Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Point out news stories, on the net or in mainstream media, related to polywell fusion.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

pbelter
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:52 am

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by pbelter »

The scam starts to crumble as those who don't buy it took over.

http://www.climatedepot.com/2017/01/20/ ... oon-today/
Meteorologist and Weather Channel Founder John Coleman had one word to describe the White House climate website changes. ‘Hooray!'

choff
Posts: 2435
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by choff »

The Greenies will need something new to scare us into coughing up tax dollars.

Global Pandemics anyone?
CHoff

paperburn1
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
Location: Third rock from the sun.

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by paperburn1 »

We are in the middle of one right now. Who among you has not had this crud that has been going around.
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.

NotAPhysicist
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2015 9:51 am

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by NotAPhysicist »

The scam starts to crumble as those who don't buy it took over.
Yes, the new president doesn't believe..
Not exactly convincing proof.
Pretending something isn't real doesn't make it not real.
Which is more or less fine until that thing happens to be important.
Well, eventually we will see.
Let us all hope that AGW is a giant global spanning conspiracy of mis-information and alarmism hey, becuase if it happens not to be we might well all be in a lot of trouble. Fortunately, unlike the relatively rapid turn around on CFCs, by the time it becomes so obviously apparent that there is a problem the lag time on a solution will be long enough it will be too late to reasonable do anything about it so we can all suffer horribly as a result. Good good.
The Greenies will need something new to scare us into coughing up tax dollars.
Global Pandemics anyone?
You mean those things people work feaverishly to prevent. Yes, lets not worry about that possibilty either hey, cut off medical research funding, increase excessive antibiotic use and get rid of all those annoying medical screening checks that get put in to place for international travellers from danger areas - it is all just another scam. At least if that kills us mostly off we won't be around to worry about AGW as well.

With the above a brief aside.
The Y2K bug was a thing, a pretty big thing. People generally think of it as a non-event because it mostly was. That doesn't mean it wasn't real. A huge amount of effort went in to trying to prevent it causing havok all over the place and after that still the odd thing popped - forutnately nothing too serious.
The point here being, just because everyone around you isn't dying horribly of unexpected deseases doesn't mean that people aren't working hard to prevent it. How quickly and how bad would things get if you ignored the pandameic issue, not sure, but I'm really thankful people are keeping a close eye on it. Don't forget some of the huge numbers of deaths related to unexpected flu strains and so on, there are things that can hit hard a fast - we have better tools than ever but even so, don't want to drop the ball on it.

choff
Posts: 2435
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by choff »

http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/03/ags-u ... cientists/

Democratic attorneys general (AG) are using the investigation into ExxonMobil’s global warming stance to target communications between the company and 142 conservative groups, skeptic scientists and other academics.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/03/ags-u ... z4WRLoCLol

Walker’s subpoena is only one part of a larger investigation into Exxon being pushed by mostly Democratic AGs (Walker is a liberal-leaning Independent) to prove the company orchestrated a conspiracy to fool the public about global warming.

The Daily Caller News Foundation obtained an unredacted version of the subpoena sent to Exxon containing the names of 88 organizations and 54 scientists, academics and other experts. Exxon’s countersuit to Walker’s subpoena says “three-quarters” of the organizations Walker is targeting “have been identified by environmental advocacy groups as opposing policies in favor of addressing climate change or disputing the science in support of climate change.”



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/03/ags-u ... z4WRM20SEl


So, we have all these energy companies clearly identified as supporting climate scientists of the Alarmist type, and we have the prior administration trying to prosecute Skeptics by claiming they take money from big oil in order to lie for them(unproven).
CHoff

charliem
Posts: 164
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 8:55 pm

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by charliem »

Before the Internet there was no easy way that the average Joe could made his voice heard, but now there is, and what we read online seems damning to the common Internet citizen intelligence level.

Who has not thought, once and again, how unintelligent most people comments sound.

Although, of course, not us.

Nope. No way. We are the exception, we are one of the few that can see things as they really are. We are sure of that.

So, how is it possible that so many say we are wrong. How is it possible that they can't see that THEY are the ones who are wrong? ... Because, your know, we ARE right; we are totally, completely, absolutely sure we are right, we can feel it, ... so we must be, don't we.

Let's try to reason this. What are the possibilities?

First one, everyone that disagrees with us are shills. Well, this option smells a bit too strongly to paranoid ideation, and the more numerous the opposition the stronger the stink. Some people may feel comfortable with this option but we don't know; let's keep searching.

Second possibility, most people are of the dumb sheep variety, they "drink the kool-aid". Well, this sounds a bit better. A bit of a problem is that some of the opposition don't seem to be that dumb, maybe it is a combination, the intelligent sounding ones are shills, and the rest are simply stupid. Well, this look much more promising, no need to look further.

