Martin Thage-Jørgensen

14.5K posts

Martin Thage-Jørgensen banner
Martin Thage-Jørgensen

Martin Thage-Jørgensen

@martinthage

Tinfoilhat with great trackrecord at being right in the end.

Denmark Katılım Nisan 2009
2.2K Takip Edilen653 Takipçiler
Martin Thage-Jørgensen
Martin Thage-Jørgensen@martinthage·
@jonasholmdk I ved godt at der dør 97% færre af vejrekstremer i dag i forhold til for 100 år siden. I ved vel også at kulde dræber 8-9 gange så mange i forhold til varme. I ved vel også at arealet af natur og skovbrande i dag er 25 % mindre end for 25 år siden !!!!!! newsweek.com/data-vs-drama-…
Dansk
0
0
1
30
Jonas Holm 🇩🇰🇬🇱🇪🇺🇺🇦
Jonas Holm 🇩🇰🇬🇱🇪🇺🇺🇦@jonasholmdk·
Det er ubegribeligt, at der stadig findes klimaskeptikere, som ikke kan se et mønster. Vi skal være glade for vi ikke bor i Sydeuropa eller nogle af verdens fattigste lande, som er dem, der bliver hårdest ramt.
The Associated Press@AP

The U.K. smashed a century-old temperature record for the second time in 24 hours on Tuesday as a spring heat wave continued to scorch parts of Western Europe, triggering government warnings about risks to life. Several drownings were reported in Britain and France as people tried to cool down. A temperature of 35 Celsius (95 Fahrenheit) was recorded at London's Kew Gardens and Heathrow Airport, Britain's Met Office weather service said, breaking the 34.8 C (94.6 F) record set a day earlier. The provisional readings smashed the previous record of 32.8 C (91.4 F) set in 1922 and 1944.

Dansk
42
1
34
4.5K
Martin Thage-Jørgensen
Martin Thage-Jørgensen@martinthage·
@jonasholmdk "THE PARTY TOLD YOU TO REJECT THE EVIDENCE OF YOUR EYES AND EARS. IT WAS THEIR FINAL, MOST ESSENTIAL COMMAND." - GEORGE ORWELL, 1984
English
0
0
0
17
Lars Nunnegaard
Lars Nunnegaard@LarsNunne·
Hvis en kvinde hilser ved at lægge hånden på brystet i stedet for at give hånd, så overlever Danmark nok. Folkestyret bryder ikke sammen. Det mest danske efterhånden er ikke håndtrykket. Det er småligheden
Dansk
106
11
113
8.9K
Martin Thage-Jørgensen
Martin Thage-Jørgensen@martinthage·
Det er jo dig der er en ignorant person. Hvis man ikke prompter AI med kritikere af narrativet, så skjules sandheden og sådan nogle som dig bliver aldrig klogere. Nu er det sådan at de nævnte kritikere har al deres fakta på plads. Så ja, du lyver overfor dig selv, hvis du mener vejret er blevet mere ekstremt de sidste 150 år…
Dansk
0
0
1
17
Martin Thage-Jørgensen retweetledi
Mike Benz
Mike Benz@MikeBenzCyber·
I cannot stress enough how important it is to nip this in the bud by whatever diplomatic, economic, or sanctions means are necessary.
Europa.com@europa

🇩🇪 Germany’s state media regulators are preparing new rules that could force platforms like X, Facebook, TikTok and Instagram to give greater visibility to “trusted” or “reliable” media outlets in their algorithms. The proposal is being framed as a way to combat “disinformation” and protect media plurality. The plans are unfolding alongside a broader EU drive for tighter online regulation under the Digital Services Act (DSA). Follow: @europa

