The greenhouse effect

 

I have taken all the theory and demonstrations of the greenhouse effect in all three mediums, solid, liquid and gas to explain the mechanism and present its physical processes. Click the image to enlarge.

Is Jeremy Corbyn antisemitic?

 I have simply collected direct quotes by Jeremy Corbyn plus one by his supporter in Arab media. I will leave it to the readers to draw their own conclusions.

I was just required to do a little research on Jeremy Corbyn's views, it's far worse than I realised. I knew he'd asked for an enquiry into the power of the 'pro-Israel lobby' on British parliament (something akin to Mein Kampf, which was enough to confirm his classical Jew-hatred alone for me) https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-jewish-chronicle/20120420/281612417393995 but confirming it was neither a slip nor an accident he said it again in 2017 in a letter to Theresa May the then PM https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israeli-embassy-scandal-jeremy-corbyn-demands-official-inquiry
He also followed Der Fuhrer asking parliament to impose sanctions on Israel (they're actually the Jewish state so it was fairly personal) https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-jewish-chronicle/20120420/281612417393995

Yes, there's more. He blamed Israel for a bombing carried out in Egypt by, no, not the IDF, Mossad or their government, but Islamic Jihadis. But Corbyn, being far more informed, believed they were told to do it by Jews. https://www.jewishnews.co.uk/corbyn-suspected-hand-of-israel-in-egypt-bombing-during-press-tv-interview/

He has also created his own fan club in the Arab world who blame guess who for his claims of being antisemitic? Yes, you've guessed it, Israel itself. By hating on Israel and being noticed and called out for doing so, it's Israel's fault. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israels-hand-behind-attacks-jeremy-corbyn

Missing the obvious

 Until I was on social media I didn't actually realise this phenomenon existed. And even more so I never thought I'd be explaining what I assumed was obvious to other people, and then having my explanations rejected. I don't know the details about how and why people have become blinded to reality, but it's real and for me quite terrifying as it means we can be run by lunatics who are voted for by similar lunatics and there aren't enough sane people to stop it. Some examples.

Heat pumps. Costing around 10 times the price of gas boilers, but can't heat water to a safe heat or work properly under about 10C. Yet our government will be forcibly cutting off our gas and leaving us with no other option. The facts are there and very few people care.

Wind turbines. These use coal to make the steel and concrete, use huge amounts of land, and work within about 10-30mph, when they go too fast they are stopped or they will burn out. The power can't be regulated to demand, and when it's producing during low demand the power is wasted. Yet the government paid billions of our taxes to cover the sea and land with these things despite needing constant backup to keep the supply constant. Therefore we only need the backup and can get rid of the wind farms.

Driverless cars. If I have to explain why these will not work I will recommend you to hire one for a day and let me know how it goes.

Changing sex. If you can change your birth certificate if you change genders, you are not changing your gender but your sex, which under current conditions is only possible for a few fish and lizards. Mammals as yet have not managed to switch their genes from XX to XY or reverse, but the activists insists changing gender means changing sex, and men now go to gynaecologists for cervical smears. No, I'm not joking. And the basis for this is mainly 'I feel like a man/woman'. Obvious point two. How do you know what it feels like to be the opposite sex? How do you even know what it feels like to be another person? It's impossible, you can't. You can and will only ever feel like you. Not a man or a woman, but you. If anyone thinks they can prove they can feel like the opposite sex they will get a Nobel Prize.

Climate change claims

 The UN IPCC and media daily turn out claims about the results of a rise in world temperatures. Having had about 40 years to test them I will quote both the IPCC and others in similar authority to see if the figures match the claims.

IPCC summary for policymakers 2021:

A.1.4 Globally averaged precipitation over land has likely increased since 1950, with a faster rate of increase since the 1980s (medium confidence). It is likely that human influence contributed to the pattern of observed precipitation changes since the mid-20th century.

A good start.

A.1.5 Human influence is very likely the main driver of the global retreat of glaciers since the 1990s and the decrease in Arctic sea ice area between 1979–1988 and 2010–2019 (decreases of about 40% in September and about 10% in March). There has been no significant trend in Antarctic sea ice area from 1979 to 2020 due to regionally opposing trends and large internal variability. Human influence very likely contributed to the decrease in Northern Hemisphere spring snow cover since 1950.

A.2.2 Global surface temperature has increased faster since 1970 than in any other 50-year period over at least the last 2000 years (high confidence).

It depends who and when you get it from.

There are plenty more conflicting diagrams out there from equally important sources. You decide.

