Climate Change/Global Warming Hoax

Ifersgold wrote:Its obvious by the way you are responding that you have not read the source material.  Not just because of the tiny amount of time that has past but because you are not addressing any of the relevant information. Maybe we can continue talking once you have. As for everyone else, please take the time to look at the data and see if you can debunk it.

the information or "data" you are referring to from David DuByne i think you mean.

http://www.iceagefarmer.com/2018/02/06/adapt-2030-roundtable-w-christian-of-ice-age-farmer-diamond-of-oppenheimer-ranch-grand-solar-minimum-primer-solutions/

This?

Again and you accuse me of not "reading the source material". The only read i can find is "MY PATH" from David DuByne. The other guys are just all over the place with very little actual data. Its just a mess. What do you want me to read? Where is the hard data?

So we are looking at the amount of sunspots, correct? Is this the "data" you are referring to that i should read?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle#/media/File:Sunspot-bfly.gif

Observing sunspots is not new and it is not NASA. Galileo Galileo is attributed by westerners to be the first to observe sunspots. But he is just the first westerners to observe sunspots with a telescope. Recordings of naked eye sunspot activity goes as far back as 1700bc China. Sunspot activity was recorded in China, Korea, Japan, Greece, Egypt, and Mesoamerica. It is speculated that ancient Egyptians used a pinhole camera to make sunspot observations in a paper by Barry D Malpas in Observing Sunspots with a Pinhole Camera. Richard R. Zito wrote a paper called Possible Naked Eye Observations of Sunspots where he shows the details of evidence of Mesoamerica observations of sunspots. The Greeks got most of what they know from Egypt. So it's not a stretch for me to see a chain of custody for sunspot knowledge and significance going from one civilization to the next. Sunspots have been observed and correlated with climactic events since ancient times.

Actual data is only 120 years or so and the equipment matters a lot. The "researchers" you mentioned are talking about that data and combine that data with the religious belief that the earth is dangerously warming up. Can you see that the only reason significance is given to the sunspot activity is because of this belief?

No. I don't agree with that argument. I find it adolescent.

Ifersgold wrote:No. I don't agree with that argument. I find it adolescent.

What is your evidence that the earth is dangerously warming up?

Ifersgold wrote:No. I don't agree with that argument. I find it adolescent.

Don't find any significant conclusions that can be drawn from your presentation of this data.
Please state your conclusions clearly and briefly so we may be better informed.

Hi ifers, glad to be here. This is the first topic I think I may be able to contribute to.

Ifersgold put forth a lot of interesting theories and data on the subject of climate and the cycles of climate that we do not know much about.

Having studied some of the same theories the conclusion seems to come down to: a reduction in sunspots=a reduction in solar activity.

A lot of the responses I'm seeing to this theory point to the fact that we only have 150 years of corroborated data, governments use the current climate change as a scare tactic and a lot of the data comes from agencies like NASA. While this is true there are written accounts from medieval Europe of cold periods and where I live on the east coast every where you look there is evidence that glaciers once covered the land. The mistake in thinking (I believe) is that the current warm period we are experiencing or are at the end of experiencing is not part of a natural cycle. Whether or not humans have an exacerbating effect on this is beyond the point. It may well be that governments know this and are assigning a human element to the cause so they can enforce new policies.

Thanks Hauchfer, well said. Vincey84 I am not arguing for the environment warming up in general per say. Realearth, the argument is not mine,
but one I agree with. It is this:

We are entering a solar minimum which indicates we are at the beginning of a cooling period. A cooling period which is always preceded by a brief warming period. This climate change is impacting traditional grow zones causing food shortages, and destabilizing the geopolitical environment. All this coincides or is correlated with the suns activity and is cyclical. The rise and fall of empires has always been correlated with this phenomena as well.


The world is contracting. In breath out breath. Spring, then Winter. We are entering a time where we will have a contracting population, and therefore contracting economy as well.

The order of events goes like this, first the grow zones are impacted causing a strain on the food supply, then the economy is disrupted, then empires begin to collapse. Continued food supply disruption causes malnutrition that then leads to disease and pestilence that causes mass fatalities to scale. A good example of this is the black plague in Europe.

