This webpage constitutes a critique of the Climate Change movement. The origins are cited and quotes provided which reveal the ideology and intentions of the movement. Some important fraudulent memes of the movement are exposed, the most important being the claim that the world faces catastrophic warming in the next decade or so. Further, several related claims are shown to be fiction, such as “97% of all scientists” statements which are often repeated. The demonization of CO2 is exposed as not based on the actual science underlying greenhouse gases as well as the contributions of the Sun and clouds to climate. Fraudulent Climate models with “tuning” to get the desired results are cited. Examples are given of data “fudging” to get the desired results. A number of important Climate Realists are featured, with a variety of videos, articles, books and helpful websites provided. The bottom line is that there is no need for world-wide action to deal with climate, nor to reduce carbon footprints or lower the use of fossil fuels.
Climate Change is a political movement of the globalist Left which must be considered in light of ideology, objectives and tactics. The ideology is Postmodern neo-Marxism, and the primary objective is political and cultural power, world-wide. While obviously there are scientific aspects to this phenomenon, because of the ideology the “science” must be considered with diligent skepticism, with a distinction made between that which is objectively true and that which is fabricated or compromised to support ideological goals.
Further, it should be understood that public attitudes towards Climate Change are molded largely through ideological tactics used by the Left. This takes place because of the significant hegemony of Leftist thinking in academia, media and entertainment spheres, and with its influence increasing in government, the corporate world, and professional and religious organizations.
The extreme hold that Leftist ideology has on college and university campuses at one time was considered to be localized in the humanities and social sciences, but today it is also expressed in enforced speech codes, diversity, inclusivity and equity among the faculty, staff, administration and students. Further, there is no reason to think that similar ideological purity will not be present in the hard sciences as well. The power of ideology in the case of climate-related sciences has significant bearing in the area of funding. If one is open to climate skepticism, then the ability to acquire funding for research is greatly diminished, and their job might be at risk.
Climate Change vs. Valid Environmentalism
Before moving forward with this critique one important element needs to be constantly in front: the environmental, ecological and general well-being of the planet. The “Climate Change” political movement is about power, employing both promotional and coercive tactics to achieve their goals. Hence, this negative movement must be separated from that which is supportive of legitimate environmental and ecological needs.
In the past 50 years or so, there has been a sequence of predictions of world-wide, man-made catastrophic processes at work: global cooling, overpopulation, acid rain, the ozone layer, resource scarcity, etc. For each of these supposedly impending catastrophes the solution was always the same: increasing global governance to solve the narrative-based “problem”.
In the latter 1980s, a threat that appeared was man-made or Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW). An important difference in AGW from some of the earlier predictions of catastrophe was the identification of a politically strategic entity that provided the Left with the long-held desire to neutralize capitalism: Carbon-dioxide. CO2. A product of the burning of fossil fuels. The totalitarian elimination of fossil fuels would essentially destroy capitalism.
The Climate Change narrative posits that because of CO2’s presence in the atmosphere, some of the heat being released from the earth’s surface is absorbed, suppressing the cooling of the earth and causing temperatures to rise significantly, and ice coverages and glaciers to melt, resulting in catastrophic rise in ocean levels. Essentially, the Left’s narrative is that the rise in earth’s temperature is primarily related to the atmospheric rise in CO2 and is man-made predominantly as a result of the use of fossil fuels.
For the Left, the “beauty” of this narrative is that they can now attempt to convince the entire world to eliminate fossil fuels to save the planet. In the resulting human tragedy brought about by significant loss in energy generation and transportation, complete world-wide governmental control would be mandatory, and the meager resources available would then supposedly be redistributed equitably (via “carbon credits”, for example). Note further that the Left’s assumption is that with their resulting world-wide totalitarian control, there would be no more war, and everybody would get along with everyone else. The Green New Deal (GND) of early 2019 spells out some of this.
Quotes from the Past
To demonstrate that the Climate Change movement is ultimately about global control, consider the following quotes from a few of the “founders” of the Climate Change narrative. One place to start is with the Club of Rome, founded in 1968, and served as an environmental consultant to the UN:
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome.” – Club of Rome, where “unite us” really equates to “control them”.
“The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” – Club of Rome, with the implication that the “enemy” (i.e., us) needs to be controlled.
“We believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is a real one or one invented for the purpose.” – Club of Rome, suggesting that false narratives are acceptable; whatever it takes to accomplish world government.
There was a 1972 report commissioned by the Club of Rome entitled “The Limits to Growth.” As Wikipedia describes it:
The Limits to Growth (LTG) is a 1972 report on the computer simulation of exponential economic and population growth with a finite supply of resources. Funded by the Volkswagen Foundation and commissioned by the Club of Rome, the findings of the study were first presented at international gatherings in Moscow and Rio de Janeiro in the summer of 1971.
