Anthropogenic Negative Climate Change (ANCC)

[Bob Armstrong]

Climate Change Reform is URGENT?

Current World Governments & the old Political Parties are TOTALLY incapable of saving the human species..........new politics and new government is immediately required!

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#in...GXwXPZRKlkVwQZ

Nations are failing to live up to their climate pledges, pointing Earth toward more intense fires, drought and other havoc, a U.N. report said.

Just 26 of 193 countries that agreed last year to step up their climate actions have followed through with more ambitious plans. The world’s top two polluters, China and the United States, have taken some action but have not pledged more this year.

[Bob Armstrong]

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)

One Consequence: Global Warming

Inadequate Governments of the World Action


"Earth’s on Track to Warm Above 2C Despite Climate Action

Global temperatures will increase between 2.1 and 2.9C by the end of the century even if all climate promises are kept, according to a UN report."

My Comment

Note carefully that only a few years ago, the world governments set the target for ending the rise of heat around the Earth at 1.5 C! A year ago it was admitted that this was impossible given governments' actions/inaction in the intervening years. Then a new target of capping the increase was informally set at 2C.

Now we find that current government actions/inaction will cause a trajectory such that this CANNOT be achieved by even 2099!!

Without both radical political change in the governments around the world, and in the global economic workings, IMMEDIATELY, the human species is TOAST (Barring some miracle, for which we have little, if any, evidence.)

My Question: Opposition Agreement? : Do the negative "Natural Climate Change" supporters agree with this scientific projection, based on your scientific assessment of the current millenia-long global warming period we are experiencing (That you "claim" Earth is now in)?

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Sid Belzberg]

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)

One Consequence: Global Warming

Inadequate Governments of the World Action


"Earth’s on Track to Warm Above 2C Despite Climate Action

Global temperatures will increase between 2.1 and 2.9C by the end of the century even if all climate promises are kept, according to a UN report."

My Comment

Note carefully that only a few years ago, the world governments set the target for ending the rise of heat around the Earth at 1.5 C! A year ago it was admitted that this was impossible given governments' actions/inaction in the intervening years. Then a new target of capping the increase was informally set at 2C.

Now we find that current government actions/inaction will cause a trajectory such that this CANNOT be achieved by even 2099!!

Without both radical political change in the governments around the world, and in the global economic workings, IMMEDIATELY, the human species is TOAST (Barring some miracle, for which we have little, if any, evidence.)

My Question: Opposition Agreement? : Do the negative "Natural Climate Change" supporters agree with this scientific projection, based on your scientific assessment of the current millenia-long global warming period we are experiencing (That you "claim" Earth is now in)?

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

World Economic Forum Spreads Climate Misinformation and Refuses Open Scientific Debate with CLINTEL

"In August, the World Economic Forum (“WEF”) published an op-ed pushing for Artificial Intelligence to manage online harms and disinformation, which sparked social media furore. In fact, the WEF is a purveyor of climate change misinformation itself and should engage in open scientific debate with CLINTEL on the fact that there is no climate emergency, Friends of Science stated in a press release.

Friends of Science Society is an independent group of earth, atmospheric and solar scientists, engineers, and citizens based in Canada. It is celebrating its 20^th year of offering climate science insights. After a thorough review of a broad spectrum of literature on climate change, Friends of Science Society has concluded that the sun is the main driver of climate change, not carbon dioxide (CO2).

Climate Intelligence (“CLINTEL”) is an independent foundation that operates in the fields of climate change and climate policy.

“Over 1,100 scientists and scholars agree that there is no climate emergency, natural factors are most influential and we do have time to adapt. See World Climate Declaration” – CLINTEL

Media and social media commentators swiftly pounced on an opinion piece by Inbal Goldberger posted by WEF on 10 August 2022, which proposed using Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) to censor harmful online misinformation, but Friends of Science Society said that’s not the most important issue. Friends of Science Society is calling on the WEF to engage in open, civil debate on their climate misinformation the old-fashioned way – in person with CLINTEL."

https://expose-news.com/2022/10/26/w...isinformation/

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Sid:

Thanks - the WEF is certainly under attack on all fronts (Danielle Smith included).

But can I repeat:

My Question: Opposition Agreement? : Do the negative "Natural Climate Change" supporters agree with the UN scientific projection in my post # 902 above, based on your scientific assessment of the current millenia-long global warming period we are experiencing (That you "claim" Earth is now in)?

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Sid Belzberg]

Hi Sid:

Thanks - the WEF is certainly under attack on all fronts (Danielle Smith included).

But can I repeat:

My Question: Opposition Agreement? : Do the negative "Natural Climate Change" supporters agree with the UN scientific projection in my post # 902 above, based on your scientific assessment of the current millenia-long global warming period we are experiencing (That you "claim" Earth is now in)?

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

Based on the misuse of the IPCC simulated computer scenarios, I would tend to agree with the investigators of this paper that there is no climate emergency and that the predicted temp stats you refer to are based on worst-case scenarios but definitely not the most probable outcome. This excellent paper explains why I agree with the investigator's more optimistic outlook. Here are some excerpts from it.


