Debt Rattle January 13 2023
- This topic has 108 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
All this talk about DUMBS reminds me of an experience I had as a student. I have had an interesting life. Not prticularly economically successful. But interesting.
I have already mentioned that Hampshire was/is riddled with military bases of Airstrip One. The biggest DUMB on Airstrip One is under Portsdown Hill. No one (other than the constructors and military personnel) knows how deep those tunnels and chambers go. Sea level is 131 metres down. 50 metres of solid chalk is enough to stop the effects of any nuclear bomb attack.
‘Southwick House is close by the north side of the hill, the HQ for U.S. General Dwight D. Eisenhower during the D-Day invasions; the generals prayed together before D-Day at Christ Church Portsdown, on the hill, which has a memorial window.’
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portsdown_Hill
As a student I worked briefly for a construction and maintenance company to augment my meagre allowance. On one occasion I was directed to deliver goods to a military establishment near Hedge End, northeast of Southampton (not far from Portsdown Hill).
I had the opportunity to climb down a steel ladder into an underground bunker and see some of the kit that the average person had no idea was ‘secretly stored’ under a field, in the event of an attack on Airstrip One: security was pretty lax in 1970. Telephones were large contraptions usually found on desks or in red cast iron boxes with small glass panes if they could be found at all. Security meant a heavy padlock passing through a steel ring and a sign saying: ‘Keep out’.
Life was a lot more secure then, of course.
50 years of fucking up everything by the military-industrial-financial-commercial complex has resulted in a very heavy toll.
By the way, I believe that the cultural memory that ‘bad things happen on Friday the Thirteenth’ comes from massacre of thousands (tens of thousands?) of Cathars by the Catholics in France on a Friday. the Thirteenth.
Do you believe in God?
No.
You’re dead!
Do you believe in God?
Yes.
Do you believe in the same God as me?
No.
You’re dead!
Do you believe in the same God as me?
Yes.
Do you believe in the same forms of worship of God as me?
No.
You’re dead!.
(Thanks, George Carlin).
I am cutting and pasting this from over on Moon of Alabama – one of the comments there. If I could link to that specific comment alone, I’d do that for brevity. Since I can’t, and I think it will be of great interest over here, I’ll post it in its entirety. (and out of respect for the discussion, I’d never post this earlier than page 3 nor earlier in the day)
Erich Vlad Interview at Emma.de, February 12
Machine TranslationErich Vad: What are the war aims?
Erich Vad is an ex-brigade general. From 2006 to 2013 he was Chancellor Angela Merkel’s military policy advisor. He is one of the rare voices who spoke out publicly early on against arms deliveries to Ukraine, without any political strategy or diplomatic efforts. Even now he is speaking an uncomfortable truth.
Mr. Vad, what do you think of the delivery of the 40 martens to the Ukraine that Chancellor Scholz just announced?
This is a military escalation, also in the perception of the Russians – even if the more than 40-year-old marten is not a silver bullet. We’re going down a slide. This could develop a momentum of its own that we can no longer control. Of course it was and is right to support the Ukraine and of course Putin’s attack does not comply with international law – but now the consequences must finally be considered!
And what could the consequences be?
Do you want to achieve a willingness to negotiate with the deliveries of the tanks? Do you want to reconquer Donbass or Crimea? Or do you want to defeat Russia completely? There is no realistic end state definition. And without an overall political and strategic concept, arms deliveries are pure militarism.
What does that mean?
We have a militarily operational stalemate, which we cannot solve militarily. Incidentally, this is also the opinion of the American Chief of Staff Mark Milley. He said that Ukraine’s military victory is not to be expected and that negotiations are the only possible way. Anything else is a senseless waste of human life.
General Milley caused a lot of trouble in Washington with his statement and was also heavily criticized in public.
