Global Warming Science Settled!

"There is No Climate Catastrophe – It’s a Lie." -- Dr. Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace (source)

Video: We Need to Eat the Babies!’ Satirical Climate Activist Confronts AOC at New York Town Hall

Man-made global warming; fact, fiction, or something in between? Courtesy of a 2013 post, 10 Climate Myths Debunked (in 60 seconds!), by James Corbett of The Corbett Report:

Myth #1. The earth is warming!

On what time scale? 16 years? 2000 years? 10000 years? 420000 years? 65 million years? (Answer: None of the above)

Myth #2. This year was the hottest year ever!

Was that before or after NASA and the NOAA altered the temperature record to make recent years warmer?

Myth #3. 97% of scientists agree on global warming!

You mean 97% of 77 scientists in an unscientific online poll?

Myth #4. Sea levels are rising!

Yes…at a rate of 7 inches per century.

Myth #5. Hurricanes are increasing!

US landfalling hurricanes are at their lowest intensity in a century. (Bonus fact: Accumulated Cyclone Energy is at a 30 year low!)

Myth #6. But…polar bears!

The polar bear population has quintupled in six decades and the USGS admits their numbers are near “historic highs.”

Myth #7. Climategate was hype and it’s been debunked.

The UK Information Commissioner found the climategate scientists guilty of breaking the law by hiding data from the public.

Myth #8. Models project a temperature increase of over 2 degrees in this century.

And these same models overestimated warming over the past 15 years by 400%.

Myth #9. Weather is not climate.

Actually, yes. And this is true when it’s hot outside, too.

Myth #10. Climate denial is a well-funded conspiracy.

Actually, the reverse. The global warming industry has generated over $140 billion in government grants, a $315 billion carbon market and is expected to generate 10s of trillions more in government-sponsored investment in the coming decades.

Global warming is a pristine example of the 'problem-reaction-solution' (Hegelian dialectic) tactic that is rolled out again and again by governments and the deep state in order to keep the populaces in check and pliable. In this scenario a problem is presented to the public, either real or contrived, for which a solution has already been developed. At the foundation of the problem-solution scenario is an agenda which is concealed from the public and which, on its own merits, is unlikely to be accepted by the public since it often involves interventionist foreign policy, the erosion of civil liberties, the expansion of surveillance and the police state, and/or the continued enrichment of extremely wealthy people. The public reaction to the proposed problem, which has been anticipated, will naturally be to demand that their government take immediate action which in turn allows the real agenda to be carried out.

I recently had a chat with a friend of mine about man-made global warming and his views were quite mainstream and predictable. Not only did he suggest that human induced global warming is a sound and scientifically proven threat that must be addressed immediately, he went so far as to suggest that it was acceptable for authorities to misrepresent the perceived problem as long as it is solved in the end. Disturbingly, such views are not uncommon.

While i appreciate the passion of environmental activists, such views are topical and dangerous. First of all, government isn't the business of solving problems -- quite the opposite -- and secondly, in the case of human impact upon our environment, many of the real problems are not being seriously addressed. The public at large often isn't aware of the real problems because the media doesn't discuss them and most people don't bother to do any serious independent research. Even the most basic questions go unasked. The public's comprehension of whatever problem is at hand is derived from what they are fed by their government and their mouthpiece, the mainstream media. The big tech companies further feed the group-think mentality through their heavily censored and politicized social media platforms. Even a significant portion of the alternative media has fallen victim to the group-think mentality.

The formerly trendy terminology, "global warming", has been swapped out by most of the media in favor of the more arbitrary "climate change", which of course is all the climate has ever done and will ever do. How many people have questioned why the terminology was changed?

