Posted on 03/26/2024 10:59:11 AM PDT by ScaniaBoy
Climate: The Movie (The Cold Truth) - Martin Durkin
. This film exposes the climate alarm as an invented scare without any basis in science. It shows that mainstream studies and official data do not support the claim that we are witnessing an increase in extreme weather events – hurricanes, droughts, heatwaves, wildfires and all the rest. It emphatically counters the claim that current temperatures and levels of atmospheric CO2 are unusually and worryingly high. On the contrary, it is very clearly the case, as can be seen in all mainstream studies, that, compared to the last half billion years of earth’s history, both current temperatures and CO2 levels are extremely and unusually low. We are currently in an ice age. It also shows that there is no evidence that changing levels of CO2 (it has changed many times) has ever ‘driven’ climate change in the past.
Why then, are we told, again and again, that ‘catastrophic man-made climate-change’ is an irrefutable fact? Why are we told that there is no evidence that contradicts it? Why are we told that anyone who questions ‘climate chaos’ is a ‘flat-earther’ and a ‘science-denier’?
The film explores the nature of the consensus behind climate change. It describes the origins of the climate funding bandwagon, and the rise of the trillion-dollar climate industry. It describes the hundreds of thousands of jobs that depend on the climate crisis. It explains the enormous pressure on scientists and others not to question the climate alarm: the withdrawal of funds, rejection by science journals, social ostracism.
But the climate alarm is much more than a funding and jobs bandwagon. The film explores the politics of climate. From the beginning, the climate scare was political. The culprit was free-market industrial capitalism. The solution was higher taxes and more regulation. From the start, the climate alarm appealed to, and has been adopted and promoted by, those groups who favour bigger government.
This is the unspoken political divide behind the climate alarm. The climate scare appeals especially to all those in the sprawling publicly-funded establishment. This includes the largely publicly-funded Western intelligentsia, for whom climate has become a moral cause. In these circles, to criticise or question the climate alarm has become a breach of social etiquette.
The film was shot on location in the U.S., Israel, Kenya and UK.
MARTIN DURKIN
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4226166/posts
I watched it-well worth watching. If you follow the subject, there is very little that is new, but it is all relevant and worth knowing.
I agree, but for those who don’t read the long (often mathematically oriented) threads at wattsupwiththat.com or climateaudit.org it is a very good summary of the climate scam IMHO.
I posted the same link in my comment above but forgot to html-format it. Thanks!
Maybe that dumb kid that Senator Kennedy took apart can watch it and learn something. The Climate Psyop is huge.
That said, I have worked with data, so I enjoy seeing a statement made in a graphical format.
This has long been my favorite example of the perfection of graphically displayed data in explaining something (in this case, it graphically displays the disaster of Napoleon's march to Moscow.
So, I do enjoy the mathematical and graphical approach as well.
Is this a Tree House of Mythical Envirowackoes sequel to the flop recently released by the Society of Magical Negroes?
Sorry, not sure what movie you refer to, but if you are thinking of the one by Al Gore it definitely is not the same!
And it’s just a Trojan horse 🐴 for Marxism.
Completely off topic but I must comment on your excellent Napoleon graph. I note that the largest reduction in numbers takes place prior to the battle of Borodin (Mojaisk on the map). Although some may have been due to losses mainly to ill health, I guess most were left behind to secure the communication roads to France. So in the end it is not 400 000+ that reach Moscow but only 100 000. Those 100 000 + another 20 000 are lost due to cold and enemy action, but what about the remaining 250 000 - 300 000? Were they able to evacuate? Or did they also succumb to the Russian winter?
Great graph, isn’t it? I made a copy of that and had it on my office wall for years.
So, the thickness of the tan part of the graph shows his inbound forces to Moscow, and the black thickness shows his outbound retreat from Moscow.
He started out with 422,000 men, and early on 22,000 men break off and go straight to the North, and shortly after that 33,000 men head up to Polotsk, where they stay put throughout the campaign, losing 3,000 men probably to winter and starvation.
They finally reached Moscow in September, but as the stepped appearance of the thickness indicated, they were losing men constantly down to half their strength by the time they got to Witbsk...only 175,000 remaining.
By the time they got to Moscow, they only had 100,000 men left, the city was empty and set ablaze by the retreating Russians. This was September, and it was a balmy 75 degrees. It dropped to 50 degrees, then plummeted to -10 by the time they returned to Smolensk on the way back.
As the Army passed far South of Polotsk, the guarding force (I presume) came South with 30,000 men to hook up with the main body.
By the time they arrived back to where they had started with 422,000 men, there were only 10,000 men remaining.
There were 100,000 battle casualties.
So, I think the answer to your question is that 322,000 men succumbed to the weather and privation, not to battle injuries.
Just wow.
It’s probably a good movie, but it’s unwatchable to me. I have hearing loss, and simply don’t understand the narrative. The background noise “(music) drowns it out. t totally baffles me why so many people make videos, and then overwrite the sound with noise. It’s particularly egregious when the noise is fake music and has no tune or rhythm at all.
I agree. Great graph. But if it is like you suggest lice and tyfoid (probably) killed many more than the cold which is really interesting. I have to read up on that. Cool!
Sorry. I understand. My mother has the same problem. I’ve been looking for a texted version of the interviews but alas.
Thanks for reposting the link, I missed it the first time.
The Grande Armee that Napoleon launched into Russia was far too large to be sustained by the supply trains. Nor could they live off the land. Mass straggling and desertion began within weeks. Stragglers and foraging parties, spread ever more widely, became targets of civilian partisans and the hovering cossacks. And diseases, especially typhoid, were catastrophic; typhoid was probably the biggest killer.
A large proportion of the Grande Armee of the 1812 campaign consisted of “allied” contingents from every quarter of conquered Europe. Some were committed to the French alliance, but there were large contingents of Germans and troops from central and eastern Europe who probably deserted at the first opportunity. I’ve never found a really good estimate of desertions plus the numbers of sick left behind in hospitals and evacuated.
Napoleon’s army had lost three quarters of its men before reaching Moscow, and over two thirds before Borodino. The bulk of the attrition was during the summer months — and the army was not yet in the depths of Russia, so desertion probably looked more feasible.
Excellent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.