He spoke an uncomfortable truth. A truth that, by the way, was hardly ever published in the German media. The interview with CNN’s Milley didn’t show up anywhere bigger, when he’s the chief of staff of our western powerhouse. What is going on in Ukraine is a war of attrition. And one with meanwhile almost 200,000 fallen and wounded soldiers on both sides, with 50,000 civilian dead and with millions of refugees. Milley drew a parallel to the First World War that couldn’t be more apt. During the First World War, the so-called ‘Bloodmill of Verdun’, which was conceived as a battle of attrition, led to the deaths of almost a million young French and Germans. They fell for nothing then. So the warring parties’ refusal to negotiate has led to millions of additional deaths. This strategy didn’t work militarily at the time – and it won’t work today either.
You too have been attacked for calling for negotiations.
Yes, as did the Inspector General of the German Armed Forces, General Eberhard Zorn, who, like me, warned against overestimating the Ukrainians’ regionally limited offensives in the summer months. Military experts – who know what’s going on among the secret services, what it’s like on the ground and what war really means – are largely excluded from the discourse. They don’t fit in with media opinion-forming. We are largely experiencing a media synchronization that I have never experienced in the Federal Republic. This is pure opinion making. And not on behalf of the state, as is known from totalitarian regimes, but out of pure self-empowerment.
You are being attacked across the board by the media, from BILD to FAZ and Spiegel, and with them the 500,000 people who signed the open letter to the chancellor initiated by Alice Schwarzer.
That’s the way it is. Fortunately, Alice Schwarzer has her own independent medium to be able to open this discourse at all. It probably wouldn’t have worked in the leading media. The majority of the population has been against further arms deliveries for a long time and also according to a current survey. However, none of this is reported. There is largely no longer a fair, open discourse on the Ukraine war, and I find that very disturbing. That shows me how right Helmut Schmidt was. In a conversation with Chancellor Merkel, he said: Germany is and will remain an endangered nation.
How do you assess the Foreign Minister’s policy?
Military operations must always be coupled with attempts to bring about political solutions. The one-dimensionality of current foreign policy is hard to bear. She is very heavily focused on weapons. The main task of foreign policy is and remains diplomacy, reconciliation of interests, understanding and conflict management. I miss that here. I’m glad that we finally have a foreign minister in Germany, but it’s not enough to just use war rhetoric and walk around in Kyiv or Donbass with a helmet and flak jacket. This is too little.
However, Baerbock is a member of the Greens, the former peace party.
I don’t understand the mutation of the Greens from a pacifist to a war party. I myself don’t know of any Greens who would even have done military service. For me, Anton Hofreiter is the best example of this double standard. Antje Vollmer, on the other hand, who I would count among the ‘original’ Greens, calls things by their proper name. And the fact that a single party has so much political influence that it can maneuver us into a war is very worrying.
If Chancellor Scholz had taken you over from his predecessor and you were still the Chancellor’s military adviser, what advice would you have given him in February 2022?
I would have advised him to support Ukraine militarily, but in a measured and prudent manner in order to avoid slide effects into a warring party. And I would have advised him to influence our most important political ally, the USA. Because the key to solving the war lies in Washington and Moscow. I liked the Chancellor’s course in recent months. But the Greens, FDP and the bourgeois opposition are putting so much pressure – flanked by largely unanimous media music – that the chancellor can hardly absorb it.
And what if the Leopard is also delivered?
Then the question arises again as to what should happen with the deliveries of the tanks at all. To take over the Crimea or the Donbass, the martens and leopards are not enough. In eastern Ukraine, in the Bakhmut area, the Russians are clearly advancing. They will probably have completely conquered the Donbass before long. One only has to consider the numerical superiority of the Russians over Ukraine. Russia can mobilize up to two million reservists. The West can send 100 martens and 100 leopards there, they don’t change anything in the overall military situation. And the all-important question is how to end such a conflict with a warlike nuclear power – mind you, the most powerful nuclear power in the world! – wants to survive without going into a third world war. And that’s exactly what doesn’t get into the heads of politicians and journalists here in Germany!
