by Alex Dirk Freyling : adf  :  independent researcher & artist 

Climate change and resource consumption

The first and most important measure for a more social and environmentally friendly (future) life on earth is a significant reduction of the world population. All other measures are by far less efficient and unsustainable.

Climate change opinion

The question here is not to what extent "climate change" is man-made. It is exclusively about the question of which measure has the greatest influence on man-made climate change. It is therefore argued within the framework of the »thought model of man-made climate change«.

Compared to other topics and issues, the answer is easy to find scientifically justified. The size of the population has the strongest and most lasting influence on the climate, assuming that humans can influence the climate.

To our surprise, this effect, by far the largest, is almost not addressed, or more precisely ignored by many scientists, politicians, journalists and the masses.

This inevitably leads to a credibility problem for “climate activists” or “climate saviours”, as they like to see themselves.


What "one" should know ... but "nobody is told" ...

If humans have a significant influence on the global climate, then it must be stated that by far the greatest "climate-damaging" aspect is man himself, a fact that is fundamentally not communicated. A reduction of the world population through strongly reduced reproduction rates is the most efficient "climate protection". Whether someone in ("Western") Europe drives more or less cars, uses more or less electricity, ... is of no real significance in view of the population explosion and massive industrialisation, especially in Asia and Africa.

external links

The climate mitigation gap

published 2017

education and government recommendations miss the most effective individual actions        

Reproduction and the carbon legacies of individuals

published 2009




7. Mai 2023

zur Kenntnisnahme und Selbstanalyse

(Verständigungs-)Basis der großen Fehlinterpretationen

zum postulierten Klimawandel

What do ice cores tell us about the history of climate change and the present trend? This video explains one perspective - arguably the most accurate one. And if you skip to 2:25, you will see the huge error we have made and the assumptions and extrapolations based on that error.

Was sagen uns Eisbohrkerne über die Geschichte des Klimawandels und den aktuellen Trend? Dieses Video aus rein wissenschaftlicher Perspektive des Niels-Bohr-Instituts klärt auf: Nach dem »Informations-Konsum« von vier Minuten Ton und Bild, sehen und hören Sie/sie den großen Fehler der gemacht wurde und erahnen die daraus resultierenden fatal falschen Annahmen und fatal falschen Extrapolationen, die auf diesem Fehler basieren: The Climate Change story told by ice cores……Prof. Jørgen Peder Steffensen erklärt an Eis-Bohrkernmessungen, das die Temperatur bis etwa 2.200 vor Christus relativ konstant auf einem Niveau, das um etwa 2,5 Grad über den heute gemessenen Werten lag. Bis zum Beginn der modernen Zeitrechnung sank die Temperatur dann auf einen vorläufigen Tiefpunkt, der ungefähr den Daten aus der zweiten Hälfte des 20. Jahrhunderts entspricht. Dann wurde wieder es kontinuierlich wärmer, bis mit der Mittelalterlichen Warmzeit ein neues Maximum erreicht wurde. Darauf folgte eine „Kleine Eiszeit“, bis um das Jahr 1875 ein absoluter Tiefpunkt bezogen auf die vergangenen 10.000 Jahre erreicht wurde – ziemlich genau zu jener Zeit, als die modernen Aufzeichnungen über Wetter und Klima begannen. Vergleichende Daten aus China und Nordafrika bestätigen die Messergebnisse aus Grönland. Das bedeutet, dass der Referenzpunkt für die letzten ungefähr 150 Jahre, der kälteste der letzten 10.000 Jahre ist. Somit relativiert sich respektive „verliert sich basierend auf Willkür des gesetzten zeitlichen Referenzpunktes" das Postulat einer von Menschen gemachten globalen Klimaveränderung.

see also TWITTER-Reaktionen



To your attention and self-analysis

Claim: "There is consensus among scientists regarding the strong effect of CO2 and IPCC temperature projections."

