ABOUT Climatism


ALARMISM is excessive or exaggerated alarm about a real or imagined threat e.g. the increases in deaths from infectious disease. The alarmist prefers intimidation and coercion to reasoned debate, and is often motivated by the desire to bring themselves to the forefront of discussion.

CLIMATE alarmism can be described as the use of a linguistic repertoire which communicates climate change using inflated language, an urgent tone and imagery of doom.

ALARMISM is fundamental to the human induced climate change narrative. Stories of boiling seas, frying cities, disease, famine, tornadoes, floods and hurricanes are the marketing tools used to garner the attention of the masses, lulling people’s fear into a state of climate guilt, with the aim of pushing policy makers into ‘climate action…now.’


DEEP within human nature there are certain types of people who yearn for catastrophe. They yearn to have significance in their lives believing that theirs is the time when the chickens are coming home to roost and everything is going to go tits up. The biggest selling environmental books in history, predict the mass destruction of the planet. Rachel Carson’s 1962 international bestseller “Silent Spring” predicted mass cancer from plant pesticides and DDT. Paul Ehrlich’s “The Population Bomb” 1968, argued on malthusian lines that population explosion would mean mass starvation around the world. People buy this stuff. They lap it up and books like this sell in droves, in a way that more reasonable books that say “hang on, lets look at the facts”, don’t.

PRESENT day alarmists – Flannery, Gore, Viner, Hansen have been hopelessly wrong with their predictions and we’ve been gulled into spending trillions of dollars on desal plants, decarbonisation, inefficient/unreliable green energy schemes and draconian climate fixes, for nothing.


A common feature of debates about global warming is that alarmist claims often go unchallenged. At best, criticism is inconsiderate. Worse, critics are portrayed as shills of the fossil fuel industry or climate change ‘deniers’. Labels aimed at discrediting the opponent and shutting down debate.

IMPORTANTLY alarmism is used to promote a cause where the science and evidence for it is insufficient.

THIS blog aims to challenge alarmist claims, bringing to your attention the mass circulation of climate and environmental “catastrophe”, served up to you by eco-activists, green lobby groups, progressive politicians, rent-seeking corporatists, grant-driven scientists, fund-driven university departments all pushed pro bono by the climate-theory obsessed mainstream media machine.


ANOTHER clue to the tenacity and effectiveness of this particular ‘scientific’ hoax is the name change from “Global Warming” to “Climate Change”.

“Global Warming” can be verified and therefore its hypothesis, “AGW”, nullified via data and empirical evidence.

Climate change” is useful because it minimises the dangerous possibility of negating the theory through observation. Any kind of change in the weather is “climate change.” That means literally any evidence supports the theory.

IF you really want to tick off a scammer, ask him what piece of observable data would lead him to conclude that his climate change theory is incorrect.


Killing The Earth To Save It

WITHIN the climate debate, it is important to understand HOW environmental alarmism and exaggeration is actually damaging the environment, harming emerging economies and shamelessly hurting the poor.

IT should also not be underestimated that the United Nations’ war on Carbon Dioxide would devastate humanity, the environment and destroy the poor…tragic outcomes in line with the United Nations’ Malthusian agenda.

See here for a straight forward example of what to expect …

Shock news : UN Carbon Regime Would Devastate Humanity

See here to see how the ‘climate change’ scare has adapted itself in direct correlation with temperature change …

THE ARCTIC : Ground Zero For Anthropogenic Hubris And Climate Change Hysteria

THE origins of the climate scam resulting overarching and draconian climate policy and energy poverty …

WESTERN Nations, Driven By A Global Agenda Of Climate Alarmism, Are Destroying Their Industries With Carbon Taxes And Promotion Of Expensive, Intermittent Green Energy

And …

HOW Green Central Planning And Big Government Has Destroyed Australia’s Electricity Market




The ultimate prize to the eco-activists and their big government benefactors is the control of carbon, which would touch every aspect of our daily lives. Consequently, greenhouse gases and global climate change are of paramount importance to the eco-activist agenda. While much has been written about global climate change over many years, the basic aspects of the issue haven’t changed; we are asked to forget things we once knew and ignore the simplest hypothesis that the earth’s climate is ever changing.

Climate Change Deliberation: Taking Occam’s Razor to Proxy Data — The Patriot Post


* Although the claims in this blog are backed up by peer-reviewed science, empirical-evidence and the latest Government data, it is always wise to do your own fact checking with any material you read on this blog or any other media outlet. Don’t believe anything you read or hear unless you’ve fact-checked it for yourself.


PLEASE Donate To Climatism To HELP Keep The Good Fight Alive!