Here is a quote from this report:
“We are unanimously convinced that rapid, radical redressment of the present unbalanced and dangerously deteriorating world situation is the primary task facing mankind…Concerted international measures and joint long-term planning will be necessary on a scale and scope without precedent. … This supreme effort is … founded on a basic change of values and goals at individual, national and world levels … “
Basically, the UN with encouragement from the Club of Rome is searching for support of global-scale measures – power – to combat world-wide “problems” (real or fabricated), requiring an ideological indoctrination of the world.
An important person to consider is Timothy Wirth, former Congressman and Senator from Colorado, Co-Chairman of Bill Clinton’s 1992 Presidential Campaign and ultimately President of Ted Turner’s UN Foundation. Here’s a quote of his, consistent with the acceptability of false narratives:
“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.” (emphasis added)
And finally, there is Maurice Strong, a Canadian with a multi-faceted career in gas and oil, water development, and molten metals technology. He first became involved in the United Nations in 1947. In 1971 he co-authored a report on the state of the planet, and became the first head of the UN Environment Program (UNEP). He took a leading role in the planning of the United Nations “Conference on Environment and Development” (UNCED), commonly referred to as the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. And he was a principal player in the development of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Here are some of his quotes:
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Program (UNEP). He was a Socialist.
“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, 1992 Earth Summit. Elimination of fossil fuels would destroy capitalism, and thus level the hierarchical structure that it produces, rendering everyone to be equally poor, except for the “elites”, of course.
“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. In other words, just as Antonio Gramsci said in 1916, “Socialism is a religion … “. And the prophet Isaiah said, “Woe until them who call good evil, and evil good.” How can those that approve of deceit to gain power be called “light”? Aren’t they the definition of darkness?
The Rio Declaration states that the only way to have long term economic progress is to link it with environmental protection. This will only happen if nations establish a new and equitable global partnership involving governments, their people and key sectors of societies. They must build international agreements that protect the integrity of the global environmental and the developmental system.
That sounds benign enough, except part of the “global environmental” includes dealing with man-made global warming. And the “economic progress” and “developmental system” entails a crippling of capitalism.
Additionally, also in 1992, the UN set forth a more extensive plan for the nations: Sustainable Development Agenda 21, and the US (under President George H. W. Bush) signed on to it, along with most of the rest of the world. The details of Agenda 21 (and its following Agenda 2030) are too extensive to deal with here, but they are draconian. Consider the following 2013 quote concerning Agenda 21 from author Rosa Kiore:
It is the action plan to inventory and control all land, all water, all minerals, all plants, all animals, all means of production, all construction, all energy, all education, all information, and all human beings in the world.
Three decades later, Agenda 21 is moving ahead nearly unknown and unopposed except by a few.
A 2019 speech by Tom DeWeese of the American Policy Center describes how the Climate Change movement combines with the Green New Deal (GND) and Agenda 21 to attempt to transition the world into a totalitarian Socialist entity. DeWeese levels special criticism at the Right for attempting to find common ground with the GND, for example by proposing Green New Deal-Lite, when in reality they’ve fallen prey to the classic Marxist dialectic (thesis, antithesis, synthesis) transition, when factually there’s no reason at all to move in the direction of the GND.
Agenda 21 is frightening in part because it is being successfully accomplished in stealth manner with very little pushback, as opposed to the Climate Change movement which strenuously and publicly demonizes “Climate Deniers”; thus, at least pushback is visible. Further information on Agenda 21 can be found here.
Demonizing Carbon Dioxide
In the three decades following the 1992 Earth Summit and the establishment of the UN IPCC, elaborate schemes of dealing with the CO2 have been developed: Carbon footprint, Carbon credits, controlling CO2 emissions, etc. And the propagation of the CO2-as-evil narrative has become an extraordinarily successful venture, such that any who are skeptical of the narrative are demonized, silenced, ostracized, fired, not published.
There is also a great increase in entrepreneurial activities during these years in alternative, renewable forms of energy such as solar, wind and hydroelectric. Curiously, in the US there has not been an increase in the development of nuclear energy, although in some of the more developed countries around the world such as China and India there has been a great increase in this technology.
Paradoxically, what is also of note is that in the US, in a counter thrust to “Climate Change” there has been the huge development of fracking, which has catapulted the US to be the world’s leading exporter of energy. In the AGW narrative, that kind of progress would ultimately be eliminated by the elites in the Climate Change movement. And indeed they are currently strongly opposed to fracking.
