The great global warming scam, worth a listen I think.

[ollie989898]

LOL.

 

[Old McDonald]

It's quite simple, I do not have the time.

For the past 4 months I've been working 6 to 7 days a week. I'm not that interested in Climate Science other than trying to understand why most people are persuaded by what amounts to very biased and narrow focus on how the world works.

I think I've covered enough to show I have an arguement and th arguments put forward by yourself and others don't stand up to scrutiny.





All you've got is some science which dates back to CO2 absorbing thermal radiation .. that's the stick Environmentalists are using to tax the lower classes in the West out of their jobs, livelihoods and culture.

I'll give you an example. When you see the BBC news .. you'll see a massive room full of Screens. 100s of screens. Most of those screens aren't needed. Yet this company pushes an agenda of CO2 and warming .. whilst flagrantly abusing energy.

And this is just a small scale example. I've pointed out before that goods which used to be made in the UK are now made in China, using dirty energy AND have massive transport energy costs.

1 Billion new consumers in China .. 1+ Billion in India .. I think Africa is forecast to have 2 Billion consumers soon .. where is the limiting of CO2 with these countries ? Actually there is no limits, they don't pay CO2 taxes .. in fact what we see is the UK putting £ 14 Billion into "foreign aid" .. £ 300 million is given out per year in Visa cards, not even targetted. Creating more and more consumers.

Where exactly is urgent CO2 reduction in all this activity ? There is none, in fact it's the reverse. CO2 is just being used to destroy the working class poor in the West whilst funding the pockets of the rich .. the same rich which openly state that countries like China will use the "Service" industries in the West for investment vehicles .. further increasing their earnings.

Take a look at the MASSIVE £ 100s million yachts of billionaires .. Monaco .. South of France .. anywhere .. do you see those that use energy the most reducing their usage ? Do you think those billionaire yachts use less energy than yachts before them ? How about Branson's space toursim ?

It's a massive scam .. a class war using propaganda and the media to take money .. there is no action .. there is no logic .. there is just greed.

You are quite right. This is my "rambling" opinion based on gut feeling.

Take your precious "Science" .. the £ Billions spent. How has mankind benefitted on those resources being given to "Climate Science" ? Nothing materially has happened of any significance. True some figures on bits of paper might say the UK has reduced CO2 but those same bits paper will totally ignore the fact much more CO2 is now generated in China.

Just imagine if that money was spent on reversing the desertification of Africa .. a win win for the environment and the climate .. but no the money is put in certain peoples pockets.

As we both know CO2 does not rule the climate .. it's ruled by the Sun and the Earth's orbit around the sun. If there was no variation in the suns output and the Earths orbit the Earth would have turned into an ice ball long ago .. CO2 didn't bring the Earth out of Ice ages.

I'm sure EVERYTHING increases temperatures on the Earth .. CGHG would not be able to reflect thermal radiation without that energy was first converted by the solid and liquid Earth. Solids get hotter than liquids which get hotter than gases.

I'm not interested in Climate Science .. I couldn't think of a bigger waste of anyones time and effort. It always amazes me how there are millions of people all willing to argue the point about Climate Science but very few actually doing things on the ground to supposedly "Fix" the situation.

If you are so concerned why not sell the farm and go rejunivanate the deserts and "Save the planet" .. in fact why haven't you done this many years ago ?

The same as all single handed farmers I have worked seven days a week for decades not just the last four months. Like you, I have found a few hours spare to contribute to this thread, although admittedly none in the last few weeks until my previous post.


If you have no interest in climate change why have you spent so much of your valuable time in making so many lengthy posts? You certainly have no interest in why the vast majority accept the settled science of 200 years that GHGs do indeed increase the Earth’s temperature. If you did, you would have put forward some evidence of your “very biased and narrow focus” instead of just trying to bully everyone into accepting your view because you say it is so. Ranting about all the waste and taxes has no connection to what I have been posting. What taxes do you pay that “Environmentalists” have introduced?


I do not use the expression “Save the Planet” other than to throw it back to people like you who do use it. I have bought five farms of varying sizes between 9 and over 3000 acres in four different countries, all in a very neglected and unproductive state when I purchased, all with land that had never before been used for agriculture and which I brought into production. All five were (in the present case, is) in a condition where productivity increased several fold by the time I sold. I have enjoyed doing it. Scrub, rocks, soil erosion and lack of organic matter in the soil have always been the main problems. Plus rabbits on the Australian 3000 acres. It has been repeated so many times, and ironically by politicians, that I am sure you are aware of Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels and the two ears of corn or two blades of grass quote. I have done better than that.


