From Newsgroup: alt.atheism


Everyone knows that "Stagnation" is impossible.

Well. At least the people who made themselves informed
on the topic of "Climate" science. They all know that
the climate can never remain stagnant, it's never going
to remain the same.

Everyone capable of discussing the climate already knows
this.

So, if the climate is never going to remain the same, it's
in a constant state of change, why would colder be better
than warmer?

Wouldn't warmer be better?

I mean, wouldn't warmer be better than staying exactly as
it is right now?

There'd be changes, yes. But those are coming anyways.
If sea level doesn't rise then it'll be dropping.

Oo! Sea level, btw, was like 16 feet HIGHER about 130
thousand years ago, back when Neanderthals ruled the
world. It was warmer. No cars, no fossil fuels and it was
warmer...

Fact is, NOBODY has ever established that a warmer earth
would be a bad thing. They just assert it. And you just
believe without question... "Longer growing seasons, bad!"

Egypt was a hot place. They sometimes could squeeze even
three crops out in a single year, because the growing
season was so long in the warmth. And it's what made Egypt
so big, so rich and so powerful. Agriculture built the
pyramids! The food surplus meant labor free to leave the
fields. It meant people could be artisans and not farmers.
It meant soldiers to defend the lands and conquer the
neighbors. Exported, it meant wealth flowing in.

Was that bad? Why would it be bad for Canada?
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

JTEM wrote:

Everyone knows that "Stagnation" is impossible.

Well. At least the people who made themselves informed
on the topic of "Climate" science. They all know that
the climate can never remain stagnant, it's never going
to remain the same.

Everyone capable of discussing the climate already knows
this.

So, if the climate is never going to remain the same, it's
in a constant state of change, why would colder be better
than warmer?

Wouldn't warmer be better?

I mean, wouldn't warmer be better than staying exactly as
it is right now?

There'd be changes, yes. But those are coming anyways.
If sea level doesn't rise then it'll be dropping.

Oo!-a Sea level, btw, was like 16 feet HIGHER about 130
thousand years ago, back when Neanderthals ruled the
world. It was warmer. No cars, no fossil fuels and it was
warmer...

Fact is, NOBODY has ever established that a warmer earth
would be a bad thing. They just assert it. And you just
believe without question... "Longer growing seasons, bad!"

Egypt was a hot place. They sometimes could squeeze even
three crops out in a single year, because the growing
season was so long in the warmth. And it's what made Egypt
so big, so rich and so powerful. Agriculture built the
pyramids! The food surplus meant labor free to leave the
fields. It meant people could be artisans and not farmers.
It meant soldiers to defend the lands and conquer the
neighbors. Exported, it meant wealth flowing in.

Was that bad? Why would it be bad for Canada?

i think most of the arguments are about how current
infrastructure and human settlement will have to relocate.

when millions of people relocate in very short time, institutions
tend to fall apart.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

On 8/30/25 12:20 PM, jojo wrote:

i think most of the arguments are about how current infrastructure and
human settlement will have to relocate.

But none have. They've taxed the air. Here, in the Boston area, you can
cut the price of natural gas all the way down to FREE and, at best, gas
bills would drop by 33%. Because of the "Gwobull Warbling" bullshit.

Nobody has been relocated though...

All the rich people, the people who can afford real information even
private research -- the people with a lot to lose -- all own hyper
expensive real estate that should be worthless, if Gwobull Warbling
were true.

Manhattan? Martha's Vineyard? Hawaii?

Nobody is so much as slowing down on their waterfront property,or
the land that's supposedly endangered by Gwobull Warbling. Prices
are HIGHER than ever before!

Manhattan has gone from unaffordable to unimaginable...

Former Prez Dent B. Hussein O'BumHole passed evil Geobull Warbling
laws that ass rape working families, and then bought land exactly
where NOBODY who believes the myths could ever buy: Martha's
Vineyard & Hawaii.