A.2.4 Global mean sea level has risen faster since 1900 than over any preceding century in at least the last 3000 years (high confidence).

Seems like they hoped no one would check up on this one. As a directly measurable parameter at any time since we invented rulers, collected sea level data from tide gauges, floats and measuring poles worldwide are the most direct proxy for world temperature. It is directly connected to rising temperatures, half through expansion and half through melting land ice. Taking into account the variations between different estimates, the only common factor here is that the IPCC claim is wrong, as the sea level rises feet in a decade coming out of the regular ice age recoveries alone, and clearly far more than the period quoted by the IPCC from the diagrams.

A.3 Human-induced climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe. Evidence of observed changes in extremes such as heatwaves, heavy precipitation, droughts, and tropical cyclones, and, in particular, their attribution to human influence, has strengthened since AR5.

In fact two of these claims are fairly new. Hurricanes and tornados were not expected to increase until this report, and as they actually haven't it makes you wonder why they have now lumped them in with all the other extremes.

A.3.4 It is likely that the global proportion of major (Category 3–5) tropical cyclone occurrence has increased over the last four decades 

Maybe a visit to Specsavers is required.

A.3.5 Human influence has likely increased the chance of compound extreme events18 since the 1950s. This includes increases in the frequency of concurrent heatwaves and droughts on the global scale (high confidence), fire weather in some regions of all inhabited continents (medium confidence), and compound flooding in some locations (medium confidence).

There isn't much available on floods, but as we found the rainfall was indeed increasing then this would follow. But the others, not so much.

Scientific papers refuting man made climate change

 Not only do believers still use the debunked claim that scientists are 97% agreed man is changing the climate, the BBC just said it was now over 99%. They are lying as here is a list to prove it.

General dismissal  Warming caused by increased energy absorption Warming caused by decreased cloud cover Warming is natural Warming caused by changes in cloud albedo

It seems the media missed this matching set of reports connecting warming with less shade blocking sunlight from the surface.

The medieval warm period was real Physical evidence of the medieval warm period Sea surface temperatures during the medieval warm period Was MWP global (summary)

Also: No warming in southern coral seas

Solar influence on climate (93 papers)

The UN IPCC claim solar changes have very little effect on temperature. They clearly filter what they read.

Climate model uncertainties (summary) 

Natural holocene climate fluctuations Glaciers shrunk more during MWP than present

No Tricks Zone. See index of similar papers

More studies questioning the hockey stick

21 new papers showing current warming is not significant and it was warmer in the Holocene

To come: Papers by name of dissenting scientists.

Where is Satan

 Satan has two qualities. Firstly you can't be troubled by him (it is actually a force, ruling people) unless you invite him in. Of course you won't do this if you know who it is, so he has to gain your trust until you think he is your friend, then you are virtually selling your soul to the devil. It is consent, but the second quality is that it is false consent, as totally based on deception.

Therefore, once you have accepted Satan it is not because you are aware of it, quite the reverse. You believe they are helping you, and any suffering is to avoid a worse fate. Once you realise it is Satan you automatically reject him.

This is the simple formula. My lesson here is how to recognise him, so you can as an individual reject him. You will probably not be capable of persuading anyone else to do so as it is a very hard spell to break, but you can share the signs so at least they know what they are looking for,

The first, and greatest, is the problem/reaction/solution formula. Lock you down to protect from a virus. Wear masks outdoors even though you may not go near enough to pass it on to anyone, and it's almost impossible to spread in open air.

Stop your heating and travel, and restrict your diet to 'stop the earth warming'. Even if this was actually happening history knows it will only be an improvement, and happen over such a long period generations will have more than enough time to adapt. But Satan catches you in his heart and not your head, as fear is based in the lower brain which reacts like an animal and is incapable of thinking. It is why rational parents keep their daughters in while others are free to roam, as they fear they will be attacked, but at the same time accept their friends are safe to do so.

It is not even subtle. In fact it is becoming more and more open and obvious. Muslims no longer fight 'Zionists' but Jews. The UN admit the climate policies are only to bring about a world economic distribution. Climate scientists admit they can't model or even measure most climate parameters, so they simply produce the data they are asked for and alter the equations and measurements to fit them. Nowadays the clues are on ten foot high pedestals with lights flashing on them, but the missing link is the media, as hypnotised minds only listen to sources they trust, and in most cases this is the 'trusted' media sources like the BBC and established newspapers, who of course publish nothing to detach our thinking from Satan as they are run by the same force.