What have you done with your life to “Save the Planet”? Why have you not gone out and rejuvenated the deserts many years ago? Or do what I did and improve individual farms? In fact, “if you are so concerned” what are you doing about the pollution you rant about?

 

[Old McDonald]

You guys don't seriously believe that c02 drives climate?

Plant life thrives on c02, if I add c02 to my greenhouse I get bigger yields from bigger plants.

Tell me, during the medieval warm period do you think man-made climate change was the culprit? The horse and cart must have had some size of carbon footprint.

Vulcanic activity and impacts from space can cause abrupt climate change and has done in the past so many times and in fact there's more and more evidence coming to light that a comet impact ended the last ice age, the younger dryas. However our Sun is the main climate driver on our fragile Earth through its solar cycles during periods of high activity we see warmer temperatures and when it's less active the planet cools. Earth's normal state is in fact ice age broken up by short periods of warm, and which we have been in for about the last 12000 years. There's evidence to suggest that we are headed toward another mini ice age like the one that followed the medieval warm period and all you have to do is a little research into something called the Grand Solar Minimum. The science behind this blows Al Gore's man-made global warming myth to pieces, but we can't tax the sun can we.

Agriculture will collapse in the northern hemisphere within ten years unless current practices aren't adapted to suit the impending climate change. There is NOTHING we as a species can do to alter what the sun is doing and a worldwide food crisis beckons.

Over the next 10-20 yrs expect the weather to become ever more erratic with colder winters and late springs, giant hail strom, and flooding, and droughts and an uptake in Vulcanic and seismic activity.

This is all due to the sun and the magnetic connection between our planet and it. The sun's magneto sphere is weakening and sunspot activity decreasing and this is what drives our weather and causes disruption to earth's tectonic plates and volcanoes.

Look at what's happening in Canada and US, and even France. Giant hail are destroying crops and vineyards and in Canada their still having snow in areas that should be having summer.

There's also record cold in the southern hemisphere while we are having a record summer. Australia will have a late spring like we just did and indeed this coming winter will bite a hellava lot deeper than the last. Before the end of November the earth will experience an 8.5 earth quake and Krakatoa will most likely erupt at some point next year (its just became active again) with the probability of 2020 being a year without a summer, just as it did the year Mary shelly wrote her frankenstein noval. And guess what? That was during the Dalton Minimum of the early 1800's when solar activity was also at a low and Napoleon's army was caught out by a record freezing Russian winter.

The fall of every great empire and civilization on earth has been preceeded by these solar events and cycles and no amount of taxation and useless paper money will change what's about to happen.

View attachment 701390

Another GSM disciple who is capable of predicting the future and even signs in as if he is "IT".

 

[Old McDonald]

Here's a link to a YouTube discussion all about the Grand Solar Minimum and the science behind it, what to expect and how best to deal with it. Id suggest give it a listen and then look at the current global weather events.

You are even more misinformed than I imagined. We have been through this Oppenheimer Ranch Project earlier in the thread. The man is a charlatan who receives his income from people who promote his videos - including anyone who even misadvertently clicks on one posted by people like you who may well be on the payroll. Perhaps you are in fact the man himself. No info on your profile page to indicate where you are. This is an agricultural forum. Are you farming? Any interest in, or knowledge of farming? If so, where?

Put forward some evidence of research already done, not hallucinatory guesses of what will happen next year or during the next solar minimum. Again we have been through the various fictional solar cycles and shown they do not line up with any time frame you care to mention.

 

[Old McDonald]

Stop taking the pee, this is a serious thread man. You are a joker. Go away and learn how GHGs work for a start.

Wanton Dwarf has indicated from his posts that at least he really understands chemical reactions, so I have refrained from being as blunt as you on the basis that perhaps he may not be able to express himself in a lucid manner. He has until recently also tended to post very late at night, and I have made allowances for this also. Occasionally my mind also runs riot late at night.

On the other hand his posts today would suggest that you are totally correct and he does not have a clue about how GHGs affect the planet. For that reason I have to "like" what you posted.

 

[Old McDonald]

Well the information I'm sharing here is exactly what the Chinese and the Russians are preparing for right now. I'd bet my house on it

Now you are talking my kind of talk. Please elaborate on exactly what you are prepared to bet your house on.