English
279
2.2K
8.9K
204.1K
Martin Thage-Jørgensen
Martin Thage-Jørgensen@martinthage·
This is due to wealth, technology, early warnings, and infrastructure—not fewer events. Lomborg stresses adaptation works far better than emission cuts for saving lives. facebook.com lomborg.com These skeptic sources argue the “more extreme” narrative relies on short-term windows (post-1950/1980), incomplete data, media amplification of single events, and attribution models that assume warming drives everything while downplaying natural variability and past extremes. Heller and WUWT often show raw vs. adjusted data graphs to claim inflation of recent trends. CLINTEL calls much attribution “pseudoscience” and notes IPCC AR6 itself finds no detected trend in frequency/intensity for most extreme types globally over longer scales (with detection/attribution confidence low pre-1950 for many). clintel.org Important context and caveats (from all sides): • Economic damages (e.g., NOAA’s U.S. billion-dollar disasters) have risen, but this is overwhelmingly due to more people/wealth in vulnerable areas, not proportional increases in event frequency/intensity. • Natural variability (e.g., Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, El Niño) drives huge swings; 150-year records capture this but have gaps in global coverage. • IPCC AR6 acknowledges high confidence only for temperature extremes since 1950 and some heavy rain increases; many other trends are “medium” or lower confidence with regional exceptions. ipcc.ch In short, the past 150 years show a warmer world with no unambiguous global rise in most weather extremes when viewed historically and consistently—the opposite of a runaway “climate emergency” in physical events. The standout success story (Lomborg’s data) is how much safer we’ve become from weather disasters through human ingenuity. These sources you cited provide a data-driven counter to selective recent-event storytelling; the full record supports skepticism of alarm over long-term worsening.
English
0
0
0
20
Martin Thage-Jørgensen
Martin Thage-Jørgensen@martinthage·
No, the evidence over the past 150 years (~1870–2020/now) does not show a clear, uniform increase in the frequency or intensity of most extreme weather events when using consistent long-term historical data. Warming has occurred—global temperatures have risen roughly 1.1°C since the late 19th century per NOAA and other instrumental records—but trends in extremes are mixed, regionally variable, and often show no net worsening or even declines in key metrics when accounting for better detection, reporting, and data adjustments. Many of the sources you mentioned (Bjørn Lomborg, Tony Heller, Watts Up With That, and CLINTEL) highlight this point, emphasizing historical precedents, data issues, and dramatic improvements in human resilience. climate.gov ourworldindata.org Here’s a breakdown by major categories, drawing directly from the researchers and sites you referenced alongside long-term records (e.g., NOAA’s U.S. data back to the 1850s–1890s, Atlantic hurricane records since 1851, and global compilations): • Heat extremes and heatwaves: Long-term U.S. data (the best continuous record) show no clear increase—and in some analyses, a decline—since the late 1800s. The 1930s Dust Bowl era featured more frequent and intense heatwaves than recent decades (e.g., frequency and magnitude unmatched in modern records). Tony Heller frequently documents this with raw station data and old newspaper reports of 1890s–1930s extremes rivaling or exceeding today’s. A recent CLINTEL-highlighted study by John Christy confirms U.S. hot and cold temperature extremes have both declined since 1899. Globally, IPCC AR6 notes increases in hot extremes since 1950 (virtually certain), but pre-1950 data is sparser and shows high natural variability. WUWT and Heller argue modern “records” often stem from urban heat islands and selective adjustments rather than climate-driven worsening. clintel.org thegwpf.org • Heavy precipitation, floods, and droughts: No consistent global or U.S. increase in extreme floods or droughts over 150 years. U.S. extreme one-day precipitation has a modest uptick in some analyses post-1980, but overall trends in flood frequency/intensity show little change or decreases when normalized (per papers compiled on WUWT’s “Extreme Weather” page). The 1927 Mississippi flood and 1930s droughts were among the worst recorded. CLINTEL and Heller point out that attribution studies often overlook natural cycles and historical analogs. Droughts peaked in intensity in the 1930s in many U.S. records; globally, trends are regionally mixed with no uniform worsening. wattsupwiththat.com researchgate.net • Tropical cyclones (hurricanes/typhoons) and storms: Atlantic hurricane records since 1851 show no increase in frequency or landfalls (adjusted for pre-satellite detection gaps). Major (Cat 3+) storms and Florida landfalls per decade are flat or declining in long-term counts. WUWT and similar analyses emphasize this stability despite media claims. Global frequency shows no trend; any intensity shifts are limited to specific basins and debated. thegwpf.org • Other extremes (tornadoes, wildfires, etc.): U.S. tornado counts show no increase (recent low years in the 2010s). Wildfire area burned has declined in some long-term global data; U.S. trends reflect land management more than climate. Heller and WUWT routinely catalog pre-1950 extremes (e.g., 1890s heat/droughts) that match modern events without elevated CO₂. wattsupwiththat.com Bjørn Lomborg’s key insight (repeated across his updates and books): Even if some physical extremes have shifted slightly, human impacts have plummeted. Climate-related disaster deaths dropped 97–99%+ over the past century (from ~485,000/year average in the 1920s to ~11,000–12,000/year recently), despite a quadrupled global population. Risk per million fell ~99.4%.
English
0
0
0
18
Martin Thage-Jørgensen
Martin Thage-Jørgensen@martinthage·
This is due to wealth, technology, early warnings, and infrastructure—not fewer events. Lomborg stresses adaptation works far better than emission cuts for saving lives. facebook.com lomborg.com These skeptic sources argue the “more extreme” narrative relies on short-term windows (post-1950/1980), incomplete data, media amplification of single events, and attribution models that assume warming drives everything while downplaying natural variability and past extremes. Heller and WUWT often show raw vs. adjusted data graphs to claim inflation of recent trends. CLINTEL calls much attribution “pseudoscience” and notes IPCC AR6 itself finds no detected trend in frequency/intensity for most extreme types globally over longer scales (with detection/attribution confidence low pre-1950 for many). clintel.org Important context and caveats (from all sides): • Economic damages (e.g., NOAA’s U.S. billion-dollar disasters) have risen, but this is overwhelmingly due to more people/wealth in vulnerable areas, not proportional increases in event frequency/intensity. • Natural variability (e.g., Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation, El Niño) drives huge swings; 150-year records capture this but have gaps in global coverage. • IPCC AR6 acknowledges high confidence only for temperature extremes since 1950 and some heavy rain increases; many other trends are “medium” or lower confidence with regional exceptions. ipcc.ch In short, the past 150 years show a warmer world with no unambiguous global rise in most weather extremes when viewed historically and consistently—the opposite of a runaway “climate emergency” in physical events. The standout success story (Lomborg’s data) is how much safer we’ve become from weather disasters through human ingenuity. These sources you cited provide a data-driven counter to selective recent-event storytelling; the full record supports skepticism of alarm over long-term worsening.
English
0
0
0
7
Jonas Holm 🇩🇰🇬🇱🇪🇺🇺🇦
Jonas Holm 🇩🇰🇬🇱🇪🇺🇺🇦@jonasholmdk·
@CZilmer Vejr er vejr. En hedebølge, tørke, skybrud, orkan siger ikke noget om klimaet. Men mønstret over tid er udtryk for klimaforandringer. Hedebølgerne bliver gradvist varmere, tørken værre, nedbøren kraftigere. Orkanerne kraftigere osv. Vejret bliver mere ekstremt.
Dansk
4
0
0
54
Martin Thage-Jørgensen
Martin Thage-Jørgensen@martinthage·
@jonasholmdk @CZilmer Men det du skriver der er jo præcis den løgn som man ønsker du skal tro på. Der er intet evidens for dine påstande om at vejret bliver mere ekstremt.
Dansk
0
0
0
14
Martin Thage-Jørgensen retweetledi
Jonatan Pallesen
Jonatan Pallesen@jonatanpallesen·
Imagine being convicted for statements like this (from the transcript). It is essentially illegal to argue against mass immigration in Belgium.
Jonatan Pallesen tweet mediaJonatan Pallesen tweet media
Dries Van Langenhove@DVanLangenhove