Video: The Great Global Warming Swindle – Full Documentary HD

The earths climate has not warmed as the alarmists have predicted. This lack of warming was evidenced at least as far back as 2009 when a massive amount of data was leaked to the public from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (the reader should note the "governmental" component of the name). Phil Jones, former director of the IPCC, was "disappointed" by the apparent lack of warming. Jones, former Professor at the School of Environmental Sciences at the University of East Anglia, went so far as to hide data from the public which may have led to the 'Climategate' and email leak fiasco which seriously jeopardized the credibility of the IPCC, as it should have. In an email dated 16-Nov-1999 Jones wrote the following:

I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to
each series for the last 20 years (i.e. from 1981 onwards) and from 1961
for Keith's to hide the decline.

He was of course referring to the decline in the earths temperature. Does this kind of behavior sound like that of a scientist? Phil Jones stepped down from his position while an inquiry took place.

The University of East Anglia broke the law when dealing with requests for climate data, according to the UK Information Commissioner’s Office.

A statement from the office says emails leaked or stolen from the university's Climatic Research Unit reveal that Freedom of Information requests "were not dealt with as they should have been under the legislation".

The vast amount of CO2 in our environment is produced by rotting organic matter and our oceans. What we humans produce is trivial and most creditable climate scientists seem to agree that the tiny amount of CO2 produced by humans is not and cannot affect global temperature to any appreciable degree. Furthermore, when one looks at the historical data, it is apparent that temperature increase precedes the increase of CO2 which, in and of itself, presents a significant problem for the warming alarmists whose genesis was built upon precisely the opposite being true.

"The only place in the world where a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase... the only place in the world where that happens is in the IPCC computer models." -- Dr. Timothy F. Ball, Ph.D., in his interview with James Corbett, 15-Dec-2014.

One of the primary drivers of the earths temperature is our star. The distance from the earth to its sun is not static, nor is its solar activity, and this has a significant impact upon the temperature here on earth.

Solar activity relative to temperature
From the 'Summary of Peer-Reviewed Research', Global Warming Petition Project

If you move an object closer or further from a heat source, does it's temperature not change, just as it has been changing on the moon? Oh, i'm so sorry, i forgot; the change in the temperature of the moon resulted from us walking on it. Yes, one explanation fed to the public is that footprints and rover tracks have caused a temperature increase on the moon. I wonder what it is we humans did in order to affect climate change on Mars and Jupiter as well?

It is the Club of Rome and the Rockefellers who founded and finance the "grassroots" climate change movement. The Club of Rome, founded in 1968 at Rockefeller's estate in Ballagio, Italy, is a hugely important and influential body. The Club is consulted by various governments and it pushes agendas that affect the entire world, yet the public knows little or nothing about it.

Following are a few excerpts from an issue of the Executive Intelligence Review (EIR), 23-Jun-1981, titled 'The inside story of the Club of Rome' by Nancy Spannaus:

In his speech before 120 diplomats and government officials in Washington, D.C. this last week, EIR founder Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr. identified the major policymaking institutions of the advanced sector as the real problem leading the world toward World War III. No one could exemplify this judgement more clearly than Alexander King, cofounder of the Club of Rome, as he described the origins and workings of that institution to EIR in Paris last month.

King's Club of Rome is not a power in its own right. Many in the United States and developing sector would hardly recognize its name. Yet the institutional connections of this elite group, which began with a mere four individuals in 1968, make it one of the central coordinating bodies for the worldwide depopulation policy which ranges from mass sterilizations, to right- and left-wing terrorism, to fomenting of Salvador-like civil wars. It is the policies formulated in the Club of Rome, on behalf of the "black noble" families of Venice and Great Britain, which are then transmitted through leading institutions such as NATO, the OECD, and governments of nations like Canada.


Gradually the policy profile becomes clearer. "Many of us felt that the nation-states of especially Western Europe were not looking at the long term, but were bound up with short-term electoral cycles, and far too traditional." The meaning of that is directly linked to the views of the Council on Foreign Relations, whose member Lloyd Cutler, then personal counsel to President Carter, wrote an article on future governments last year. Governments will increasingly be absorbed with the business of managing scarcity, Cutler said, and therefore must be cut off from the demands of the constituencies.


