerate models which are skillless in water vapor, long term trends, rainfall, and cloud cover.
OK. So what do Heartland pay you to do? And which Heartland are you referring too?
170
“you have any financial conflicts of interest in this discussion.”
Which is something I most definitely do not have, except that I would prefer my electricity to be reliable an cheap..
.. and I hate seeing those ugly wind turbines destroying once-pleasant views and wasting so much money that could be spent on many other worthwhile things.
70
US EPA, NASA, NHM… how many do you want.
the tobacco one (Heartland that is)
02
the ‘mechanism’ is the hypothesis that co2 causes runaway global warming.
but you have not provided evidence sufficient to prove that hypothesis.
that is because said evidence does not exist:
1. there is no evidence of runaway global warming or the predicted hotspot.
2. there are no reliable measurements (which is actually a condition precedent required to prove 1)
3. no validated or falsifiable models (they provide projections, not predictions).
so cagw remains unproven speculation.
60
“links to literally thousands of published papers proving the the mechanism “
Well no, you haven’t.
Plenty “postulating” a mechanism, following the climate mantra,
.. but actual proof.. nope.
WG1 contains no such proof, anywhere, just baseless “belief”.
Just one paper will do…
Not postulating, not theorising, not models… actual real data and measurements.
Here is your chance. 😉
30
Ad-hom? How did you describe this “ Fake Saint Guterres”?
02
I back up my insults with reasons. You use insults as your reason. That’s the difference between an insult and an Ad Hom.
Note the form of the sentences — an insult is just a colorful description as long as the commentator has evidence that it applies. (I called Guterres a Fake Saint because he is telling us he can control the weather if we do what he says). But saying someone is wrong because they are (an insult) proves nothing at all, and is an ad hom.
40
“how many do you want.”
Funny watching you blustering and calling to quangos that rely almost entirely on supporting the AGW meme to survive.
…but STILL not putting forward a single paper that actually contains any actual scientific evidence. 🙂
Making provably incorrect mantra statements.. eg “This means that it causes an effect like the glass in a greenhouse, trapping heat and warming up the inside.”
How can any group purporting to use science make such a ludicrous anti-science statement !
Are they aiming their comments at scientifically illiterate school children ?
40
There is 120+ years of scientific theory and evidence showing that climate is strongly affected by the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. b.nice has to provide evidence to the contrary. There hasn’t been a paper in a significant journal contradicting the greenhouse gas warming effect in decades, so he will struggle.
011
You want our money to solve your “cause” — you provide the evidence.
As I said, there is so much evidence (according to you) that you can’t name it. We can all see through your transparent bluff…
170
Well present a paper that proves CO2 causes warming
Still waiting !
Not “theoretical”, ignoring everything else happening in the atmosphere, and pretending that the only movement of energy is by radiation…
.. Actual REAL data !!
50
There hasn’t been a paper in a significant journal proving by data and measurement that CO2 warming even exists.
The fact that you still cannot produce one, after all your bluster, just reinforces that point.
The fact is that warming by atmospheric CO2 has NEVER been observed or measured anywhere on the planet… period.
It only exists in models and inadequately understood theory.
50
Geez Jo, do you really want a literature review?
Arrhenius (1896) “On the influence of carbonic acid in the air upon the temperature of the ground”
Callendar (1938) “The artificial production of carbon dioxide and its influence on temperature”
Manabe & Wetherald (1967) “Thermal Equilibrium of the Atmosphere with a Given Distribution of Relative Humidity”
The Charney Report (1979)
Parmesan (2003) “A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change impacts across natural systems“
Held & Sodon (2006) “ Robust responses of the hydrological cycle to global warming“
All of the IPCC Reports.
There is a greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_consensus_on_climate_change
https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/
15
CONSENSUS.. Is that all you have
None of those paper contains actual proof.
They all accept the conjecture and model it
Arhenius.. conjecture.. no atmospheric measurements at all… not proof.
Manabe… “Our model does not have the extreme sensitivity of atmospheric temperature to changes of CO2″
Charney.. first line in summary, “We examine principle attempts to simulate….
Parmesan.. Warming , but no evidence caused by CO2 (he did show that plants grow better with CO2 and warmth, though.)
Held and Sodon.. “We use the archive of coupled climate models results organized by”
Thank you so much for presenting a load of conjectures and models based on conjectures..
ZERO out of 5 for actual scientific evidence!.
Oh, and did you know, the word “consensus” has absolutely zero meaning in any real science.
90
1. no paper showing evidence of runaway global warming or the predicted hotspot (current temperatures are consistent with the null hypothesis: natural climate change).
2. no paper showing reliable measurements (a condition precedent required to prove 1)
3. no paper showing validated or falsifiable models (they provide projections, not predictions).
4. “greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature”; which is a straw man fallacy, as no one denies humans cause climate change. the question is whether their co2 emissions cause runaway global warming, which is a question that can only be addressed to relevantly qualified atmospheric physicists.
40
No DLK, no. 4 is a Bandwagon Fallacy also known as ” Appeal to Consensus ” …A Straw Man fallacy is contingent upon the misrepresentation of an opponents argument ..Simon just trotted out the figure without thinking or researching its veracity
40
I’ll add to the literature review.
