greenhouse climate on demand

… courtesy United Nations et al.

You can have just about any climate change you want any decade you like, at a price of course.
Want the future 3°C warmer‥? Sure, we have that scenario well covered (on com­put­ers) by our fine se­lec­tion of “climate scien­tists” – the very best and most poli­ti­cally correct, servile and sub­mis­sive sub­jects money can buy these days, and we con­stantly stream­line their drafts and con­clu­sions to fit our poli­ti­cal agendas.

Oh, you rather want it cooler? Yeah, well, we do of course have that covered in our computer models too – just in case, made easy by redefining “global warming” to the all-covering “climate change” years ago. Will cost more though, as such a nega­tive trend isn't actually on our political wishlist agenda just yet, and covering up previous lies with new ones tends to cost money – lots of money.

Maybe the price for global cooling will go down slightly next year or the year there­after, as the pre­vi­ously pre­dic­ted “warming” trend seems to have fallen flat already. All loose ends should be tidied up and in the right hands pretty soon any­way, so what climate changes that inevi­tably will follow shouldn't really matter much when it comes to ful­fil­ling the over­riding global control agenda for all but the global climate.

Of course the climate is changing … what did you expect‥? Does anyone seriously think climate was static until the UN and IPCC came along? Actually, that “climate has been static until latest decades” message, is what many Climatards are pushing – remember “the IPCC hockey stick”. Shows how ignorant and history-less they are, and/or how stupid they think all others are.

just add more heat, more CO2, and water

Yes, the IPCC is awfully sorry, but … the actual effects of the rising CO2 level on climate have always been difficult to predict on a global scale once nature itself kicks its (pretty irritating) regula­tory mecha­nisms into gear. Thus, your green­house will need the same supplements of growth factors as before, and most likely more of them since it – according to the UN – is impera­tive that we con­tinue to coun­ter­act, exploit and tax nature in every way possible.
Those all-important growth factors will of course be made available, at prices dic­ta­ted by the market forces same as every­thing else in life.

You may have to double or triple up on CO2 (800 to 1200ppm should do) to make your green­house promote growth as needed to feed your desig­na­ted part of a growing population. In case you wondered: increasing CO2 levels is quite normal in com­mer­cial green­houses. That prac­tice in itself does not increase temp­era­ture by a meas­ur­a­ble factor, unless a heating-unit is used for re­leas­ing CO2. 1

The sun will (hope­fully) still provide heat and drive photo­syn­thesis for a bil­lion years or so longer. Should do for most of us, and (just to put things in per­spec­tive) the next ice-ages are ex­pec­ted to hit us a few times before the sun expands (in both size and temp­era­ture) to over­heat and finally engulf the earth.2
And, if your green­house is small enough just spending plenty time inside “talking to your plants”, may provide enough CO2 from your breath to satisfy the least de­man­ding plants. (The CO2 is about 4% of total exhaled gasses, compared to the about 0.04% CO2 in inhaled air.)

If that doesn't suffice, you may light a wood-fire inside your greenhouse for increased CO2 level in the air – and added heat on cold nights, if you're still allowed to burn wood that is – it may be prohibited and/ or taxed.

No guarantee that water will be available and/ or affordable3 either, as all that wet stuff may end up being under strict market-control – even rain falling on ones own property can be taxed.

on the brighter side

Now, if you're lucky the CO2 levels in air will rise high enough through natural pro­ces­ses – mainly being released from the vast storage in the Earth's oceans, helped by releases of methane from thawing permafrost areas, to solve some of the problems with poor and/​or over­exploi­ted soil and lack of clean water, as found in many areas around the globe. Reversing desert­ifi­cation here and there most certainly wouldn't hurt a growing population.

Most plantlife does after all need less water and fertilisers for growth and natural spread at some­what higher CO2 levels – see above, which is the main reason many of us dub CO2 “the gas of life” and do not mind a raise to well above what we have now. Changes are not neces­sarily a bad thing, and we cannot freeze the Earth and what lives on it to status quo (what­ever that is) anyway.

confused?

Why write the above that “everyone” knows already?
Well, if one listens to some of those who suggest solutions to all sorts of problems that really should not bother any wise and some­what edu­ca­ted person in the first place, climate changes caused by rising CO2 levels from burning fossil fuel will run out of control and destroy the world as we know it within years. They have been going on and on about that scenario for decades now…
Thus, we will in their view have to elim­i­nate all man­made CO2 going to the atmos­phere (unless we live in places like China, India, Africa, etc, where number of man­made CO2 outlets are allowed to increase), and reinvent ways to live and grow food. All to counter­act a disaster that doesn't exist, by creating a whole series of totally un­ne­ces­sary and 100% man­made dis­as­ters affec­ting mil­lions, if not bil­lions, of people. Stupidity kills!

still confused?

Not to worry … the process of “unconfusing” you will start as soon as it is too late for you to do any­thing about any­thing that matters.
In short: you risk being stuck for life in a ditch others have con­vin­ced you to dig for your­self, to the degree that you'll even have some­thing that resemb­les a life if you do not quit paying atten­tion to all you're being told by “experts” – experts on man­ip­u­la­tion that is, and their lackeys.

Thus, not much will have changed from the days gone by, not even the weather and the earth's cyclic climate.
History repeats itself, just with different players/​suckers at the scenes for each genera­tion, and (in case you won­dered) the uni­verse simply does not care one way or the other.

So, grab whatever illusion you like the most while you can, and hold on to it as if your very life depended on it. It probably will…

Another way to put it, is that you will have to sort out and choose what to ignore of all the un­real­istic, non­sen­sical and unim­por­tant infor­ma­tion that gets sent your way, if you do not want to end up as more of a mental case with no mind of your own. No-one else will, or can, do it for you without controlling who, and what, you are.

sometimes…

Sometimes ones thoughts are better left hanging loosely in public spaces, instead of being spelled out in minute details.

Maybe I should have followed my own advice some­what better, but – to be perfectly clear – I am not bothered by any of the climate change nonsense.5 I am not the one who will have to save “crisis inventors” and indoc­tri­nated climate ex­trem­ists from their own fool­ish­ness, so they may as well carry on down the drain.
I do feel sorry for all the innocent who will continue to suffer under the ongoing and announced madness, but they are not my respon­si­bi­lity either … shame on me.

But, we have to do some­thing…
Yes, we have to quit listening to, and paying, climate alarm­ists, and rather start paying atten­tion to, and become, proper environ­ment­a­lists. Nature runs its course … stop polluting and destroying it.

At the time of writing more pressing global matters occupy my mind and most media outlets, as the spread of the Corona virus COVID-19 spreads fear, disease and death among people I know, and lots more people I do, or did, not know. All so sad…

Unlike the “climate crisis”, the ongoing pandemic most defi­ni­tely is not a laughing matter.
Hoping for the best all around, as hoping (and obser­ving isola­tion regula­tions) is pretty much all most of us can do these days.

sincerely 

Hageland 30.mar.2020
last rev: 10.apr.2020