I also want full details of where and what your house is so I can put a valuation on it. I might then be prepred to put up an equal amount of money in cash, or possibly my own property if I think you are wrong in your guess. I might, of course, decline to bet.

You made the move. As Tom Dreaper said in 1964 "Put your money where you put your mouth and then we'll play the game."

 

[Old McDonald]

So embarrassing that this thread is always on the top page of this forum.

Why do you find it embarrassing? It is a very serious subject which most people tend to ignore, even during episodes of temperature maximums such as much of the northern hemisphere is currently experiencing. Yesterday's max here was 1.8ºC above anything I have previously recorded in 15 years and that was on the previous day.

 

[GSM]

Il check back in a year and see how you all are doing.. Expect next year to be worse than the current one and so on and so forth.

I'm interested because our food supply is under threat and that is reason enough.

This is an extremely serious subject and some of you are behaving like children, ridicule all you like but co2 driving climate is the biggest laugh in here

 

[wanton dwarf]

The same as all single handed farmers I have worked seven days a week for decades not just the last four months. Like you, I have found a few hours spare to contribute to this thread, although admittedly none in the last few weeks until my previous post.


If you have no interest in climate change why have you spent so much of your valuable time in making so many lengthy posts? You certainly have no interest in why the vast majority accept the settled science of 200 years that GHGs do indeed increase the Earth’s temperature. If you did, you would have put forward some evidence of your “very biased and narrow focus” instead of just trying to bully everyone into accepting your view because you say it is so. Ranting about all the waste and taxes has no connection to what I have been posting. What taxes do you pay that “Environmentalists” have introduced?


I do not use the expression “Save the Planet” other than to throw it back to people like you who do use it. I have bought five farms of varying sizes between 9 and over 3000 acres in four different countries, all in a very neglected and unproductive state when I purchased, all with land that had never before been used for agriculture and which I brought into production. All five were (in the present case, is) in a condition where productivity increased several fold by the time I sold. I have enjoyed doing it. Scrub, rocks, soil erosion and lack of organic matter in the soil have always been the main problems. Plus rabbits on the Australian 3000 acres. It has been repeated so many times, and ironically by politicians, that I am sure you are aware of Swift’s Gulliver’s Travels and the two ears of corn or two blades of grass quote. I have done better than that.


What have you done with your life to “Save the Planet”? Why have you not gone out and rejuvenated the deserts many years ago? Or do what I did and improve individual farms? In fact, “if you are so concerned” what are you doing about the pollution you rant about?

I'm a farmers son .. so I work and farm .. I'll be working on various tasks outside of farming as well as farming as I have done since an early age. I'm not going to waste time jumping to a pointless excercise in attempting to refute science papers where £ Billions is given out freely to the chosen few.

That is a matter of politics. The political fight is far more worthwhile given it is politics which forces the Western poor to pay Climate Taxes whilst the rich gain wealth, destroy jobs and make money off imports .. imports which don't pay climate taxes.


My point all along has been that Climate Science focuses on a few gases which can be taxed, legislated and regulated. Yet all elements increase the temperature of the Earth and all contribute to cooling .. which is literally Thermodynamics. I note that includes your Climate Gases ..


Seeing as Climate Models don't work how can "Climate Science" be settled ?

In the past few years the models have so far out that the temperature data has had to be changed .. blaming the changes on the absoption of the sea.

The water cycle, milankovitch cycles and thermodynamics are all established science and more credible than "Climate Science" .. which as yet has to even show working models where the science can be repeated.

So there are your examples which I really shouldn't have to find research papers for ..

As regards your farming accomplishments, well done. As a farmers son I've kept the farm running but as we all know farming doesn't earn very much money .. so no I wouldn't be interested in doing what you have done, sorry. I have done various things in my life I am proud about but don't feel the need to brag .. I'm sure making large companies more efficient has done some measure towards "Saving the planet" whilst increasing peoples quality of life without bias.

Your the one bullying all along attempting to use 200 years of science papers like some kind of blunt weapon when faced with the fact that Climate Science just doesn't work at the moment. It's not my fault all the scientists involved can't replicate the real world nor my fault Climate Scientists change the evidence on a regular basis. This kind of bullying is seen as a behaviour throughout the Left of politics with George Monbiot using papers with total disregard of their basis in fact as justification for introducing draconian policy.

You might not have mentioned Politics but I did .. from the first post I made. I have gone over quicky what I did post and my basis has always been the same - pointing out the narrow focus of Climate Science and the fact the Western poor are punished using Climate Taxes and regulation - something I note you've never admitted.