Although, just for curiosity's sake, is there any other option?

Third one. May that be that most people are neither shills, nor dumb, but as intelligent as we, and also sincere?

Ummmmm, don't know, that can't be true, because, you know, if they were sincere, and as intelligent as we are, they would know what we know, wouldn't they. To accept that those who contradict us are mostly sincere and intelligent is the same that accepting that, maybe, we shouldn't be so sure.

Clearly unacceptable. They MUST be stupid, or trying to deceive.

Or wouldn't they?



Humans may not be very good at thinking rationally, but we are very, very, very good at feeling sure ... with or without good reason.
"The problem is not what we don't know, but what we do know [that] isn't so" (Mark Twain)

pbelter
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:52 am

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by pbelter »

NotAPhysicist wrote:
The scam starts to crumble as those who don't buy it took over.
Let us all hope that AGW is a giant global spanning conspiracy of mis-information and alarmism hey, becuase if it happens not to be we might well all be in a lot of trouble.

What kind of trouble?
Do you mean the increased biomass and agricultural output due to increased CO2? Or maybe the extended frost free agricultural season? Or maybe the fact that there will be less extreme weather as according to AGW poles will warm way more than equator reducing the pole to equator temperature gradient that drives extreme weather. Or maybe the fact that cold weather kills 20 x as many people as hot weather? Or maybe the fact that seas will continue to raise as they did throughout the last 2 centuries of industrial CO2 production and drown the few of us who managed to survive the ongoing global flooding?
Or maybe the planet is going into runaway greenhouse effect like Venus? I got bad news for you, CO2 is at 0.04% of the atmosphere. At 3% long term exposure is lethally poisonous. Venus has 97% in atmosphere 100 times denser than ours. Geological record shows that at 7% CO2 there was no runaway greenhouse effect. If 3 % were possible we would die of CO2 poisoning long time before we die of warm weather, but that is not what AGW claims.

So what kind of trouble did you mean?

I really hope AGW is real so we can get back to the Climate Optimum with warmer and less extreme weather with cargo ships sailing over ice free Arctic, habitable Siberia and northern Canada, and stop to the overpopulation of Florida that almost doubled since 1990.Unfortunately it is just a fallacy and a power grabbing scam.

CherryPick
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 9:39 pm
Location: Finland

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by CherryPick »

charliem wrote:Before the Internet there was no easy way that the average Joe could made his voice heard, but now there is, and what we read online seems damning to the common Internet citizen intelligence level.

Who has not thought, once and again, how unintelligent most people comments sound.

Although, of course, not us.

Nope. No way. We are the exception, we are one of the few that can see things as they really are. We are sure of that.

So, how is it possible that so many say we are wrong. How is it possible that they can't see that THEY are the ones who are wrong? ... Because, your know, we ARE right; we are totally, completely, absolutely sure we are right, we can feel it, ... so we must be, don't we.

Let's try to reason this. What are the possibilities?

First one, everyone that disagrees with us are shills. Well, this option smells a bit too strongly to paranoid ideation, and the more numerous the opposition the stronger the stink. Some people may feel comfortable with this option but we don't know; let's keep searching.

Second possibility, most people are of the dumb sheep variety, they "drink the kool-aid". Well, this sounds a bit better. A bit of a problem is that some of the opposition don't seem to be that dumb, maybe it is a combination, the intelligent sounding ones are shills, and the rest are simply stupid. Well, this look much more promising, no need to look further.

Although, just for curiosity's sake, is there any other option?

Third one. May that be that most people are neither shills, nor dumb, but as intelligent as we, and also sincere?

Ummmmm, don't know, that can't be true, because, you know, if they were sincere, and as intelligent as we are, they would know what we know, wouldn't they. To accept that those who contradict us are mostly sincere and intelligent is the same that accepting that, maybe, we shouldn't be so sure.

Clearly unacceptable. They MUST be stupid, or trying to deceive.

Or wouldn't they?



Humans may not be very good at thinking rationally, but we are very, very, very good at feeling sure ... with or without good reason.
People are not stupid, just uninformed. It takes hard work to think independently and do the research it requires. No-one can invent the modern physics (for example) alone. You are always standing on the shoulders of others.

Because you have to rely on your intuition and the others you can quite easily follow the wrong prophets. Group thinking and the interests of the mind leaders are common reasons for the popular delusions and madnesses of the crowd.