O'Bumhole wasn't even worth a million dollars when he ran for the
U.S. Senate, and he had won but had yet to take his seat yet when
he opened his first PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN office in Iowa. And yet,
he's throwing away tens of millions of dolloars on properties that
he believes won't even exist soon due to GWOBULL WARBLING?!?!?

Here:

https://en.sauvees.com/2048/

Need a hint? The Maldives were going to be submerged by rising sea
levels by... what was it? 2018? Instead Saudi Arabia has been hurling
cash at them, FOR DEVELOPMENT, for years on end...

Because the rich and powerful LOVE losing money, right?

"We just want to be poor!"
--
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

JTEM wrote:

On 8/30/25 12:20 PM, jojo wrote:

i think most of the arguments are about how current
infrastructure and human settlement will have to relocate.

But none have. They've taxed the air. Here, in the Boston area,
you can
cut the price of natural gas all the way down to FREE and, at
best, gas
bills would drop by 33%. Because of the "Gwobull Warbling" bullshit.

Nobody has been relocated though...

All the rich people, the people who can afford real information even
private research -- the people with a lot to lose -- all own hyper
expensive real estate that should be worthless, if Gwobull Warbling
were true.

Manhattan? Martha's Vineyard? Hawaii?

Nobody is so much as slowing down on their waterfront property,or
the land that's supposedly endangered by Gwobull Warbling. Prices
are HIGHER than ever before!

Manhattan has gone from unaffordable to unimaginable...

Former Prez Dent B. Hussein O'BumHole passed evil Geobull Warbling
laws that ass rape working families, and then bought land exactly
where NOBODY who believes the myths could ever buy:-a Martha's
Vineyard & Hawaii.

O'Bumhole wasn't even worth a million dollars when he ran for the
U.S. Senate, and he had won but had yet to take his seat yet when
he opened his first PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN office in Iowa. And yet,
he's throwing away tens of millions of dolloars on properties that
he believes won't even exist soon due to GWOBULL WARBLING?!?!?

Here:

https://en.sauvees.com/2048/

Need a hint?-a The Maldives were going to be submerged by rising sea
levels by... what was it? 2018? Instead Saudi Arabia has been
hurling
cash at them, FOR DEVELOPMENT, for years on end...

Because the rich and powerful LOVE losing money, right?

"We just want to be poor!"

it is a very slow moving train, no one expects to see 16 feet
rise in their lifetime.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

On Sat, 30 Aug 2025 16:20:37 +0000, jojo <f00@0f0.00f> wrote:

JTEM wrote:

Everyone knows that "Stagnation" is impossible.

Well. At least the people who made themselves informed
on the topic of "Climate" science. They all know that
the climate can never remain stagnant, it's never going
to remain the same.

Everyone capable of discussing the climate already knows
this.

So, if the climate is never going to remain the same, it's
in a constant state of change, why would colder be better
than warmer?

Wouldn't warmer be better?

I mean, wouldn't warmer be better than staying exactly as
it is right now?

There'd be changes, yes. But those are coming anyways.
If sea level doesn't rise then it'll be dropping.

Oo!a Sea level, btw, was like 16 feet HIGHER about 130
thousand years ago, back when Neanderthals ruled the
world. It was warmer. No cars, no fossil fuels and it was
warmer...

Fact is, NOBODY has ever established that a warmer earth
would be a bad thing. They just assert it. And you just
believe without question... "Longer growing seasons, bad!"

Egypt was a hot place. They sometimes could squeeze even
three crops out in a single year, because the growing
season was so long in the warmth. And it's what made Egypt
so big, so rich and so powerful. Agriculture built the
pyramids! The food surplus meant labor free to leave the
fields. It meant people could be artisans and not farmers.
It meant soldiers to defend the lands and conquer the
neighbors. Exported, it meant wealth flowing in.

Was that bad? Why would it be bad for Canada?

i think most of the arguments are about how current
infrastructure and human settlement will have to relocate.

when millions of people relocate in very short time, institutions
tend to fall apart.

