The video “Global Warming Myths Debunked by IPCC Expert Gregory Wrightstone” shows you the myths around global warming and CO2. Read more in Gregory Wrightstone’s book: https://www.succesboeken.nl/book/9789…
What if more CO2 in the atmosphere is good for Mother Earth and beneficial for all life on the planet? What if global warming is not an existential threat to humanity?
“To most people nowadays, it would sound like I’m drunk,” says interviewer Flavio Pasquino during his opening. “But Gregory Wrightstone thinks I’m not drunk at all.”
In this eye-opening interview, IPCC Expert Reviewer Gregory Wrightstone joins us to discuss his controversial views on climate change. As an American geologist and author of the bestselling book “Inconvenient Facts: The Science That Al Gore Doesn’t Want You to Know,” Wrightstone claims that we need more CO2 instead of less. He’s here in our studio in the Netherlands to talk about his new book, “A Very Convenient Warming.”
Appreciate these videos? Like this video, subscribe to our channel, and support the independent journalism of blckbx with a donation ➡ https://www.blckbx.tv/doneren
Want to stay updated?
Telegram – https://t.me/blckbxtv
Twitter – / blckbxnews
Facebook – / blckbx.tv
Instagram – / blckbx.tv
LinkedIn – / blckbxnews
TikTok – / blckbx.tv
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
And the BBC’s reporting of this will start in …. 3 …. 2 …. 1 ….
No?
Oh well, one day it might happen – a flock of pigs just flew past my window.
I just saw a cow jump over the moon !
And Goldilocks visited me last night.. that was fun.. I pretended I was a bare. 😉
What is Auntie ‘reporting’ today? Well….
Deaths mount as Pakistan swelters in heatwave
Climate change made US and Mexico heatwave 35 times more likely
Olympics 2024: how extreme weather could impact Paris games
Climate change: World’s oceans suffer from record-breaking year of heat
And my favourite given the lousy weather this year thus far
How to keep your home cool
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cmj34zmwm1zt
The reality has been how to keep warm and not turn the heating on – in June.
Recently back from 3 weeks in Devon and Cornwall. Little rain, the sun shone quite a lot, and the temperatures struggled to get above 60F. In June!
One day the truth will prevail over fantasy. On that day, the lefties will say what they always say once their lies are exposed. They’ll say ” That was in the past, let’s not dwell in the past, we must look forward to the future”, and in one bound they will be free of all accountability for their crimes and misdemeanours.
That’s what many on the left are saying after Biden’s debate “performance” last night. “He had a cold, he’s been doing a wonderful job up to now, Biden is the best…”
Hopefully, more wake up to the cheap fake gaslighting being perpetrated by the cheap fake left, democrats, and mainstream media, up to and including the climate industrial complex and its cheap fake climate scientists.
Joe Biden: ” I promise we’ll get rid of fossil fuels”
And wind and solar have all the stamina and predictability of Biden, in other words, none.
Even John Stewart’s YouTube channel portrayed Biden very negatively.
As he couldnt possibly deny what was happening to Biden he made fun of both in equal terms. But most people, including democrats, saw what happened. The conspiracy theory is that the Dems wanted to get it out of the way quick so they could push the replacement and get some wind behind it. The evidence f that is that most Dems, spokespeople including msm seem to agree that it is now time f a change. I don’t think that’s a coincidence..
If they don’t start telling the truth they can’t justify dumping him for someone else.
Zombie Joe…
The you see the silver bullet? Jill escorting Joe off the stage and Joe taking one step at a time, first one foot then the other balancing on Jill.
My concern is, if Joe cannot sustain a 90 minute debate, how can he handle a crisis that goes into the night or lasts for days. How would Joe handle the next Cuban Missile Crisis or the next Twin Towers crisis?
OMHO, Joe Biden is not the President. He is merely a front, a figurehead, and people behind the scenes are making all the decisions and telling him what to say, which seemingly is beyond his ability to do accurately.
A couple of points.
1) I wonder if the many people who have spent the last few years declaring that there is nothing wrong with Slow Joe and any claim to the contrary is just more Republican lies, will have sufficient integrity to apologize?