The argument is that Putin doesn’t want to negotiate and that he needs to be put in his place to stop him raging in Europe.
It is true that the Russians must be signaled: up to here and no further! Such a war of aggression must not set a precedent. It is therefore right that NATO is increasing its military presence in the east and that Germany is involved. But the fact that Putin does not want to negotiate is unbelievable. Both the Russians and the Ukrainians were ready for a peace agreement at the beginning of the war in late March, early April 2022. Then nothing came of it. Finally, during the war, the grain agreement was finally negotiated by the Russians and Ukrainians with the involvement of the United Nations.
Now the dying goes on.
You can continue to wear down the Russians, which means hundreds of thousands of deaths, but on both sides. And it means further destruction of Ukraine. What is left of this country? It will be leveled to the ground. Ultimately, that is no longer an option for Ukraine either. The key to solving the conflict does not lie in Kyiv, nor does it lie in Berlin, Brussels or Paris, it lies in Washington and Moscow. It’s ridiculous to say that Ukraine has to decide that.
With this interpretation, one is quickly considered a conspiracy theorist in Germany…
I myself am a convinced transatlantic. I’ll tell you honestly, if in doubt, I’d rather live under an American hegemony than under a Russian or Chinese one. This war was initially only a domestic political conflict in Ukraine. It started in 2014 between the Russian-speaking ethnic groups and the Ukrainians themselves. So it was a civil war. Now, after the invasion of Russia, it has become an interstate war between Ukraine and Russia. It is also a struggle for Ukraine’s independence and its territorial integrity. Thats all right. But it’s not the whole truth. It’s also a proxy war between the US and Russia, and it’s about very specific geopolitical interests in the Black Sea region.
Which would be?
The Black Sea region is as important to the Russians and their Black Sea Fleet as the Caribbean or the Panama region is to the United States. As important as the South China Sea and Taiwan to China. As important as Turkey’s protection zone, which they established against the Kurds in violation of international law. Against this background and for strategic reasons, the Russians cannot get out of there either. Quite apart from the fact that in a referendum in Crimea the population would certainly vote for Russia.
So how is this going to continue?
If the Russians were forced to pull out of the Black Sea region by massive Western intervention, they would certainly resort to nuclear weapons before stepping off the world stage. I find it naïve to believe that a nuclear strike by Russia would never happen. According to the motto, ‘They’re just bluffing’.
But what could be the solution?
One should simply ask the people in the region, i.e. in Donbass and Crimea, who they want to belong to. One would have to restore Ukraine’s territorial integrity, with certain Western guarantees. And the Russians also need such a security guarantee. So no NATO membership for Ukraine. Since the Bucharest summit in 2008, it has been clear that this is the Russian red line.
And what do you think Germany can do?
We must dose our military support in such a way that we do not slide into a Third World War. None of those who went to war with such enthusiasm in 1914 thought afterwards that it was the right thing to do. If the goal is an independent Ukraine, one must also ask oneself what a European order that includes Russia should look like. Russia will not simply disappear from the map. We must avoid driving the Russians into the arms of the Chinese, thereby shifting the multipolar order to our disadvantage. We also need Russia as the leading power in a multinational state in order to avoid flaring up fighting and wars. And to be honest, I don’t see Ukraine becoming a member of the EU and certainly not a member of NATO. In Ukraine, as in Russia, we have high levels of corruption and rule by oligarchs. What we in Turkey – rightly – denounce in terms of the rule of law, we also have the problem in Ukraine.
What do you think, Mr. Vad, what awaits us in 2023?
A broader front for peace must be built in Washington. And this senseless activism in German politics must finally come to an end. Otherwise we wake up one morning and we’re in the middle of World War III.
About Biden’s Documents:
AG Garland knew Nov. 2/22 about Biden docs.
Trump doc raid Nov 16/22
Biden docs story leaked early Jan/23.