A very sad announcement. I have just been convicted a second time for 'hate speech' and it is only due to a technicality that I could not immediately be sent to jail —to the judge's frustration. In an ironic turn of events it's actually thanks to my previous prison sentence (for memes in a private group chat) that I am now still free —in a physical sense, at least. Call me naive but I didn't think they would take it this far, given that this precedent criminalises many of the arguments used by even the most moderate politicians critical of mass migration. In February 2024 I gave a lecture at Catholic University Leuven wherein I linked mass migration to crime and a deterioration of our quality of life. Every single point I made was 100% the truth and based on scientific evidence. Cynically, even the judge that convicted me admits as much by writing in his verdict: “Even if all of the statements made by Van Langenhove are based on scientific evidence and statistics, it makes no difference to the criminal intent. Van Langenhove is not charged with spreading false information. He is charged with presenting facts in a way that incites hatred against persons on the grounds of one or more of the protected criteria in the Anti-Racism Law.” That's a lot of words just to say he wants to send me to prison for speaking the truth. Even the regime media write: "It did not matter to the court that Van Langenhove was quoting scientific sources. The judge argued that Van Langenhove's main message was that a big part of the societal problems like insecurity, housing shortages and lowering educational standards are due to mass migration." You may think the regime media are being sympathetic to me in the first sentence, but in reality they are warning people: even if you speak the truth, if you go against our narrative, we will crush you in every way possible. Both the public prosecutor and the judge did not present a single real argument as to how or against whom I would have incited hatred. So even if I would accept their crazy, dystopic law, I still did not break it. The only argument they present is that I created a "hostile atmosphere of us versus them” in regards to migrants. But even this silly argument (which is not even a punishable offence) is not true. To me, the deadly disease is self-hatred and one of its worst symptoms is replacement migration. My enemy is thus NOT the migrants themselves but those orchestrating the mass migration. Sadly, in Belgium, evidence is not needed and ‘vibes’ are enough to put someone in jail. Given the fact that I have another court case coming up in September and that I have a dozen active criminal investigations for hate speech, time is running out for me. I have already paid more than €420,000 in legal fees and there is no ending in sight. I have been in an intense battle of attrition for eight years and must now regroup to make sure I can still win. If you want to help me, you can do so via the links below. If you can help in other ways, please contact me via DM. If you live in a country that still has free speech, never let them touch it, however noble they make the motives sound, because this is where it leads to.