Yet, even more paradoxically, as natural gas has become inexpensively available in the US as a result of fracking, it has been used to replace coal in the generation of electrical power. Since coal releases more CO2 into the air than natural gas, the so-called “carbon footprint” in the US has decreased, such that as of 2020 the US leads the world in reducing carbon emissions. As a result of Left-opposed fracking.
The overriding irony is that such emission reductions have no existential value since there is no CO2-based apocalypse facing the world. Further, the lessening of CO2 emissions means less “greening”: trees, grasslands, etc. So in the real world of logic and facts, a case could be made that lessening of CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is of net detriment to humanity.
Of course, the fundamental question is whether or not CO2 is the primary cause of “global warming”. And in the 1998-2014 timeframe, a big problem for the Left arose: the world’s temperature elevation essentially flattened, while the CO2 percentage in the atmosphere continued to rise. That flattening – the “pause” – provoked the Left to re-brand the issue from “Man-Made Global Warming” to “Climate Change.”
Leftist Corruption Relative to Climate
In the past decade or so, there have been considerable issues of corruption among climate scientists and other promoters of the Climate Change narrative. One of the earliest examples was the manipulation of data sources to produce the infamous (and false) “hockey stick” graph in the 1990s. The falsification is described in a video entitled Hide the Decline – A Climategate Backgrounder. As an example of the extent of continuing false narrative from the Left is that 20 years later this discredited graph continues to be displayed by both governmental and non-governmental media.
Another example of corruption is the exposure of emails from the East Anglia University in 2009 (called Climategate), which demonstrated considerable deceit, attempting to hide the lack of dependence of world temperatures on the quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere, and falsifying temperature readings from around the world. A second anonymous release of emails demonstrating corruption from the Climate Change establishment took place in 2011 (Climategate 2.0).
Consider the following 2011 quote from the Forbes website:
Three themes are emerging from the newly released [i.e., 2011] emails: (1) prominent scientists central to the global warming debate are taking measures to conceal rather than disseminate underlying data and discussions; (2) these scientists view global warming as a political “cause” rather than a balanced scientific inquiry and (3) many of these scientists frankly admit to each other that much of the science is weak and dependent on deliberate manipulation of facts and data.
There are also approximately 32 computerized Climate models from around the world, all of which (excepting one, INM-CM5) show varying amounts of catastrophic rise in world temperature and sea levels in the near future, supposedly because of increased CO2 in the atmosphere. Yet all of these models have user-defined parameters to manipulate the predictions in favor of imminent disaster. Years ago, in the early days of computer modeling someone stated “with enough adjustable parameters, you can draw an elephant.”
Among the many examples of false narratives dealing with Climate Change, perhaps one of the most egregious is the claim that 97% of scientists believe in catastrophic CO2-based global warming. But from where did that number originate?
There were two reports in 2009 and 2010 suggesting that a review of scientific articles on man-made Climate Change resulted in 97% consensus. But the first report came from a 2-question online survey wherein 79 out of more than 3000 people who took the survey claimed to be scientists who had considerable publishing experience in climate-related studies responded. Of them, 77 agreed that global temperature had risen since 1800, and the human activity was a significant factor. Hence 97%, not of ALL climate scientists, but those who happen to come across the survey, or perhaps were informed of the survey by colleagues, and took enough time to fill it out. Because there are thousands of scientists world-wide who did not participate, this statistic is essentially worthless. A second study a year later with an equally small sample size yielded similar results.
Consider the following analysis of a 2013 study:
Surely the most suspicious “97 percent” study was conducted in 2013 by Australian scientist John Cook – author of the 2011 book Climate Change Denial: Heads in the Sand and creator of the blog Skeptical Science (subtitle: “Getting skeptical about global warming skepticism.”). In an analysis of 12,000 abstracts, he found “a 97% consensus among papers taking a position on the cause of global warming in the peer-reviewed literature that humans are responsible.” “Among papers taking a position” is a significant qualifier: Only 34 percent of the papers Cook examined expressed any opinion about anthropogenic climate change at all. Since 33 percent appeared to endorse anthropogenic climate change, he divided 33 by 34 and – voilà – 97 percent!
When David Legates, a University of Delaware professor who formerly headed the university’s Center for Climatic Research, recreated Cook’s study, he found that “only 41 papers – 0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent,” endorsed what Cook claimed. Several scientists whose papers were included in Cook’s initial sample also protested that they had been misinterpreted. “Significant questions about anthropogenic influences on climate remain,” Legates concluded.
There are two additional resources to consider which shed light on the “97% of climate scientists” claim:
97 articles refuting the “97% consensus” claim – this article provides commentary and links to 97 articles on the internet which debunk the 97 percent claims.
The In-depth Story Behind a Climate Fraud (16:12) – this video provides many important details falsifying the 97% claims.