2) BIden insiders today are out in force declaring that there is nothing wrong and Biden has no intention of bowing out. If Biden does bow out, it leaves these insiders with egg on their collective faces as well as making any Biden bow out looking contrived and manipulative.
3) If Biden bows out before the convention, then the delegates are free to select whomever they want and we get the spectacle of a brokered convention and whoever is selected will bear the burden of being selected by the insiders not the people.
4) If Biden bows out after the convention, then the DNC will pick the new candidate and the burden of being selected, not elected will be even greater.
This year the Democrats have managed to pull off a political hat trick. They have offended everyone.
They’ll never admit they were wrong- never. Not on the climate topic. They’ll find some way to spin it. Something like, “because of the installed renewable energy- we didn’t reach the tipping points that would have burned up the planet- got close- but didn’t reach it- please thank us for saving the planet”.
And give us more money for the next crisis we stumble upon.
Absolutely incorrect.
The Lefties will say: “See all the things we did averted the catastrophe!”
Bank on it.
As soon as the next thing comes along.
The lefties are overdue for a new, shiny cause. The climate hoax keeps going because they come up with endless variations. It has to be nearing its shelf life.
Probably mutated bird flu. Monkey pox fizzled out.
News Flash: SCOTUS just overturned Chevron Deference – major win.
Covid, anyone?
‘On that day, the lefties will say what they always say once their lies are exposed.’
If past is prelude, this is what they’ll say:
‘You know the responses to this. Say them with me. “That wasn’t real communism.” “That was all just one bad guy in charge, not an indictment on the system itself.” “It was the leftover greed and sadism from the market economy.” “Marxism is scientifically sound. It just requires a maturation period for people to learn the right values, then it all turns to paradise.”’
Source:
https://mises.org/mises-wire/socialists-it-doesnt-matter-if-socialism-works-what-matters-power
Hans Anderson’s child in a crowd passing honest comment on the Emperor’s new clothes will pretty soon be two hundred years of age, and still there are too many adults who do not and never will learn.
It’s all too easy for politicians to seduce the public with great promises. People want to believe…
Not to mention handing out wads of cash.
panem et circenses
‘panem et circenses’
See! I told you our southern border was wide open!
/sarc
Global Warming Myths Debunked by IPCC Expert Go Straight Down The Memory Hole.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/search?q=Gregory+Wrightstone++&seqId=6dbab240-3537-11ef-b300-bd3e2f06ea78&d=NEWS_PS
Gets you a big fat net zero. Similarly
Your search – IPCC Gregory Wrightstone site:www.theguardian.com – did not match any documents.
This remains the real problem.
Yup. Search engines that only search on topics that are approved by the owners of the search engines are not really engines at all. They are propaganda engines.
Who reads The Guardian nowadays?
Guardianistas
Good start on realistic dialog about the CAGW nonsense. How about the parallel theme of the cost of Adaptation versus Mitigation? That would give the BBC, CNN, etc fearmongers something else to ignore.
Today on BBC4 radio: 3 green leaning people (not the Greens) talking about how little green policies were marked as important by the Cons, Labour and Lib Dems. Reform are considered fascists so they don’t deserve attention.
The presenters of course fully agreed.
Net Zero we apparently need ( like an ffin hole in the head i might add).
Diversity at work😆
Not to mention the costs imposed by the Left’s Agitation.
Anyone can apply to be an IPCC Expert Reviewer. As the IPCC itself says:
IPCC 2020, “What is an Expert Reviewer of IPCC reports?” PDF
So does Gregory Wrightstone fall into this broad “self-declared” category, or has he actually had a comment published by the IPCC (in which case he will be credited by name in the final report for his contribution)?
Instead of attacking the man, you might address the reality that science funding itself is driven by supporting the leftist narrative as Wrightstone points out.
You assume he can defend the science. The reality is that TFN has been trying for months to defend the science here on WUWT, and failing miserably.
“Anyone can apply to be an IPCC Expert Reviewer.”