Senator Miss Lindsey Graham calls for special prosecutor Jan 11th.
AG Garland appoints “deep state” special prosecutor Jan. 12th.
Jan 13th “we can’t talk about docs as it is under investigation”.There is no pattern in the above lying facts at all.
Appointing A Special Prosecutor:
Washington DC swamp’s dirty legal trick to hoodwinked Americans, over and over, again.
A special prosecutor has to legally report everything he finds to the swamp.
When was the last “swamp person” ever convicted of anything by a special prosecutor?
I will patiently wait for your reply.US Gov’s Vaccine Legal Protection Racket:
Anser Corp set up to run operation Warp Speed for DoD.
This legal set up shields vaccine manufacturers, like Phizer, from financial liability.
(Congress passed the required laws for this setup years ago.)The covid branding agency was Fors-Marsh.
Per Dr. David Martin.
Regarding the counterproductive and self-defeating strategies adopted by The Empire of Lies:
The propensity of The Empire of Lies to shoot itself in the foot is exceeded only by its propensity to shoot its citizens in the head.
Want to send a scandal to stagnation?
Want to bore the populace to tears?
Just impanel some investigation-
The blathering will gobble up the years.WES, from yesterday- Other viruses, other vaccines…there’s something very special about the spike protein. Why must everybody (who’s not somebody) carry it? Even the beasts!
I’ll just climb out on a limb, with a Cheshire Cat grin. Spike protein is like MSG to the ALIENS(!!!). We are all just being seasoned. :0At my latitude, we have gained 23 minutes of afternoon light, and will soon be gaining morning light.
They can’t take that away from me- No, no, they can’t take that away from me!Everything said and done in The Empire of Lies is a either a blatant lie or is founded on a lie. Everything, from creation of money to ‘measurements’ of economic activity to ‘unemployment numbers’ to ‘education’ to ‘healthcare’ to ‘defence’ to so=called planning. All of it. All fabrications and lies.
Are you speaking hyperbolically or seriously?
Because, from what I understand, much of the research and policy proposals taken in “The Empire of Lies” supports the theory that climate change is occurring, and “climate change” of the specific kind that you’re on record stating is our current reality, Is it your position that you have facts and information and research supporting your claim that occurred without any assitance, funding, material resources, or “saying” and “doing” from The Empire of Lies?
Also, in an earlier response to Dr. D quoting an interview with Richard Lindzen, you stated “Richard Lindzen has zero credibility.” If this is an accurate and precise claim, and you are capable of assigning quantitative measurements to people’s credibility, what is your quantitative measurement of your own credibility? How many credibles do you have, based on your own analysis and assessment?
I notice also that in that comment, you link to the website co2.earth, which calls itself “Daily CO2.” You then finish that comment, after posting that link, with “Never let the actual data get in the way of a ‘good’ argument.” But if you go to that website and look at where they get “the actual data,” one sees that they retrieve this information from NOAA GML: “This table presents the most up-to-date, daily average reading for atmospheric CO2 on the planet. Units = parts per million (ppm). Measurement location = Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii. Source = NOAA GML.” And when I go to that website, and look at their “About Us” page, besides noticing that I’m accessing a .gov site, I notice at the very bottom that NOAA is an agency within the US Department of Commerce, the Department that is likely also the umbrella responsible for the “measurements” of “economic activity” that you’re saying are lies.
So, now I’m confused. You on the one hand tell us that when it comes to The Empire of Lies, everything, all of it, fabrications and lies. But then on the other hand tell us —yet sarcastically— that “the actual data” should never get in the way of a good argument, with the twist of the sarcasm implying that if we were to study “the actual data,” we’d conclude that you’re correct. But how can both of these things be true? If the data you want us to learn about and then infer from that data that climate change is real, then why are you linking us to data that comes from the same organizations you are also saying are all of it, everything, fabrications and lies, blatant or founded on lies?