Climate Change as Important Strategy in the Globalization Movement
In summary, it is obvious the Climate Change scheme is one of the key strategies in the overall Globalization movement for world dominance, headed by often “invisible” global elites such as Hungarian George Soros (who is visible!). Another movement of similar scale is the Open Borders immigration scheme, pursued on a massive scale in the West. While Climate Change is supposedly a world-wide endeavor, in fact it is not actively pursued in countries such as India and China, nor with many “developing” countries. The poorer countries are obviously not all that enthusiastic about eliminating the use of fossil fuels critical to the survival of their people. In the case of China and India, eliminating fossil fuels would hinder their goal of achieving parity with or dominance over the West.
Nevertheless it is obvious that the global elites’ ultimate goal is a totalitarian world government, where capitalism is eliminated, and Socialism with its enforced egalitarianism is in place. As noted at the top, the ideology behind the movement is Postmodern neo-Marxism, where logic and objective truth are demonized. The resulting false narratives of impending doom are skillfully proclaimed throughout the culture, creating religious-like movements on the part of the indoctrinated. After all, if you eliminate logic and objective truth, all you have remaining is emotion, responding to the most persuasive and repeated narrative.
What Conservatives in the US label as the “deep state” is in reality simply the US portion of the overall Globalism movement. Since the time of Reagan until the emergence of Trump, the Republican party has been controlled by people who have been either unbelievably naïve concerning the Globalist agenda, or actually complicit, as seen in the support of the immigration movement by some on the “Right”, because of its provision of an inexpensive and compliant labor force.
A perfect example of Rightist support of Leftist ideology is President H.W. Bush’s support for Sustainability and the UN Agenda 21: the New World Order (NWO). The context for Bush’s repeated proclamations about the NWO was the collapse of the Soviet Union and the brief emergence of anti-communism under Boris Yeltsen in Russia. Incidentally, not widely known is that Yeltsen wished to establish a Nuremberg-like forum for bringing accountability to the 70+ years of Soviet rule. Yet, after six months or so of opening of KGB files and other acts of transparency, Yeltsen called off his plans. Why? The West did not want it.
Thus, it is the Globalist Left that operates both the Climate Change and Open Borders movements, as well as deeply opposing movements of Nationalism as found in the US, the UK and some other European countries. And common in all the Leftist initiatives is comprehensive false narratives. As an example, there were pathetically transparent and absurd initiatives to prevent Donald Trump’s election in the US, and then after his election, removal. There is a constant red thread in a host of Leftist initiatives: Russia Hoax, FISA abuses, Steele Dossier, Ukraine phone call, SPLC, Antifa, Critical Race Theory, all the other Critical Theories, Gender fluidity, Standpoint Epistemology, US history fabrication, Global Warming, Global Cooling, etc.
Political Correctness is a tool of the Globalist Left. In essence, PC entails stating something that is objectively false to be true for political gain. It rejects objective truth and is incredibly successful in the art of propaganda and coercion. Thus, Leftism equals false narratives. In the US, the extreme Postmodern neo-Marxist ideology of the Clinton and Obama administrations, coupled with the pathetic naivety (concerning ideology) of the two Bush administrations provided a nearly 3-decade opportunity to pack the upper echelons of governmental control with Leftist ideologues, who today mostly control both policy and funding. Add to that, the near 100% hegemony of Leftist ideology in news media and academia, and the Gramscian “pillars of culture” are all stacked against objective truth and logic, the essence of true science.
Thus, it is in this deceitful ideological context of the Globalist Leftist elites that Climate Change must be considered. The narratives and funding are essentially controlled by the global elites, and any who dare to express skepticism are at risk of being demonetized, demonized and unemployed. Try getting an article supporting Climate Realism published in a scholarly journal. It will be rejected, and often with prejudice (i.e., “don’t bother submitting a revised version”).
The above provides an outline of the ideological back-drop to technical aspects of Climate Change. Much more detail could be supplied to demonstrate the immense political and cultural power exerted to “get the right answer”, which is: pending apocalypse. The outcome from the international deep state is eminently predictable, but for humanity catastrophically dangerous. In other words, there IS a climate endangerment for the world, that being the drastic chaos, death and misery if the anti-CO2 movement were actually to be comprehensively enforced.
Climate Realism is the Answer
In the above, emphasis has been on the ideology behind the Climate Change movement. This is done to alert the reader of the significant potential for corruption in the scientific aspects of Climate Change. As we now turn to objective scientific realities, exposure will be given to scientists and commentators who understand the details of the earth’s climate, yet essentially falsify claims of pending disaster due to CO2, with its subsequent need to reorganize the entire world under totalitarian control.
