“The data doesn’t matter. We’re not basing our recommendations
on the data. We’re basing them on the climate models.”
– Prof. Chris Folland,
Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research
“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.“
– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation
global warming climate change scare has absolutely nothing to do with the environment or “Saving The Planet”. Rather, its roots lie in a misanthropic agenda engineered by the environmental movement of the mid 1970’s, who realised that doing something about claimed man-made “global warming” would play to quite a number of the Left’s social agendas.
IN THEIR (UN IPCC) OWN WORDS:
ENERGY rationing and the control of carbon dioxide, the direct byproduct of cheap, reliable hydrocarbon energy, has always been key to the Left’s Malthusian and misanthropic agenda of depopulation and deindustrialisation. A totalitarian ideology enforced through punitive emissions controls under the guise of “Saving The Planet”.
STANFORD University and The Royal Society’s resident global warming alarmist and population freak Paul R. Ehrlich spelled out in 1976 the Left’s anti-energy agenda that still underpins the current ‘climate change’ scare :
THE creator, fabricator and proponent of global warming alarmism Maurice Strong, founded UNEP and ‘science’ arm, the UN IPCC, under the premise of studying only human (CO2) driven causes of climate change.
STRONG and the UN’s charter and agenda was clearly laid out before the ‘science’ of climate change was butchered and tortured to fit the global warming narrative…
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsiblity to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)
“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.” – Maurice Strong, Rio Earth Summit
“It is the responsibility of each human being today to choose between the force of darkness and the force of light. We must therefore transform our attitudes, and adopt a renewed respect for the superior laws of Divine Nature.“ – Maurice Strong, first Secretary General of UNEP
ATMOSPHERIC Physicist, MIT Professor of Meteorology and former IPCC lead author Richard S. Lindzen, examines the politics and ideology behind the CO2-centricity that drives the man-made climate change agenda.
“For a lot of people including the bureaucracy in Government and the environmental movement, the issue is power. It’s hard to imagine a better leverage point than carbon dioxide to assume control over a society. It’s essential to the production of energy, it’s essential to breathing. If you demonise it and gain control over it, you so-to-speak, control everything. That’s attractive to people. It’s been openly stated for over forty years that one should try to use this issue for a variety of purposes, ranging from North/South redistribution, to energy independence, to God knows what…”
“CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? – it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality.”
To believe humans are dangerously warming earth’s climate, you have to swallow a bunch of unbelievable notions.
- You have to think the atmosphere drives temperature, instead of the ocean with 1000 times the heat capacity.
- You have to disregard the sun despite its obvious effects from summer to winter and longer term.
- You have to think CO2 drives radiative heat transfers, instead of H2O which does 95% of the radiative work.
- You have to think rises in CO2 cause temperatures to rise, rather than the other way around.
- You have to forget it was warmer than now in the Middle Ages, warmer still in the Roman era, and warmest of all during Minoan times. And on and on.
The global warmist narrative is full of ideas upside down and backwards, including many reversals of cause and effect.
It is like a massive hot air balloon, so why doesn’t it deflate? Answer: It is because so many interests are served by keeping it alive and pumping up public fears.
EQUILIBRIUM CLIMATE SENSITIVITY (ECS)
WE are constantly told by the Climate Crisis Industry that the “science is settled”. Yet, the main indicator of a so-called climate “crisis” – Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity or ECS – the hypothesised amount of temperature increase per doubling of CO2, keeps shrinking even as carbon dioxide rises.
CO2 is Life with the rub…
The Ever Changing “Settled” Science; How Can a “Settled” Science need Continual Updating?
The “Science” was “Settled” in 2000 CO2 Sensitivity 4.25°C
The “Science” was “Settled” in 2005 CO2 Sensitivity 3.75°C
The “Science” was “Settled” in 2010 CO2 Sensitivity 2.75°C
The “Science” was “Settled” in 2015 CO2 Sensitivity 0.50°C
OVERHEATED UN CLIMATE MODELS
THEN there are the failed CO2-centric UN CMIP5 climate models. Overheated climate models that do not accord with observed reality, and yet increase IPCC confidence in dangerous global warming despite ever-increasing divergence from satellite and weather-balloon data…
JUST as ECS declines as CO2 increases it becomes harder to see how policy makers can justify the deliberate deindustrialisation of the Western world driven by draconian, UN climate policies based on overheated UN climate models, fear, funding and mass propaganda.
DO politicians even look at empirical data or “the science” anymore? Or does the wicked truth expose their scam, hindering globalist intentions?
THIS eco-scare is strong and will not die quickly. Too many jobs, reputations and egos are now at stake. And, access to unlimited “Save The Planet” taxpayer trillions, completely immune to oversight.