I guarantee if the BBC put a single known situation on the main news, by the next day whatever it had been supporting previously before it was released would collapse. If they exposed the algorithm all main temperature sensing organisations use which creates nearly all modern warming then people would all feel cheated and never fall for that scam again, and probably many more as once your eyes are open they rarely close again. You have been awakened, red pilled, and it is now virtually impossible to fool you again as there is a formula and it is extremely narrow and limited.

This is all you need to know, if even 30% of people wake up it will be impossible to maintain any illusions any longer, as, to use a current phrase, there will be a herd immunity of the minds. Satan will fall.

These things are all legal but they're wrong

 Politics is full of glaring loopholes. Some, you will see, are obviously wrong, others are based on the problem/reaction/solution formula, where you would believe they were wrong unless they were offered as an alleged solution to something worse. Of course when that something worse doesn't happen they always claim it's because of the solution, even though it will always be impossible to know either way, much like the local criminals offer to look after your car so it doesn't get stolen or your business so it doesn't burn down. After nothing happens to it they claim it was because of the insurance you paid, although what they actually meant is if you don't pay them then they'll steal your car or burn down your business.

1) Offshore taxation. This is a totally legal loophole. It means in many countries any firm nominally located in a tax haven pays barely any tax wherever it does business. We all know the main culprits and it can easily be changed by taxing business on where it is done, not where it is based.

2) Phoenix companies. It is possible to own a limited company, go broke, not pay any of your liabilities, and then buy back the company in another name and start up the next day or so with the same assets and no debts. There has never been a single politician who challenged this ancient loophole in the law.

3) Energy rationing. Our first solution to an imagined problem. If using energy to heat, travel and manufacture using cheap and reliable fuel emits a poison then it is banned, as with the Clean Air Act requiring coal plants and the like to scrub their emissions before they left the chimneys, and ended smog. But if it emits CO2, which is known as essential to all life on earth through the carbon cycle, and is treated in the same way as it is alleged CO2 causes not just warming but this warming is overall bad for life on earth, then as stated in the Kyoto Protocol, you must reduce energy usage.

If there was a plentiful and constant alternative fuel we would have done so already and changed to use it, but there isn't. Instead the British government wants us to lower our radiators by 10C to around 10C. That is the average temperature on a winter's day, and basically unless it's almost freezing it is the same as not having any heating on at all. They will make this happen partly through banning gas boilers and partly through smart meters which can regulate how much energy you use.

Surely forcing people to restrict their heating, which we know is bad for your health as there is a physical optimum temperature and minimum temperature for indoors, and that is what everyone sets their heating at. People are already dying of cold in winter as the green taxes mean they can't afford enough heating, so people are dying in their thousands every year already for something not even expected to happen till around 2050 at the most liberal estimates.

4) Travel restrictions. This is the twin of energy rationing, as restricting car and plane travel are for the same purported reasons as above, and previously only something done automatically in totalitarian regimes. Banning certain vehicles from cities even though they all pass their MoT tests suggests either the strict MoT emissions tests are useless, or they are actually sufficient so the additional bans are pointless. Both can't be true at the same time.

On top of vehicle restrictions, which include banning all cars except electric by 2050, blocking roads makes no sense unless they are death traps. All others provide access to buildings and through traffic and will mean emergency vehicles and deliveries are made almost impossible to access. Add some speed humps and chicanes and you will combine many more deaths a year from ambulances who have to drive slowly and will not reach victims in time, or get victims to hospital in time, with accidents from people trying to avoid traffic forced onto the wrong side of the road by chicanes. Vehicles are not  designed to be dropped vertically very often besides off-roaders, and this can happen a hundred times a day now in many suburban areas, and councils have special funds for vehicles damaged by hitting one underneath. Bad drivers will always cause accidents as they are ignorant, and putting bumps on the road will ruin journeys for the huge majority of safe drivers and will do little or nothing to prevent bad drivers causing havoc.

5) Hunting animals. If you're not going to eat it, don't kill it. If you do, then be quite prepared to be killed by an animal yourself, it's the same thing as what you're doing.

6) Live animal exports. These should be kept to a minimum, killing the animals where they originate and then freezing the meat for export. Many have no food or water and die on the journeys which can be for thousands of miles.

I'm sure there are plenty more similar examples which I would like to hear about if so, but these are all examples where either fraud or harm is legalised, with or without a plausible but baseless excuse. Mankind will not evolve until its worst elements such as these are tamed.

Sources:

Offshore tax havens

Phoenix companies

Kyoto Protocol

Turning down heating

Deaths from cold through high bills

Cars to be banned from cities

Road humps cause around 500 deaths a year

Live animal exports