Outside the Leftist-controlled scientific and governmental entities, there is an alternative enterprise of scientists – Climate Realists – who reach very different conclusions and are able to demonstrate convincingly that the Climate Change narrative is fundamentally wrong; CO2 plays a real but relatively minor role in the earth’s temperature, the seas are not rising catastrophically, the polar bear populations are increasing, and the oceans are not becoming more acidic, and are rising at an almost imperceptible rate. Also, there’s been a mild decrease in the past 100 years in violent weather events, and no impending catastrophe. But as stated above there would be catastrophic chaos and immense loss of life if Leftist anti-CO2 plans were fully implemented under totalitarian control.
World Climate Declaration
In the Fall of 2019, a Declaration was prepared by some Climate Realists and disseminated to various world organizations involved in Climate Alarmism, as follows:
There is no climate emergency
A global network of 500 scientists and professionals has prepared this urgent message. Climate science should be less political, while climate policies should be more scientific. Scientists should openly address the uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real benefits as well as the imagined costs of adaptation to global warming, and the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of mitigation.
Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming
The geological archive reveals that Earth’s climate has varied as long as the planet has existed, with natural cold and warm phases. The Little Ice Age ended as recently as 1850. Therefore, it is no surprise that we now are experiencing a period of warming.
Warming is far slower than predicted
The world has warmed at less than half the originally-predicted rate, and at less than half the rate to be expected on the basis of net anthropogenic forcing and radiative imbalance. It tells us that we are far from understanding climate change.
Climate policy relies on inadequate models
Climate models have many shortcomings and are not remotely plausible as policy tools. Moreover, they most likely exaggerate the effect of greenhouse gases such as CO2. In addition, they ignore the fact that enriching the atmosphere with CO2 is beneficial.
CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is essential to all life on Earth. Photosynthesis is a blessing. More CO2 is beneficial for nature, greening the Earth: additional CO2 in the air has promoted growth in global plant biomass. It is also good for agriculture, increasing the yields of crops worldwide.
Global warming has not increased natural disasters
There is no statistical evidence that global warming is intensifying hurricanes, floods, droughts and suchlike natural disasters, or making them more frequent. However, CO2-mitigation measures are as damaging as they are costly. For instance, wind turbines kill birds and insects, and palm-oil plantations destroy the biodiversity of the rainforests.
Climate policy must respect scientific and economic realities
There is no climate emergency. Therefore, there is no cause for panic and alarm. We strongly oppose the harmful and unrealistic net-zero CO2 policy proposed for 2050. If better approaches emerge, we will have ample time to reflect and adapt. The aim of international policy should be to provide reliable and affordable energy at all times, and throughout the world.
Climate Realism – Summary of Findings
Given in the following is an outline of some of the findings of Climate Realists. It is not a complete list, but does provide a window into some of the important technical issues. Following this section will be links to videos featuring some of the important Climate Realists.
The crux of the Climate Alarmism false narrative is that the world is heading in an accelerated fashion to catastrophic warming is caused by increasing concentrations of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, and that the CO2 increase is essentially the result of human activity.
With that postulated scenario, the Climate Alarmists proclaim that the world must drastically reduce its “carbon footprint”, and most of that reduction will need to result from a cessation of the use of fossil fuels throughout the world, whether it be for generation of electrical power or for use in transportation. Hence the promotion of the development of alternative forms of “renewable” energy such as wind and solar, as well as further exploitation (where possible) of hydroelectric power. Curiously there does not seem to be a unified front on the use of nuclear power generation, even though it would not have a carbon footprint.
Consider the following observations/conclusions from Climate Realists:
1. CO2 is a gas of life, critical to photosynthesis; the more, the better for both plants and animals.
2. Recent CO2 levels have recently been so low they were only 30 ppm above which all life begins to die (~ 150ppm).
3. CO2 levels are indeed rising and in the process the world is “greening”, thus agriculture is booming with fewer people starving to death.
4. Historically over the past 300 million or so years, CO2 elevation follows temperature elevation, generally by hundreds or even a few thousand years, rather than the converse. The world is currently emerging from the “Little Ice Age”, with modest temperature increases starting around 1850, which is to be expected.
5. The “greenhouse” effect of CO2 actually decreases logarithmically as CO2 concentration increases. For example, an increase from 400ppm to 800ppm would only contribute half the greenhouse effect found at 400ppm. Additional decrease when going from 800ppm to 1600 ppm.
6. From 1910 until 1945, while CO2 increased by 18ppm, the world temperature rose by 0.6 C (remember the 1930s Dust Bowl in the US). If CO2 really was the “control knob” of world temperature, it would be catastrophically hot right now, because CO2 in 2020 is at about 400ppm, while below 200ppm in 1910.
7. Since WWII, CO2 concentration in the atmosphere has been constantly rising, yet from approximately 1998 – 2014 there was a pause in world temperature elevation. How then could CO2 be the “control knob”?