False: Quite a few scientists who differ from the IPCC opinion have since withdrawn from the IPCC in frustration because their interpretations have been ignored. The selection of scientific papers evaluated by the IPCC is incomplete. The global weather or climate is basically an inadmissible construct, since it consists of very different local events in more or less arbitrarily defined areas. Important climatic processes in the range of natural climate factors are not taken into account by the IPCC and are also not run as a possible scenario in the climate models. The IPCC view can therefore by no means represent a consensus.

General orientation

Numerous examples are known from the history of science where a majority of scientists were wrong and ultimately the interpretation of a minority prevailed (e.g. plate tectonics in geology). Scientific truth cannot be achieved by democratic vote.


Weather and climate events that are better left unreported

...otherwise it might dawn on some people that there is no man-made climate change, apart from local human excesses of violence against nature and animals, such as deforestation and drought caused by wind turbines.... 

The most extreme (documented) drought catastrophe in Central Europe to date, which far exceeded the events of the 21st century, occurred in 1540. An international 32-member research group led by Oliver Wetter of the University of Bern analysed more than 300 chronicles.

The authors of the study [1] write, among other things...

"The mega-drought of 1540 also highlights that palaeoclimatic natural archives in particular, such as tree rings or vintage data, may not be able to detect climatic outliers, whereas social archives usually describe them very accurately."

The numerous chronicles show that...

The heat from late February to mid-September 1540 caused the Thuringian Forest to burn in quite a few places and the rivers to dry up. Even large rivers such as the Rhine, the Seine and the Elbe "were so small" that people could walk through them. All in all, forest fires occurred in large parts of Europe. Numerous settlements and entire towns were incinerated. In Germany alone, 33 towns burned. ...

 [1] The year-long unprecedented European heat and drought of 1540 - a worst case





Why does everyone actually want to end up like the well-known German "climate researcher" Rahmstorf, who writes: ... "We are losing control of the climate system." Mr. Rahmstorf is losing things he never possessed !?!?!?! What comes next?



by George Carlin

There is a very entertaining "alternative voice" to be heard (including on the subject of plastic). See the video George Carlin - Saving the Planet. All in all, George Carlin's eight minutes are an excellent "theatre piece" - especially from an epistemological point of view - on the irrational concerns of a humanity that overestimates itself beyond measure.


[Transcript] "See, I’m not one of these people who’s worried about everything. You got people like this around you? Countries full of them now: people walking around all day long, every minute of the day, worried… about everything! Worried about the air; worried about the water; worried about the soil; worried about insecticides, pesticides, food additives, carcinogens; worried about radon gas; worried about asbestos; worried about saving endangered species. Let me tell you about endangered species all right? Saving endangered species is just one more arrogant attempt by humans to control nature. It’s arrogant meddling; it’s what got us in trouble in the first place. Doesn’t anybody understand that? Interfering with nature. Over 90% – over, WAY over – 90% of all the species that have ever lived on this planet, ever lived, are gone! Pwwt! They’re extinct! We didn’t kill them all, they just disappeared. That’s what nature does. They disappear these days at the rate of 25 a day and I mean regardless of our behaviour. Irrespective of how we act on this planet, 25 species that were here today will be gone tomorrow. Let them go gracefully. Leave nature alone. Haven’t we done enough?

We’re so self-important, so self-important. Everybody’s gonna save something now: “Save the trees! Save the bees! Save the whales! Save those snails!” and the greatest arrogance of all: “Save the planet!” What?! Are these fucking people kidding me?! Save the planet?! We don’t even know how to take care of ourselves yet! We haven’t learned how to care for one another and we’re gonna save the fucking planet?! I’m getting tired of that shit! I’m getting tired of that shit! I’m tired of fucking Earth Day! I’m tired of these self-righteous environmentalists; these white, bourgeois liberals who think the only thing wrong with this country is there aren’t enough bicycle paths! People trying to make the world safe for their Volvo’s! Besides, environmentalists don’t give a shit about the planet. They don’t care about the planet; not in the abstract they don’t. You know what they’re interested in? A clean place to live; their own habitat. They’re worried that someday in the future, they might be personally inconvenienced. Narrow, unenlightened self-interest doesn’t impress me.