As Nobel Laureate for Physics, John Clauser, put it: [the climate crisis…] it’s a crock of crap.
I’m sure you know better than he does, right? By consensus?
Again, fungal is TOTALLY INCAPABLE of arguing any point put forward…
Pathetic. But we expect nothing else.
LMAO
He has a masters in geology- which makes him better qualified than many if not most reviewers. I wish I had majored in it rather than forestry, since even more people hate forestry than believe in the climate lunacy, especially in Wokeachusetts. Geology is a great science and is highly relevant to understanding the climate over hundreds of millions of years- better than ecologists and biologists.
I know a guy who majored in forestry at UMass. He’s a successful brewer today because people in MA are apparently very fond of beer.
I once met that guy many years ago. Many forestry grads go into something else.
The best method for determining truth is to never trust anyone over 30.
That’s wonderful news! It means therefore that we can simply ignore anything the IPCC has to say!
The only way to be declared an expert in climate science, is for the insiders to agree to let you in.
Anyone outside the club is not an expert and must be ignored.
From the above comments and failure to produce any evidence to the contrary, it seems to be the case that Gregory Wrightstone indeed falls under the “self-described” category of expertise.
And you fail UTTERLY AND COMPLETELY to have any more expertise than a mouldy carrot.
Oh dear. I expect this won’t be featuring on somebody’s “honest” climate blog.
Too simple and generic for my blog.
I also avoid videos, except for the very short Tony Heller videos.
I did not enjoy Al Gore’s silly predictions getting so much time on screen. I prefer conservatives trying to refute predictions by leftist scientists, not leftist failed politicians.
Trouble with your blog is that it amplifies all your own AGW cultist tendencies and your lack of basic scientific comprehension.
It is a dumb and dumber site.
“It is a dumb and dumber site.”
Then you should visit every day !
No-one is dumber than you are making yourself out to be. That is for certain.
Except maybe fungal and the simpleton.
And I have no wish to lower myself into your sewer.
I will however, continue to watch your pitiful attempts to duck-dive for that lost evidence.
Wow, Gore showed Patagonia before and now. It looks much nicer now with a huge lake. A much nicer local ecosystem.
The problem with the lying left is that they fundamentally transformed all institutions that we should trust into their own lying image.
We expect politicians to lie, it’s almost as if it’s part of the job. As a scientist, it saddens me that lying is so pervasive and, especially in medicine and climate science, has become a job requirement.
“”The problem with the lying left is that they fundamentally transformed…””
The meaning of words, and some words have had their meaning literally reduced to homeopathic levels; ie non existent.
This is easily recognised – when people roll their eyes at the mere mention of…
I hear you. For example in the area of “healthcare,” it seems that Sunak supports assisted suicide. The leftist path leads to a dead end.
Slavery and death.
The good news about leftist lying is the consistency. Assuming everything they say is a lie or at least deeiving is a good rule of thumb.
An intelligent liar would mix lies with truth so you never could be sure.
I’m currently reading Prof. Hubert Lamb’s epic two part treatise called ‘Climate: Past, Present and Future’. Despite being over 50 years old, it is full of wonderful insights which help to refute in their entirety all the IPCC nonsense, even without the modern datasets compiled using satellites, the Hubble Telescope etc etc.
I’m pretty sure Hubble can’t focus on anything as close as the Earth.
Carbon Dioxide is way more than just a fertilization effect as was said here in the the You Tube presentation. Also mentioned was the fact that methane and nitrous oxide have very little effect on global temperature. It would great if we were told in degrees how small that is.
52°F of the greenhouse effect comes from water vapor
6°F comes from carbon dioxide
1°F comes from methane, nitrous oxide, and all of the other greenhouse gases combined
(my admittedly rough conversions from K to F, based on the conclusions from The impact of CO2, H2O, and other greenhouse gases on equilibrium Earth temperatures; Coe, Fabinski, Wiegleb; International Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences; Volume 5, Number 2 pp29-40 (2021)
I like Greg’s calm, rational voice. Of course some people here will disagree that CO2 has anything to do with humans and there is no warming. Regardless, I think Greg’s perspective is beneficial to opposing the climate emergency/crisis/disaster nonsense. I’m going to pass it along to everyone I know here in the Mecca of the climate emergency lunatic cult, Wokeachusetts.