Let me know if Climate Science one day actually replicates the real world and moves on from being a belief system.

I won't be rushing to create science papers but you can be assured I am already involved in politics and that I believe can and will make a difference.

 

[wanton dwarf]

I think you need to read my post again.

WHY are we taxed to the limit on CO2 ?
Because it’s the best way to tax the biggest culprits of the most obvious factor we can control.
WHY are other countries NOT taxed on CO2 ? Because some are third world counties, that can hardly afford the changes and look after their populations as is, who can best afford to make changes?

WHY have millions of people lost their jobs because of what a few people with an incomplete theory "think" ? I am not sure you can put millions of job losses at the door of climate change, theories, and it has also created lots jobs in new sectors.

I like some aspects of renewables. But that isn't a reason to make the UK upper and middle classes rich at the expense of the lower classes.

How are Co2 taxes affecting the poor the most, they are universal via electricity uses, and indirect taxes, they have provided the people on the lowest incomes free insulation , replacement boilers etc etc, that is taxing the rich to give to the poor. New technologies are offering hope of energy equality that the fossil fuel system never could it’s called self production. The schemes offer free solar panels to anyone where the owner or house user gets the free electric.

In the end everything cost money to start up the biggest costs are upfront the greatest rewards are at the end. we would all be poorer long term if the old system had continued. Even China can see the advantages of where we are heading, over where we were.

We are not taxed for CO2 on imports of goods outside of the EU.

Not all are third world countries.

Do you think the 30,000 Steel workers who recently lost their jobs will be thinking about insulation or boilers compared to their lost jobs and way of life ? I should think they're more concerned about losing their homes.

It's very interesting to see some people say the UK can afford to change .. but what did those very same people do when faced with the loss of Environmental payments via the EU ? The loss of the LIFE system ? Suddenly with the shoe on the other foot the "Environmentalists" were up in arms ..

The worst is the jobs that have left UK shores now use dirty energy and have massive transport pollution .. how can you justify creating more pollution ? your taxes do the complete opposite.

China as never believed the current political system is viable .. it's pretty obvious why because a large section of society throughout the West is being systematically persecuted .. and people like you actively hide the evidence.

 

[wanton dwarf]

Wanton Dwarf has indicated from his posts that at least he really understands chemical reactions, so I have refrained from being as blunt as you on the basis that perhaps he may not be able to express himself in a lucid manner. He has until recently also tended to post very late at night, and I have made allowances for this also. Occasionally my mind also runs riot late at night.

On the other hand his posts today would suggest that you are totally correct and he does not have a clue about how GHGs affect the planet. For that reason I have to "like" what you posted.

Rather than concentrating on GHG's give a break down on how ALL elements affect the temperature.

Start off with the Sun, the solid Earth and the ocean.

Then having given an example of the energy levels hitting the Earth give an example of how much energy is reflected back on to the Earth by CO2.

You should be able to do that seeing as you have 200 years of science papers.

Then give a comparison to how many times more energy would have to be reflected back onto the Earth by CO2 for existing Climate Models to be correct.

 

[ollie989898]

If you don't understand how green house gases work, may I suggest some remedial googling?

 

[Dave645]

We are not taxed for CO2 on imports of goods outside of the EU.

No co2 taxes are directly on goods, they are on co2 used so the electric generation industry was hit they have moved away from coal as much as possible to avoid the tax, they tax cars for co2 through road tax which again can be avoided or reduced by personaln choice.

Not all are third world countries.
That’s what I said.
Do you think the 30,000 Steel workers who recently lost their jobs will be thinking about insulation or boilers compared to their lost jobs and way of life ? I should think they're more concerned about losing their homes.
Was it climate change or China’s subsidising of its steel industry, it’s hard to see this is climate change policies fault it’s a political thing. Sad as that is.

It's very interesting to see some people say the UK can afford to change .. but what did those very same people do when faced with the loss of Environmental payments via the EU ? The loss of the LIFE system ? Suddenly with the shoe on the other foot the "Environmentalists" were up in arms ..
Is this anything to do with climate change or another rant against envioromentalists?
The worst is the jobs that have left UK shores now use dirty energy and have massive transport pollution .. how can you justify creating more pollution ? your taxes do the complete opposite.
I think your over simplifying world politics and trade, consumer habits, and you feel you have found a scape goat to blame it all on, now that said I am sure jobs have been lost and jobs have been created if you could give me a link to some data that your drawing all this info from we could have a proper debate, or this is only your word against mine, data sources for your conclusions are very important if you want to carry an argument as your the one saying these things it’s on you to back it up with actual data.

