climate discourse is dominated by disaster hysteria and intellectual dictatorship. To this conclusion, Claude Allègre came 12 years ago, and the situation continued to deteriorate. The greenhouse effect is even a good priority! If there is none, let the temperature on the earth at minus 18 degrees! Climate skeptics doubt that CO2 is the main factor in increasing the acidity and thereby raising the temperature; Still, in 2003, American and French scientists came to a study that concluded that variations in temperature were 800 years ahead of variations in CO2, in other words: it was not CO2 that changed temperature, but it has just turned around.
T he weather is a chaotic system – that’s why the forecasts are only feasible for a few days – and the climate is so complex that it is difficult to imagine that CO2 is the only factor contributing to changes. What do we already know a lot about the sun, with its magnetic fields cycling off and on, respectively? The sun itself is not stable, changes its activities.
How big is our knowledge of the oceans that absorb the CO2 sometimes? About the role of the cloudsWhile is our knowledge of the oceans absorbing CO2 even lower? About the role of the ken in the whole is as good as nothing scientifically known, etc. What is scientifically proven: in the Middle Ages it was sometimes warm, since then Greenland is called “green land”, because even then ice and snow have disappeared to a good extent. Scientist Fred Singer could now prove that climate change in the Middle Ages was more brutal was like today’s; At that time, the CO2 was not significantly high! After this episode came a mini-ice age, between the sixteenth and nineteenth centuries. During this time, however, there were extremely hot moments, so in France in 1719 nearly half a million people died of the heat and starvation suites
I n the IPCC clergy one skeptic after another was issued, respectively, they resigned disillusionedly. Politics and the public are constantly being sold, that there is a consensus among scientists. In science, that term is not an argument! With that notion, Galileo and Einstein royalty would be ignored! It would make sense to have skeptics out there who would regularly ask, just as science should do! The Kyoto Protocol is as absurd as it is expensive: $ 370 billion at the landfill where it came from. Today, fingers crossed at US President Trump; It is forgotten that, before him, Bill Clinton (along with his vice Al Gore) signed the treaty, but the Senate refused ratification, arguing it would hurt too much the American economy.
Moreover, over the years and in its reports, the IPCC has changed its position more than once. In the 4th report for example, which came out in 2007, the relationship between CO2 and temperature was dropped, as it was withheld from the archives for many years!
T he media, therefore, plays a disastrous role in which almost no journalist has a scientific training. Well, of course it’s great to show pictures of a Kilimandjaro where the snow is melting, and then talk to a shudder of climate change. However, this phenomenon has existed for centuries. Claude Allègre pointed to one of his many books on journalistic excellence, such as one in a serious newspaper such as LE MONDE, through climatic changes, possibly in the future there would be more tsunami! I always thought a tsunami would be triggered by an earthquake.
But temperatures will rise on the planet: much to the Poles, zero to the equator. In about 1000 years, Greenland was then definitely ‘liberated’ from snow and ice. We must therefore adapt to the new situation, such as building houses differently, less against the cold than heat, planting the right trees, developing new summer gardens for agriculture, etc. And quite clearly: we have to cut CO2, even if he is not the main culprit for the houses of degrees. But maybe everything else works …
- : The quote in the headline is by Albert Einstein