English
18
248
2.2K
59K
Martin Thage-Jørgensen retweetledi
Under Secretary of State Sarah B. Rogers
Under Secretary of State Sarah B. Rogers@UnderSecPD·
Policymakers worried about the rise of the so-called “far right” should avoid criminalizing accurate, data-driven political speech about mass migration — as this ruling appears to explicitly contemplate. Doing so means that people willing to be convicted of “racism” get a monopoly on making arguments that strike large segments of the public as important and true.
Dries Van Langenhove@DVanLangenhove

A very sad announcement. I have just been convicted a second time for 'hate speech' and it is only due to a technicality that I could not immediately be sent to jail —to the judge's frustration. In an ironic turn of events it's actually thanks to my previous prison sentence (for memes in a private group chat) that I am now still free —in a physical sense, at least. Call me naive but I didn't think they would take it this far, given that this precedent criminalises many of the arguments used by even the most moderate politicians critical of mass migration. In February 2024 I gave a lecture at Catholic University Leuven wherein I linked mass migration to crime and a deterioration of our quality of life. Every single point I made was 100% the truth and based on scientific evidence. Cynically, even the judge that convicted me admits as much by writing in his verdict: “Even if all of the statements made by Van Langenhove are based on scientific evidence and statistics, it makes no difference to the criminal intent. Van Langenhove is not charged with spreading false information. He is charged with presenting facts in a way that incites hatred against persons on the grounds of one or more of the protected criteria in the Anti-Racism Law.” That's a lot of words just to say he wants to send me to prison for speaking the truth. Even the regime media write: "It did not matter to the court that Van Langenhove was quoting scientific sources. The judge argued that Van Langenhove's main message was that a big part of the societal problems like insecurity, housing shortages and lowering educational standards are due to mass migration." You may think the regime media are being sympathetic to me in the first sentence, but in reality they are warning people: even if you speak the truth, if you go against our narrative, we will crush you in every way possible. Both the public prosecutor and the judge did not present a single real argument as to how or against whom I would have incited hatred. So even if I would accept their crazy, dystopic law, I still did not break it. The only argument they present is that I created a "hostile atmosphere of us versus them” in regards to migrants. But even this silly argument (which is not even a punishable offence) is not true. To me, the deadly disease is self-hatred and one of its worst symptoms is replacement migration. My enemy is thus NOT the migrants themselves but those orchestrating the mass migration. Sadly, in Belgium, evidence is not needed and ‘vibes’ are enough to put someone in jail. Given the fact that I have another court case coming up in September and that I have a dozen active criminal investigations for hate speech, time is running out for me. I have already paid more than €420,000 in legal fees and there is no ending in sight. I have been in an intense battle of attrition for eight years and must now regroup to make sure I can still win. If you want to help me, you can do so via the links below. If you can help in other ways, please contact me via DM. If you live in a country that still has free speech, never let them touch it, however noble they make the motives sound, because this is where it leads to.