China as never believed the current political system is viable .. it's pretty obvious why because a large section of society throughout the West is being systematically persecuted .. and people like you actively hide the evidence.
As a UK farmer I don’t see myself working for China to cover up evidence or involved in persecuting the west.
I do see my self as well read and interested in the topic not prone to make thinks up to take anything I read with a pinch of salt, question things look at data with my own eyes and draw my own conclusions not just what YouTube videos tell me, this is why I ask you for data and links.


science has this think called pear review where they take evidence that has been created via study of ices cores or sedimentary samples and they draw conclusions based on that then they send it out for pear review, where those finding are checked and validated by other independent scientists, to make sure the data is correct based on understandings of science at that time.
This is a continual process in science this is repeated over and over new data comes up. Even then new science and new thinking may over turn that data it may take years or decades, but if the data is found to be in error it’s over turned and the new data moves on, as fact.
So when someone says data is 200 years old was scientifically excepted was tested to be true and possible is still being tested or used in test, then that is an assurance that it’s quite a sound principal in science, it’s not just a few people on videos or web pages saying it’s not true. Its hundreds of scientist over hundreds of years have tested that theory in multiple experiments have exepted that co2 acts as a greenhouse gas as fact!
But your evidence is a gut feeling and videos and websites that offer you no links to real data or pear reviewed experiments that prove they are right! Who is most likely to be telling the truth? Look for data or links to experiments that show co2 is not acting as a green house gas then we can look at it and make our own minds up.

I am open to changing my mind if you can do that.

 

[ollie989898]

You can't tax the third world, they can't afford it, and rightly point out that they haven't polluted anything like as much as the West has in their history. Fair enough.

We need to find a cheap, zero-carbon way of producing and supplying energy to these places. We need to make them wealthier and they still stop having so many kids.

It is that simple.

The amount of CO2 generated by shipping is literally bugger all on a per unit basis, it's WAY more efficient to ship or rail something than transport it in a fudging truck and if you were that kinky about it you can use the wind or nuclear reactors to power ships, both methods work.

 

[wanton dwarf]

You can't tax the third world, they can't afford it, and rightly point out that they haven't polluted anything like as much as the West has in their history. Fair enough.

We need to find a cheap, zero-carbon way of producing and supplying energy to these places. We need to make them wealthier and they still stop having so many kids.

It is that simple.

The amount of CO2 generated by shipping is literally bugger all on a per unit basis, it's WAY more efficient to ship or rail something than transport it in a fudging truck and if you were that kinky about it you can use the wind or nuclear reactors to power ships, both methods work.

China has polluted massively. India has polluted massively. Both have space programs.

We don't produce any renewable energy products. China does. No we don't need to make them wealthier .. China is already the second largest economy in the world.

Goods produced in China use dirty energy, get transported by truck or rail to a port. Then by ship. Then by truck or rail.

Why not just produce goods in the UK and people either go pick them up or they get sent to them locally. I'm sure barbie dolls can be produced without having to travel 1000s miles.

No Nuclear powered ships to be taken over by terrorists thank you.

 

[Dave645]

http://www.siemens.co.uk/en/wind/hull.htm
Not all but most, there are a few exceptions.

What the UK does best is, design and research, then patent them.
Their are always other ways to get a slice of the pie.

By the sounds of it, Mr Dyson is also busy. Their are lots of opportunities and lots of problems to be solved, they don’t all have to involve China.

I think the third worlds cheap power can only come from renewables, as small scale local energy production, is the cheapest solution.

Another UK innovation, is utilising mine shafts to store energy the UK company has started up to get the idea going, the idea is once the designs and tests have been done, these mechanical batteries if you will can be built anywhere where you can drill a hole in the ground.
The basic premise is you suspend a large weight in the shaft you Wind the large weight up on surplus renewable energy, then when it’s required let the weight drop which converts the stored enegy back to electricity. I am not sure how far they have gotten with the idea yet.

