Oct 28 Harvest report

[Sheepwheat]

Are you still confused about the difference between climate change trends over long periods versus seasonal weather variability?

Just like the “climate scientists” who use daily and single season events to backup their cause?

A few years ago the Great Lakes were low and it was proof of climate change. Now, the water levels are high. The cause? Still climate change.

A few years ago a ski resort in the alps of Switzerland has to close for the season due to lack of snow. Reason? Climate change. Seems it was a single season problem. Same resort has been running every year since with lots of snow.

After the dryer early 2000 years, the ponds in the Saskatoon east hills were dry. I listened to a radio show where the expert was stating it was caused by climate change, that this is the new normal, that the water cycle in this region is damaged beyond repair and will never be the same again. A few years later, the ponds not only filled up, but flooded farms, wrecked highways and caused high dollar expenditures to fix roads and build them up to pass through this area.

These are but three of these items that have been in the news, used as irrefutable proof of warming. There are many, many more failed warming stories.

My question then is: Why can the experts use these short term anomalies and events as proof of the warming, yet if some lay person with long term firsthand experience, who lives in an area, shares his ideas on how things have changed, be ridiculed as a denier?

[sk_wheatking]

Because logical and rational thought is now a thing of the past in north america and most of Europe. Radical leftist ideology is now the new norm, being taught in our schools every day and also in the homes of chuck, dml, integrity farmer and the like. I don't really put grassfarmer in with them, I honestly believe he just enjoys debate and anything that drives sf3 nuts.

[furrowtickler]

Just like the “climate scientists” who use daily and single season events to backup their cause?

A few years ago the Great Lakes were low and it was proof of climate change. Now, the water levels are high. The cause? Still climate change.

A few years ago a ski resort in the alps of Switzerland has to close for the season due to lack of snow. Reason? Climate change. Seems it was a single season problem. Same resort has been running every year since with lots of snow.

After the dryer early 2000 years, the ponds in the Saskatoon east hills were dry. I listened to a radio show where the expert was stating it was caused by climate change, that this is the new normal, that the water cycle in this region is damaged beyond repair and will never be the same again. A few years later, the ponds not only filled up, but flooded farms, wrecked highways and caused high dollar expenditures to fix roads and build them up to pass through this area.

These are but three of these items that have been in the news, used as irrefutable proof of warming. There are many, many more failed warming stories.

My question then is: Why can the experts use these short term anomalies and events as proof of the warming, yet if some lay person with long term firsthand experience, who lives in an area, shares his ideas on how things have changed, be ridiculed as a denier?

Much the same in California, the huge reservoirs were drying up , the water would be gone forever global warming was and will be the cause forever..... but the reservoirs filed to capacity and then some the past two winters and the rains returned in late November through Jan just as they had for a millennium.
And strange how the rain Forrest in Brazil is not wiped out from fires ..... oh yup , the rains returned as the always do after the dry season in the Amazon. Not a word about that now .

[fjlip]

Just like the “climate scientists” who use daily and single season events to backup their cause?

A few years ago the Great Lakes were low and it was proof of climate change. Now, the water levels are high. The cause? Still climate change.

A few years ago a ski resort in the alps of Switzerland has to close for the season due to lack of snow. Reason? Climate change. Seems it was a single season problem. Same resort has been running every year since with lots of snow.

After the dryer early 2000 years, the ponds in the Saskatoon east hills were dry. I listened to a radio show where the expert was stating it was caused by climate change, that this is the new normal, that the water cycle in this region is damaged beyond repair and will never be the same again. A few years later, the ponds not only filled up, but flooded farms, wrecked highways and caused high dollar expenditures to fix roads and build them up to pass through this area.

These are but three of these items that have been in the news, used as irrefutable proof of warming. There are many, many more failed warming stories.

My question then is: Why can the experts use these short term anomalies and events as proof of the warming, yet if some lay person with long term firsthand experience, who lives in an area, shares his ideas on how things have changed, be ridiculed as a denier?

Thanks, keep repeating these examples, you have them all "over a barrel"! Just plain idiots!

Cult must be so disappointed that BC did not BURN in 2019! Check these Nov temps...

[Guest]

Oh , its just weather
Its all NA , that had no summer and is into winter in oct , but means nothing to the sheeple
Now even the cold weather is caused by glowbull warming

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Just like the “climate scientists” who use daily and single season events to backup their cause?

A few years ago the Great Lakes were low and it was proof of climate change. Now, the water levels are high. The cause? Still climate change.

A few years ago a ski resort in the alps of Switzerland has to close for the season due to lack of snow. Reason? Climate change. Seems it was a single season problem. Same resort has been running every year since with lots of snow.

After the dryer early 2000 years, the ponds in the Saskatoon east hills were dry. I listened to a radio show where the expert was stating it was caused by climate change, that this is the new normal, that the water cycle in this region is damaged beyond repair and will never be the same again. A few years later, the ponds not only filled up, but flooded farms, wrecked highways and caused high dollar expenditures to fix roads and build them up to pass through this area.

These are but three of these items that have been in the news, used as irrefutable proof of warming. There are many, many more failed warming stories.

My question then is: Why can the experts use these short term anomalies and events as proof of the warming, yet if some lay person with long term firsthand experience, who lives in an area, shares his ideas on how things have changed, be ridiculed as a denier?

Great examples of how "climate change" is a meaningless nonsense, catch all phrase, which makes it perfect for low information, non-critical thinking, gullible people, since their confirmation bias is satisfied with every weather event, every media story, every political speech, and nothing they encounter can ever disprove the theory. So we get brainwashed people like Chuck who know they have chosen the right side, because all they get is confirmation, without ever considering that by its very definition "climate change" is so all encompassing that nothing can ever prove it wrong.

Just like the sports analogy I made elsewhere.

[jazz]

, without ever considering that by its very definition "climate change" is so all encompassing that nothing can ever prove it wrong.

And nothing can ever prove it right either, that's its weakness as anything by conjecture.

But when you have a population filled with virtual retards staring at their phone all day long, doesn't take much. I mean we have Trudeau voted back in again by these retards.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

And nothing can ever prove it right either, that's its weakness as anything by conjecture.

But when you have a population filled with virtual retards staring at their phone all day long, doesn't take much. I mean we have Trudeau voted back in again by these retards.

You are looking at this as a rational informed person, But to the true believers, everything proves it right.