If you can’t trust the US Department of Commerce to tell you the truth about the economy, why do you trust them to tell you the truth about the climate, especially when everything, all of it, are blatant lies or founded on lies?
So, in light of the inconsistency noted here, would it be incorrect to say that your assessment of your own credibility is in doubt? Or should we have some other inference?
And, if you’re just being hyperbolic above, and you think there are some data that are trustworthy coming from The Empire of Lies, then weren’t you just bullshitting when you said all of it, everything, everything said and done, are lies?
Either way, it will be useful and helpful to know what your own quantified measurement of your own credibility is. As you have pointed out that a few of the commentors here are bullshitters, it stands to reason you think you are more credible (unless you too are a bullshitter). Thus, there must be some quantity of credibility you’ve obtained, if Lindzen’s is “zero.” What is yours?
The Russian MoD is now reporting far more pickup trucks and SUVs being destroyed for each military AFV/APC/tank destroyed. A typical MoD summary report will say 20 Ukrainian service men, 6 pickup trucks, 3 SUVs, and 1 military AFV destroyed in a given attack.
The number of Ukrainian service members being destroyed daily by the Russians is now only in the tens, not hundreds.
The Russian MoD is saying half of the Ukrainians they now destroy are foreigners.
Ukraine is winning the war now because the number of artillery shells Russia is firing daily has dropped by 75%. Clearly Russia is running out of shells!
Or maybe Russia is simply running out of suitable targets to shoot at?
MPSK:
My best guess is that “they” know we won’t willingly take anymore vaccines now, so they will simply put it into our food, like lettuce, without telling us.
Next thing to check is, can I at least wilt my spinach, put it in a soufflé, a spanakopita or something? Need to check how resistant both the mRNA and spike are to heat
Polemos said
I notice at the very bottom that NOAA is an agency within the US Department of Commerce
How interesting, the government scammers recognising that the atmosphere is a commercial project. If there really was a climate problem, what chance would that department have of fixing the issue?
Why The Spike? Why is it so important that everything makes The Spike Protein?
Are those who suggest “they” want everything to be genetically modified so the claim of ownership holds, correct?
Is there a “Part 2” to The Spike Protein?
Does it impart something that’s worth killing off all that can’t tolerate it?
Do they want to kill as many mega-consumers as possible? (This one has documentation, at least).MPSK:
One thing the spike protien does is allows them to tracked us all better. Not sure exactly how, but might have something to do with vaccine ingredients like magnetic particles (clustering like micro-circuits), graphene, and god knows what else they put in the vaccines, etc.
Likely electrically or magnetically by an unnoticed/hidden scanner as you walk by.
@ Polemos.
I am speaking literally, with a tiny measure of hyperbole thrown in.
If I were to speak totally literally I would have to say more than 90% of what The Empire of Lies say and does is fake or fraudulent or fabricated. The 10% that is not fraudulent/fake/fabricated is more-or-less insignificant.
You have mentioned the matter of ‘Climate Change’.
Well, it’s not ‘climate change’; it is severe Planetary Overheating. Or Planetary Meltdown.
The term ‘Climate Change is fraudulent/fake/fabricated, designed to create the [false] perception in the minds of the scientifically illiterate or scientifically naive that what we are experiencing is simply a small change in the way the world works that could even benefit people in certain locations!
The data presented by the UNIPCC is all completely outdated -often a decade out of date.
The forcing factors assigned to various greenhouse gases are all fake/fraudulent/fabricated.
I had extensive discussions with numerous real experts on these matters around a decade ago.
For instance, the forcing factor for methane was arbitrarily set at 34 times CO2..
That figure was revised to 56 times CO2.
Then it was revised to 86 times CO2.
The real factor for time scales that matter is around 300!
But none of the criminals involved in the UNIPCC assessments is allowed to say that: it would be ‘bad for business’.