Abstract


Climate science research and assessments under the umbrella of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have misused scenarios for more than a decade. Symptoms of misuse have included the treatment of an unrealistic, extreme scenario as the world’s most likely future in the absence of climate policy and the illogical comparison of climate projections across inconsistent global development trajectories. Reasons why such misuse arose include (a) competing demands for scenarios from users in diverse academic disciplines that ultimately conflated exploratory and policy relevant pathways, (b) the evolving role of the IPCC – which extended its mandate in a way that creates an inter-relationship between literature assessment and literature coordination, (c) unforeseen consequences of employing a temporary approach to scenario development, (d) maintaining research practices that normalize careless use of scenarios, and (e) the inherent complexity and technicality of scenarios in model-based research and in support of policy. Consequently, much of the climate research community is presently off-track from scientific coherence and policy-relevance. Attempts to address scenario misuse within the community have thus far not worked. The result has been the widespread production of myopic or misleading perspectives on future climate change and climate policy. Until reform is implemented, we can expect the production of such perspectives to continue, threatening the overall credibility of the IPCC and associated climate research. However, because many aspects of climate change discourse are contingent on scenarios, there is considerable momentum that will make such a course correction difficult and contested - even as efforts to improve scenarios have informed research that will be included in the IPCC 6th Assessment.



https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...14629620304655

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Sid:

Thank you for your clear answer. The projected temperature rise by the IPCC is too high (Increase of over 2C by 2099 on current trajectory evidence)

I am interested in the projected temperature rise (from Jan. 1, 2023), and by what date it will reverse, according to your "natural cycle" hypothesis (Which, it appears, the IPCC Investigators claim will not be based on an "unrealistic, extreme scenario". And as you opined, will be based on "most probable outcome".)

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Sid Belzberg]

Hi Sid:

Thank you for your clear answer. The projected temperature rise by the IPCC is too high (Increase of over 2C by 2099 on current trajectory evidence)

I am interested in the projected temperature rise (from Jan. 1, 2023), and by what date it will reverse, according to your "natural cycle" hypothesis (Which, it appears, the IPCC Investigators claim will not be based on an "unrealistic, extreme scenario". And as you opined, will be based on "most probable outcome".)

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

"We see that the net effect is to increase the apparent warming since ~2000 by about 0.15C"

https://clivebest.com/blog/?p=10224

This would imply less than 1C over the next 100 years.

[Bob Armstrong]

Sid:

Very precise - thanks.

Quite a different projection than by the IPCC:

IPCC - more than 2 C by 2099
IPCC Investigators - less than 1C by 2122.

And I take it that the 0.15C rise between ~2000 and 2022 includes the effect (You say it is negligible) of the man-made contribution to greenhouse gases in that period?

We plebs can now clearly see what the difference is in position for the future. I hope this will help us all in deciding how to approach the "evidence" of which position is "fact".

I must admit that the data/evidence is a bit overwhelming for the ordinary person. I think that is why people are making a decision on "trust" - who they think is the more credible, while being unable to assess the massive amount of conflicting evidence. I am not condoning this..........just stating that it seems to me to be the fact.

I will try to spend more time on the "opposition position" of negative Natural Climate Change, of a less severe nature, to understand it better. I will review earlier posts, though my time available is limited...........despite my belief that the situation is critical, I do have somewhat of a life outside of climate change, as do most.

Bob A (T-S/P)

[Bob Armstrong]

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)

The Two-Pronged Solution

Reduce + Capture

https://time.com/6213489/remove-carb...lctg=206908353

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Bob Armstrong]

Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC)

The public is aware; the public does not accept any "urgency".

Solution?

Climate Justice vs Self-Interest

"For years, decades even, providing assistance to the Global South has been framed as a “climate justice” agenda. The justice framing was straightforward: wealthy countries have spent more than a century emitting carbon dioxide unchecked, and they owe it to the rest of the world to pay for the damage they have caused. Words like justice, equity, and responsibility sat at the center of the plea. This logic is understandable, and the moral case is compelling, often poignant, even.

European Commission Executive Vice President Frans Timmermans, who oversees climate policy in the E.U., says that the moral argument can lack persuasive power for some audiences—even if there’s “some truth in that argument.”

......What does convince them is that if we don’t increase our efforts in this area, there will be even more disruption; there will be more migration; there will be less opportunity for investment and economic development.”

https://time.com/6225469/climate-jus...lctg=206908353

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Tom O'Donnell]

When people start using the word equity in this context, they out themselves as Communists, imo.

[Dilip Panjwani]

When people start using the word equity in this context, they out themselves as Communists, imo.

Equity in a Libertarian sense means: 'the quality of being fair and impartial, especially by removing unfairly created inequalities in opportunity', which is an honorable goal.

Equity in the 'woke' sense (in a culture dominated by the need for the government to provide you with everything) has unfortunately ended up meaning: 'the government should give more to people who are inefficient by themselves, and steal away more from people who are efficient'...

