Climate Realism by Paul Burgess 
A young man called Chris Martz recently posted 10 questions to ask climate alarmists on X. Here I feature the ten questions with comments!
source
About The Author
World's First Non-profit Media on Sustainability & Climate Change
What a silly man
He asks for exact values and then says exact values don't make sense
Silly
Brazil produces more food than before they started farming.
More food is produced than during ice age?
They are not asking to go back to.
They are asking that things don't get worse
Nuclear
If was inexpensive private industry would be doing?
Thousands of scientific reports are peer reviewed.
Companies invest millions in background against climate change. They dont oay scientist to write reports or peer review.
Greenhouse most powerful substances is silly.
Scientists acknowledge rhat greenhouse gases are needed for live on earth.
The problem they say us the wrong balance if green house gases
Plants grow better when co2 from oil heating systems is exhausted into greenhouses & poly tunnels to extend growing seasons, no co2 no life , final.
Send the questions to Jim Dale! đ¤Ŗđ¤Ŗđ¤Ŗđ¤Ŗ
Ridiculous first question
This is such bs
The picture of the London flood in 1888, reminded me of a famous painting by Vincenzo Chilone showing gondolas sailing in a flooded St Mark's square in Venice.
He painted it in 1825 đ
I saw a graph the other day that came from a media outlet that i've never heard of it showed that all the western countries like the UK U.S and Australia put out more Co2 than what all the developing countries like China absolute rubbish!!
Well said both you and young Chris Martz
The only issue I have is CO displayed in text where it should be CO2 usually the 2 being subscript. Something does not support subscript ????
I think itâs beyond madness. Itâs deliberate and by intent. Its point is to use âclimate controlâ as the unarguable means to tax and regulate ordinary people back to serfdom. As has been stated, you will own nothing, have no privacy, and be happy.
I think that water vapour is only mentioned by people like Paul is to throw us off. Obviously it's a strong but natural thing in a steady climate and it falls out of the sky as a handy thing called water which I like. All the really potent man made grg, s are toxic and much worse in the e atmosphere and can last for tens of thousands of years which is quite a long time, even Paul might agree with that bit. Anyway I like to use a sauna and find the water vapour has very nice effects conducive to good health. I've never heard of any of the 63 green house gasses have nice effects on humans apart from growing corporations bank accounts. It's a silly point but this whole thing is silly. Paul says all climate scientist agree nothing is happening and that's just clearly more guff. The ones I listen to who are not paid by big oil and chemicals strongly disagree and go into great detail as to why. Often being cancelled for not spouting the denying narative. I do understand why people cling to the current nothing to see here narative and wish I could believe it myself. Thanks for letting me speak on your platform Paul, most people just ban anyone who doesn't just kiss their you tube behind. Wonder how long before Paul does the same. I see very few or none people asking any questions just a lot off agreement. This creates a bad environment in my view for learning but is the modern way and why we have become so dumbed down these day. You have to agree or else your out. Long live free speach and debate
An excellent video as usual Paul. However there is one point I disagree on.
You mentioned the CO2 level before the industrial revolution was around 250 ppm, however that is using ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica and there have been a number of papers over the years that show that Ice cores are not a good proxy for CO2 levels. They suffer from diffusion caused by the extreme pressures in the ice and also lose some of the CO2 caused by friction of the drilling when CO2 goes into the water caused by the friction. A much better way is by counting Stomata in leaves. When CO2 is abundant there are less stomata because the gas exchange is better and when there is less Co2 in the air there are more Stomata. The level of CO2 was much higher in the past than the IPCC say.
Dude….The earth is flat…?
I was reminded today of the summer of 1976. Can you imagine if it happened today! The point is, it hasn't happened since!
Follow the gravy.
One more question to be directed at people from the UK. The UK contributes about 1% of the man made CO2. Man made CO2 is only about 3% of the total. So the UK is responsible for 0.00030 of the CO2, yet you are allowing your "leaders" to destroy your way of life! ARE YOU DAFT?????
UK produces 2% of the 0.0016 % ( from human activity ), of the 0.043% of Co2 in the atmosphere. If that 0.043 drops to 0.035 the plants in the food chain start to die, and everything reliant upon them also. Co2 was at 0.15 % during the Carboniferous and life was abundant.
When are we going to admit that the climate crisis is a scam ? None of the so-called solutions currently on offer do anything more than enrich the already rich and impoverish the poor, adding additional members to their ranks as net zero destroys the economies of the west, turning the middle class into the working poor.
And who doesn't make sacrifices or change their lifestyle? The very advocates, the WEF, The UN, The politicians and the self proclaimed philanthropists, who's beachfront properties are apparently climate proof !
We're all being scammed ! đ¤¨
So you have had to cancel me and deleat my posts. What a little snowflake you are just like the rest. You want to spout nice sounding propaganda and just have a gaggle of bum lickers kiss your arse. Oh Paul's that's very sad. Don't you like being corrected on your false narrative?
A list of fairly brief questions which viewers could screenshot may also be useful, as we could quickly pass them around when weâre in groups and start discussions that way. Thanks for making this, though.
Maybe the 2050 NZ cost of 300K per house hold is inflated currency and a loaf of bread in 2050 costs ÂŖ300
Thanks Paul great info. đ¯ As to Ed Milliband, rich socialists have always hated the working class
These climates zealots remind me of the leaders of the ancient civilisations (?) that thought sacrificing babies, virgins etc would change the weather of the times. Pseudo religious gobblygook
The main thing Dale and the other climate tragics do not see is that you are not lowering your carbon footprint by losing your industries and buying the products from China that are still using fossil fuels. You are still creating the same amount of carbon into the atmosphere.
Ps. All you have achieved is to send the profit to another country.