Try "billions". Nearly half the planet's population lives within a
hundred miles of a seacoast.
--
I do not think that horse is completely dead yet.
Whip it some more. - Siri Cruz
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

Le 30/08/2025 |a 18:20, jojo a |-crit-a:

i think most of the arguments are about how current infrastructure and
human settlement will have to relocate.

when millions of people relocate in very short time, institutions tend
to fall apart.

Why "in a very short time" ? 30 years trends of central England
temperatures since 1650 : no recent change.

https://i.postimg.cc/cCdwGwnK/CET-vitesse.png

Change in speed is made up using "Mike trick for Nature" : compare
proxies (apples) and instrumental data (oranges).

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

Paul Aubrin wrote:

Le 30/08/2025 |a 18:20, jojo a |-crit-a:

i think most of the arguments are about how current
infrastructure and human settlement will have to relocate.

when millions of people relocate in very short time,
institutions tend to fall apart.

Why "in a very short time" ? 30 years trends of central England
temperatures since 1650 : no recent change.

https://i.postimg.cc/cCdwGwnK/CET-vitesse.png

Change in speed is made up using "Mike trick for Nature" :
compare proxies (apples) and instrumental data (oranges).

no change? i thought it was getting pretty red.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

Le 31/08/2025 |a 19:20, jojo a |-crit-a:

Paul Aubrin wrote:

Le 30/08/2025 |a 18:20, jojo a |-crit-a:

i think most of the arguments are about how current infrastructure
and human settlement will have to relocate.

when millions of people relocate in very short time, institutions
tend to fall apart.

Why "in a very short time" ? 30 years trends of central England
temperatures since 1650 : no recent change.

https://i.postimg.cc/cCdwGwnK/CET-vitesse.png

Change in speed is made up using "Mike trick for Nature" : compare
proxies (apples) and instrumental data (oranges).

no change? i thought it was getting pretty red.

Change in speed : look at the CET 30 years trends. They are now about
the same as they were in 1650.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

On 8/30/2025 9:46 AM, JTEM wrote:

Everyone knows that "Stagnation" is impossible.

Well. At least the people who made themselves informed
on the topic of "Climate" science. They all know that
the climate can never remain stagnant, it's never going
to remain the same.

Everyone capable of discussing the climate already knows
this.

So, if the climate is never going to remain the same, it's
in a constant state of change, why would colder be better
than warmer?

Wouldn't warmer be better?

I mean, wouldn't warmer be better than staying exactly as
it is right now?

There'd be changes, yes. But those are coming anyways.
If sea level doesn't rise then it'll be dropping.

Oo!-a Sea level, btw, was like 16 feet HIGHER about 130
thousand years ago, back when Neanderthals ruled the
world. It was warmer. No cars, no fossil fuels and it was
warmer...

Fact is, NOBODY has ever established that a warmer earth
would be a bad thing. They just assert it. And you just
believe without question... "Longer growing seasons, bad!"

Egypt was a hot place. They sometimes could squeeze even
three crops out in a single year, because the growing
season was so long in the warmth. And it's what made Egypt
so big, so rich and so powerful. Agriculture built the
pyramids! The food surplus meant labor free to leave the
fields. It meant people could be artisans and not farmers.
It meant soldiers to defend the lands and conquer the
neighbors. Exported, it meant wealth flowing in.

Was that bad? Why would it be bad for Canada?

Extreme warming (predicted by some climate models) == death for all
human beings.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

On 8/31/2025 2:59 AM, Paul Aubrin wrote:

Le 30/08/2025 |a 18:20, jojo a |-crit-a:

i think most of the arguments are about how current infrastructure and
human settlement will have to relocate.

when millions of people relocate in very short time, institutions tend
to fall apart.

Why "in a very short time" ? 30 years trends of central England
temperatures since 1650 : no recent change.

https://i.postimg.cc/cCdwGwnK/CET-vitesse.png

Change in speed is made up using "Mike trick for Nature" : compare
proxies (apples) and instrumental data (oranges).

