22 Comments
RemovedJan 13
Comment removed
Expand full comment
Mar 22, 2023Liked by Fabius Minarchus

To my recollection, in his later years Dr. Pournelle repeatedly remarked that although he wasn't convinced that an AGW-predicated catastrophe was in the pipeline he preferred we not run the experiment on Earth's atmosphere... :)

Expand full comment

What we DON'T have is actual data. I'm sorry. We have a couple hundred years of some measurements at some specific points versus the geological span of the planet. None of what we have raises above the noise floor. And let's do models. We don't have any models yet that have successfully run into the past and ex post facto described any trends that we knew about. Therefore you can throw out all of those models for predicting future events. I'm all for nucs but I'm still not in favor of preemptive air pollution experiments in the name of pseudoscience.

Expand full comment

... and then there's geoengineering. how can anyone know for certain that what it is and is not causing?

... and then there's modern farming techniques which some apparently believe contributes to the heating, but again, how can anyone be certain about this?

... and then there's modern warfare which must also be negatively contributing to the otherwise natural environment. besides the carbon footprint that must be created in typical military battles (like in Ukraine), what kind of environmental impact might the bombing of the Nord Stream pipelines caused which the current foolish administration most likely perpetrated?

the problem is that there are too many agendas without the concern for truth, and none of these "studies" can be trusted (in like manner as the STATE sponsored "food pyramid" deceit).

and now we have the added hurdle of massive censorship actions under the guise of "controlling misinformation" by the F-MSM & the STATE, which ironically have been the two primary sources of actual misinformation forever.

thankfully, i remain convinced all this will come to an end soon, but in the meantime it's maddening and there is no resolve when people make religion out of what they falsely call “science”, as was done with the PLANdemic.

Expand full comment
Mar 25, 2023Liked by Fabius Minarchus

Indeed, AGW doesn’t have to be a complete hoax in order to oppose the anti human non solutions proposed by our current leaders. Water vapor and carbon dioxide increase the temperature. We have long known about this. So? As you said let’s find ways to engineer around whatever warming is going to happen. If the Dutch people in the Middle Ages were able to reclaim land from below sea level certainly modern civilization cannot be helpless in the face of climate change?

Expand full comment
Apr 25, 2023Liked by Fabius Minarchus

Read The Case For Nukes by Zubrin, it's a great realist, optimistic take on the whole AGW situation and I recommend it to everyone. Also the climate change chapters from Zeihan's The End of the World is Just the Beginning

Expand full comment
May 2, 2023·edited May 2, 2023

CO2 doesn't affect the climate. The climate affects CO2 levels. Believing the opposite is the basis of the psyop the Club of Rome came up with in the 1960's. In recent years we have produced 14% of the total CO2 emmisions humanity has produced in our entire history, yet there's been negligible warming over this period, no correlation. We in a slow warming interglacial period, defrosting, still technically in the ice age.

Expand full comment

Apply the same logic to "racism" to see how ridiculous your position is.

Expand full comment