(Climate rationalists are still waiting for that “big oil” cheque to arrive in the mail!)

Click link for more info…TQ! Jamie.

Donate with PayPal




29 Comments on “ABOUT Climatism”

  1. Paul Johnson says:

    The quotes on your website from the words of Prof Stephen Schneider, Prof Chris Folland, and Emeritus Prof Daniel Botkin revealing the true nature of the deception are extremely powerful. I want to distribute these (and any similar) to people on my email list – BUT, to do that and retain credibility I will also need to cite the date, venue, and source from which each of these statements were obtained & any other information that will allow the quotes to be independently verified by those I send them to (e.g. book title, page number, etc). Are you able to provide this information for me? Thanks.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. It is now abundantly clear that the IPCC Climate models are useless as a climate forecasting tool. For estimates of the amount and timing of the coming cooling based on identifying quasi-repetitive ,quasi- periodic patterns in the temperature and driver data see several posts at
    Feel free to re-blog on this site any which may interest your readers.
    Here is a summary of the conclusions of the latest post.
    “I have combined the PDO, ,Millennial cycle and neutron trends to estimate the timing and extent of the coming cooling in both the Northern Hemisphere and Globally.

    Here are the conclusions of those posts.

    1/22/13 (NH)

    1) The millennial peak is sharp – perhaps 18 years +/-. We have now had 16 years since 1997 with no net warming – and so might expect a sharp drop in a year or two – 2014/16 -with a net cooling by 2035 of about 0.35.Within that time frame however there could well be some exceptional years with NH temperatures +/- 0.25 degrees colder than that.
    2) The cooling gradient might be fairly steep down to the Oort minimum equivalent which would occur about 2100. (about 1100 on Fig 5) ( Fig 3 here) with a total cooling in 2100 from the present estimated at about 1.2 +/-
    3) From 2100 on through the Wolf and Sporer minima equivalents with intervening highs to the Maunder Minimum equivalent which could occur from about 2600 – 2700 a further net cooling of about 0.7 degrees could occur for a total drop of 1.9 +/- degrees
    4)The time frame for the significant cooling in 2014 – 16 is strengthened by recent developments already seen in solar activity. With a time lag of about 12 years between the solar driver proxy and climate we should see the effects of the sharp drop in the Ap Index which took place in 2004/5 in 2016-17.

    4/02/13 ( Global)

    1 Significant temperature drop at about 2016-17
    2 Possible unusual cold snap 2021-22
    3 Built in cooling trend until at least 2024
    4 Temperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2035 – 0.15
    5 Temperature Hadsst3 moving average anomaly 2100 – 0.5
    6 General Conclusion – by 2100 all the 20th century temperature rise will have been reversed,
    7 By 2650 earth could possibly be back to the depths of the little ice age.
    8 The effect of increasing CO2 emissions will be minor but beneficial – they may slightly ameliorate the forecast cooling and help maintain crop yields .
    9 Warning !! There are some signs in the Livingston and Penn Solar data that a sudden drop to the Maunder Minimum Little Ice Age temperatures could be imminent – with a much more rapid and economically disruptive cooling than that forecast above which may turn out to be a best case scenario.

    How confident should one be in these above predictions? The pattern method doesn’t lend itself easily to statistical measures. However statistical calculations only provide an apparent rigor for the uninitiated and in relation to the IPCC climate models are entirely misleading because they make no allowance for the structural uncertainties in the model set up.This is where scientific judgment comes in – some people are better at pattern recognition and meaningful correlation than others. A past record of successful forecasting such as indicated above is a useful but not infallible measure. In this case I am reasonably sure – say 65/35 for about 20 years ahead. Beyond that certainty drops rapidly. I am sure, however, that it will prove closer to reality than anything put out by the IPCC, Met Office or the NASA group. In any case this is a Bayesian type forecast- in that it can easily be amended on an ongoing basis as the Temperature and Solar data accumulate. If there is not a 0.15 – 0.20. drop in Global SSTs by 2018 -20 I would need to re-evaluate.”

    Liked by 1 person

  3. OMG. You do realize the “coming ice age” cover is a fake?

    I mean really- we’re supposed to take someone talking science seriously who can’t even be bothered to check the most basic of facts?