In the CAGW discussion sceptics focus too much on science because the alarmists will not listen to facts. Credibility of their opinion leaders is a better target. They are surrogates of OPEC in the camouflage of the environmentalists and selected scientist. They are business men looking for government subsidies.

charliem
Posts: 164
Joined: Wed May 28, 2008 8:55 pm

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by charliem »

CherryPick wrote:People are not stupid, just uninformed. It takes hard work to think independently and do the research it requires. No-one can invent the modern physics (for example) alone. You are always standing on the shoulders of others.

Because you have to rely on your intuition and the others you can quite easily follow the wrong prophets. Group thinking and the interests of the mind leaders are common reasons for the popular delusions and madnesses of the crowd.

In the CAGW discussion sceptics focus too much on science because the alarmists will not listen to facts. Credibility of their opinion leaders is a better target. They are surrogates of OPEC in the camouflage of the environmentalists and selected scientist. They are business men looking for government subsidies.
So you go with the second option, most people who disagree with us are just following the crowd, drinking the kool-aid so to speak, and the few who sound more informed/intelligent are in it simply for self-gain. Although, of course, we are not one of either, we've taken the necessary steps to know what we are talking about, and we are not influenced by economic considerations or political views, nor by our preferences, hopes or fears.

I'm not very interested in the AGW discussion, what fascinates me is how the human mind works, in this specific case where does our incredible ability to be blind to our lack of mental acuity comes from.

I'm curious, you say that no one can invent modern physics, do you think anyone can "invent" modern climatology? I mean, how much studying do you think it takes to become knowledgeable in the subject? "Half a day of googling", like our estimated Nobel laureate Ivar Giaever, one week of "researching" the web, a month of studying the scientific literature, a year, multiple years?

You know, most people, when confronted with facts that don't fit with an already decided position of theirs, very much prefer to deny, bend, or find any way to dismiss them, than to risk changing opinion. This is not a question of intelligence or knowledge, or lack or thereof, it is a question of how our minds work, no one is 100% free of this, not even Nobel laureates.

Do we want to be more rational? A good first step would be to start doubting ourselves a bit more often, at least as often as we doubt others. THAT is hard work, much more so than "to think independently and do the research".
"The problem is not what we don't know, but what we do know [that] isn't so" (Mark Twain)

pbelter
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:52 am

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by pbelter »

CherryPick wrote: In the CAGW discussion sceptics focus too much on science because the alarmists will not listen to facts. Credibility of their opinion leaders is a better target. They are surrogates of OPEC in the camouflage of the environmentalists and selected scientist. They are business men looking for government subsidies.
Very true, every time I want to bring some facts or discuss Scientific Method and its tools I hear about the conspiracy theories, the bandwagon fallacy or strawman (with bent on vaccination and other medical sciences).

There is another fallacy circulating around that says that only the acolytes of AGW certified by their high priests have any authority on AGW, as it is "too complex science" for anyone outside of the field to understand. I don't remember the proper name for this particular fallacy but if this fallacy were true then an obscure swiss patent clerk named Eistein could not possibly understand the complexity of physics. This fallacy must have been pretty common in the past as here are even popular saying aimed at ridiculing it:

- "What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.”
- "Science is the belief in ignorance of experts"

AGW is a fallacy that cannot withstand to rigors of scientific method, especially Ockham's Razor, but supporting it with the above fallacy, bandwagon fallacy and the strawman fallacy does not help. 4 fallacies bundled together are no better than one, yet they do make excellent social engineering techniques and provide distraction allowing to drive the discussion off the data and methods. Dr Goebbels would have been proud, and he was a PhD :lol:


Lets forget the fallacies for a moment and get back to the data.
https://realclimatescience.com/2016/12/ ... tampering/

Image

Image

Image
When presented with my claims of fraud, NOAA [US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration] typically tries to arm wave it away with these two complaints.

1. They use gridded data and I am using un-gridded data.
2. They “have to” adjust the data because of Time Of Observation Bias and station moves.

Both claims are easily debunked
More interesting stuff in the article itself, but it looks like the entire warming is the result of Policy Based Evidence Making.
It looks to me that AGW it at its peak right now or even little past it. The data falsification graph looks like a bubble market about to burst. Some people will think it can go on longer but further data falsification, no matter how dressed, is going to become more obvious and more and more people will leave the bandwagon.
Last edited by pbelter on Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

choff
Posts: 2435
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Re: Bill Gates is heading a $1 billion venture fund to combat climate change

Post by choff »

I don't even have to look at the science anymore. I've literally been having this climate doomsday schlock thrown at me since the day I could walk. In the sixties I was told if we didn't stop air pollution all life would die in 20 years. Later I was told our children wouldn't know what snow looked like, and my sea level city should have been underwater years ago. Too many doomsday predictions that are way past due date, time to call BS.
CHoff

Post Reply