Rasool and Schneider 1971.
Even for an increase of CO2 by a factor of 10 , the temperature increase does not exceed 2°K.
Schneider changed his mind from we must decarbonize the world to stop global cooling to we must decarbonize the world to stop global warming, then became South Australia’s Thinker in Residence to teach us The Science.
None of this settled science has on single paragraph that can link the flooding in Pakistan to anyone’s SUV.
30
Tell us again who is struggling Simon …Well Jo and ‘moderators ‘ I left a few punctuation errors so they can be used as a pretext to ‘moderate ‘ my comments into oblivion
The evidence is all here though And more ……And its not “all good ”
https://thepostil.com/greta-thunberg-and-eco-eugenics/
01
Rasool and Schneider 1971.
A paper full of assumptions about clouds.. the atmospheric model used is simplistic at best.. reality does not even enter into their “study”
eg “As indicated by Table 1, one-half of Earth is considered to be cloud-covered at an effective altitude of 5.5km.. The cloud is assumed to be “black” to infrared radiation and therefore, the outgoing flux from Earth over the cloudy region is computed only from the cloud top and the atmosphere above the cloud level…. etc etc.
Its NOT REAL..
… and again seems to assume that only radiation moves energy in the atmosphere, an assumption so divorced from reality that the paper can be dismissed as nothing but baseless theoretical musings.
20
further on Rasool and Schneider.
They say “The effect of increase in CO2 is to reduce the outgoing infrared to space”
Yes, in a tiny thin weak band of radiation.
But actual measurements show that that decrease in more than balanced by an increase in the radiation in the atmospheric window.
https://i.ibb.co/WBzWpZz/radiative-change-2.jpg
They obviously made erroneous assumptions about radiation in the atmosphere…
… but erroneous assumptions are the whole basis of the AGW meme.
30
Congratulations, you found one of the contain 0.5%.Take a look at the citation history to see how influential it has been.
02
And you have found absolutely nothing as usual.
Again, proving my point.. Thank you ! 🙂
20
“Take a look at the citation history to see how influential it has been.”
For your information… Science is NOT a beauty contest !
20
I tweaked it Jo so whats the problem ?
…
00
Has your tweaked reply disappeared? I saw only responses that discussed moderation.
00
Apparently, it was settled science 7 decades earlier.
Politics and funding determine how many papers get published, not good science. R&S is crap but it highlights that it was not settled science until politics intervened.
00
perhaps I can assist:
1. those positing a claim must provide evidence to justify it.
2. there is no evidence to justify the claim that co2 will lead to catastrophic global warming.
e.g.
A. temperature records are too short and are not reliable (the measurement problem).
B. climate models are not falsifiable and so not science (by their own admission)
C. the CAGW hypothesis fails on its own terms (eg no hot spot; even accepting that co2 causes warming, without speculative positive feedbacks, co2 only leads to a 1 degree temperature increase per doubling of co2).
90
and your proof for the statements is?
oh and by the way, notrickszone is not evidential
08
A pitiful Ad Hom. Notrickszone quotes peer reviewed papers. You can’t neutralize all of them because they were discussed on a website. In your brain it’s almost like NoTricksZone has this incredible effect where any paper linked there and all the observations within are instantly rendered null and void. Pierre has quoted the IPCC, so are they vaporized scientifically too?
130
1. I am pointing out a failure to provide evidence, not positing a claim, therefore I do not have to provide proof.
2. Reversing the onus of proof is a fallacy (the matters stipulated are things you need to prove in order to justify your claim).
3. the testimony of Prof. Dr. Horst-Joachim Lüdecke quoted by notrickszone is most certainly evidential.
90
“notrickszone is not evidential’
Ah.. so now you are saying that peer-reviewed papers are not evidence.. because that is what Pierre posts. 🙂
Now, where is that paper showing, by measurement and real data, that CO2 causes warming.
Surely you must have one somewhere 😉
30
Then quote the original papers, not opinion
03
Still waiting for that paper that proves by data and measurement, that CO2 causes warming
Stop dithering, and produce it. 😉
30
Now reduced to lying and glorifying yourself ……You are not here to debate in good faith and you and Simon get smashed on every thread
20
“No Tricks Zone ” is a blog and a publisher …..You have vilified the website as ” non evidential ” pathetically bereft of any evidence to back up that assertion, unwittingly vindicating Jo’s criticisms of yourself : ” everyone here can see that you don’t respond with evidence ” …..
[snip, no need]
20
I had read about the water vapour increase.
60
‘ … something like 50% …’
That isn’t correct, its 10% extra H2O in the stratosphere because of Hunga-Tonga.
Not sure about a warming effect, but there has been chatter about a polar vortex.
60
According to NASA its only 10% and the warming will be temporary.
‘The plume released 146 teragrams of water vapor into the stratosphere, which is equivalent to about 10 percent of the total water already in that layer of the atmosphere.’ (Smithsonian Mag)
40
I stand corrected. But yes, there is very little water vapour in the stratosphere and Hunga-Tonga added to it significantly with uncertain effects.
