Climate change – the one thing you really need to understand

The only relevant question regarding climate change is: are human-generated CO2 emissions driving climatic changes? This is purely a scientific question, and the entire global warming theory hinges on this one question.

We can either unquestioningly (as we are asked to) accept and believe the alleged consensus that answers this question resoundingly in the affirmative, or we examine the scientific arguments and understand the issue ourselves.

Having done that, my understanding is that CO2 has little or even no discernible influence on the Earth’s climate system as a whole, let alone the huge but still relatively small amount of human-made CO2 emissions. 

And if that is the case, the entire global warming theory collapses in a heap – there is no need to worry about whether climate models are accurate (they’re not!), whether there is a consensus amongst 97% of scientists (there isn’t!), etc…

But I am not a scientist, and whilst I think I now understand CO2 much better, others can explain that much better. So below some useful video sources that helped me understand the science behind CO2 and that convinced me that CO2 cannot possibly be the climate control knob alarmists claim it to be.

And in German:

Climate change litigation – the next stage of the climate change hype

[Last updated 21 Dec 2019]

The following headline is telling of the prevailing hype, censorship and propaganda, specifically when it comes to climate change: Bernie Sanders wants to take fossil fuel companies to criminal court. Another example would be the warning by former Australian High Court Justice Kenneth Hayne that company boards must take the issue very seriously or face the legal consequences:

“International opinion is now firmly behind the need for all entities with public debt or equity to respond to climate change issues in their governance, their strategy, their risk management and their metrics and targets and, importantly, to record their responses to the issues in their financial reports.”

What Kenneth Hayne says about climate change, Australian Financial Review, 9 Dec 2019

Indeed, as the world awaits a final decision on the case brought by the Urgenda Foundation against the Dutch Government (the judgment commits the Dutch Government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 25% by the end of 2020), and ExxonMobil and others are currently being dragged through the US courts (although without the desired result), self-righteous shareholders and lobby groups the world over are pressuring companies to take steps to not only reduce their carbon footprint (whatever that means), but to reduce their climate change liability risk (whatever that means).

Keep Reading

On the climate “debate”

The earth’s climate is and has always been changing. Just about everybody agrees on that. But for the last decades and especially more recently there has been fervent disagreement when it comes to the question whether the climate changes of the last decades have been caused by humanity, more precisely, whether our massive CO2 emissions have caused a warming of the planet, and whether this could have consequences for the environment, which could also affect humans.

The mainstream view seems to be that humans have indeed caused the Earth’s climate to change, and that urgent action to prevent the potential effects is required. But there are also people who have a more or less opposite view.

So whom should we believe?

Keep Reading

New study on the collapse of WTC 7 ignored

A new draft report, A Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center 7, sponsored by the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, was published on 3 September.

The study comes to the conclusion that the collapse of World Trade Center 7 could not have been caused by fire (the official story), but that it was the result of a “global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”

This should have been all over the news, especially with the anniversary just around the corner, but the mainstream media have so far completely ignored the release of this report, despite a press conference being held at the National Press Club in Washington on 11 September where the newest modelling was also presented, and PR Newswire reporting the release of the report.

An international search of the print media via Thomson Reuters Westlaw news service shows that so far there have only been a handful of mentions of this significant report. The UK’s Daily Star and the Express, and The Asian Age are the only non-alternative news publications that have so far acknowledged the new report in some way. No major newspapers – none!

Some of the alternative news sources I know of that have written on the report are Truth in Media and The Corbett Report, as well as the German alternative media outlets Rubikon and KenFM, which have published the same article by Swiss peace researcher Daniele Ganser.

At least on Twitter a bit of a storm has broken out.

Whether you swallow the official story of 9/11 or not – the fact that a new report on a major event of that day is simply ignored by the mainstream media should make us all very worried about the state of the so-called 4th pillar of democracy.

Trip to the Blue Mountains

  • Jul 14, 2019
  • /
  • Blog

I recently walked the Dardanelles Pass loop in the Blue Mountains, enjoying the spectacular scenery on a chilly and windy day.

Importing your own scanned text into LingQ

I love using LingQ for my language learning, and to make the most of it, I wanted to import one of my favourite French books that I have only in hardcopy. Whilst the LingQ process for importing text is as easy as could be, preparing the text involved a bit of trial and error, so I thought I would share what I do.

The book is La délicatesse by David Foenkinos, which is full of vocabulary I’d like to internalise. By the way, I love the movie with Audrey Tautou too.

Step 1: Scanning

I found it best to create individual scans of each double page, or to scan to a multi-page PDF, but it’s important not to scan with OCR (optical character recognition) turned on, so that you just have a plain PDF without any text in the background of the image. On the scanner I used the option is called a “non-editable PDF” – a slight misnomer, but anyway. If you produce a scan with OCR you may later have trouble overriding the default underlying text output – unless of course you can change the scanner’s OCR language to French, but with my office equipment that wasn’t possible.

Step 2: OCR process

I use a program called Nitro, but Adobe Acrobat would probably be similar. After importing the PDF, I go to Review > OCR > Options > Advanced, and select French as the recognition language. Then click OK, and the text recognition process only takes a few seconds.

Step 3: Create text document

Still in Nitro, I go Convert > To Word > Convert. A Word doc with the text opens up. In my experience there are some anomalies in the placement of some blocks of text, so I continue…

Step 4: Cleaning the text

I copy and paste the text in the correct order into a Notepad document. The purpose of this is to strip out any weirdness that comes from the Word doc.

Step 5: Assembling the text

I then copy and paste the text from Notepad into a WordPad document, which is easier to work with than Notepad. In WordPad I get rid of any OCR errors, for example hyphens that have magically turned into bullet points, or unnecessary spaces, etc.

It could be easier to edit in Word though. If you want to get rid of double or even triple spaces between words, you can do an easy copy/replace.

Save the file as a LingQ-compatible DOCX file if you import the whole book in once go.

Step 6: Importing the text

You can then use the Import ebook function in LingQ to easily create a lesson with the text you scanned.

Or you can create a new course and then add each chapter as a lesson.