Let us not think too simply of climate change as "global" temperatures going up, down, or not changing. The idea is more like grow zones will migrate. One area can get cooler temps and more precipitation while another one gets warmer temps with dry air.  

The Levant (mid east) was an abundant bread basket. For a good long time it has been too arid to be productive. Now it appears that the Levant is re-emerging as a grow zone while the Mid-West grow zone is shrinking. (Oil wars as a cover story for securing emerging grow zones, i.e. Iraq north Africa etc.)

Another book to consider while researching this subject talks about how climate change impacts grow zones, disease, and empire.

THE FATE OF ROME
Climate, Disease, and the End of Empire
By Kyle Harper

Ifersgold wrote:The solar minimum sources I'm following are David Dubine from adapt 2030, Christian from ice age farmer, and Diamond from the Oppenheimer ranch project. I've been catching up on the science they are reporting and from what I'm learning the data is primarily gathered from sun spot activity. An easily observable and straightforward science. The more sunspots means the sun is active, no sunspots the sun is less active. There are also ice cores which like rings in a tree or a CD record the sun's magnetic activity. Furthermore, there is astrological data that shows all this dramatic change coincides with the end of an age.

Ifersgold wrote:So how is it you don't believe in natural cyclical cataclysmic events? Events that cause a large scale die off? Because the archeological and geological record is replete with them. The natural world is replete with boom and bust periods for species. The most relevant past event however is the Younger Dryas event about 12000 years ago. This event changed sea levels and moved continents. It is thought to be the event that destroyed the megalithic stone structure civilizations. I mean how much science do you have to ignore to say that our environment does not change?

Why is this sun worshiping shill still on this forum, read this guys posts and it's blatantly obvious

First of all I am not a sun worshipper. You know but I do think the sun is kind of cool and all. I mean I can't help but to give some credit to the sun for providing all that warmth and life and stuff.

Second, I was not aware that being a sun worshipper is so offensive to the members of this community. I wonder if Russian Blue Cat speaks for the admins of this forum. Are sun worshippers not welcome here then? If that is true, maybe it should be written into the welcome message or something. We can have people sign a document that swears they are not sun worshipers. I Ifersgold hereby swear I do not worship the sun as a deity.

It is super easy to accuse someone of being a schill, easier if you don't agree with or don't understand them.

If you have a perfect understanding of the sun and our solar system, please share. If you do not have a perfect understanding of the sun, then why would you discourage discourse and discovery about it? And why would you be so rude and dismissive? What is your agenda?

Further more Blue Cat, as I am educating myself about the sun, I find that is more central to all life on this plane than I have previously thought. And in ways that are awe inspiring.

So, ...no, I am not a sun worshiper. Not yet anyway.

We don't have a solar system . Are you still of the belief that the sun is 93,000,000 miles away?

Speculative papers by Malpass and Zito are proof of nothing but are typical of mainstream pseudo science .

Not a personal attack but I can see why shill accusation came about. Science can only be speculative now because science will not provide proof of the shape or rotation of the earth .

hmm ok. So you are not arguing for the standard "climate change". As in the definition that is being peddled that something dangerous is happening to our climate. Although the people you referred to in your first post ARE. lets make that abundantly clear.

Apparently my childish mind cannot understand these predictions related to the sun cycle. Apparently after you have to be mentally matured so you can start using science more creatively to draw conclusions to fit your view of the world and creation.

Vincey84, to be clear, the three sources I mentioned in my first post do not subscribe to the propaganda narrative on climate change. Ice Age Farmer, Adapt 2030, and the Oppenheimer Ranch Project are 100% against the mainstream narrative on climate change. They provide an alternative narrative that makes a lot more sense.

However a couple of the authors of the books I listed, do seem to be writing with a pro global warming bias. But if you can see past their bias and look at the historical patterns you can extract factual information from their work.

Also, I called your theory adolescent, not you. If we were in person you would see I meant it to be frank and succinct not disrespectful.

When I say solar system, I do not mean fake space. I mean that there is a sun in the sky that is central to the system of energy and life we know as the observable world. Some people believe that the Sun is just a NASA psyop. I'm not sure because I wasn't born yet. But I'm pretty sure that the sun predates NASA.