Which I have done- and as always- I get zero responses to any climate skepticism I forward to them. After all, the climate emergency cult is the established religion of Wokeachusetts.
Supreme Court overturns Chevron decision, curtailing federal agencies’ power in major shift
Loper Bright v Raimondo
West Virginia v EPA
The tide has turned. Legislators should write laws, not bureaucrats. Courts should have judicial authority, not bureaucrats.
— Outstanding Video — Both guys were great, Climate Imperialism is my takeaway
phrase for the morning.
I listened to over 12 minutes of the video and only noticed one small error: Al Gore took two science courses in college and got low grades in both of them, not one course.
The video was very basic and generic, as if for people with no climate knowledge
That’s okay for a general audience, but not for here. I imagine some of the Nutters here will be upset that CO2 was linked to global warming?
If I had a few minutes to refute CAGW in a video, I would start with several examples of predictions by scientists and reveal what actually happened
Not predictions by two dimwits like Al Gore and Greta Thunberg
Then I would discuss the actual warming since 1975 and how it is far from even globally. Warmer more pleasant winters here in Michigan, for one example.
Then I would ask the audience two questions
(1) How would your life change if in 100 years the average daily temperature was +1 degree C. or +2 degrees F. warmer than this year?
(2) If you think +1 degree C. or +2 degrees F., warmer would be a problem, then would you change your mind if the warming was mainly at night and mainly in the colder months?
The predicted temperature rise of +1 degree C. or +2 degrees F. in 100 years will be even easier to adapt to than the almost daily +1 degree C. to +2 degrees F. temperature rise in the first two hours after dawn, for almost every day of our lives.
There you go again w your favourite word ‘Nutters’ in relation to Co2. Greg says it as it is: Co2 contributes to warming. How much? He doesnt say precisely but states it’s very little .What is enough for you to stop saying ‘nutters’ to those who say it has (almost) no effect or say the GHE is not a factor because other factors way heavier?
I see it as a scale of possibilities: from 0 to 1 degree Celsius ( disgarding amount, log etc). Nobody is a nutter stating his or hers opinion about this. You, hombre ARE one for posing such insulting language especially in light of your otherwise reasonable assertions. It is a real blind spot and you should be ashamed. Now go and wash your mouth..
Unfortunately there are still people who try to claim that it has been proven that CO2 has no impact on climate and that it is impossible for CO2 to have an impact on climate.
I do not believe Richard is targeting those that believe that CO2 has an impact but that it is too small to be measured with our current instrumentation, since that is his position as well.
I have always said that there is no empirical scientific evidence for warming by atmospheric CO2.
RG has never shown this statement to be untrue.
The atmosphere does not actually allow warming by CO2 and there is no real scientific evidence that it does.
If you think there is empirical scientific evidence.. then present it.
Nutter Exhibit A
El Nino Nutter Division
Zero evidence from RG as always… So funny !
Doing well in destroying whatever credibility you never have had.
I am rather unsure about exactly what is acceptable to him. Ive presented a narrow band of likely influence of Co2 on temperature as stated by various contributors. But clearly to him those who argue that Co2 impact has no discernable influence are nutters ie, stupid people who dont know what they are talking about. Now, ive looked into the matter and you CAN at least clearly make a case. Im not saying they are right. And then there is the aspect of proving Co2 does… and there we see the level of uncertainty. Now, since it’s clear everybody is speculating and hypothesising Richard now claims to know the truth about these matters and feels free to call people ‘nutters’. That is unacceptable. I suspect some psychological issues.
You are a Nutter Defender
The Hall of Fame of Nutter False Claims
There is no greenhouse effect
There is no AGW
Manmade CO2 is 3% of all CO2
El Ninos cause all global warming
Underseas volcanoes cause all ocean warming
These myths are spread by nutters whose goa; seems to be making conservatives appear to be science deniers.