26
We live on a dangerous planet, negative feedbacks as far as the eye can see.
30
Jo . I cannot ” like ” your comment posted September 12 4.41 PM : ” A pitiful Ad Hom “
02
Well I liked it.
I thought it was concise, and totally to the point !. 🙂
20
Then perhaps Simon you can explain how Hunga Tongas sulfate and water vaper aerosol plumes altered the Arabian Sea monsoonal storms that deluged Pakistan but not Indian subcontinent regions that have experienced decreasing rainfall ? Oh that’s right – the “uncertain effects “
20
Water vapor in the stratosphere? Sorry it is cold there and therefore icy and reflective. Not warming at all.
70
” There has been a lot of discussion about Hunga Tonga if you know where to look “.
Yes Jo’s blog explored the eruption and its ramifications for the eastern Australian floods and rain bombs earlier this year . I will let you on a little secret in the annals of paleoclimatology Simon : there was a massive burst of approximately 45 Gigatons of CO2 into the atmosphere sometime between 1330 and 1350 coinciding with the advent of the Little Ice Age and the world continued to cool. The cause was probably an oceanic meteor impact , biomass burning an enormous undersea volcano in the southern hemisphere Or a combination of them ..Those interested can visit Andy May’s website and examine the Antarctic ice core CO2 series to see the 1330 – 1350 AD 45GT bulge for themselves . No “long term warming ” ensued .You have no idea what you are parroting on about Simon
120
The only eruption in that time frame was the Long Valley Caldera, California in 1350.
The start of the LIA began in 1257 when Samalas (Lombok) erupted.
30
el+gordo last I checked there were no upper scale VEI sulfate signals between 1300 and 1343 …..There was a major volcano in 1344 that may need to be adjusted on the Sigl et al radionucleitide anchor redating timescale . That may be the one you are referring to . However the CO2 surge first detected in the cores by Siegenthler et al in 1988 then refined chronologically by Baillie in 2006 , begins AFTER 1330 corresponding with a radiocarbon calibration curve ‘ depletion’ turning point phase circa 1325 -1335 AD …Presumably the result of ” old carbon ‘ emitted from the oceans diluting the atmospheric radiocarbon.
While there are no records in the southern hemisphere ,European chroniclers writing near the time of the Black Death do indeed describe meteor sightings and impacts [ Hecker’s account of the devastation of Cyprus ] mass fish kills , mists obscuring the sun and dead marine animals washed up on the shores ….Yet the 45GT CO2 surge appears in the South Pole ice cores and it just so happens Ted Bryants south east Australian coast paleo -tsunami series shows a sub peak 1300 – 1350 AD …In Fagans book ‘ The Great Warming” he discusses what is known in anthropology circles as ” the 1300 Event ” in the South Pacific that sparked voyagings and population perturbations
71
Sea level was already falling in 1300.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1931-0846.2007.tb00277.x
I think it was Nunn who discussed the tsunami which was caused by an asteroid falling to the south of New Zealand.
10
My error, it was Bryant and we are looking at a comet in the 15th century.
https://ro.uow.edu.au/scipapers/42/
10
Yes it was your error ….And ‘ we are not looking at a comet in the 15th century “
20
Its academic, the theory has been critiqued.
https://www.theage.com.au/national/meteorite-theory-makes-waves-20031219-gdwyps.html
10
Simon – from your “nuanced” Conversation link, we find that — as I predicted — the scientists know Guterres is ranting unscientific gibberish, but they won’t tell him off publicly, because … it’s not about the science, and they are on the same team as people who parasitically misuse and abuse the brand-name of science for power and money.
The Conversation
Ben Clarke, DPhil Candidate in Environmental Research, University of Oxford,
Friederike Otto, Senior lecturer, Imperial College London,
Luke Harrington Senior Lecturer in Climate Change, University of Waikato
They’re all riding the same gravy train.
160
Attribution of individual events is often difficult. What we do know is that warmer air holds more moisture, weather patterns are changing, and that small changes in mean and standard deviation can significantly alter the probability of extreme events.
I have no idea who or what you are accusing of being parasites, that is a very odd thing to say.
28
step 1. assume co2 causes catastrophic global warming
step 2. plug your assumptions from (1) into a climate model.
step 3. run the model and obtain a probability.
step 4. conclude that (1) is occurring because of the results in (3).
how can (4) be falsified? it can’t.
50
Somebody who knows what they ate talking about needs to construct an alternative hypothesis that explains observations. These debates have already been settled.
04
Plenty of evidence and proof that it is solar and cloud variations that have cause the slight by highly beneficial warming
You have yet to come up with anything except an unproven conjecture.. after 120 years. !
A utter failure to produce and actual science.
20
wrong.
10
‘The IPCC states it has only “low confidence” in how much climate change is to blame for increased heavy rains in south Asia.’
That should be the end of the matter, yet the politicians, bureaucrats and MSM claim that its because of global warming. Its patently untrue, observation suggests natural variables are at play.
40
“weather patterns are changing,”
Just like they ALWAYS have.
“probability of extreme events.”