8. Of the 32 major climate models currently in use, 31 of them predict catastrophic warming and do not “predict” the pause. The model that does correctly predict the pause (INM-CM5) more heavily weights the heat capacity of the oceans. If the other models would treat ocean heat capacity similarly, they would likely also predict the pause.
9. The goal (at the elite level) of man-made global warming going back to the 1980s has always been to demonize CO2, regardless of the facts, in order to (1) cripple capitalism, and (2) require international totalitarian control and wealth redistribution.
10. In the US, starting with the first Bush administration, the federal bureaucracy has been increasingly packed with ideologues at the management level who support globalization and weakening of capitalism, with funding for research predicated on (1) focusing only on CO2 as the world temperature control knob, and (2) demonstrating pending catastrophe requiring totalitarian control. In other words, the results must meet the objectives, or you don’t get funded, you don’t get published, you lose your job, and similar. By the end of the Obama administration, this ideological packing was comprehensive. Similar ideological packing has occurred throughout the West, and in the United Nations
11. The Data Manipulation / cheating scandals of 1998, 2009 and 2011 exposed the mechanisms for getting the “right” results (i.e., predicting scary warming due to CO2). The Climate Alarmists have even published articles providing suggestions on how best to “tune” your climate models to get the “right” (i.e., Leftist-approved) result of catastrophic warming. One publication even cited “cultural identity” as an important factor in Climate Change thinking. Identity Politics in Climate Change?
12. The “tuning” of climate models to “get the right results” has been comprehensive throughout the West. Significantly much of that tuning has been done by graduate students and post-docs who have poorly documented their “black boxes” in the models such that today most of them are far removed from connection to observable data, as well as from known and mathematically defined physical processes.
The conclusion from Climate Realists (non-ideological scientists) is that the world is currently in a phase of “lukewarming” of world temperatures and continued rise in CO2, both of which are of great benefit to humans, animals, plant life: everybody, everything. The world is also entering a 3-decade phase of a solar minimum, which could serve to suppress the world temperature slightly over the next decade or so.
Climate Realism Websites
There are several important Climate Realism websites that provide ongoing information on the worldwide battle for sanity with respect to Climate Change. They are updated on a nearly daily basis:
Climate Depot is a project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), which was founded to promote a much-needed, positive alternative voice on issues of environment and development. Marc Morano is the founder of the Climate Depot website, which supports Climate Realism, and provides extensive and timely content.
(From About page) About Anthony: I’m the founder and editor of WattsUpWithThat.com the world’s most viewed website on climate. I’m a former AMS Television Seal Holder (Seal 676 retired) television meteorologist who spent 25 years on the air and who also operates a weather technology and content business, as well as continues daily forecasting on radio, just for fun.
(From About page) Dr. Patrick Moore has been a leader in the international environmental field for over 30 years. He is a founding member of Greenpeace and served for nine years as President of Greenpeace Canada and seven years as a Director of Greenpeace International. As the leader of many campaigns Dr. Moore was a driving force shaping policy and direction while Greenpeace became the world’s largest environmental activist organization.
(From About page) The CO2 Coalition was established in 2015 as a 501(c)(3) for the purpose of educating thought leaders, policy makers, and the public about the important contribution made by carbon dioxide to our lives and the economy. The Coalition seeks to engage in an informed and dispassionate discussion of climate change, humans’ role in the climate system, the limitations of climate models, and the consequences of mandated reductions in CO2 emissions.
(From About Us page) The Climate Discussion Nexus is a group of concerned Canadians who believe more information about climate science and policy debates will lead to better decisions.
(From About page) Our Goal: To educate the public about climate science and through them bring pressure to bear on governments to engage in public debates on the scientific merits of the hypothesis of human induced global warming and the various policies that intend to address the issue.
Our Opinion: It is our opinion that the Sun is the main direct and indirect driver of climate change.
(From blog) 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.”
(From blog) The Global Warming Policy Foundation is unique. We are an all-party and non-party think tank and a registered educational charity which, while open-minded on the contested science of global warming, is deeply concerned about the costs and other implications of many of the policies currently being advocated.
Climate Realism – 2019 Conferences
One of the organizations that has been in the forefront of the battle for climate sanity in the 2000s is the Heartland Institute. Two conferences were organized in 2019, and they have included some of the leading scientists and spokesmen for Climate Realism. Links to many of the presentations are found in these two webpages:
The speakers in these two conferences provide ample exposure of the false nature of climate alarmism from both a technical and cultural/political perspective. Every presentation is excellent, but not every reader will have the time to view everything. Two speakers to not miss are:
William Happer – American physicist who has specialized in the study of atomic physics, optics and spectroscopy. He is the Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics, Emeritus, at Princeton University. He is also Board director for the CO2 Coalition, a non-profit organization which educates thought leaders, policy makers, and the public about the important contribution made by carbon dioxide to our lives and the economy.
