Friday for future-
Dear children, dear youths, dear Schulschwänzer,
I find it class that for the present youth obviously not only able to gather in larger groups, if they find a new smartphone model way in the same business, or proposed to casting DSDS, but also around those Problems of our time on the road to go and face.
Great!
It took hundreds, if not thousands of reasons, where it would be worthwhile to demonstrate today. You just think of the poisoning of our food through pesticides and chemical additives, or even the threatening microwave-duration radiation through the new 5G technology as well as all the “smart” monitoring installations. Also, the acclaimed “Artificial Intelligence” reads nothing good to come and secure man and animal as well as to work the pollution of the sea, completely silent on gestures. World power in all men’s countries!
But now is the bad news: Climate change definitely does NOT belong there!
Then, as soft as the old Goethe, nein, not from “Fack Ju”, except for the real, Johann Wolfgang von, with his conveying “natural intelligence”:
“You have to keep repeating the truth, as well as the irreversion of being preached to you again and again, although not by anybody but by the masses. In newspapers and encyclopaedias, at schools and universities, everywhere is irretrievable, and it is comfortable and comfortable, in the sense of the majority, which is on its side. “
Explanation: Encyclopaedias were those published on paper by Wikipedia, Google, YouTube and Co.
Yes, the feeling of the majority reads one actually suspected, one would be on the right side, on the winning side, with the guys.
Who is aber Prof. Shaviv of the Institute of Physics in Jerusalem correctly establishes, science is no democracy, in science, science does not necessarily have the right, but it does (or should at least) rely on verifiable and verifiable facts. A fact remains free only as long as a fact, as long as the contrary is not proved.
Here’s a nice example:
Swans were up until the 17th. by definition white. This fact, of course, only existed until the first black swan of a Dutch explorer in Australia was observed. It tells us that science is in constant flux and examines new findings and gifts. to integrate hat.
Were we ignoring or combating from today’s prevailing state of science, we would have to guess who it is currently e.g. in the debate about an anthropogenic (human-made) climate change, one speaks of a dogma (which the god describes as very good), which reads every science missing.
The finding of the above mentioned Prof. Shaviv naturally applies in the field of climatology, science and climate studies. So if we claim that almost all scientists are in agreement (consensus) that anthropogenic climate change is real, it does not necessarily mean that it is, in fact, not a consensus with scientific evidence.
To express it figuratively:
Also, if a larger group of people would agree in a consensus that the Martians give, there would be no evidence of their actual existence!
See our brief facts in the field of climatology and:
Climate is the value of u.a. Temperature over a period of at least 30 years in a particular city, or simply expressed, Climate = Weather x 30 years / defined city. In that post, it was noted that it is shocking to me that you think “weather” is estimated to be 30 years / defined. But gut…
And further:
“Ice Age” is defined by the fact that at least one of the two poles must be said. During a period of about 80% of the total earthquake (4.6 billion years), both poles were ice-free! So that would be a whopping 3.68 billion years. As the alleged culprit of the ice melt, the same claims are about 150 years of nominal industry and about 130 years of internal combustion engine history. At least here, someone must have realized that there must be other factors, such as e.g. the sun activity, the climate changes.
Whoever we knew, since even today requires both Poles, was saying that we are in fact still in one…, right…, Ice Age.
After an ice age, since the existence of the earth comes a constant change in one…, again right…, warm time, was e.g. by reading Bohrkerne siege reads. There are climate change, respectively. correctly expressed, climate change, whose “walk” suggests endurance, is like a natural event, one could just as little “fight” as the ever-present dawn or the all-encompassing sunrise.
Also climate or natural disaster are misleading notions. The climate or nature knows no ‘disasters’. Here I may reiterate Goethe, softly: “Nature understands no pleasure;
It pays to think about this phrase and remember it!
The CO2 discussion in the first place is since its beginnings in a circular conclusion where correlation (incidental relationship between certain phenomena) is obviously intertwined with causality (causal relationship)! Here, in reference to “circular lock”, quotes again from the dead, where the following reads: “Evidence, in which the evidence is prepared as a prerequisite (eg: Kaffeee regn, because he has an anticipatory effect)” or, in this case, “CO2 is harmful because it has a harmful effect.” In that logic, today’s logic is critically followed, although there is no scientific evidence for the computer-based statements that “human-made” CO2 the climate would be strained. On the contrary: CO2 is unmanageable for the living on earth! The more plants to a certain degree get there, the better they grow. This reads e.g. in greenhouses observing where Spur gas is a more important fertilizer! Vegetable plants e.g. develop to your part optimally at a CO2 content of the air, which is about the double concentration of the desired concentration! Plants are less likely to lose CO2 and better plant growth would benefit both humans and animals. Dazu should be used e.g. simply look for the ‘medieval optimum’ in an encyclopedia, or simply google it.
Besides, in addition to their own breathing, there is no real ‘human power’ CO2. This results from combustion of oil, coal, wood, etc. we naturally release carbon dioxide stored in these substances and in no case become new. In this case also mentioned that it is so. ‘Renewable energy’ does not give. Energy cannot be renewed, but only in one form, e.g. Coal, in some other form, e.g. Stream, transform.
Physics tells us that a higher CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is the result of rising temperatures and does not reverse what is claimed. Due to higher temperatures, less CO2 is released into the lakes and consequently rises in the atmosphere. You can even check this out before you read sprinkler water or other CO2-containing drinks in the sun. Here, nobody wants to be responsible for the idea of making the dizzying CO2 from the spray bottle for the hot summer day.
Minister of Education Claude Meisch has for the announced demonstration against climate change the 15th of March the willing student to shave and demolish this already in the water in relation to real protest, strike strike. Therefore, it should already be arranged around Luxembourg even at customer locations or as pattern knuckles. One has to ask why politicians, so in the eyes of the protesters, ever support the “guilty”, at all, such actions?
Instead of strengthening the power-hungry rebels in beliefs and artificially constructed icons of La Greta Thunberg and actually selling them for stupid, it would make sense to let children and adolescents get real education and convey a critical spirit instead of ideologically driven to support.
Mario Dichter
06.03.2019