Real data does not show this to be happening. No evidence.
Predictions from the “climate models” are just irrelevant non-science.!
30
Well Simon, tell us why you don’t think they are parasites.
20
” I have no idea who or what you are accusing of being parasites ” ..
.Gaslighting feigned incredulity ..
20
Simon says CO2 causes warming and warming causes more moisture in the air and more moisture in the air causes floods in Pakistan ! So what causes droughts Simon ?
30
Why stop at droughts Robert ? . Almost anything and everything is blamed on global warming We are dealing with a pantomine religion or cult ..This compendium ” A complete list of things caused by global warming ” was last updated years ago ..
10
Why confine your question to droughts Robert and do you expect an honest answer from Simon ? . Almost anything and everything is blamed on global warming .We are dealing with a millenarian cult or pantomine religion .The incredibly funny compendium : ” A complete list of things caused by global warming ” was last updated years ago .The pages managers just gave up as they felt overwhelmed by the increasingly ludicrous claims https://numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm
20
” weather patterns are changing , and that small changes in mean and standard deviation can significantly alter the probability of extreme events ”
Weather patterns have changed for millennia and as for the probability of extreme events how do you explain the decline in climatic disasters globally by a factor of 10% over the last 22 years? Visit Roger Pielkes website and see the UNDRR data for yourself …
10
Oooooh thats so nuanced Simon
11
Give me more of that “nuance ” Simon
20
Similar rain events have happened in the past. They are called monsoons.
Last one this size, in this location, was about 130 years ago… so not unprecedented.
This is a WEATHER EVENT that was forecast by Piers Corbin a couple of years ago.
What is unprecedented is the increase on Pakistanis living on recognised flood plains.
The site Conversation, starts with the word CON.. designed for the perpetually gullible climate cultist..
290
Simon, real scientists don’t use words like “unprecedented” or phrases like “the science is settled”.
That is the language of political propagandists, not real scientists.
Real scientists deal with facts, not opinions.
“Just the facts.” https://youtu.be/Dj6UEQoXHSo
280
Natural variables are implicated, the meandering jet stream is not caused by CO2.
‘Unusual monsoon rains over Pakistan have some predictability. They occur when multiple phenomena coincide, including a La Niña event in the Pacific and large meanders in the high-altitude jet stream, as was the case in both 2010 and this year.
‘There is emerging evidence that this confluence of factors may occur more regularly as the climate changes.’
110
Also the IOD was negative in 2010 and 2022.
60
A more nuanced view would be one which honestly examines all the factors and all the historic data.
140
“nuanced” and “theconversation” is an oxymoron
140
Reading in the link
So.. when did the definition of the word “unprecedented”, get changed.
And then they say this..
ie they need to change their models to show its caused by “climate change”
You do know that their “attribution studies”, are just running two fake models against each other.. don’t you.
So they just change one of the models until they get the answer they want.
Maybe they can then get a “likely”, or “maybe” from their fake results.
The whole of “climate science attribution” is a weird field of scientific fakery, based on the antithesis of real science.
130
‘Unprecedented’ used to mean ‘ never happened before’, now it seems to mean ‘never happened in my lifetime’, by a churnalist born in 1992.
40
Always check the facts when dealing with warmists!
In the link that Simon posts, if you follow a link therein you get to a link with an image showing the “unprecedented” rainfall. In the following link see the image “Rainfall in Pakistan Monsoon 2022” by various regions. Go down the page to find it.
https://floodlist.com/asia/pakistan-floods-update-august-2022
Now go to this link showing average rainfall for all Pakistan from all available historic data from 1920 and click on “MAX”. Nothing seems “unprecedented” at all.
https://tradingeconomics.com/pakistan/precipitation#:~:text=Precipitation%20in%20Pakistan%20averaged%20287.75,of%20187.52%20mm%20in%202018.
161
Because the 2022 data isn’t available yet 🙂
17
Floods this size have happened before.
The whole geomorphology of the area tells you that the region is frequented by large floods.
Even your own link says ““Pakistan last experienced flooding on a similar scale in 2010,””
Much larger event about 130 years ago.
And the WEATHER patterns that created this rainfall event are well known and were predicted. !
Absolutely NOTHING to do with greening by increased atmospheric CO2.
80
And what did they say The Science was a few years ago after the drought?
The average precipitation seems to have a zero trend with yearly variations of the average of the whole country varies from 200 mm to 400 mm, and averages for regions vary by over a factor of 4.
So it’s not surprising that Pakistan’s extremes are used in climate porn.
40
” A more nuanced view ” courtesy of The Conversation website that has an editorial policy of banning climate skeptics contributions in the comments section . “nuanced’ is one of those throat clearing weasel words beloved of sophists like Simon. The 2022 Pakistan floods are by no means ” unprecendented ” as the satellite data map displayed on Paul Homewoods blog indicates nothing like a “third” of the country deluged ..More in the proportion of 8 -10%
Joanne , the Wikipedia page ” History of Pakistan Floods ” only extends , deceptively ,to 1992
60
the [one-way] Conversation states
and links from that statement to a page with the following comment:
link
that page also states:
and
Conclusion: so, based on the reference provided
(1) provinces have “between 200 and almost 800 percent” average rainfall, not 500%-700% as suggested by ‘the conversation’; and
(2) ‘unprecedented’ apparently means back to 1992 in one province; and
(3) insofar as people making a claim are required to provide evidence to support it, this claim is debunked.