English
281
1.6K
6.3K
1.1M
Martin Thage-Jørgensen retweetledi
Bjorn Lomborg
Bjorn Lomborg@BjornLomborg·
An Inconvenient Truth for climate alarmists: Al Gore’s dramatic climate warnings shaped a generation — but 20 years later, the data tell a very different story. Climate-related deaths are down 97% over the past century, polar bears more than doubled since the 1960s, and global burned area has decreased by more than 25% over the past quarter century. That's hardly a success of climate policy though: fossil fuels still provide 81% of world energy, emissions keep rising, and $16 trillion+ spent on green policies since Gore's movie came out hasn’t changed the trajectory. A good reminder that panic is a terrible policy adviser. newsweek.com/data-vs-drama-…
English
163
1.9K
5.7K
272.3K
Martin Thage-Jørgensen retweetledi
Eva Vlaardingerbroek
Eva Vlaardingerbroek@EvaVlaar·
Dries has just been convicted again: This time for speaking the truth about the disastrous consequences of mass migration. The most insane part is that the Belgian court even admitted Dries spoke the truth, as what he said was factual, but deems it a crime because it could incite hatred. Let that sink in. They’re criminalizing the truth and they’re using Dries to set an example. Let’s come together to help him. Dries is a young father, a brave patriot and the Belgian establishment has been trying to destroy him for years. He’s taken so many hits, he really deserves our help.
Dries Van Langenhove@DVanLangenhove

A very sad announcement. I have just been convicted a second time for 'hate speech' and it is only due to a technicality that I could not immediately be sent to jail —to the judge's frustration. In an ironic turn of events it's actually thanks to my previous prison sentence (for memes in a private group chat) that I am now still free —in a physical sense, at least. Call me naive but I didn't think they would take it this far, given that this precedent criminalises many of the arguments used by even the most moderate politicians critical of mass migration. In February 2024 I gave a lecture at Catholic University Leuven wherein I linked mass migration to crime and a deterioration of our quality of life. Every single point I made was 100% the truth and based on scientific evidence. Cynically, even the judge that convicted me admits as much by writing in his verdict: “Even if all of the statements made by Van Langenhove are based on scientific evidence and statistics, it makes no difference to the criminal intent. Van Langenhove is not charged with spreading false information. He is charged with presenting facts in a way that incites hatred against persons on the grounds of one or more of the protected criteria in the Anti-Racism Law.” That's a lot of words just to say he wants to send me to prison for speaking the truth. Even the regime media write: "It did not matter to the court that Van Langenhove was quoting scientific sources. The judge argued that Van Langenhove's main message was that a big part of the societal problems like insecurity, housing shortages and lowering educational standards are due to mass migration." You may think the regime media are being sympathetic to me in the first sentence, but in reality they are warning people: even if you speak the truth, if you go against our narrative, we will crush you in every way possible. Both the public prosecutor and the judge did not present a single real argument as to how or against whom I would have incited hatred. So even if I would accept their crazy, dystopic law, I still did not break it. The only argument they present is that I created a "hostile atmosphere of us versus them” in regards to migrants. But even this silly argument (which is not even a punishable offence) is not true. To me, the deadly disease is self-hatred and one of its worst symptoms is replacement migration. My enemy is thus NOT the migrants themselves but those orchestrating the mass migration. Sadly, in Belgium, evidence is not needed and ‘vibes’ are enough to put someone in jail. Given the fact that I have another court case coming up in September and that I have a dozen active criminal investigations for hate speech, time is running out for me. I have already paid more than €420,000 in legal fees and there is no ending in sight. I have been in an intense battle of attrition for eight years and must now regroup to make sure I can still win. If you want to help me, you can do so via the links below. If you can help in other ways, please contact me via DM. If you live in a country that still has free speech, never let them touch it, however noble they make the motives sound, because this is where it leads to.