Here is where I will make some predictions based on this working theory. Predictions we only have to wait a short time to see. First, in a couple months the harvest reports for this year's food crops will come in and they will be bad. Second, lockdowns and restrictions on movement will continue and get more restrictive. Third by December food prices will go up significantly and food shortages in the grocery store will be obvious. Fourth, delayed or canceled elections.

By next winter there will be starvation. Im putting it all on the line here. But if I'm wrong, then great!!!

Ifersgold wrote:,
theory.....  
predictions..... theory..
By next winter there will be .

This is a research forum.
Not theory forum = pretend.
Not predictions forum = pretend.

Theory = a part of the scientific process.

Ifersgold wrote:Theory = a part of the scientific process.

WRONG

Theory =  Pseudoscience = Pretend

Pseudoscience is a claim, belief, or practice which is presented as scientific, but does not adhere to a valid scientific method, lacks supporting evidence or plausibility, cannot be reliably tested, or otherwise lacks scientific status.

Real World wrote:Recent NEWS:
Looks like the Earth is cooling down...

First time in history snow at Hawaii:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/hawaii-sees-snow-from-winter-storm-for-first-time-in-state-park-on-maui?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20foxnews%2Fnational%20%28Internal%20-%20US%20Latest%20-%20Text%29&utm_content=Yahoo%20Search%20Results

But where did it go "global" warming?

In section of The Washington Post article, they show picture with constant rise of temperatures in recent years:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2019/02/12/heaviest-rain-strongest-wind-coldest-temperature-snow-hawaii-follows-year-extreme-weather/?utm_term=.380f7e58314a

Now people can go back to State of Fear, promoted by manipulative media, thanks to government mafia.

The only thing you have contributed to this thread is a theory that the earth is cooling down based on two copied and pasted links from Fox News, and the Washington Post. Two sources I would never ever site lest someone think I am a lazy researcher.

Do you consider those sources to be reliable then? Fox and Wapost? Do you base your theory that the world is cooling down strictly on those sources or do you have other information to support you claim?

A claim, by the way, I am supporting with better sources.

This is a research forum. Not a copy and paste mainstream news article forum.

Tell us what is you process? What is the scientific method in your mind?

Ifersgold wrote:Tell us what is you process? What is the scientific method in your mind?

This is not a theory forum.
This is not a Pseudoscience forum.
This is not a prediction forum.
This is not a pretend forum.
This is not a question forum.

This is a research forum.
"The International Flat Earth Research Society"
You need to read the rules of this forum to avoid being banned.
Peace

The rules for the forum:
1. Do not start a new thread if you merely have a question. First, do your due diligence in searching the forum for an existing related thread, and if your questions haven't already been asked/answered, feel free to post there. If you cannot find an appropriate thread to ask your question, please ask in the Few Questions About the Flat Earth Model thread.

2. Do not start new threads unless they contain beneficial and significant "RESEARCH" regarding the Flat Earth or other related topics. One sentence and a video link, for example, does NOT warrant it's own thread. This is meant to be a "research society," where Flat Earthers can come learn and discuss the flat Earth conspiracy. Ballers beware! This is not a ball Earth "debate" society.

3. Do not promote the ball-Earth or other related propaganda

4. Do not promote your unwavering faith in any religious belief

5. Be respectful, thorough and clear with your comments, and be sure to provide sufficient evidence/proof/sourced links for your claims.
....................................

STEPS OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD:
The scientific method has five basic steps, plus one feedback step:

1. Make an observation.

2. Ask a question.

3. Form a hypothesis, or testable explanation.

4. Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.

5. Test the prediction.

6. Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions.
....................................................

Real Earth you seem to be breaking rule 5 of the forum rules. You are disrespectful in your communication. Do you have banning powers then? Are you threatening to ban me for making an honest effort?

What rule am I breaking? Perhaps you are accusing me of "promoting other related propaganda". But wouldn't anything that contradicts your own interpretation of things be labeled propaganda? Who decides if what I'm saying is propaganda or just an opposing observation if the world?

Real Earth do you agree with the basic steps to the scientific method above?

Could you please spell out the process of research that is acceptable to you? How do I go about making contributions to the effort in an acceptable way?

Also why are you insisting that we remove steps 3, 4, and 5 from the scientific method? How are we supposed to do research then?

And how do we solve this problem moving forward? Do we need to start a new thread educating new members on how to be contributors?

