Uploaded September 2019 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
SOURCES ARE BELOW:
The debate so far can be found here:
Heller’s opener: youtube.com/watch?v=uE-zY0roNfw
My rebuttal: youtube.com/watch?v=WLjkLPnIPPw
Heller: youtube.com/watch?v=XjdT-NdSoWM
Me: youtube.com/watch?v=weQ-N4iymrQ
Heller: youtube.com/watch?v=XycF0uCuByQ
Me: youtube.com/watch?v=V5fncpSikwk
Heller: (refused to continue)
Eight months on, Tony finally responded with this rebuttal:
youtube.com/watch?v=0A0luC11szU&t=24s
*At 10:17 I said that the increase in the Earth's temperature continues at a smaller and smaller rate. As I mention in the video, this is after the initial forcing -- insolation changes caused by orbital changes -- stops. But this needs further explanation to avoid confusion....
The shift in insolation stops because it is part of a change in orbit that obviously doesn't go on for ever. So when the forcing stops, positive feedback eventually dies down, until the Earth reaches its new equilibrium temperature.
Similarly, the forcing we are currently encountering is due to radiative forcing from increasing concentration of CO2. Temperatures will therefore continue climbing higher as long as we are still increasing that concentration.
Once we stop adding CO2 to the atmosphere, the forcing will stop. But feedbacks will continue, adding further warming until the Earth reaches equilibrium temperature.
Sources for the causes of glaciations are:
“The ice-core record: climate sensitivity and future greenhouse warming” – Lorius et al, Nature 1990
“Investigations of Milankovitch and the quaternary curve of effective solar radiation” – W. Jardetsky, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, October 1961
“Links between annual, Milankovitch and continuum temperature variability” – Huybers and Curry, Nature 2006
“Global warming preceded by increasing carbon dioxide concentrations during the last deglaciation” -- Jeremy D. Shakun, Nature 2012
“Tightened constraints on the time-lag between Antarctic temperature and CO2 during the last deglaciation” -- J. B. Pedro, Climate of the Past, 2012
“Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice core Antarctica” -- Petit et al., Nature1999
“A time-dependent climatic feedback system involving sea-ice extent, ocean temperature and CO2” – Saltzman and Moritz, Tellus 1980
“Positive feedback between global warming and atmospheric CO2 concentration inferred from past climate change” – Scheffer et al., Geophysical Research Letters, 2006
"Is carbon dioxide from fossil fuel changing man's environment?" -- Keeling, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 1969
14:21 – “Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III” -- Caillon et al, Science 2003
“CO2 record in the Byrd ice core 50,000 – 5,000 years BP” A Neftel et al., Nature 1988
“CO2-climate relationship as deduced from the Vostok ice core” -- Barnola et al, Tellus 1991
For figures on methane:
“Radiative forcing of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the methane radiative forcing” – Etminan at al., Geophysical Research Letters, 2016
ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/ghgp/Global-Warming-Potential-Values%20%28Feb%2016%202016%29_1.pdf
“Methane bubbling from Siberian thaw lakes as a positive feedback to climate warming” – Walter et al, Nature 2006
“Methane production by ruminants, its contribution to global warming” – Moss et al., 2000
“Radiative forcing of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the methane radiative forcing” – Etminan at al., Geophysical Research Letters, 2016.
“Man-made carbon dioxide and the “greenhouse” effect” JS Sawyer - Nature, 1972
In addition, there’s a very good paper on matching Milankovitch cycles to glacial cycles:
Insolation-driven 100,000-year glacial cycles and
hysteresis of ice-sheet volume” – Abe-Ouchi et al., Nature 2013
The relationship between global temperature and energy balance is governed by the Stefan Boltzmann equation, where the radiation of a body is proportional to the temperature of the body to the power of four. For more on how ingoing and outgoing radiation affects temperature,, see this paper:
“Earth’s energy imbalance and its implications” – Hansen et al., published by GISS and Columbia University Earth Institute 2011. I cannot vouch for this as a peer-reviewed paper, but it is published by two reputable scientific institutes, and is therefore an educational rather than a research tool.
CORRECTION:
At 0:12 in the video, #12 should read 'ppb' not 'ppm'.
For my explanations of the cause of glaciations, see my videos
“Does CO2 lead or lag global temperature” youtube.com/watch?v=zQ3PzYU1N7A&t=281s
“The Evidence for climate change WITHOUT computer models or the IPCC”
youtube.com/watch?v=OJ6Z04VJDco&t=343s
SOURCES ARE BELOW:
The debate so far can be found here:
Heller’s opener: youtube.com/watch?v=uE-zY0roNfw
My rebuttal: youtube.com/watch?v=WLjkLPnIPPw
Heller: youtube.com/watch?v=XjdT-NdSoWM
Me: youtube.com/watch?v=weQ-N4iymrQ
Heller: youtube.com/watch?v=XycF0uCuByQ
Me: youtube.com/watch?v=V5fncpSikwk
Heller: (refused to continue)
Eight months on, Tony finally responded with this rebuttal:
youtube.com/watch?v=0A0luC11szU&t=24s
*At 10:17 I said that the increase in the Earth's temperature continues at a smaller and smaller rate. As I mention in the video, this is after the initial forcing -- insolation changes caused by orbital changes -- stops. But this needs further explanation to avoid confusion....