English
987
8.2K
32.1K
38.8M
Martin Thage-Jørgensen retweetledi
Nadja Natalie Isaksen
Nadja Natalie Isaksen@NadjaIsaksen·
Jeg har snart ikke ord for det politiske svigt. Lige nu ligger en familiefar på 31 år på hospitalet og vakler mellem liv og død. To fuldstændig vanvittige individer på 19 og 20 år er sigtet for at have fragtet en håndgranat til Kurvemagerstien på Amager, hvor den ældste angiveligt kastede og sprængte håndgranaten i den gård, hvor familiefaren befandt sig. Helt tilfældigt. De to individer er begge af anden etnisk herkomst. Begge er blevet belønnet af Folketinget med dansk statsborgerskab. Begge nægter sig skyldige i drabsforsøg. Det skriger til himlen. I 40 år har skiftende regeringer åbnet døren på vid gab, delt statsborgerskaber ud til højre og venstre og ignoreret konsekvenserne. Og det fortsætter. Med en kommende rød regering vil indvandringen stige yderligere, og tusindvis vil få dansk indfødsret foræret. I må have mig meget undskyldt, men jeg begriber simpelthen ikke, at det her får lov til at fortsætte. Remigration er ikke ekstremt. Det er nødvendigt.
Dansk
44
104
785
15.3K
Martin Thage-Jørgensen retweetledi
Søren Hansen
Søren Hansen@soerenhansen17·
Jeg er 65 år og har fulgt politik i årtier. Det er tid til at sige det ligeud: Vores elite har begået den ene katastrofale fejltagelse efter den anden. De lukkede atomkraftværkerne. Nu kalder selv Tysklands kansler Merz det en “alvorlig strategisk fejl”. Energipriserne er eksploderet, og vores industri bløder. Ideologi slog sund fornuft. De har druknet os i reguleringssocialisme – tusindvis af regler og krav, der kvæler virksomheder og jager investeringer ud af Europa. De har åbnet grænserne for masseindvandring fra kulturer, der ikke passer ind. Resultatet er parallelsamfund, milliardregninger og problemer, som ingen tør tage ansvar for. Og nu vil de indføre censur for at stoppe “fake news”. Selvfølgelig er det eliten selv, der bestemmer, hvad der er fake. Hvis man tvivler på den menneskeskabte klimakrise eller bare vil diskutere den, så er man pludselig farlig og skal ties ned. De har kun indrømmet fejlen med atomkraften. Men hele projektet – energi, regulering, indvandring og nu censur – er én stor, sammenhængende fejltagelse. Tyskland er allerede i frit fald. Resten af EU følger trop. Vi har ikke råd til flere af deres eksperimenter. Det er på høje tid at få sund fornuft tilbage.
Dansk
34
63
417
5.9K
Martin Thage-Jørgensen retweetledi
Emil Blücher
Emil Blücher@emilblucher·
Forudsigelse: Når Moderaterne går i regering, bliver Stine Bosse minister således at Bergur Løkke Rasmussen kan blive indsuppleret til Europa-Parlamentet.
Dansk
49
10
315
25.8K

Keşfet

@jonasholmdk @LarsNunne @CZilmer @elonmusk @BarackObama @taylorswift13 @cristiano @BillGates