[Sid Belzberg]

Sweden Ditches Agenda 2030’s Climate Change Scam



On 17 October 2022, Ulf Kristersson was elected Sweden’s Prime Minister. The next day Prime Minister Kristersson made it clear there would be no climate and environment minister – he dissolved the Ministry of the Environment. Environmental issues have been relocated to the Ministry of Enterprise and Innovation.

In June 2019, the World Economic Forum (“WEF”) and the United Nations (“UN”) signed a strategic partnership framework to accelerate the implementation of the 2030 Agenda. WEF has a Strategic Intelligence platform that includes Agenda 2030’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (“SDGs”). You can explore the interactive map for SDG13 (climate action) HERE or the map for “climate change” HERE, and it will soon become obvious that the “climate change” agenda’s aim is not to protect wildlife or the environment nor is it about “saving the planet.”

New Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson is not heeding the Green agenda. He promptly eliminated the entire Ministry of Climate and Environment, marking the first time in 35 years that Sweden does not have a specific climate ministry. People are crying that the world will crumble without funding bureaucrats who pretend they have the ability to alter the weather cycle with enough funding.

Klaus Schwab’s plans for Agenda 2030 are in jeopardy. “Environmental issues are going to be given a disadvantage at the same time when we have a huge challenge in Sweden when it comes to biodiversity and forestry,” stated Stockholm University professor Karin Bäckstrand. “We won’t meet the Agenda 2030 goals on biodiversity.”

Democratic leader Ebba Busch will serve as the new Minister for Energy, and 26-year-old Liberal Romina Pourmokhtari will serve as the Minister for the Environment. The Nationalist Sweden Democrats do not support the goal of achieving net zero emissions.

Instead, the new government is prioritizing nuclear power initiatives that will make it increasingly difficult to shut down existing plants while using €36 billion to build new nuclear power stations. The new government is also considering reopening two nuclear power plants that discontinued operations in recent years. Yet another example of how Agenda 2030 and Schwab’s plan to alter the world will fail.


https://expose-news.com/2022/10/29/s...e-change-scam/

[Bob Armstrong]

ChessTalk Negative Anthropogenic Climate Change (NACC) Thread

Week # 44 (22/10/25 – 22/10/31 – 7 days)

Weekly Stats:
.....................................................2022 Average..........................................................2022 Average
Last Week's......Prior Week's........Views/Day..........Last Week's.....Prior Week's......Responses/Day
Views/Day........Views/Day.............(44 wks.)........Responses/Day....Resp./Day......... (44 wks.).

...45..........................36.......................49........................3.......................2.........................3.........

Analysis of Last Weeks Stats

Activity last week was better than the week before, and almost dead on the average throughout 2022 so far. The thread is remaining of high interest to CT'ers!

Climate Change Thread “Responses”

There are lots of climate change articles out there, both on negative anthropogenic climate change, and negative natural climate change.

This thread encourages CT'ers on all sides to re-post here, as responses, the climate change posts of interest they see elsewhere. Overall, ChessTalker's have been quite active here in posting “responses” and it seems that chessplayers across Canada re wanting information on climate change, a challenge unlike any our species has ever faced before.

Note: I personally, as the thread originator, am trying to post a new response at least every 2^nd day, but admit my busy schedule means I am sometimes falling short on this. So it is great that a number of other CT'ers are posting responses here somewhat regularly.

The Pressing Climate Change Issue

The core issue:

Building a sense of URGENCY on this issue in society. We must realize that we cannot kick it down the road any longer!

The public is aware of the climate change issue.......

BUT.....

climate activists must find strategies to “AWAKEN” the public to the “urgency”.

It is expected, though somewhat disheartening, to see other negative issues of the day climb immediately to the top of the public's agenda, with climate change being sometimes substantially downgraded in importance. We will all pay for this.........

The Time Line

Nature's Tipping point is estimated to be, on current trajectory, only 9 years away (Around Jan. 1, 2031). Capping the temperature rise at only 1.5 degrees Celsius (the original international target) is now impossible (UN Climate Change Panel's most recent report). Their position is that the problem at this time is mostly due to human activity, and that radical change in our method of living is the only way to avoid this rising, very problematic, temperature. UNCCP noted that current government deadlines were totally insufficient to solve the problem. CO 2 must be capped by 2025! Also, it has now become necessary to add in the process of CO 2 “removal”, along with “eliminating” the spewing of greenhouse gases into our atmosphere by human activity.

Our window of opportunity is fast closing.

The Large Picture Solutions

Can we come up with at least one viable suggestion of some impressive, radical thing that might wake up the public, that we could then put out there to other concerned climate activists?

CT'ers' Local Actions on Climate Change

You can do something! When you like one of this thread's links on an aspect of climate change, spread the news by posting it to your social media accounts and other Websites/Discussion Boards you participate in!

~ Bob (T-S/P)

[Sid Belzberg]

https://www.rebelnews.com/germany_to...arm_coal_mines