This kind of behavior drives people away from the forums. Why can't we be more patient and polite with each other? What is my incentive for contributing, other than getting disrespected for my posts?

Ifersgold wrote:

Why can't we be more patient and polite with each other?

You have promoted solar system.
3. Do not promote the ball-Earth or other related propaganda...

Your ad hominem remarks are of no value in this research forum
5. Be respectful, thorough and clear with your comments, and be sure to provide sufficient evidence/proof/sourced links for your claims.

You have not provided verifiable, repeatable, testable, measurable evidence.

Realearth. Are you Trolling on IFERS? Not cool man.

Listen, there is no way I can take you seriously now. I won't engage with you anymore. I am quite disgusted by your false allegations. Please stop trolling. It hinders research by wasting time and adding confusion, and it creates an atmosphere of hostility. It's my opinion that you are a liability to the research.

You are not justified to break rule 5, because it's your opinion I broke rule 3. That's pretty silly.

You don't seem to want to engage in any kind of constructive conversation about the scientific method. You actually said that theory = pretend. But theory is a part if the scientific process. I suggest you look up the etymology and definitions of the word theory in all its contexts. You don't get to rewrite the dictionary with the battle cry of Pseudo science.

Mainstream cosmology and physical science does not follow the scientific method. That mainstream science cannot show proof of rotation or curvature of the alleged globe earth.

It sees fit to ignore all contrary evidence, observation and experience , and bases it's "theories" on the pretence that earth is a spinning globe . Doing so allows further baseless unprovable garbage to develop under the pseudonym of theoretical science .

Any independent research is shackled by the "Peer" review system - fit in with the mainstream view or you are out .

Scientific method only counts if you don't upset the apple cart .

Ifersgold wrote:Vincey84, to be clear, the three sources I mentioned in my first post do not subscribe to the propaganda narrative on climate change. Ice Age Farmer, Adapt 2030, and the Oppenheimer Ranch Project are 100% against the mainstream narrative on climate change. They provide an alternative narrative that makes a lot more sense.

However a couple of the authors of the books I listed, do seem to be writing with a pro global warming bias. But if you can see past their bias and look at the historical patterns you can extract factual information from their work.

Also, I called your theory adolescent, not you. If we were in person you would see I meant it to be frank and succinct not disrespectful.

When I say solar system, I do not mean fake space. I mean that there is a sun in the sky that is central to the system of energy and life we know as the observable world. Some people believe that the Sun is just a NASA psyop. I'm not sure because I wasn't born yet. But I'm pretty sure that the sun predates NASA.

Here is where I will make some predictions based on this working theory. Predictions we only have to wait a short time to see. First, in a couple months the harvest reports for this year's food crops will come in and they will be bad. Second, lockdowns and restrictions on movement will continue and get more restrictive. Third by December food prices will go up significantly and food shortages in the grocery store will be obvious. Fourth, delayed or canceled elections.

By next winter there will be starvation. Im putting it all on the line here. But if I'm wrong, then great!!!

No no, you don't get to say this shit and then say "if im wrong great". They predicted an ice age 40 years ago the climate doom sayers. And even though the sources you provided do not agree with the reason as to why the earth is warming up dangerously they do promote the idea of a abnormal warming of the earth.

You make claims of what will happen without showing a logical narrative as to why this will be so. I don't know what or who you have been listening to but the actual data (which is mainly from satellites so we don't know what we are being fed here) suggests it is only going about around 0.3 degrees Celsius difference by 2050. Something else is that there is way, way, way too much food. The only reason that a lot of people are starving today is political. There is some kind of predictive plot that you have that is not science, it is not testable it is not a theory it is a prediction based on very very flimsy data. You can't deny that this prediction is more fed by your belief than it is by actual data. If you do claim your "prediction" (belief really) is scientific, you are totally lost.

Also you seem to think you can bypass nasa when it comes to information about this subject, you can't.

Ifersgold wrote:
By next winter there will be starvation. Im putting it all on the line here. But if I'm wrong, then great!!!

Wow. That's some prediction you have there. As far as I can tell this is purely based on speculation/theory, I'm right?

Making a claim like that, followed by "I hope I'm wrong", is nothing more than fear-mongering.