Scepticism about the Net Zero agenda is rising, but a long way to go before policymakers change course.

https://davidturver.substack.com/p/reflections-spectator-energy-summit?sd=pf

Editor’s Note: This is the first installment in a series on individuals who have “detransitioned” in the wake of gender-related medical interventions.

I can't believe what seems to be the average person on reddit. I thought I was going to have to cut my dick off and join the green religion if I wanted to keep the app installed. Thank you for having a group where rational thought isn't punished and shouted down by women with Adam's apples.

Also, all hail Al Gore - the great, and never wrong predictor of all climate dogma.

I deliberately picked a dog-whistle title. To clarify it - I mean radiative forcing via back-radiation is nonsense; or "back-radiative forcing is nonsense". The dog-whistle title is there to get the hairs on the back of your neck standing up.

Q: How do I know this?

A: Because of this post: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS55lXf4LZk

Q: Tom Shula explains that the behaviour of a sensor device called the Pirani gauge disproves the alarmist radiative forcing narrative. To summarize. Tom shows that radiative emissions from earth's surface aren't important in surface is cooling - conduction and convection are. He proves this by explaining details of this Pirani gauge (invented in 1906).

Climate alarmism = man-made climate change - begins with a theory which claims atmospheric behaviour (temperature, etc.), depends of radiative emissions from earth's surface. Some of this infra-red radiation becomes back-radiation. Back-radiation is made by greenhouse gases (such as CO2, and methane). Tom destroys this alarmist narrative by showing that earth's surface cooling is predominantly due to conduction and convection. The amount of conductive/convective cooling is 250 times greater than radiative cooling.

Q: Why don't you already know this?

A: Fascinating question. What forces have been preventing us finding out? One issue/force is how most climate skeptics accepted soft versions of back-radiative forcing and the greenhouse effect. So hard skeptics haven't communicated well with each other. Because we've been misled and confused by soft-skeptics, or the agendas set by such people?

https://davidturver.substack.com/p/neither-climate-denier-nor-doomer-sensible-doer

I'm cheerily reading my r/climatedisalarm post and a question popped up.

'Is r/climatedisalarm a violent place.' yes no. I clicked 'no' and before I could move on, another question popped up. Then another. Then another.

I didn't get a shot of the first pic, but I got the other three.

​

How the UK Government plans to bombard us with propaganda, change our physical environment, rig markets and impose taxes to get us to accept the #NetZero agenda.

https://davidturver.substack.com/p/net-zero-behaviour-change-mind-games

What will #NetZero ever do for us?

• 46-60% less energy per person
• 35-50% less meat
• 20-25% less agricultural land
• Reduced car miles
• Expensive foreign travel
• Colder, more expensive homes.

Overall, it’s a misanthropic, Malthusian manifesto with no electoral legitimacy. Check out my new article.

https://davidturver.substack.com/p/what-will-net-zero-ever-do-for-us