It's happening:

https://nsidc.org/sea-ice-today

No doubt about it.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

Dawn Flood wrote:

Extreme warming (predicted by some climate models) == death for all
human beings.

We are tenacious little buggers. We can live by mugging cockroaches.

It is rapid change that kills people.
--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
Thank goodness my iron lung is working again! /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

I like the idea of millions of dead Americans in the red state south, so I'm fine with Algore's global warming.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

On 8/31/2025 3:43 PM, chine.bleu wrote:

Dawn Flood wrote:

Extreme warming (predicted by some climate models) == death for all
human beings.

We are tenacious little buggers. We can live by mugging cockroaches.

It is rapid change that kills people.

Hi Siri!

It's been awhile!!

Do you like your cockroaches with or without chocolate??

Dawn
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

Dawn Flood wrote:

On 8/31/2025 3:43 PM, chine.bleu wrote:

Dawn Flood wrote:

Extreme warming (predicted by some climate models) == death for all
human beings.

We are tenacious little buggers. We can live by mugging cockroaches.

It is rapid change that kills people.

Hi Siri!

It's been awhile!!

Do you like your cockroaches with or without chocolate??

Dawn

Dutch or Swiss?
--
Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. @
Thank goodness my iron lung is working again! /|\
The Church of the Holey Apple .signature 3.2 / \
of Discordian Mysteries. This post insults Islam. Mohamed
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

Le 31/08/2025 |a 22:30, Dawn Flood a |-crit-a:

Why "in a very short time" ? 30 years trends of central England
temperatures since 1650 : no recent change.

https://i.postimg.cc/cCdwGwnK/CET-vitesse.png

Change in speed is made up using "Mike trick for Nature" : compare
proxies (apples) and instrumental data (oranges).

It's happening:

No change in speed (acceleration) is happening. The limited bandwidth of
proxy data doesn't allow any direct comparison with instrumental data. Fortunately, there has been a slight temperature increase in most
regions of the world (1.2 -#C) since the "little ace age" (circa 1700).>

https://nsidc.org/sea-ice-today

No doubt about it.

Central England not located in the polar circle, where snow and ice are
doing very well in 2024-2025.

https://polarportal-prod.dmi.dk/api/v1/serve-image/surface?image_name=1756687691564_SMB_combine_SM_day_EN_20250831.png

The blue curve shows the current and the light grey curve the previous seasonrCOs surface mass balance measured in gigatonnes (1 Gt is 1 billion tonnes and corresponds to 1 cubic kilometre of water).

The dark grey curve traces the mean value from the period 1981-2010.

The light grey band shows differences from year to year. For any
calendar day, the band shows the range over the 30 years (in the period 1981-2010), however with the lowest and highest values for each day omitted.




--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

Le 31/08/2025 |a 22:28, Dawn Flood a |-crit-a:

Extreme warming (predicted by some climate models) == death for all
human beings.

Not a single CMIP climate model passed the reality check test. Each and
every one is overheating. Thus all those models have been invalidated.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYPapE-3FRw

Now I'm going to discuss how we would look for a new law.
In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First we
guess it. Well don't laugh that's really true. Then we compute the consequences of the guess to see, if this law that we guessed is right,
what it would imply, and then we compare those computational results to
nature (to experiment or experience). That is we compare it directly
with observation to see if it works.

If it disagrees with experiment, it's wrong.

In that simple statement is the key to science.
It doesn't make any difference how beautiful your guess is. It doesn't
make any difference how smart you are who made the guess, or what your
name is. If it disagrees with experiment it's wrong, that's all.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.atheism

Paul Aubrin <paul.aubrin@invalid.org> wrote:

No change in speed (acceleration) is happening. The limited bandwidth of proxy data doesn't allow any direct comparison with instrumental data.

What does "bandwidth of data" mean?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2