I have 2 comments (otherwise known as a football minute – or an attorney speaking in billable hours, or the diatribe of a sunsetting lecturer). The point being, bear with me.
1) Regardless of the professional and educational credentials of the scientific researchers conducting these weather prediction or climate change studies – look to see who financed the study.
Follow the money.
2) The best data indicator for weather is still the American Farmer’s Almanac, which began in 1818. https://www.farmersalmanac.com/weather-history
Farmer’s understand the natural world and respect the wonders of our world – more closely aligned with Native Americans than any other industry.
This is why:
Generational families of farmers share the same core need of survival equal to Native Americans.
As an Inupiaq and Yupik woman, we call it subsistence. They call it farming.
The core values of both groups are tied directly to the most basic needs for survival. Those values are engrained in our DNA and include:
Respecting the land.
Responsible utilization of resources.
Knowing how to be innovative and adaptable to respond to changes from the environment.
A higher level of expertise in using all of the common “five senses” and intuition to analyze, make rapid decisions, delegate, and execute direction to survive.
Those inherent ways of being are not manufactured because we are needing to find our place in society by being charitable.
We either live and honor the rules of Mother Nature, or we die.
Mother Nature is not in the business if charity.
Living off the land is not a country club, cigar bar, or political fundraiser event.
When your survival comes directly from living off the land, you can find commonalities in belief systems between subsistence lifestyle and the farming populations.
Our worldview is not to take up a “cause” to protect the land.
Anything that becomes a “cause” is manufactured by privileged human’s choice.
When thousands of years and hundreds of generations in your direct bloodline depends on the land and sea to survive, it is not a choice or fashionable trend. It is not an educated dinner party debate that we send out invitations for, hire caterers for, and have servers bring us eight courses of food that we do not eat because we have to maintain a size 2 figure.
We respect the land and honor the unpredictability of Mother Nature.
Climate Change is guaranteed it is Mother Nature. We do not control Mother Nature, we are to be adaptable.
But most of all being disrespectful of Mother Nature is what makes this a “cause” manufactured.
And this is WHAT THAT MEANS:
There are the groups of people that created this unattainable “issue” of predicting climate change, blaming others for it, and polarizing populations as a result.
Who does these acts of disrespecting Mother Nature?
* People that have money and need a tax write-off by donating to a “cause”.
* People that get funding for never-ending studies.
* Political strategists and political factions.
* Special interest groups – who also get money.
Of trusting those that work together and created a manufactured “cause”.
Learn how to identify if they crossed the line by manufacturing a “flavor of the day” cause.
Their motive’s are generally derived from simple “wants” and not “needs” in the hierarchy of survival.
Examples of their motives (wants or desires):
* To fulfill some gaping hole in themselves stemming from unaddressed issues of whatever happened to them in their own lives.
* Ego for a “cause”.
* Superiority – Paternalism.
THINGS TO ASK YOURSELF AND OTHERS
Has there been any recent “fact checks” or social media “take-downs” regarding old research studies from decades ago that predicted “science-based” end of the world – political and societal call-to-actions that have not come to fruition?
Are these people at dinner parties, being served $1500 plates of food that they do not eat, funding bogus “research” to manufacture false legitimacy of said “cause”?
Are the people, politicians, special-interest groups, universities, foundations, etc. carrying out their own agendas and forcing their own will, while concurrently disregarding the authentic data-holders/knowledge holders?
Are they funding scientists, foundations, and universities to “create” a source of secondary research and then using that secondary research as if it were the original or primary data source?
Sometimes there are causes that are created, manufactured, packaged, and sold – and not so ironically – by opposing industries to the one they are trying to wipe out.
Causes are a tool used by many people, who are not authentic.
But they have the means, motive and opportunity to conduct market research.
The purpose of market research is to find what motivates people to act one way or another.
They then execute that strategy based on what issues trigger “the everyday man”. Those triggers are what defines the “cause”
That trigger is then packaged into a “cause” to motivate a mass of people to do what it is the privileged want accomplished.
In scientific experiments and research studies, you have a theory. You define some factor to test that theory against.
The outcome is then whatever it ends up being – whether the theory was proven or not.
What happens nowadays is the the outcome is defined first. The call-to-action is the motive of the research.
“This is what we want people to do”
Others – with the means (rich) create an opportunity (offering funding) for universities, scientists and researchers to create “secondary research” studies and papers to use as citation references.
These references are manufactured to add credence to whatever the “cause” that was predetermined. Ultimately, it is to get people to act one way or another.
That “cause” is analyzed for longevity, return on investment, loyalty, all the relative economic indicators of priority.
Then ultimately, the cause is decided upon by least dollar investment compared to highest yield of return, i.e. making people do what they want them to do, with the least amount of money invested.
Also, if time is of the essence, other factors become the priority to achieve the end goal. Initial cost can become less of a priority, depending on the urgency factor.
But think deeper about what a “cause” is really about. Look who is financing the research, then look at those financers and see who they are investing in other areas, such as radical special interest groups.
If you are younger and idealistic in wanting to change the world, do your due diligence deeper before attaching your integrity to a cause. Do not sign on just for the purpose of being an activist on an adventure.