Additional Climate Realists
In addition to Patrick Michaels, William Happer and the others featured in the two Heartland Institute 2019 events are four well-credentialed and articulate critics of the Climate Change: Marc Morano, Patrick Moore, Willie Soon. and Tim Ball.
Journalist and Author Marc Morano
Marc Morano is a former Republican political aide who founded and runs the website ClimateDepot.com. Climate Depot is a project of the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, a Washington, D.C. non-profit that promotes the truth about climate change. He has also produced a documentary film Climate Hustle which exposes the climate hysteria.
In this lecture at the Liberty Forum, Marc Morano provides a comprehensive view of the origin of the Climate Change movement, and the ongoing false narratives that are used to create a sense of impending doom for the world. As with other Climate Realists, he does not deny that a slight warming trend has been taking place since the end of the end of the Little Ice Age, but that there is no need to take drastic measures to deal with such modest and beneficial changes.
Marc Morano testified at a contentious Pennsylvania Climate hearing on October 28, 2019.
Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore
Patrick Moore (born 1947) is a Canadian activist, and former president of Greenpeace Canada. Since leaving Greenpeace, Moore has criticized the environmental movement for what he sees as scare tactics and disinformation, saying that the environmental movement “abandoned science and logic in favor of emotion and sensationalism.” Dr. Moore earned a PhD in Ecology from the University of British Columbia.
(From YouTube) Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore gives a keynote address to the Economic Education Association of Alberta’s 6th annual “Freedom School” conference, on “Things that Matter: An Agenda for Alberta”, about changing the world by speaking the truth – in this case about the science, policy and politics of man-made global warming.
Astrophysicist and aerospace engineer Dr. Willie Soon
(From friendsofscience.org) Willie Soon is a geophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. He received his Ph.D. (with distinction) in aeronautical engineering from the University of Southern California, and he has been Astronomer at the Mount Wilson Observatory; Senior Scientist at the George C. Marshall Institute; Senior Visiting Fellow at the State Key Laboratory of Marine Environmental Science at Xiamen University; and Professor of Environmental Studies at the University of Putra Malaysia. The author of 90 scientific papers, he has IEEE received the Nuclear & Plasma Sciences Society Award, Rockwell Dennis Hunt Award, Smithsonian Institution Award, Courage in Defense of Science Award, Petr Beckmann Award for Courage and Achievement in Defense of Scientific Truth and Freedom, and Frederick Seitz Memorial Award.
Clip from the Independent Institute speech video entitled “Global Warming – Fact or Fiction Featuring Physicists Willie Soon and Elliott Bloom.” The full video includes an excellent Q&A session.
Lecturer and Writer Dr. Tim Ball
(From heartland.org) Dr. Timothy Ball is a renowned environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Dr. Tim Ball cites the immoral use of Climate alarmism to achieve hidden and nefarious goals, such as population reduction and maximization of governmental control.
Other Voices Critiquing Aspects of Climate Change
The correlation of the ice ages with solar activity over the past 2000 years is discussed, with specific focus on Greenland as an agricultural region prior to the latest ice age.
Dr. Judith Curry is Professor and former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Following is her verbal remarks as delivered to last week’s US Senate Commerce Committee Hearing on “Data or Dogma? Promoting Open Inquiry in the Debate Over the Magnitude of the Human Impact on Earth’s Climate.”
A large contingent of Climate Alarmists are Millennial youth who have been indoctrinated their entire life with the Climate Catastrophe narrative. Time Magazine’s Person of the Year for 2019 was Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg, because of her emotional appeals for immediate comprehensive action on Climate Change. However, during late 2019, a second teenager dealing with Climate Change has become visible, especially on media not controlled by the Left. It’s German 19-year-old Climate Realist Naomi Seibt. Unlike Greta, Naomi has actually “done her homework” and can speak authoritatively on the scientific, economic and ideological aspects of Climate Change. Naomi does not want to be labeled the “Anti-Greta” because she does not see herself as a “puppet” of a Right-wing conspiracy. Further, she doesn’t want to debate Greta out of kindness for fear that she (Naomi) would “destroy her”.
The above link provides access to a page providing a number of videos featuring Naomi, from a 2019-2020 timeframe.
On the same day that Greta Thunberg made an impassioned speech to the UN about her fears of a climate emergency, 500 scientists sent a registered letter to the UN Secretary-General stating that there is no climate emergency and climate policies should be designed to benefit the lives of people. Current List of signers.
