Clif High’s data processing predicts that whatever emotional tension and release language that is occurring in the aftermath of the stolen Midterm Elections will be doubled on or around November 13th and this emotional tension will remain in that elevated state for 4-to-6 weeks before we see a drop.

It’s unclear what the trigger will be, he says, because the censorship of the internet has so completely polluted the data but it’s conceivable that it could relate to evidence presented of election fraud.

Then he switches topics to discuss the World Economic Forum’s climate agenda, which is based on total nonsense and fraud, just like the entire COVID hoax is.

He sees that French President Emmanuel Macron, a former partner at Rothschild & Cie Banque has been appointed by the World Economic Forum to play the “tough guy” and to push the agenda through in Europe, which is basically the agenda to crash the EU.

Clif then explains the simple math that shows how “Climate Change” is a myth; humans do not produce carbon, they do not create energy. They¬†transform energy from one state into another, from matter that already existed in the biosphere into another state.

The Sun sends 430 kilojoules per hour to Earth. Humans use 410 kilojoules per year. Moreover, humans do not produce these kilojoules of energy, they convert the pre-existing energy. That’s the math. It’s that simple. Furthermore, he says we’re moving into a mini Ice Age, the opposite of Global Warming.

Contributed by

Contact

You Might Like

Alexandra Bruce

View all posts

2 comments

  • Whatever the Macaroni is
    And yes, climate change is overhyped though not to forget that human greed still causes great amount of destruction.

  • Not to enter into the climate change debate here (my mind is not yet settled on it) – but as usual with “I have the argument that ends the argument” claims, Clif’s argument here is far less powerful than he thinks it is.

    The problem is that he represents his 430 KJoules of solar energy as a fixed constant. Now if he’s simply talking about the amount of solar energy hitting the sunny side of the planet per hour it probably is (give or take changes in the sun itself over time) but that’s not the number that matters. The number that matters is the amount of that energy that is absorbed and retained by the planetary system. THAT’s the energy that humans convert a tiny portion of in our activities here.

    The crux of the climate alarmists’ argument is that human activity alters the composition of the atmosphere in a way that causes Earth to absorb and retain a larger portion of the solar energy that hits it, and that the increase is significant and dangerous.

    I’m not saying I believe this, or believe that it’s as potent and relevant as climate alarmists claim. I am saying that Clif’s argument that ignores this is not the slam dunk he presents it as. It’s actually a complete whiff, oversold with his characteristic, professorial delivery.

    Even if I work within his strawman I don’t buy it. Having fixed the energy input to the system, he then uses a conservation of energy argument to claim that no process of energy conversion we engage in could possibly warm the planet – but one common energy conversion is chemical energy into heat, and pretty much every other process of energy conversion is inefficient, with the losses escaping as heat.

    I’m not saying I think these effects are large and significant to the climate. I don’t know. I am saying that Clif is whiffing again, because his conservation of energy argument pretends that the type of energy doesn’t matter – in a debate over heat!

Lockerdome

Most Viewed Posts

Categories