The Climate has been changing since the Earth was formed, but the alarmists want you to believe the change is caused by coal the energy that has created a prosperous and healthy world; or overpopulation which is also the effect coal has caused. Before coal 1 in 5 children dies before 5 years, similar to developing third world. The answer to third world poverty is the creative use of fossil fuel, in raising their standard of living. It is done by capitalism and a valued care for people.
The Marxist do not want more children, their view of the individual is disposable, that is why one child policy, abortion and euthanise is paramount in their agenda. Catastrophic climate is making young women fearful of having children, that is Greta's anger, "How dare you destroy my future!".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=share&v=MaN2_XT1BVo&fbclid=IwAR1icXOwMwVyIPQ_plTKwCerN9A8DJ-xMuF630UZt7uh8mSF3PyuQHzQh8k&app=desktop

There is no climate emergency. Superstitious people are being panicked by fear-mongering and lies. Only ignorant, uneducated people fall for such codswallop, and this site has more than its fair share of that sort - the sort that believes in black magic in the guise of science.

So lets get real! First no more air travel, gas heating or cars. This should start the ball rolling. Cancel all public service pensions and seize private superannuation and use that money for remediation!
Of course this applies only to members of political parties supporting the emergency. Scientists supporting the emergency and fellow travelers. Myself I welcome more space on airline travel and roads.The strife in financial markets wont affect me either.
Lets see how serious you guys really are with this existential threat to life on earth? Any takers or any increases on my sensible measures?

Dear Belly,

Scientists have a moral obligation to issue warnings
of catastrophic threats. They are obligated to speak
out based on their evidence. Now it seems they are
going beyond just research and publishing and are
going directly to citizens and policy makers.

However, making changes is politically difficult
as the economic interests behind the various industries
are a powerful political lobby that is reluctant to commit
the necessary resources to the task. The reluctance to
make changes derives from political decisions not to
slow down economic growth.

We have to wait and see if appealing to citizens and
policy makers directly will produce better results.

This paper pretty comprehensively details temperature changes around the world, mainly in the Northern Hemisphere:

https://notrickszone.com/2018/05/03/its-here-a-1900-2010-instrumental-global-temperature-record-that-closely-aligns-with-paleo-proxy-data/

Very illuminating.

I'm puzzled why there is alarm at birth-rates, which, on a world scale, are approaching zero population growth:

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/population-by-age-group-to-2100

Note that it's not the births, but the older age-groups which are rapidly growing in numbers, as people live longer and don't conveniently die off. That 'demographic transition' will last only until life-spans reach a natural limit, of 100-120; and then those numbers will stabilise.

The number of births round the world will stabilise in the next couple of decades, then slowly decline. So, a few years later, the number of 5-14-year-olds will decline; and then, of course, the 15-24 year-olds after them. And then, us.

But the number of working-age people, 25-64, will increase substantially, by about 40 % by 2100; and the number of people aged 65+ will increase by three and a half times. It's going to be a much older world by 2100.

So let's see: with a fascist one-world government, who should we kill off ? And how ? Should it be us old farts first ? Some un-named ethnic groups ?

Joe

To Belly.

The scare tatics of global warming, and the consistent use of "emergency" should be all the proof you need that there is a con job being made. Is there any truth to the matter? I use to believe that there was, but watching one "climite emergancy" follow another climate emergancy, and I think it's all rubbish at this point. A hurricane is an emergancy. People die from those,my hey thappen suddenly and cause a lot of havoc. A famine on the other hand is a disaster, but it is not an emergancy like a hurricane, a tornado, an earthquake, or a flood is.

The repeated use of the term climate emergency with no actual destruction, deaths, or otherwise shown threat, show that this is a con.

You asked for proof. I'm telling you the proof is in the words being used, and in the lack of actual harm that's occured. The damage of Global warming is that everyone who sees it further their pursuits uses it as a truth to score points for their cause (if they are environmentalist), for their career (if they are a scientist looking for grants), or for their popularity (if they are a politician looking for votes). Each group exaggerates the claims and make it yet another emergency that follows yet another false alarm. This harms those who actually do care for the environment. There are big issues to tackle. Smog being one huge issue for countries that issue warnings for their population to wear masks and stay indoors.

What happens to environment concerns when global warming is found out for what it is? A giant scare machine that isn't actually helping anything. People will lose heart on environmentalists and clean air advocates, because they associated with global warming frauds over and over again. No reliability means no trust. No trust means LOCAL POLUTION will get worse and no one will look for better solutions because they don't trust the industry providing solutions and lies.