I just found a link
https://www.theengineer.co.uk/abandoned-mine-shafts-energy-storage/

 

[wanton dwarf]

science has this think called pear review where they take evidence that has been created via study of ices cores or sedimentary samples and they draw conclusions based on that then they send it out for pear review, where those finding are checked and validated by other independent scientists, to make sure the data is correct based on understandings of science at that time.
This is a continual process in science this is repeated over and over new data comes up. Even then new science and new thinking may over turn that data it may take years or decades, but if the data is found to be in error it’s over turned and the new data moves on, as fact.
So when someone says data is 200 years old was scientifically excepted was tested to be true and possible is still being tested or used in test, then that is an assurance that it’s quite a sound principal in science, it’s not just a few people on videos or web pages saying it’s not true. Its hundreds of scientist over hundreds of years have tested that theory in multiple experiments have exepted that co2 acts as a greenhouse gas as fact!
But your evidence is a gut feeling and videos and websites that offer you no links to real data or pear reviewed experiments that prove they are right! Who is most likely to be telling the truth? Look for data or links to experiments that show co2 is not acting as a green house gas then we can look at it and make our own minds up.

Peer review, not pear.

Einstein created the theory of relativity which was thought to explain the Universe. But it was found that this explanation of the universe only works for large objects (macro), but doesnt work for very small objects - some time later Quantum theory was found to work for small objects (micro).

There is currently no one overriding theory which works for both the macro and micro.

So science is not concluded based on it being 200 years old. Science moves on all the time.

Climate Science came up with Climate Models which were used by Ed Miliband to create Climate Policy in the UK. Those models were identified as being failures some time ago. To the extent that the very minimum they were wrong by was 1 degree - ie the climate pause. Other climate models were worse.

To "Fix" the problem various agencies decided the "Temperature Data" had to be changed because the Seas were cooling/warmer more than was allowed for in the original climate models.

BUT if UK policy is based on temperatures which are NOT going to happen in the future .. because the models are wrong and therefore we are not in the danger proposed by the original climate models .. then why do we have todays Climate Policy ?


The reason about "Truth" is a question of the politics and if the original climate models were deliberately manipulated. In addition because the climate models are wrong and given the fact something as simple as the sea not being accounted for correctly .. the whole theory is open to question because of incompetance and previous manipulation of data.

My opinion having read the Climate literature for some years is that the situation was exaggerated many years ago. My gut feeling is that some have an unhealthy interest in manipulating the situation and quite frankly I do not trust the system at all - especially given the timing of Climate Policy and the rejection by the public of being taxed to fund the 3rd world.

 

[wanton dwarf]

http://www.siemens.co.uk/en/wind/hull.htm
Not all but most, there are a view exceptions.

Siemens is a German company. I'll take it that the UK will produce some German products whereas before we used to import everything.

 

[ollie989898]

Siemens is a German company. I'll take it that the UK will produce some German products whereas before we used to import everything.

FFS. Large corporations are now stateless. I have told you that before. There is no such thing as a British, Gerrman or anything company. For all you know the majority of Siemens shareholders are Chinese, British or American, no one knows. The fact they have headquarters in Germany doesn't actually matter a job any longer. They have factories all over the shop.

Give the cost of establishing factories, and training staff, having a barbie doll factory in every consumer country is pointless, I thought you would have worked that out already.

But just what is it with you and your obsession with forcing people to make stuff in factories? I have told you countless times:

MANUFACTURING IS WHERE THE LEAST VALUE IS ADDED TO A PRODUCT.

You would think someone working in or connected to agriculture would understand that. The designer, owner and retailer of a product or service always make the most margin.

 

[joe soapy]

face it, at university students learn that if bthey want to stay in the academic world they need research money, to get that money they have to be quick to pick up on peoples fears,
and reinforce those fears with a few believable fake facts.
for the UK in the last 25 years TB and badgers has been one of the lucrative avenues but now falling out of favour, the smart money is now in climate change and renewable energy,
there is still good money to be milked out of enviromental scaremongering aka monbieot., but its a bit niche.
There are plenty of other niche sources such as origins of man, age of civilization, stonehenge, Egypt and the pyramids, huge stone buildings in south america.
we are in the main kept in the dark , for instance a bit of research shows that the Sumarians and others pre egyptian time always depicted earth as the 7 th planet counting inwards
and saturn with its rings, hell, we have only noticed the first two in the last 100 years and saturn's rings cant be seen with the naked eye, but they are depicted in the ancient stone carvings and clay tablets,
one of the better cons to be found in climate change and Antarctica,the entire continent has been covered in ice ever since a sailing boat ran into a big lump of ice and discovered it.So, how come a man in 1500 was able to draw a very accurate map of the place?