Even when the UNIPCC does move slightly towards telling the truth, it is done fraudulently.
For instance, UNIPCC spokespersons blithely talk about 3oC or 5oC or even 8oC increases in average temperature as though they are survivable.
The criminals at the IPCC work hand-in-hand with the criminal managers of Airstrips to promote digital-money-shifting scams like ‘carbon trading’. Carbon trading, like everything else they do, makes matters worse by utilising energy and resources whilst doing nothing to address the real source of he predicament, he desequestration of ‘ancient carbin’.
Criminals at the local level promote ‘climate change’ scams.
For instance, The Scorpion, having declared a ‘Climate Emergency’, had a fake ‘Climate Commission’, headed by a discredited lawyer-economist, established.
This fake ‘Climate Commission’ proceeded to p[resent a set of completely fake responses to the ‘Climate Emergency’ that included:
1. Promotion of electric vehicles -much of the electricity needed to run these vehicles being generated by way of burning coal.
2. Establishment of a ‘hydrogen economy’ -the hydrogen being generated from natural gas via an ineffeicient process that causes CO2 emissions!
Needless to ay, challenging this bullshit is futile -I tried several times- because the entire game is rigged to ensure that bullshit cannot be challenged.
Need I go on?.
At one stage I had a pile of documents half a metre high, detailing the frauds and fakery of The Empire of Lies. I disposed of it all because there is no mechanism for using it.
\
I commenced writing a report to The Auditor General a year ago, but put it on the backburner because I believe that Office of the Auditor General -a supposedly independent body overseeing government- is just as fake and fraudulent as everything else..At some stage I might complete the report to confirm my suspicion, which is based on The Office of Auditor General having completely ignored two previous, well-documented complains.
Need I go on? .
. . . ; . .
@ Polemos
‘Thus, there must be some quantity of credibility you’ve obtained, if Lindzen’s is “zero.” What is yours?’
maybe you have missed it. i have pointed out several times on TEA that I have an Hounurs in Chemistry and studied the Structure of Matter using UV-Visible and Infra-Red Spectroscopy, plus X-ray crystallography.
I spent many as a Chief Chemist and as a Technical Manager, carrying out environmental monitoring, compiling and presenting environmental reports.
Whenever I have face to face discussions with anybody, I immediately destroy any fake arguments thye might come up with. One of the most notable was when I destroyed the fake arguments of Dr Sue Krundieck of the University of Canterbury at an energy and environmental symposium.
None of it makes a scrap of difference because the Empire of Lies just keep pursuing its fake narratives whatever we say or do..
On the matter of CO2 readings. I do not believe that actual scientists doing the measuring are faking the numbers they report. I believe the US Department of Commerce is simply the funding agency for the researchers.
The Empire of Lies does generate fake unemployment numbers, fake GDP numbers etc. But, as far as I am aware, the atmospheric CO2 numbers are genuine.
That said, it would not surprise me at all if the reporting of daily atmospheric CO2 were to be terminated by ‘the controllers’. I have been expecting it to happen.
.
. . .
Talking of ancient carbon, more proof that the airstrip special child is nuts … https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.1958.0021 by one of his fellow countrymen.
Prediction: the kid thinks the author is a complete moron.
Meanwhile the antarctic ice continues to ignore climate change … https://joannenova.com.au/2023/01/2000-gigatons-of-plant-wrecking-co2-and-icebergs-around-antarctica-are-the-same-as-the-1700s/ … when will it get on board this climate scam.
More nonsense from aspnaz, as usual.
‘While the decline in Antarctic Sea ice extent is always steep at this time of year, it has been unusually rapid this year, and at the end of December, Antarctic sea ice extent stood at the lowest in the 45-year satellite record. Sea ice extent was more than 500,000 square kilometers (193,000 square miles) below the previous record year of 2018; four of the five lowest years for the last half of December have occurred since 2016.’
Reported today: Sea temperatures off the coast of Airstrip Five are 6oC above average.