100
Simon
The Conversation banned anybody who actually reads the research and looks at the data and concludes that there is no emergency at all, and begs to differ with those alarmists who refuse to acknowledge the past record and use models instead of data to guide them.
Until they allow a full and frank debate, and accept that they may be wrong, then there is no use listening to such people. They allow anything and everything alarmist to come through without any attempt at a proper assessment, and ban properly done research which shows they are incorrect. If you cannot see the danger in this then I cannot help you.
60
Maybe Simon might understand this, or does his pay depend on him not understanding?
There are over 250 river systems in the world. They are not completely independent (some flood at the same time as others) but assuming that they are, then a one in one thousand year flood should happen about every 4 years somewhere on the planet. So you can’t point to a one in a thousand year flood as evidence that it must be due to human emissions. Anyone who starts there is not arguing anything, they’re trying to con you.
And is this a one in a thousand year flood. There are massive floods in Pakistan often. A similarly large one in 1950, 2910 killed. Both 1992 and 3 had massive floods that killed thousands. Was there less rainfall then? While it’s easy to measure rainfall at a specific spot with great precision, it’s not that precise for a whole country, especially when the number of weather stations were so few in 1950 and the claim is the wettest since 1961, when records began.
There is no trend in rainfall, globally. This was due to weather pattern that has happened before.
30
A huge growth on population over the last 50 years, and the rapid growth of settlements within the floodplain..
Of course a major flood is going to be an issue. !
40
Good stuff RB.
Add in that Pakistans population has exploded in the past 50 years or so, and that land clearing and construction of paved roads would have followed this explosion and run off will be far larger than in the past. It would seem that Simon and his fellow travellers insist that we ignore such factors and just luxuriate in the fear.
Another fact. The current death toll is around 1300. Back in 1950 the population was 1/5 – 1/6 of now roughly and 2910 killed. So proportionately to the population we have an impact in the range of 10 times less on the population. Don’t get me wrong, lives lost are terrible but the 1950 event was far more serious by any measure. But you won’t hear any of that in our reckless press.
20
Now that’s nuance!
10
Higher than normal but not unprecedented.
170
In an environmental physics lecture during my first degree, the lecturer was asked about ‘normal’ weather. He pointed out that we might have variation around a mean, but ‘normal’ is a subjective evaluation. If you want ‘normal’ you might have to define a band in which most events, measures, of systems fall. [end of paraphrase]
So, let’s say within two standard deviations of the mean (if this particular fat-tailed distribution has a mean) is normal. Seems the floods are within the ‘normal’ range, on a moving 100 year period (the UN’s 30 year period merely paves the way for propaganda).
40
What I never understand is how people can be so gullible as to believe their obvious proven BS!
Just how do they think CO2 at 0.04% of the atmosphere and a specific heat lower than ordinary air can transmit any significant energy to cause any substantial effect when it has no involvement in any meteorological processes is beyond me.
CO2 can no more cause any substantial meteorological effect than a single match can make you a cup of tea.
340
What a pity this UN idiot can repeatedly tell every lie in the book and always gets away with it.
Pakistan’s population has increased by 3.9 times since 1970 and their life expectancy has increased from 52.3 yrs then to 67.4 years in 2022.
And China is helping them to build brown coal fired power stations to further develop their country’s future.
When will the world call out this clueless fool and his infantile nonsensical claims?
Here’s the Macrotrends link AGAIN and they are using UN data, so this donkey should do more internal research before he yaps again.
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/PAK/pakistan/population
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/PAK/pakistan/population
120
With such a large population it’s almost certain that there’s a large group of Pakistanis with significant wealth, just like Indonesia.
It may surprise many that the higher income groups have more disposable income available than Australians and that they have more cash there to look after their poor.
Strangely, we condescend to care for their poor while they live the high life and probably laugh at us for being so gullible.
30
You’re calling M. Guttieres a “donkey idiot”?
This person who has probably never worked a day in his life, who is undoubtedly on a good income from his mother country and the United Bloody Nations?
He’s a smart guy.
20
Normalising the Collapse
https://xyz.net.au/2022/09/normalising-the-collapse/
The coming Northern Winter may be the winter of discontent! It will likely break many people the ones, initially at least, covid missed! WEF/NWO is why DJT was tricked out of winning the 2020 Election that allowed them to install Biden. Biden, as 2IC to Obama, that created the Russian discontent and war in Ukraine. Team Biden has decimated the US economy and negated American oil production. With The USA on its knees, Europe is already failing but the global elites are flourishing! Australia and NZ mere pawns in the game.
230
So let Guterres give Pakistan all the solar and wind power they need, then sit back and wait for the next naturally occuring monsoon. Then say “now what?”
100
BTW here’s a Wiki list of some of the deadliest floods in recorded history and you’ll note that the loss of life is much greater than we experience today.