Rational people admit CO2 emissions cause some amount of warming. They may even admit there is more evidence of manmade warming since 1975 than evidence of natural warming.
The important subjects for discussion are:
Various climate feedbacks
The 100 to 200 year effect of CO2 emissions
Whether warming is good news or bad news.
The delusional Nut Zero goals
For your information, my own beliefs would get me called a nutter, or much worse, by leftists
(1) I love global warming
(2) I have advocated for a doubling of atmospheric CO2 since 1997
(3) I believe the current climate is the best climate for humans, animals and plants in the past 5000 years,
and
(4) I believe all US leftists should be deported to Cuba, and Jumpin’ Joe Bribe’em should be shipped to a nursing home.
“CO2 emissions cause some amount of warming”
How much??
Please show actual measurements…
Oh wait.. YOU CAN’T
The lab spectroscopy measurements with no feedbacks, accepted even by most
skeptic” scientists, such as William Happer, estimate +0.75 degrees C. warming for CO2 x 2, which would take 168 years at the current CO2 rise rate of +2.5 ppm a year/
Most people believe various feedbacks could change that number.
There is inaccurate evidence that a warmer atmosphere from 1980 to 2000 held more absolute water vapor.
There is also evidence that the warmer atmosphere from 2000 to 2020 did NOT hold more water vapor.
Unfortunately, the global annual average absolute humidity data collection is poor below the altitude of satellites, which is where most of the humidity is located.
So any estimate of a water vapor positive feedback is just a guess based on the Clausius–Clapeyron relation, rather than proven by accurate data.
You remain a perpetual El Nino Nutter, Stage IV.
Radiative theoretical calculation with data from a lab jar.
I asked for measured atmospheric data.. Still waiting.
Your petty jibes are pointlessly hilarious.. like a yapping chihuahua
Much of radiative analysis ignores the fact that the release of latent heat causes radiation at frequencies other that of CO2. In other words it’s not obvious that radiative studies are complete.
Why are you totally incapable of showing any atmospheric warming apart from at El Nino event, in the UAH data, RG ??
Still waiting for you to do something other than throw little tantrums.
“manmade warming since 1975 than evidence of natural warming.”
You are still getting mixed up between urban warming and “global” warming.
You have never presented any evidence of human caused “global” warming.
Failed totally every time you have been asked to.
“El Ninos cause all global warming”
Again.. you have been totally incapable of producing any evidence of warming in the UAH data that is not associated with El Nino events.
Here is your chance.. again.
Even UAH Land shows warming only at El Ninos.
Essentially zero trend between them.
Again.. you are welcome to present your evidence… or not. !
It is pretty clear that you are lashing out to every side that does not completely sign up to your beliefs and call them ‘nutters’. You do not realise this makes your various arguments invalid as you seem not to accept dissent, even from those who can clearly state their reasons for their views. By dismissing them you have disqualified yourself and cannot be taken seriously. I suspect some personal, psychological issues are playing out here. Pity, as i find yr contributions often worthwhile. Bizarre..
“(1) How would your life change if in 100 years the average daily temperature was +1 degree C. or +2 degrees F. warmer than this year?”
I’d probably be in the Guinness Book of World Records.
“Very Little” in fact Infinitesimal warming.
So tiny that you are totally incapable of producing any empirical evidence.
Only exists in theory and “belief”.
Still waiting for your empirical scientific evidence… you are an empty abyss
Your comments are empirical evidence of permanent brain damage, probably from too much alcohol.
Roflmao.
another petty jibe…. the sum total of your “science”
and of course, absolutely ZERO real evidence.
Why is that RG ???
Are you posting these on Rumble? If not, why not?
The only way to win this fight, and we will win, is to call these CAGW clowns out for the liars and cheats that they are. It won’t be pretty but it needs to be done non the less.
Well done Greg
I know two men who are warmists. I could send them the link to this brilliant talk by Greg, but I know they will never watch it. This is the tragedy of the man made global warming scam. No warmist will ever open their ears to the real science and facts about the world’s climate.
NASA web page says water vapor contributes half the 59F greenhouse effect whereas he says 52F of the warming or 88%