Whereas air temperatures can swing wildly (here it was 34oC in the shade one day and 14oC the next), water temperatures change slowly. And the heat content of water is more than one thousand times the heat content of the same volume of atmosphere.
Therefore a 6oC increase in average temperature –the highest ever recorded– is highly significant.
@Jesus I notice you did not address Polemos’ point regarding CO2 level readings. If you quote the bad corporations’ government department, how do you know they are not lying to you, how do you not know that CO2 is actually only 10 ppm? Your source is not reliable, you said so yourself, so you are bullshitting us?
I know, I know, religion does not need a source on this earth, you are endowed with universal truth and imbued with activist bullshit. Keep on ebelieving.
Jesus said
Sea temperatures off the coast of Airstrip Five are 6oC above average.
I thought you were a Chemist? You cannot even document a temperature correctly? Or maybe that is just the way your religion does it.
If I were to speak totally literally I would have to say more than 90% of what The Empire of Lies say and does is fake or fraudulent or fabricated. The 10% that is not fraudulent/fake/fabricated is more-or-less insignificant.
If this is what you’re saying totally literally, without snark or sarcasm but with all credible sincerity, then why did you link us to the website Daily CO2, which as I pointed out are getting their numbers from The Empire of Lies? Either those CO2 fall into the 90% range, in which case they are lies, fake, fabricated, fraudulent, or they fall into the 10% range, that is “more-or-less insignificant.” Are you asking us to agree with you that Planetary Meltdown is occurring on the basis of insignificant measurements? Are you saying that what you regard as “the actual data” is most probably (90%) fraudulent or least probably (10%) insignificant? How am I being responsible in coming to any inference using insignificant data?
Because, you go on to say
On the matter of CO2 readings. I do not believe that actual scientists doing the measuring are faking the numbers they report. I believe the US Department of Commerce is simply the funding agency for the researchers.
So, you said 90% are fake, 10% insignificant. What does ‘insignificant’ mean to you? Can one make good inferences from insignificant data? What does “actual data” of significance look like, if this data from the website you linked us to is not faked, comes from The Empire of Lies, and is therefore —since you’re totally literally speaking— insignificant?
You say you do “not believe” the scientists (actual) are faking the numbers they measure, but this doesn’t tell me what significance I should place on the numbers, or if what they measure is what the agency reports, or if the measurements are accurate and precise (where do poor measurements fall in the 90%/10% split), or if the scientists are actually actual at the NOAA.
Still, as you write here, these are your beliefs. Do you allow for others to have differing beliefs? I mean, maybe I agree The Empire of Lies is not to be trusted, because I take you seriously that everything is fake and whatever is not part of the everything is nevertheless insignificant. So, my belief is not to listen to anything said by any of the NOAA people, because I don’t believe the “actual scientists” working for the NOAA are the ones coding the websites, scripting the databases, reporting the numbers, posting the findings, but what I do believe is that it’s all lies, everything, all of it, except the part that’s not, in which case it’s insignificant, and thus meaningless and not worth considering and unimportant. And maybe I believe that tracing the funding of an agency back to its sources reveals reasons why I do not need to listen to anything said by that agency.
For example, maybe I learn that Professor Lexample of Varhard Diversity is funded by the Dogo Institute —an institute I do not trust, have never trusted, and think is scum— so whenever someone in an online comment posts a long interview by Professor Lexample where he disagrees with me, I can instead ignore it and not respond to any piece of it, because clearly an agency I do not trust funding someone means that person is incapable of speaking truths that might have something of significance to say to influence my thinking, or at least anyone at my level of thought, towards truth, or have helpful insights, or at the very least be interesting. Would you think this belief is wrong, because we can separate the scientists from the funding agency?