For example Pakistan’s 1950 flood killed 2,900 + people compared to the 2022 flood that killed 1396.
Their population in 1950 was about 37 million and today is 235 + million and that’s an increase of over 6 times in the last 72 years.
THINK about it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deadliest_floods
80
Selling Carbon schemes? All these schemes involve some idea that we can ‘bury’ CO2, in plants or in the ground or the ocean or as compounds. Ideas like growing forests.
However it is all fake science. One of the first things you learn about chemistry is the idea of equilibrium which controls all reactions and compositions of mixes, like CO2 dissolved in water. How much is in the water is dependent on how much is on either side and the temperature and at constant pressure, nothing else.
So in the last 30 years we have seen water temperature rise, and CO2 rise by about 14%. NASA as far back as 2016 and the CSIRO also agree that total plant growth, greening has increased by about 14%, an area the size of Australia. Deserts are shrinking. Essential crops are larger. This is blamed on (tiny) global warming. However it demonstrates the truth that more CO2 means more trees.
This also means the ‘biosphere’ of plants is irrelevant to total CO2. So is human output and fossil fuel CO2. This in turn means that sequestration and growing more trees for Carbon Credits is a waste of time. Excess CO2 quickly goes into the ocean.
It was noticeable after the bushfires in NSW. The ocean to the West bloomed. This was alleged to be because ‘nutrients’ fed the phytoplankton. Rubbish. This is the old myth that trees come from the ‘good earth’. 99% of trees and life on earth comes from CO2. More CO2 means more life in the ocean and it also demonstrated how fast excess CO2 disappeared into the Pacific!
So carbon credits are based on very wrong science. Total human CO2 is under 4% and possibly still under 3% (it was 2.3% +/- 0.15% in 1958)
Whether additional and largely invisible CO2 in the air causes slight warming is not known and unlikely. What is certain is that trees and man made CO2 have nothing to do with CO2 levels. It all goes straight into the oceans which cover the planet.
And planetary temperature is determined short term by solar intensity and the vast amount of heat trapped in the massive oceans, 1400x the heat of the air. We humans can change nothing. And carbon credits are like indulgences. Of value only if you have faith.
210
Forget about the biosphere.
We are now dealing with the lunatic-sphere.
120
“lunatic-sphere.”
The climate idiosphere?
60
Or, is there ‘anyone here sphere’?
30
Words like Biosphere and Anthropogenic are just made up words to give credence to carbon dioxide as contained and controlled by living things. Carbon dioxide is just another oxide and a common one. The entire of the Nullabor is calcium carbonate, limestone. The White Cliffs of Dover. Much of England. Even Paris is built on limestone, with massive quarries underneath. Like Rheims where people sheltered and champagne is kept to mature. So much of South Australia along the Limestone coast. It’s a world covered in solid CO2 especially the ocean floors.
The very idea that the set of all living carbon based things dominates and even controls Carbon Dioxide levels is pure fantasy. Organic chemistry is a tiny subset of real chemistry on a gigantic planet, but it affects our lives but the idea that we humans control all physical and inorganic chemistry even on the surface of the planet is just nuts. The oceans, our ancestral origin, are just huge. And they contain 98% of all free CO2.
I wondered about the cargo cults of New Guinea and accepted that stone age people could not understand the richness of European manufacturing. Metals, cloths, foodstuffs, canned food. I never thought that modern educated people would fall for a fantasy like man made Global Warming based on the idea that we humans control a planet and all CO2.
200
Here you are TdeF:
proof of something?
Sinkholes are opening up all over Britain:
They’re appearing at FIVE TIMES their normal rate – must be Climate Change
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2560892/Terrifying-holes-opening-Britain-How-sinkholes-appearing-five-times-normal-rate-bad-weather-mean-havent-seen-them.html
50
A month ago, record drought. Climate Change. Now “after weeks of heavy rain” which is also Climate Change.
This is not the weather. Climate is different. Which is why none of the experts in climate change are meteorologists or geologists. One discipline is too short and the other is too long. Climate Change is the Goldilocks of science.
70
Just as well they haven’t started fracking yet, or it would be getting the blame. Perhaps the sink holes are in anticipation of the effects of fracking.
50
It’s all those leaking water mains that haven’t been repaired or replaced since Queen Victoria was around.
20
Proof of the damage from all that fracking that they’re talking about but haven’t actually done yet
10
Supposed anthropogenic global warming is a cargo cult for the Elites.
The cult delivers to them vast riches in the form of wealth transfer payments for ordinary people to them, typically via electricity bills or taxes non-Elites have to pay.
It is in the interests of the Elites to continue to promote this cargo cult.
80
Both cargo cults are based in ignorance , otherwise it wouldn’t work.
10
I don’t quite understand by what you mean . ..” The ocean to the West bloomed. This was alleged to be because ‘nutrients’ fed the phytoplankton. Rubbish.”
Marine scientists have shown that massive fires in Australia seed phytoplankton with ash, they then photosynthesise drawing CO2 out of the atmosphere and grow rapidly. Just like the blue-green algae in over fertilised lakes and rivers.