    • Climatism says:

      Thanks for the concern, I realise image was a fake. To be honest I started the blog back in June 2013 for a bit of fun, put together an ‘About’ page and haven’t been back to it since. Didn’t take long before blog became a more substantial concern. So appreciate being pulled into line ))
      Have updated for you…and while i’m at it, may update some of that grammar too!
      Feel free to fact check anything else within the blog. Keen eyes are good.
      Cheers ‘drugsandotherthings’.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. “Although the claims in this blog are backed up by peer-reviewed science, empirical-evidence and the latest Government data,…”
    Really,? Let’s see- we are now well over 90% of scientists in the fields who believe anthropomorphic climate change ie: “Global warming” is happening and human caused.
    or- just use one of my favorite google fu tips- used the advanced search (search tools -> All results dropdown and choose “reading level -> advanced [It filters out most of the partisan nonsense] )
    Or shall we discuss arguably the leading climate change skeptic- Richard Meuller. The one the Koch brothers funded to put together a team to exhaustively review the science. And who, after two years his team admitted he was wrong- and that the science does indeed back anthropomorphic climate change. More here:
    Or, shall we discuss the insurance industry- the first ones having to pay for industry/societies refusal to address the issue.. See here:
    Sorry, but the evidence is overwhelming… And if you think the costs of acting now are high. well, the costs of NOT acting will be catastrophic. Maybe not so much for you and me- but for those that come after us.


  5. Chicalina says:

    When is the Class Action suit for fraud, malfeasance, terro rism and damages? I am fed up with lies and sacrifice to fake plastic gods.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. […] actually found this article through a blogger. I can’t find his name but here’s his about page. His referring to the article lead me to a translated article. I enjoyed reading the article […]


  7. JOe says:

    When you photoshop news articles to enhance your claims you might not want to provide a link to the exact article you enhanced.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. Peer says:
    From a site calling itself “Open Mind”. Talk about pots-kettles-black. It would take so many pages to unwind the deceptions – it’s tedious isn’t it.
    Love your site, and thanks for all your efforts.

    Liked by 2 people

  9. The direct solar radiation does NOT account for the mean surface temperature of Earth. What does is in my 2013 paper at:

    It’s not too hard to understand the “heat creep” hypothesis.

    The Second Law of Thermodynamics is all about unbalanced (total) energy potentials dissipating so as to approach maximum entropy – see

    Think of a lake in calm conditions which is in a state of (mechanical) equilibrium. Because the temperature gradient in the troposphere is also a state of (thermodynamic) equilibrium, being maximum entropy with (PE+KE)=constant over altitude, new thermal energy spreads out in all directions due to gravity just as new rainwater falling just in the center of the lake also spreads out due to gravity. Thus the surface temperature rises just like the level of the lake all around the shore.

    It all happens because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics which acts in all natural processes, even those caused by gravity. That law is not just about thermal energy: entropy is affected by changes and/or re-distributions of any type of internal energy including gravitational potential energy. Simplified expressions that are often used for entropy only apply in a horizontal plane and that’s why the Clausius (hot to cold) statement also only applies in a horizontal plane in regard to heat diffusion and natural (or free) convective heat transfer.

    When the troposphere is in “ideal” calm conditions in the early pre-dawn hours the temperature gradient just above the surface still exists but there is virtually no convective heat transfer occurring up or down. Now, if the Sun is directly overhead on a clear day it may increase the surface temperature temporarily. This surplus thermal energy absorbed in the surface enters the base of the troposphere by conduction and causes upward natural (“free”) convection. The reverse happens early in the morning when the solar radiation may warm the clouds and/or the middle and upper troposphere but not the surface where there may still be shadows of mountains for example. This causes downward convection as a result of the tendency towards maximum entropy, and so there develops a new thermal profile with the same gradient but at a higher temperature throughout. Thus the surface temperature rises.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Denis Rancourt says:

    Hi Climatism: I want to let you know about my recently published report that is highly relevant, on many points, to your vital work:

    “Geo-Economics and Geo-Politics Drive Successive Eras of Predatory Globalization and Social Engineering: Historical emergence of climate change, gender equity, and anti-racism as State doctrines”, by Denis G. Rancourt, Ontario Civil Liberties Association, OCLA Report 2019-1, April 2019.

    It contains new fact-based analysis about the history of politics of climate. Cheers.

    Liked by 1 person

  11. Denis Rancourt says:

    Jamie… you gotta look at my this 7-pager. The pithy document is impacting municipal politics of climate:


  12. Peter Jackson says:

    This is a fake news site, run by climate science denialist(s). I can counter almost any absurd claim made on this site. More importantly, you have drawn completely innocent people into your bent logic, such as your “east coast woman” who mused about moving because of snow and ice. The story was about ice CLEARING, not prevalence. Climate change (the term that was originally used by the UN when the IPCC panel was formed in 1988, by the way) has affected this part of the world as it has almost every other region. No credible scientist predicted the “end of snow.” This blog is laughable.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.