That is, if you’re okay with the scientists at a lab of the NOAA who receive their funding from the US Department of Commerce (and you are stridently against the kind of imperialistic capitalism that the US Department of Commerce supports and militates for, so this is Big News that you’re willing to set aside a principled stand against fake, fraudulent, and fabricated lies on this Very Important Issue), should I be okay with reading an interview of Professor Lexample of Varhard Diversity who’s also connected with the Dogo Institute? Or can we have different beliefs, and I remain adamantly opposed to anything connected with that scumbag Dogo Institute outfit while you find occasion to not be adamantly opposed to everything, all of it, connected with The Empire of Lies?
And thank you for posting that you have an Hounurs in Chemistry, studied the Structure of Matter using UV-Visible and Infra-Red Spectroscopy, plus X-ray crystallography, and spent many as a Chief Chemist and as a Technical Manager. So, quantifying this, how many credibles does this amount to? One hundred credibles? Two thousand credibles? I’m trying to understand where to rate you, because if Professor Lindzen has zero credibles, while he also has a degree and spent many years doing chemistry and working as a manager too, among other activities and so on, then I’m unsure if you have more credibles or fewer.
Finally, I notice that in response to aspnaz posting what you stated was “nonsense” “as usual,” you posted a link to the National Snow and Ice Data Center, which while located within the University of Colorado Boulder (are universities within The Empire of Lies part of the “education” fabrications of The Empire of Lies?) is nevertheless supported by http://www.nasa.gov (aren’t they deeply connected with the military and [counter]intelligence arms of The Empire of Lies?) and by World Data System, which traces sponsorship to the US Department of Energy (are they part of The Empire of Lies?) and the International Science Council. The International Science Council has a fairly interesting history, with many intersections with the United Nations and other world-spanning organizations tied to what you’re saying is the FFFalse Path (fake/fabricated/false) of “climate change” (with The One True Path being the one that talks about Planetary Meltdown). For example, the ISC connects with the World Meterological Observatory through the path of its history as the ICSU. Notice that in 1985, they note with significance:
“Villach meeting: The joint UNEP/WMO/ICSU conference “International Assessment of the Role of Carbon Dioxide and of other Greenhouse Gases in Climate Variations and Associated Impacts” is remembered as a turning point in creating global awareness of climate change.
So, not only does the ISC use the misleading and scientifically naïve language (they explicitly state this was about “global awareness”! of “climate change”!, just what you warned us about!) of the FFFalse Path, but this moment in history shows a long-running connection with the organizations you explicitly call out as FFFalse Path. That is, you state above that we’re not to trust the criminals at UNIPCC. But if we go and find out more about the IPCC, we find that they were founded by UNEP and WMO, the same organizations that support the ISC, the same organization that supports World Data Systems, the same organization that supports the National Snow and Ice Data Center, who hosts the website that you linked us to, where we are supposed to learn something to address the nonsense as usual.
So, we are here again: on the one hand, you do not want us to trust the criminals who distribute false and misleading information, who follow the FFFalse Path and support The Empire of Lies where 90% of what they say and do is fake, fraudulent, fabrication and the other 10% is meaningless, useless, unimportant because insignificant. But on the other hand, you want us to learn from data you are citing that is demonstrably linked to those exact same criminals on the exact same FFFalse Path. If it’s the flow of the money and the content of the language that corrupts the cause, why are you supporting these criminals when they send money and codify the language for these websites we’re supposed to learn is not nonsense, not fake, not insignificant?
I don’t get it. How is this supposed to work? Am I doing it wrong?
I’ll admit I’m scientifically naïve and never been anything as important as a Technical Manager. I once managed a yogurt shop in my teens, but that was about it. And I’ve certainly never destroyed anyone in a public debate. I’m kinda much more conciliatory and interested in understanding why people think what they do rather than go around toppling castles in their minds. So, I’ll defer to your wisdom about why you on the one hand do not want us to support criminals and on the other hand do want us to use their data, which you seriously totally literally say is 90% FFFalse Path and 10% insignificant.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.