Climate Control is a (strikethru powerful tool strikethru) fanciful imagined situation whereby humans feebly attempt to manipulate the weather, showing total disregard and contempt for the laws of nature. Based on a flawed belief system using falsified unscientific government propaganda about carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, naturally occurring fossil fuels are intended to be phased out and replaced with renewable technology such as solar, wind, hydroelectric, geothermal, wave and tidal power generation, thereby crippling the economies of developing nations, effectively keeping billions of people in starvation. In the old days this philosophy was referred to as 'the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer'. These days it is marketed as a virtue-signalling politically correct Green Movement on an unprecedented global scale.
The idea is to preserve dominant capitalist western economies and minimalise the rest of the world. The recent rise of China with its cheap labour force has sent economic shock waves through the US, UK, Australia etc now scrambling to prevent India (with its even cheaper labour force) from dominating the market.
What a lot of Australians don't realise is that it is our coal (as the world's biggest exporter) that is fueling expanding Asian economies yet there is no end to the amount of polly-speak about conforming to Kyoto protocol, Paris accord, blah blah blah meanwhile we continue to sell out. How many Australians see through this farce? It is our coal that ran China's and now India's Gross National Product yet we spend billions on converting our power sources to renewables! By the way, China and India have always expressed (at COP24 & 25) that they have no intention of reducing carbon emissions until 2030! Meanwhile they enjoy easy access to cheap sources for power generation (fossil fuels, heard about them?) thus ensuring their economic expansion.
I want you to pause for just a moment and think about world starvation. The best way to stimulate the economies of developing countries is to facilitate the development of industry using the same implementation that current world powers took advantage of. In case you haven't been paying attention that means fossil fuels.
Now... technically nuclear isn't a renewable energy source, being mined like coal, oil and gas. However, there is an abiogenic theory about the origin of fossil fuels (popular in Russia) where they are supposedly generated from within the Earth's core unlike the minerals uranium and plutonium which are a finite source. But given that the traditional scientific theory that carbonaceous fuels originating from the Fossil Era are a result of heated and compressed organic matter is more popular and accepted, this places them in the unrenewable category with nuclear fuels.
Mankind has always loved to play God. The idea of being able to control the weather has fascinated the human psyche since the beginning of time. That it could be regulated is a kind of blasphemy akin to going against nature - pardon the pun, but the theory is actually quite 'unnatural'. Yet this obsession is the reason behind the whole Climate Control ideology. The concept of being able to control the entire planet's weather systems by reducing or at least containing just one trace gas's level to 1/2500th of the atmosphere is, well, more like religious fanaticism than well-grounded science.
Yep - CO₂ at 400 parts per million equals 0.04% of the atmosphere. Before the Industrial Age which began in roughly 1850 it was more like 0.03%. It took a little over a century to add the first third of that 0.01% increase, about forty years for the next third, and the last third was added since 2000. You can see in the graph (I have superimposed the temps over CO₂; the X and Y axes are the same for both) below that there doesn't seem to be a proportional increase in global temperatures, making the 'science' somewhat dubious!
Notice also the downward temperature trends from 1880-1910 and 1940-1975, indicating that there are other factors at work here and that Climate Control isn't as simple as reducing carbon emissions. The most glaring anomaly is that although one third of all carbon emissions from fossil fuels has been dumped in the last two decades there is no corresponding proportionate temperature increase. According to the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming theory they should be going through the roof. But they're not. We hear about 'hottest year on record ever' but were talking about a decimal point of a degree - as in 0.01 or 0.02°C. That's all it takes to rewrite the records.
The thermometer was invented by D. G. Fahrenheit in the 18th century in 1709-14 but it wasn't until the mid-1800s that temperature recording was perfected and accurate temperatures were kept. So we can take it for granted that since the beginning of the 19th C. Industrial Age we have fairly accurate data. Even though modern digitals measure to the decimal point, old thermometer readings were either rounded up or down or estimated to the decimal point by the person making the meteorological observations. More importantly, older instruments didn't respond to split-second rises and falls (known these days as digital noise) but often took ten minutes or so to visibly reflect any change of temperature. This greatly impacts on daily maxima and minima - modern digitals often producing higher and lower values than mercury and alcohol thermometers. So when we hear a press announcement about record temperatures it should be taken with a grain of salt. After all, how many of us can discern a change of 0.01°C?
More to the point - there are plenty of early record temperatures from the late 1800s and early 1900s that have been expunged or 'adjusted' by authorities to fit the CAGW agenda because 'it couldn't have possibly been that hot then so the equipment must've been faulty'. Well hello, back in those days sailors could circumnavigate the globe without falling off the edge. Modern science needs to stop painting those days with the tarred brush of the Flat Earth myth. In fact hardly anyone believed in the Flat Earth nonsense back then. It is a ploy invented by atheistic scientists to discredit the Church. Ever since ships have sailed the Earth landlubbers have witnessed them disappearing over the horizon, proving that the Earth wasn't flat.
Given that water boils and freezes at definite temperatures at sea level (a quick refresher course: 100°C and 0°C; 212°F, and -32°F and given normal barometric pressure) there is no reason to suspect that old thermometers weren't calibrated properly. Even so, they wouldn't have been out by much. That's how it was done then and that method of calibration based on the characteristics of water still applies today. Despite global warming (one degree in the last century) water still behaves in exactly the same way that it used to in the 18th century (or any other for that matter).