(From YouTube) Dr. John Robson looks back on the 10th anniversary of the exposure of the scandalous “Climategate” decision to delete awkward data that contradicted the idea that settled science said we face a man-made global warming crisis.
This video provides many important details refuting the claim that 97% of climate scientists believe that the earth is warming, that human activity is a significant contributor, and that the situation is dangerous for the world. While there is little dispute that the world has been warming since the end of the “little ice age” in the 1800s, the amount of that warming which is caused by humans is not settled. However, whatever warming is happening is slight, and there is no cause for alarm and thus no need to modify human behavior to deal with the “lukewarming”.
This video explains that the world not facing a climate emergency, but it is facing an impending climate POLICY problem that can negatively affect much of humanity. The slight bit of warming likely to take place in the next century will be of net benefit to humanity.
Rupert Darwall discusses his book Green Tyranny: Exposing the Totalitarian Roots of the Climate Industrial Complex. American Enterprise Institute’s Senior Policy Analyst Michael Barone lauded this book as “the definitive history of global warming alarmism.”
Books Critiquing Climate Change
(From Amazon) Less freedom. More regulation. Higher costs. Make no mistake: those are the surefire consequences of the modern global warming campaign waged by political and cultural elites, who have long ago abandoned fact-based science for dramatic fearmongering in order to push increased central planning. The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change gives a voice — backed by statistics, real-life stories, and incontrovertible evidence — to the millions of “deplorable” Americans skeptical about the multibillion dollar “climate change” complex, whose claims have time and time again been proven wrong.
(From Amazon) Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout: The Making of a Sensible Environmentalist is Dr. Patrick Moore’s engaging firsthand account of his many years spent as the ultimate Greenpeace insider, a co-founder and leader in the organization’s top committee. Moore explains why, 15 years after co-founding it, he left Greenpeace to establish a more sensible, science-based approach to environmentalism. From energy independence to climate change, genetic engineering to aquaculture, Moore sheds new light on some of the most controversial subjects in the news today.
(From Amazon) Rupert Darwall’s Green Tyranny traces the alarming origins of the green agenda, revealing how environmental scares have been deployed by our global rivals as a political instrument to contest American power around the world.
Drawing on extensive historical and policy analysis, this timely and provocative book offers a lucid history of environmental alarmism and failed policies, explaining how “scientific consensus” is manufactured and abused by politicians with duplicitous motives and totalitarian tendencies.
(From Amazon) In Lukewarming, two environmental scientists explain the science and spin behind the headlines and come to a provocative conclusion: climate change is real, and partially man-made, but it is becoming obvious that far more warming has been forecast than will occur, with some of the catastrophic impacts implausible or impossible. Global warming is more lukewarm than hot. This fresh analysis is an invaluable source for those looking to be more informed about global warming and the data behind it.
(From Amazon) Tirelessly promoted by princes, presidents, actors and activists, “climate change” has become a dominant theme of global politics. But what’s really going on as the “pause” in global warming prepares to enter its third decade? In this new anthology, leading scientists and commentators from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia consider the climate from every angle – the science, the policy and the politics.
(From Amazon) The “hockey stick” graph of global temperatures is the single most influential icon in the global-warming debate, promoted by the UN’s transnational climate bureaucracy, featured in Al Gore’s Oscar-winning movie, used by governments around the world to sell the Kyoto Accord to their citizens, and shown to impressionable schoolchildren from kindergarten to graduation.
And yet what it purports to “prove” is disputed and denied by many of the world’s most eminent scientists. In this riveting book, Mark Steyn has compiled the thoughts of the world’s scientists, in their own words, on hockey-stick creator Michael E Mann, his stick and their damage to science. From Canada to Finland, Scotland to China, Belgium to New Zealand, from venerable Nobel Laureates to energetic young researchers on all sides of the debate analyze the hockey stock and the wider climate wars it helped launch.
(From Amazon) Updated 2nd Edition: Al Gore’s new movie An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power is reviewed for its accuracy in climate science and energy policy. As was the case with Gore’s first movie (An Inconvenient Truth), the movie is bursting with bad science, bad policy and some outright falsehoods.
(From Amazon) You have been inundated with reports from media, governments, think tanks and ”experts” saying that our climate is changing for the worse and it is our fault. Increases in droughts, heat waves, tornadoes and poison ivy – to name a few – are all blamed on our “sins of emissions” from burning fossil fuels and increasing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Yet, you don’t quite buy into this human-caused climate apocalypse. You aren’t sure about the details because you don’t have all the facts and likely aren’t a scientist. Inconvenient Facts was specifically created for you. Writing in plain English and providing easily understood charts and figures, Gregory Wrightstone presents the science to assess the basis of the threatened Thermageddon.