It has been established that phytoplankton produces 60% of the global free oxygen . After the big fires three years ago , two massive ‘ islands’ of phytoplankton together grew to the size of Australia, one in the Pacific Ocean and the other in the Southern ocean.
Phytoplankton is the keystone species for marine food chains.
Trees have a massive ecological role, but they are not the be all end all in capturing CO2. If a plant is alive and growing it’s taking up CO2, this includes domestic gardens and that nice green lawn.
20
So, when a Volcano goes off or an earthquake happens, is that Mother Nature or should I just blame my car again?
120
Blame your car. It’s a lot easier than accepting that we humans do not control the planet.
110
I often blame the dog when the dog passes wind especially with that bad egg smell (methane) adding to Global Climate Change or whatever it’s called these days.
62
Methane is odourless, you are smelling hydrogen sulphide (rotton egg smell) and mercaptans.
A typical human fart is about 59 percent nitrogen, 21 percent hydrogen, 9 percent carbon dioxide, 7 percent methane and 4 percent oxygen. About one percent is hydrogen sulphide and mercaptans.
I imagine a dog fart would be somewhat similar.
100
Is that the vegetarian one?
30
I think they were typical average figures.
Another study is here looking at a typical Western diet vs a Mediterranean fibre enriched one which is more vegetarian.
https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/13/8/2638/htm
40
I think there would need to be an adjustment to those percentages if you “follow through”.
20
I stand corrected.
10
And I didn’t know that we could use the word ‘fart’ on this site without being moderated by the AI police………………….
30
David,
Waaay to much information . I can’t even use that for trivial pursuit . You must have eidetic memory to be able to produce that . Wish I had that….
20
“A typical human fart is about 59 percent nitrogen, 21 percent hydrogen, 9 percent carbon dioxide, 7 percent methane and 4 percent oxygen. About one percent is hydrogen sulphide and mercaptans.”
When methane is mentioned as a greenhouse gas, it crosses my mind that methane is a flammable gas, and the example I think of is what happens when some sort of ignition is applied to said fart. Perhaps the combination of hydrogen and methane causes the resulting flame.
20
I’ve seen some burn with a bluish flame when strained through denim.
10
Methane is odourless and colourless! With natural gas, mostly methane, they add another substance to make it smell bad so that if there is a leak people will notice it and not do something foolish like strike a match. They might even arrange to have the leak repaired.
John
80
In other words, invisible. But the religion of Climate Change says invisible gases block light. What really blocks light is the gas H2O, but it is not treated as a Greenhouse gas when it absolutely is the most important greenhouse gas on the planet. So H2O is the controller of our climates, not only because 75% of the planet is covered by water but because all the clouds are water. But we are to believe everything averages out and only CO2 and now CH4 and NO2 matter. I think I see a flight of pigs.
70
I guess it was roughly a 250 to 300 period where bad weather was not blamed on the sins of man.
What should we call it now … the New Age of Scienstition?
Guess the moon didn’t make it to the Seventh House.
And Jupiter didn’t align with Mars.
BTW, very quiet hurricane season on this side of the world.
Don’t say anything.
80
Very quiet cyclone season down under.
Don’t say anything as well.
70
It’s always a long time to the next drought. Except in the UK where six weeks without rain is a drought, not six months.
50
Does anyone really believe that Guterres thinks that Pakistan will now start to deploy more wind and solar ?. We all know that RE is way too expensive for developing countries to deploy on any serious scale, especially when they have their own FF resources that can be developed with local funds and used to boost export earnings. And not to forget that the UNFCC, signed back in 1992, still gives developing countries a free pass on CO2 reductions. Why doesn’t Guterres seek to change that agreement, which has allowed a doubling of CO2 ???. No prize for guessing that answer 🙂
It’s obvious that Guterres is just using these floods to promote the cause as part of their western climate propaganda, to speed up the fall of western economies. When you consider that Russia is a major funding arm of the environmental activist movement and China uses debt diplomacy on smaller nations for pushing the same cause and yet both countries have a priority on producing and using more FF, it’s obvious what game is being played here. For example, countries like Fiji accuse small emitter countries such as Australia for causing sea level rise (Which is not occurring) and at the same time sign huge debt deals with China and yet make no mention of China’s massive emissions. The entire west is being played like a bunch of fools and is led by fools that are influenced by bigger fools.
The main problem we all face is how to stop the rot, rid ourselves of the fools in power and get the adults back in control. Perhaps a big crunch in Europe this winter might start the transition back, but we need one that’s not too big as to cause a total collapse beyond recovery, but large enough to deliver a wake up call to voters.
110
Judging by the demonstrations in Europe e.g. the recent one in Prague, getting rid of the fools in power may be getting underway but as those fools are unelected their removal is difficult.
My opinion is that either the EU abandons the sanctions against Russia and brokers a peace between them & Ukraine by Christmas or the EU will collapse in disorder. Already Hungary has done a deal with Russia over gas supplies.
60
“….we have waged war on nature, and nature is striking back, and striking back in a devastating way.”
