milking a hypothesis

… and destroying our earth.

Three things control our world more than any­thing else: greed, stupi­dity and fear. Neither of them have any positive effects on the earth's climate, but they sure cause more than their fair share of damage to our environment.

One of the most stubborn climate change related hypo­thes­ises is that rising CO₂ levels in our atmos­phere caused solely by human acti­vi­ties, will trig­ger irre­vers­ible pro­ces­ses that will cause tem­pera­tures to rise to danger­ous levels on a global scale, and lead to increases in all kinds of world-wide natural and unna­tural disasters.

Climate is changing‥!
Right, thank your god for that, and quit stir­ring up hysteria about it.

Now, CO₂ has never shown signs, or been proven, to have much of an effect on atmos­pheric tem­pera­tures. Rather the other way round; that tem­pera­ture affects CO₂ con­ver­sion to and from the atmos­phere, with the Earth's oceans as the main “con­ver­sion partner”. Human activity is also only respon­sible for a very small per­cen­tage of the observed rises in CO₂ levels in the atmos­phere no matter which way it is cal­cu­la­ted, but that minor fact is (inten­tion­ally?) over­looked by most s.c. “climate change experts”. Consequently^(?), there has to be some­thing seriously wrong with nature since it stub­bornly refuses to coop­erate and line up its beha­vior with the care­fully craf­ted com­pu­ter models. The “climate experts” can of course not be wrong, so nature must be… That reaching some­what higher atmos­pheric CO₂ levels is the single most important factor for achieving increased greening of our planet and impro­ved growt of the plant-based food we and all other beings on Earth depends on, is another “minor detail” that seems to be totally ignored by the before mentioned “experts”. Death to nature no matter the cost, seems to be the mantra for these fact-sup­pres­sing igno­rants.

The general hysteria caused by the flawed but wide­spread climate change hypo­thes­ises, resem­bles reli­gi­ous sec­tar­ian­ism, and seems to have totally taken over for sanity and actual fact-checking in sur­pris­ingly large sections of our world's leader­ships and public.
The common view seems to be that “ why bother with facts when we can put all our faith, and every­one else's money, in untested and mainly untest­able hypo­thes­ises and com­pu­ter models‽ ”

This arti­fi­ci­ally created “crisis” and the unwar­ran­ted hysteria rising from it, is of course a great excuse for des­troy­ing envi­ron­ments, drain­ing budgets, and rais­ing taxes, and poli­ti­cians, busi­ness people, and other greedy creatures, are all in and really going for it at full steam.

how to destroy the world, and getting paid for it…

Dream up, or adopt, a whole bunch of global crisis situa­tions caused by an un­veri­fi­able fic­tion, and pre­sent your­self and your dis­ci­ples as saviors.
Kill off, liter­ally or virtu­ally, those who call out the dream/​night­mare for what it is, and scare off all others who may ques­tion or cri­ti­cize any part of it or show signs of dis­res­pect for any of the “true be­liev­ers”. It has worked before – check world history, and it will work again, and again, and again, gene­ra­tion after gene­ration.

Make sure not to let any chance to insert con­nec­tions to the dreamed-up crisis into news-stories about what­ever happens any­where in the world, pass unused. Hammer these con­nec­tions in via all available channels, all the time, as every­one must be cons­tantly re­mind­ed that it is a sin to think for them­self and risk losing focus on the only true faith.
Whatever goes wrong is of course always some­one else's fault, and such inci­dents must not be allowed to slow down the money-streams, or lower the feel-good factor among the faithful.

anything goes…

Image with text:
0.3% consensus, not 97.1%
'Scientific consensus that human activity is very likely causing most of the current GW (anthropogenic global warming, or AGW).'
11944 ABSTRACTS REVIEWED Cook et al.(2013)
7931 were excluded for expressing no opinion 66.4%
3896 marked as agreeing we cause some warming 32.6%
64 marked as endorsing consensus as defined 0.5%
41 actually consensus as defined 0.3%
0 marked as endorsing manmade catastrophe 0.0%

Consensus is a won­der­ful thing, and seem­ingly very easy to con­struct out of thin air and some inven­tive mathe­ma­tic jumble when­ever needed.
No wonder the num­bers behind the s.c. “scien­ti­fic con­sen­sus” are among those “minor details” that can not be dis­pu­ted. They are after all nothing but con­veni­ent lies, that, when repeated over and over and over again enough times, are being accepted as truth by large sections of the public, and are used as covers for all kinds of mad­ness and des­truc­tion by those res­pon­sible for same lies.

The s.c. “con­sen­sus” is of course not a scien­ti­fic con­struc­tion at all, but rather an entirely poli­ti­cal one. Any­thing goes in those circles, and those who won't accept it must be silen­ced by any means in order to uphold the illu­sions until there is no turn­ing back to sane be­ha­vior no mat­ter the outcome.

conspiratory? hell yeah!

Statistically about 10% of all humans simply lack the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. A pity that kind of not very trust­worthy people are over-repre­sen­ted in all kinds of leading posi­tions in our socie­ties, in addi­tion to con­trol­ling the world of crimes. Finding the same people on both sides of the law, is not un­common.

One reason these crea­tures are allowed to domi­nate, may be that sta­tis­ti­cally about 80% of us prefer to stay calm and quiet, leave deci­sions to those who present them­selves as leaders, and just accept what­ever comes – at least for a while. There will always be limits to how much mad­ness the common man and woman will accept, regard­less of how many impres­sive words and slick lies the mainly self-appoin­ted leading figures wrap their irra­tional and des­truc­tive plans in.

When people finally wake up and start pushing back against the rascals, the gloves come off and uni­for­med and non-uni­for­med enfor­cers are sent in to keep the public back and the paid des­truc­tion going.
Whatever respect people may have had for them before, will disappear, and who knows if they'll ever get any of it back, or if they even care about such matters.
Such processes are great for those who want to deal with socie­ties that are already well and truly ripped apart and are easy to divide further and destroy. For every­one else, well … we do at least get to know who we most defi­ni­tely can not trust.

One may write it all off as just another step for­ward on human­kind's sad but inev­i­table journey towards self-des­truc­tion, and just let them carry on with their futile attempts at being in control of some­thing/​any­thing/​no­thing until they're done this time around.
With the dedi­ca­tion they show I'm in no doubt they will reach their insane goals one day, and then they'll regret they did and blame some­one else – same as always.

In the mean time; have fun … if you can. Laughter makes non­sen­si­cal be­hav­ior through­out our com­muni­ties eas­ier to ignore.

sincerely 

Hageland 15.oct.2020
last rev: 24.oct.2020