The shift in insolation stops because it is part of a change in orbit that obviously doesn't go on for ever. So when the forcing stops, positive feedback eventually dies down, until the Earth reaches its new equilibrium temperature.
Similarly, the forcing we are currently encountering is due to radiative forcing from increasing concentration of CO2. Temperatures will therefore continue climbing higher as long as we are still increasing that concentration.
Once we stop adding CO2 to the atmosphere, the forcing will stop. But feedbacks will continue, adding further warming until the Earth reaches equilibrium temperature.
Sources for the causes of glaciations are:
“The ice-core record: climate sensitivity and future greenhouse warming” – Lorius et al, Nature 1990
“Investigations of Milankovitch and the quaternary curve of effective solar radiation” – W. Jardetsky, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, October 1961
“Links between annual, Milankovitch and continuum temperature variability” – Huybers and Curry, Nature 2006
“Global warming preceded by increasing carbon dioxide concentrations during the last deglaciation” -- Jeremy D. Shakun, Nature 2012
“Tightened constraints on the time-lag between Antarctic temperature and CO2 during the last deglaciation” -- J. B. Pedro, Climate of the Past, 2012
“Climate and atmospheric history of the past 420,000 years from the Vostok ice core Antarctica” -- Petit et al., Nature1999
“A time-dependent climatic feedback system involving sea-ice extent, ocean temperature and CO2” – Saltzman and Moritz, Tellus 1980
“Positive feedback between global warming and atmospheric CO2 concentration inferred from past climate change” – Scheffer et al., Geophysical Research Letters, 2006
"Is carbon dioxide from fossil fuel changing man's environment?" -- Keeling, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 1969
14:21 – “Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III” -- Caillon et al, Science 2003
“CO2 record in the Byrd ice core 50,000 – 5,000 years BP” A Neftel et al., Nature 1988
“CO2-climate relationship as deduced from the Vostok ice core” -- Barnola et al, Tellus 1991
For figures on methane:
“Radiative forcing of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the methane radiative forcing” – Etminan at al., Geophysical Research Letters, 2016
ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/ghgp/Global-Warming-Potential-Values%20%28Feb%2016%202016%29_1.pdf
“Methane bubbling from Siberian thaw lakes as a positive feedback to climate warming” – Walter et al, Nature 2006
“Methane production by ruminants, its contribution to global warming” – Moss et al., 2000
“Radiative forcing of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide: A significant revision of the methane radiative forcing” – Etminan at al., Geophysical Research Letters, 2016.
“Man-made carbon dioxide and the “greenhouse” effect” JS Sawyer - Nature, 1972
In addition, there’s a very good paper on matching Milankovitch cycles to glacial cycles:
Insolation-driven 100,000-year glacial cycles and
hysteresis of ice-sheet volume” – Abe-Ouchi et al., Nature 2013
The relationship between global temperature and energy balance is governed by the Stefan Boltzmann equation, where the radiation of a body is proportional to the temperature of the body to the power of four. For more on how ingoing and outgoing radiation affects temperature,, see this paper:
“Earth’s energy imbalance and its implications” – Hansen et al., published by GISS and Columbia University Earth Institute 2011. I cannot vouch for this as a peer-reviewed paper, but it is published by two reputable scientific institutes, and is therefore an educational rather than a research tool.
CORRECTION:
At 0:12 in the video, #12 should read 'ppb' not 'ppm'.
For my explanations of the cause of glaciations, see my videos
“Does CO2 lead or lag global temperature” youtube.com/watch?v=zQ3PzYU1N7A&t=281s
“The Evidence for climate change WITHOUT computer models or the IPCC”
youtube.com/watch?v=OJ6Z04VJDco&t=343s
![Did Greta Thunberg slip up?
I have been asking subscribers for examples of an error by Greta Thunberg for over five years. Now I think Ive found one. But it was buried under a pile of fabrications and even worse errors by her critics. A definite own goal.
ERRORS SUGGESTED BY POSTERS:
Following my request for more Thunberg errors, here are a couple of posts I received:
1) @lemdixon01wrote: We only have 5 years left tweet in 2016 deleted I could find no record of this tweet, so I asked the poster where he got this from. He wrote back: I dont care about exactly what the tweet said. This kind of emphasises the point I made in the video, that a lot of Thunberg quotes are just people making stuff up.
2) @ShuffleboardJerk writes that he 100% support[s] Greta but he did find an error: “About 100 companies emits [sic] approximately 71% of our total emissions of CO2.” - Greta Thunberg, 2019
I checked, and this is indeed a quote, and Thunberg was incorrect in saying it. The figure comes from a study that identified 100 companies that produce fossil fuels, mostly oil companies and coal mining companies. But they are not burning their own product, simply supplying it, and therefore are not emitting CO2, as Thunberg claims. Not only that, one of the companies was listed as China, the other Russia. These are not companies, they are countries. So the figure is wrong and misleading.
It is interesting that none of Thunbergs critics could find an error, they simply made up quotes or passed on a myth they read. It took an admirer of Thunberg to have the intelligence to find something, check its veracity, quote it correctly, and then have the honesty and objectiveness to post it publicly. That says a lot.
SOURCES:
Forbes story:
https://perma.cc/ZG8N-6ES6
https://www.factcheck.org/2023/06/viral-posts-distort-greta-thunberg-tweet-warning-about-climate-change/
https://rumble.com/v2vhz98-greta-thunberg-said-all-of-humanity-would-be-wiped-out-by-today-trust-the-s.html?e9s=src_v1_s%2Csrc_v1_s_m
https://highlandcountypress.com/wrong-again-sorry-greta-humanity-still-here#gsc.tab=0 Did Greta Thunberg slip up?](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/UVZiKGjl6RY/mqdefault.jpg)







![Will Earths magnetic reversal cause catastrophe? (Part 2 of Did the CIA classify...?)
Part one of this video is here:
https://youtu.be/0FtYSzS53C0
TO SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL PLEASE SUPPORT THIS CHARITY:
I do not ask for contributions. Instead, please support the work of Health in Harmony, which trades forest protections for health care. See my video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j9-GRugP9pU for an explanation of their work.
Donations can be made here: https://healthinharmony.org/donate-today/
Health in Harmony also has a live website: https://actnow.healthinharmony.org/
CORRECTIONS:
1) 13:01 – I said ‘kilometers an hour’ instead of ‘miles an hour.’
2) As expected, someone corrected my understanding of the torque required to stop the Earths rotation. The formulaa I used is for a uniform sphere, whereas the Earth has a much denser center and a lighter crust. So the torque would be slightly less than I calculated. But in non-scientific terms, still a shitload.
3) Another poster wrote: The unit of torque is Nm [Newton-meter] not Nm/s.
4) @anttibra, a physics teacher from Finland, corrected my calculation. On the basis that he knows better then me, Im happy to lay it out here. He wrote:
Torque is calculated by this equation: M=F x r, where x is vector product. If force is plumb compared to distance of rotating axis, then you can use simple multiplication.
Angular momentum is L=J*w, where J=moment of inertia (similar to mass in rotation) and w=angular velocity.
Assuming Earth is uniform sphere (its not, but this is simplified math), then J=2/5*Mr^2=9,721052869650016e37 kgm^2
Since Earth rotate once every 23h 56min 4,10 seconds, then angular velocity w=2*pi/(86164,1 s)=7,292*10^-5 1/s.
Now we get Earths angular momentum L=7,08870359707824214497e33 kgm^2/s.
When we want to stop the Earth, we must apply torque over time.
delta L=M*delta t, delta t = time we apply torque. If the Earth stops in 10 hours, then delta t= 36000 seconds.
M=L/t=7,08870359707824214497e33 kgm^2/s / (36000 s) = 1,96908433252173392916e29 Nm.
How much is this? Well, if we apply force on the equator, the required force would be:
M=F*r
F = M/r = 1,96908433252173392916e29 Nm / (6 378 140 m) = 3,08723912068680513309e22 = 31e21 N = 31 ZN = 31 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 N.
Another poster added: You have this line as part of your corrections: Since Earth rotate once every 23h 56min 4,10 seconds, then angular velocity w=2*pi/(86164,1 s)=7,292*10^-5 1/s. The units are in radians per second, but the unit written have been written as rotations per second (Hz or 1/s).
SOURCES:
Earth Catastrophe Cycle | Pole Shift
Suspicious0bservers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgJ4zVNe_vk
An overview of Earth’s magnetic field
https://geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/earthmag.html#_Toc2075556
Strength of field falling:
https://www.ontariobeneathourfeet.com/magnetic-reversal
Magnetic field over 9,000 years:
https://www.universetoday.com/156234/the-rapid-changes-were-seeing-with-the-earths-magnetic-field-dont-mean-the-poles-are-about-to-flip-this-is-normal/
Equations of inertia;
https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/force-required-to-stop-a-rotating-disc.553017/#:~:text=a%20rotating%20disc%3F-,The%20formula%20for%20calculating%20the%20force%20required%20to%20stop%20a,takes%20to%20stop%20the%20disc.
https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/613448/energy-required-to-tilt-earth-s-axis-by-90-degrees
https://www.universetoday.com/156234/the-rapid-changes-were-seeing-with-the-earths-magnetic-field-dont-mean-the-poles-are-about-to-flip-this-is-normal/
Recurrent ancient geomagnetic field anomalies shed light onfuture evolution of the South Atlantic Anomaly https://www.pnas.org/doi/epdf/10.1073/pnas.2200749119
The Earth’s magnetic field – an overview
https://geomag.bgs.ac.uk/education/earthmag.html
https://www.ontariobeneathourfeet.com/magnetic-reversal
How Does A Magnetic Reversal Affect Life On Earth?
RapidChangesinStrengthandDirectionofEarthsMagneticFieldOverthePast100,000Years
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2023GC011236 Will Earths magnetic reversal cause catastrophe? (Part 2 of Did the CIA classify...?)](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VpmUdUDIjVQ/mqdefault.jpg)