Or maybe Mother Nature is just sick of the way they treat women in Pakistan and now it’s payback time.
71
what i see is not so much a ‘war on nature’ as a war on the dignity, rights and freedoms of humanity.
110
Its insanity alright ” ….The IPCC “bible’ Guterres is clutching in the cartoon has for the past three ‘synods’ decreed ” low confidence “in flood trends on a global scale attributable to climate change. He has contravened the IPCC’s holy writ …. Is it worth asking if nature is “striking back ” in an age of deteriorating monsoonal intensity from the zenith of the Holocene Thermal Optimum as the Intertopical Convergence Zone has shifted southward ? . This presentation narrated by Jim Steele is a complete rebuttal of Guterres millenarian fearmongering
” Are Pakistans Floods Your Fault And You Should Pay ?” https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/09/07/are-pakistans-floods-your-fault-and-you-should-pay/
50
Did his long angry tirade about China upset them?
11
My name is really GOD (DOG spelt backwards) so I will now undo all of this nonsense and take the World back to 4.5 Billion years ago. And there is no Adam and Eve so good luck to you all. Bye.
21
It is all about convincing people. That is all that matters. They have convinced the developed world, but environmentalism doesn’t really exist in third world countries, people are too focused on survival, so they must use these events to spread it there. The bonus is the prophet brings news of who is to blame, the rich and white countries.
20
Oh crap, now I’ve got to put the Pakistani flag in my Twitter profile, what’s their flag look like again?………
40
notice how truth as a value has now been replaced with ‘offensiveness’.
so, e.g. dogmas of CAGW and gender can’t be questioned because to ask the question is just too offensive (hence ‘denialism’).
the result of this is to throw us back to the days of the pre-Greek enlightenment when no one was allowed to question ‘the Gods’ because it was too offensive to do so (Aristophanes’ attacks on Euripides and Socrates may be considered a reactionary in this respect).
in other words: replacing ‘truth’ with ‘offensiveness’ as a fundamental social value undoes 2500 years of western progress (and this from those who call themselves ‘progressives’).
20
Haven’t the msm played up the Pakistan flooding, headlines crying one third of Pakistan under water, when it turns out to be more like 12% or so.
Tug on the heartstrings why don’t you.
20
I was at the shops and some hippy was rattling the can saying ‘can you help with the Pakistan flood’, and I told him I didn’t think my garden hose would reach that far.
40
By any chance would that have been his can do you think?
20
Quote:”Guterres is utterly shameless. The people of Pakistan need real help not solar panels and windmills.”
That comment is naive, as a nation founded upon the principles of ideological supremacism, and just like National Socialist Germany, who actively carries out physically the principles of such (at the partition check what % of non muslims lived in Pakistan and
of non-Hindus who lived in India, then look at the %s now. The infidels in Pakistan have dropped markedly due to the constant persecution but the muslims in India have markedly incresed in number.
Pakistan is the 2nd terror nation after Iran (with Turkey sneaking up behind it) but most of its actions are hidden and discrete as it does not wish to openly spit in the face of the stupidly naive western countries who constantly bail out yet another muslim disaster sewer.
I would not give Pakistan one cent.
30
Floods happen. It is called ” CLIMATE”.
10
As I wrote as the Title of a video I recorded on my own channel; “Give Pakistan cash for Flood Repair? Not a Plugged Nickel’
Unfortunately, the right-wing doesn’t get much achieved in the UK today, as we heard that GB&NI just shelled out sixteen million quid for this ‘Disaster’, with more to follow.
Its just like that film with Danny de Vito:- “Its just Other People’s Money”!
00
[…] https://joannenova.com.au/2022/09/nature-is-striking-back-fake-saint-guterres-exploits-pakistans-pai… […]
00
An attribution study of the Pakistan floods is now available. The event is estimated at a probability of 1 in 100 in today’s climate and the 5-day maximum rainfall over Sindh and Balochistan is about 75% more intense than it would have been had the climate not warmed by 1.2C.
https://www.worldweatherattribution.org/climate-change-likely-increased-extreme-monsoon-rainfall-flooding-highly-vulnerable-communities-in-pakistan/
00
You do know how their “attribution” studies work, don’t you ?
They run one FAKE model against another FAKE model..
They can program any FAKE scenario into those models that they want. eg warming by atmospheric CO2.
Hence get any outcome that they want.
This is NOT science.. it is nonsense.
00
The whole methodology is fundamentally flawed from a mathematical/statistical perspective as well.. and has been from the start..
https://judithcurry.com/2021/08/18/the-ipccs-attribution-methodology-is-fundamentally-flawed/
00
From their own pages..
“To attribute the change to anthropogenic emissions (or not), as many climate models as possible are being used. “
Sorry, but combining the output of many JUNK models, does not save the results from being utter fantasy.. in fact.. it contributes to it.
Meaningless and irrelevant are some suitable words to use.
00
Or as Obama’s Climate Scientist, Steve Koonin put it:
Reality is found in REAL data and measurements.. which show that, as Crowded House sang,”It’s Only Natural”
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2022/09/16/pakistan-floods-likely-made-worse-by-warming-bbc/#more-58559
10