“GLOBAL COOLING gained considerable traction with the general public. But then, instead of cooling as long predicted by manmade climate change advocates, the planet started warming again. Something had to be done to rescue the climate change agenda from utter disaster. Enter Al Gore.”
ANOTHER Paul Driessen, must read, masterpiece…
By Paul Driessen ~
Although his science is often seriously wrong, no one can deny that Al Gore has a flare for the dramatic. Speaking about climate change in an October 12 PBS interview, the former vice-president proclaimed, “We have a global emergency.” Referring to the most recent UN climate report, Gore claimed it showed that current global warming “could actually extend to an existential threat to human civilization on this planet as we know it.”
Al Gore’s overblown rhetoric makes no sense, of course. Yet his hyperbolic claims beg the question: How did this all start?
Back in the 1970s, media articles warning of imminent climate change problems began to appear regularly. TIME and Newsweek ran multiple cover stories asserting that oil companies and America’s capitalist life style were causing catastrophic damage to Earth’s climate. They claimed scientists were almost unanimous in their opinion that manmade climate change would…
View original post 990 more words
“IT would not be impossible to prove with sufficient repetition and a psychological understanding of the people concerned that a square is in fact a circle. They are mere words, and words can be molded until they clothe ideas and disguise.”
― Joseph Goebbels
FROM the “department of the absurd” comes this out of the global warming theory-obsessed NBC…
GOTTA love how 1 extra CO2 molecule per every 10,000 atmospheric molecules can change the way we look!
TWITTER’S excellent “Sooky Blessington” with the most viable explanation of what’s going on here…
Roger Federer, one of the world’s greatest tennis players, may have become an unwitting spokesman for the effects of climate change on Monday at the U.S. Open.
Federer, who is ranked No. 2, seemed to struggle all night in the heat and humidity at Arthur Ashe Stadium, losing in a fourth-round upset to John Millman, an Australian ranked 55th.
“It was hot,” Federer said. It “was just one of those nights where I guess I felt I couldn’t get air; there was no circulation at all.”
This was the first time Federer, who won the U.S. Open five consecutive times from 2004 to 2008, lost to a player outside the top 50 at the tournament.
To some, the comments by Federer, 37, may sound like sour grapes. But they also underscore a growing problem: increasing nighttime temperatures.
Under climate change, overall temperatures are rising — 2018 is on track to be the fourth-warmest year on record — but the warming is not happening evenly. Summer nights have warmed at nearly twice the rate of summer days. Average overnight low temperatures in the United States have increased 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit per century since 1895, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
TONY HELLER aka Steve Goddard of Real Science recently checked temperature trends at Ithaca NYC as part of a rebuttal to another piece of epic NYT climate propaganda and fraud – “How Much Hotter Is Your Hometown Than When You Were Born? – The New York Times”
WATCH the blatant fraud uncovered by Heller in this MUST SEE vid:
WHILE Heller’s work on the NY area at Ithaca doesn’t explore humidity, his analysis, using USHCN offical Govt data, shows that the number of hot days over 90F are declining as CO2 increases – the opposite of what global warming CO2-theory demands. And, shock news, Heller’s data shows the exact opposite of what the failing NYTimes impugns…
New York Times Fraud At Ithaca, New York
The New York Times claims that Ithaca, New York gets about three days per year over 90 degrees, when in fact they average almost double that.
The number of 90 degree days has declined by 50% over the last 90 years, as CO2 has increased.
The New York Times claims the opposite trend.
A large percentage of New York Times reporting is fraudulent, and sometimes it is trivial to prove. They are hiding readily available historical data, reporting incorrectly on historical and present data, and claiming trends which are the exact opposite of reality. Scientific and journalistic fraud at its worst.
AS an Aussie, bravo to John Millman for downing the Fed! And, obviously he had to play under the same conditions as the champ. Just maybe, Millman was the better player on the ‘humid’ night in NYC and in better condition than ye olde Rog, God bless him!
AS for the failing NY Times – “Scientific and journalistic fraud at its worst.” – we and the empirical evidence concur!
Tony Heller with the inconvenient truth on September 3 New York historical temperatures…
AUGUST is peak melt season for Arctic sea-ice. It’s also peak season for Arctic alarmists to scream and yell for an “ICE-FREE” Arctic.
HOWEVER, for the entire 21st Century, their cries, smears and slimes at “deniers” and Mother Nature have added up to nothing more than loud voices of a minority, with the usual and telling absence of empirical evidence or scientific reality.
THE attached fifteen second animation of all August months available via DMI, from 2003 – 2018, confirms the lies and falsehoods about the state of the Arctic that “Death Spiral” alarmists bleat about.