Besides, there is nothing wrong with the planet… nothing wrong with the planet. The planet is fine… the people are fucked! Difference! The planet is fine! Compared to the people, THE PLANET IS DOING GREAT: Been here four and a half billion years! Do you ever think about the arithmetic? The planet has been here four and a half billion years, we’ve been here what? 100,000? Maybe 200,000? And we’ve only been engaged in heavy industry for a little over 200 years. 200 years versus four and a half billion and we have the conceit to think that somehow, we’re a threat? That somehow, we’re going to put in jeopardy this beautiful little blue-green ball that’s just a-floatin’ around the sun? The planet has been through a lot worse than us. Been through all kinds of things worse than us: been through earthquakes, volcanoes, plate tectonics, continental drifts, solar flares, sunspots, magnetic storms, the magnetic reversal of the poles, hundreds of thousands of years of bombardment by comets and asteroids and meteors, worldwide floods, tidal waves, worldwide fires, erosion, cosmic rays, recurring ice ages, and we think some plastic bags and aluminum cans are going to make a difference?

The planet isn’t going anywhere… we are! We’re going away! Pack your shit folks! We’re going away and we won’t leave much of a trace either, thank God for that… maybe a little styrofoam… maybe… little styrofoam. The planet will be here, we’ll be long gone; just another failed mutation; just another closed-end biological mistake; an evolutionary cul-de-sac. The planet will shake us off like a bad case of fleas, a surface nuisance. You wanna know how the planet’s doing? Ask those people in Pompeii who are frozen into position from volcanic ash how the planet’s doing. Wanna know if the planet’s all right? Ask those people in Mexico City or Armenia or a hundred other places buried under thousands of tons of earthquake rubble if they feel like a threat to the planet this week. How about those people in Kilauea, Hawaii who build their homes right next to an active volcano and then wonder why they have lava in the living room?

The planet will be here for a long, long, LONG time after we’re gone and it will heal itself, it will cleanse itself cause that’s what it does. It’s a self-correcting system. The air and the water will recover, the earth will be renewed, and if it’s true that plastic is not degradable, well, the planet will simply incorporate plastic into a new paradigm: The Earth plus Plastic. The Earth doesn’t share our prejudice towards plastic. Plastic came out of the Earth! The Earth probably sees plastic as just another one of its children. Could be the only reason the Earth allowed us to be spawned from it in the first place: it wanted plastic for itself, didn’t know how to make it, needed us. Could be the answer to our age-old philosophical question: “Why are we here?” PLASTIC!!! ASSHOLES!!!

So the plastic is here, our job is done, we can be phased out now, and I think that’s really started already, don’t you? I mean, to be fair, the planet probably sees us as a mild threat; something to be dealt with, and I’m sure the planet will defend itself in the manner of a large organism. Like a beehive or an ant colony can muster a defence, I’m sure the planet will think of something. What would you do if you were the planet trying to defend against this pesky, troublesome species? Let’s see… what might… hmm… viruses! Viruses might be good. They seem vulnerable to viruses. And uh… viruses are tricky; always mutating and forming new strains whenever a vaccine is developed. Perhaps this first virus could be one that-that compromises the immune system of these creatures. Perhaps a human immunodeficiency virus making them vulnerable to all sorts of other diseases and infections that might come along and maybe it could be spread sexually, making them a little reluctant to engage in the act of reproduction.

Well that’s a poetic note and it’s a start and I can dream can I? See, I don’t worry about the little things… bees, trees, whales, snails. I think we’re part of a greater wisdom that we won’t ever understand, a higher order. Call it what you want. You know what I call it? The big electron… the big electron. [Imitates electronic hum] It doesn’t punish, it doesn’t reward, it doesn’t judge at all. It just is and so are we… for a little while"…[source]


November 2022

To your attention and selfanalysis

Electric Cars: Inconvenient Facts  [Part One]


To your attention and selfanalysis

Electric Cars: Inconvenient Facts  [Part Two]



To your attention and selfanalysis

16. September 2022

Carbon and Climate Catastrophe

by Dr. Patrick Moore, Co-Founder and former President of Greenpeace, Director of the CO2 Coalition, Senior Fellow of The Heartland Institute and author of "Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom"