Climate Change

Climate change is like the weather, something everyone complains about.

 

There are many factors impacting climate…….
Volcanic activity
Earth orbit changes
Changes in land use
Changes in solar output
Ocean currents
Past climate
Impacts from asteroids
But the greenhouse gas issue is an overarching factor the is supported by real data.

Past climate issues include the”little ice age” that led to the depopulation of Viking settlements in Greenland and many of today’s remaining alpine glaciers as well as the dust bowl years that led to record high temperatures that remain unbroken for many locations.
Science does change and evolve…..for example geology struggled to explain contradictions until new understanding of plate tectonics evolved. That doesn’t mean we should just give up and accept a reign of ignorance and stop looking at data.

 

Agreed. But let’s also not whitewash the facts that there was a Cooling narrative in the 1970s. This idea that somehow media misrepresented the Scientists?

Like ok…let’s unpack that a little bit. Let’s assume that’s true. What does that tell you about the media and what they say about Science?

But is it even true? Look at the books I just posted. If so, how was there such a disconnect to begin with between Science and media?

Could that ever happen again? Was it an honest mistake and nothing more?

How were there so many sources saying that evidence points to Cooling?

Why are we now saying there never even was this narrative? Should we trust that media?

The media also told us in 2020 that Covid came from bat soup…

 

OSF

Quantum nature of consciousness – Double slit diffraction experiment in medicine - ScienceDirect

Yes, MeAgain, before you say it, I do see this part for the first link:

“OSF preprints are not peer reviewed and acceptance into OSF preprints is not an indicator of scholarly merit.”

We are on the fringes of Science here. You wanted proof of replications so I provided it. It’s not surprising to me that mainstream Physics doesn’t yet embrace a Consciousness of Physics. Physics doesn’t usually want to touch Consciousness, and mainstream Physicists aren’t gonna automatically jeopardize their careers by peer-reviewing and giving credence to these ideas and experiments.

 

The second paper’s abstract:


The essence of our hypothesis is quantum properties of conscious processes as well as the possibility to measure changes in conscious attention by using quantum double-slit experiment. We supposed that the act of observing in state of focused attention cause a wave function collapse in double-slit diffraction. In order to test the hypothesis, 26 participants took part in the study divided into physical and physiological parts of the experiment. The purpose of the physical system was to reproduce the brain quantum process via hypothesized quantum entanglement. The physical part consisted of a red laser source, neutral density filter, double-slit diaphragm, and linear couple charged camera, while the physiological part of the experiment was significant for the physiological quantifying state of attention. Physiological data were collected by using 29 channel electrophysiological unit with 21 channel electroencephalograph. The study had control and experimental group according to dependent variables measured in the physical part of the experiment. The data in the experimental group were collected over ten studies (sessions). Results obtained in hypothesis testing showed significant increases in corpuscular properties of the electromagnetic wave as well as significant quantum entanglement between the brain and external double-slit quantum system. Our results also offer insight into the connection between the chaotic dynamic of the electroencephalographic signals and uncertainty in the physical system due to focused attention effect. We also hypothesized that the state of concentrated attention was highest during the first several seconds. The last hypothesis considered possible backward time referral effect of cognitive evoked potential p300.

 

That’s the goal, bro

 

Also, if this is all too fringe for you, I recommend at least looking into Roger Penrose’s Orch-OR Theory. While controversial in nature, Sir Roger Penrose is an absolute giant in Physics. He’s willing to stick his neck out here without fear of repercussions.

But to be clear, this is an opposite model. Rather than proposing that Consciousness collapses the Quantum Wavefunction, Penrose suggests that the Quantum Wavefunction generates Consciousness, and that Quantum effects are happening deep within the brain. Similar, yet slightly different. But still related in my view.

“Orchestrated objective reduction (Orch OR) is a controversial theory postulating that consciousness originates at the quantum levelinside neurons (rather than being a product of neural connections). The mechanism is held to be a quantum process called objective reduction that is orchestrated by cellular structures called microtubules. It is proposed that the theory may answer the hard problem of consciousness and provide a mechanism for free will.[1] The hypothesis was put forward in the 1990s by physicist Roger Penrose and anesthesiologistStuart Hameroff; it combines molecular biology, neuroscience, pharmacology, philosophy, quantum information theory, and quantum gravity.”

Orchestrated objective reduction - Wikipedia

 

Things are not always as they seem. Nor are they otherwise. It's all there. Take what you need.

 

Just going to leave this here…

 

So apparently we have been misled?

 

It’s not even fun to be right yet again. It’s more just infuriating that the masses will continue to blindly believe every scam imaginable and mock and ridicule you the entire time. It will change nothing.