King is interested in promoting zero growth through the rubric of the "technetronic society," as envisioned by such madmen as Zbigniew Brzezinski and the late H. G. Wells. How does this cohere with the so-called concern for the "humanization" of science reflected in the educational reforms and King's discussion of the policy review by the Nobel Foundation in 1968? Merely that an increasingly small group of technocrats will run the increasingly smaller core of industry, manipulate the overall population through the "information" society, and leave the bulk of the world's population without access to the tool of technological development.


King's description provides the reader with a remarkably clear image of how the Club of Rome functions to shape the policy directions of leading institutions. The Club of Rome is not at all interested in wielding power as such-that makes it too direct a target of opposition. It prefers to act "as a catalyst," leaving the appearance that the student rebellions, destabilizations, and economic retrenchment programs it is fostering are "just popping up spontaneously."


The so-called academic institutions are quite revealing. Key among them are IFIAS, the International Federation of Institutes of Advanced Studies, and IIA SA, the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis. These groupings, both technically oriented, are key penetrators of explicitly anti-Club of Rome governments and institutions, including especially the Soviet Union. Acting as impartial experts, their members are ruining dozens of nations, controlling international institutions like the United Nations, IMF, and World Bank, and perverting the best of scientific minds looking for a solution to underdevelopment.

As you may recall, former U.S. president Ronald Regan stated several times during his presidency how the people of the world might unite if we were faced with an alien threat. The capacity to manufacture alluring enemies seems to be in the DNA of the Club of Rome.

"Humans only truly unite when faced with a powerful external enemy" -- The Club of Rome, The First Global Revolution (1991, ISBN067171094X). From page 85 of the same book we find the following:

The common enemy as proposed by the Club of RomeIn searching for a new enemy to unite us, we suggested that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. In their totality and in their interactions, these phenomena constitute a common threat which demands the solidarity of all peoples. But in designating them as the enemy, we fall into the trap about which we have already warned, namely mistaking symptoms for causes. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and it is only through changed attitudes and behaviour that they can be overcome. The real enemy is humanity itself.

For more information about the Club of Rome, the modern environmental movement, and who is behind it, i suggest reading EIR Special Report: ‘CO₂ Reduction’ Is a Mass Murder Policy. From the introduction:

Read this report to learn the dark story of the modern environmentalist movement. Come to understand why the world’s greatest financial powers are eagerly supporting climate hysteria. Encounter data refuting the supposed certainty of a world cataclysm facing us in a dozen years, and gain a fuller appreciation of the complexity of the Earth’s climate, in the context of the mechanisms of the solar system and beyond.

And from the section titled Frontal Assault on Our Living Standard: Multibillionaires Are Financing the ‘Climate Protectors’!:

A closer look at the financing of Greta Thunberg, the Extinction Rebellion (XR) and Fridays for Future reveals that this movement is being funded by the richest people on Earth. Among the founders and periphery of the Climate Emergency Fund (CEF), are to be found Rory Kennedy, the daughter of Robert Kennedy; Aileen Getty, daughter of the late John Paul Getty; and the “philanthropist” Trevor Neilson, whose career has included various forms of collaboration with Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, George Soros and Ted Turner. According to the Guardian, the CEF has already transferred 500,000 euros to XR, which will soon be followed by “ten times as much” money. Breitbart has published internal documents from XR, revealing further five- and six-figure donations by Soros, the European Climate Foundation, the Tides Foundation, and Greenpeace Furka Holdings AG, among others.

Article: Peer-Reviewed Study Confirms Antarctica Hasn't Warmed In Past 70 Years | Climate Change Dispatch

Cancel all the claims by climate activists that global warming is decimating Antarctica.

A peer-reviewed study recently published in one of the most prominent science journals destroys one of the most frequently asserted claims by climate activists – that climate change is warming Antarctica and melting the Antarctic ice sheet.

This recent study confirms Antarctica has not warmed in the past 70 years and Antarctic ice cover is expanding rather than shrinking.

Writing in the journal Nature, scientists at Columbia University and the University of Victoria, British Columbia report, "The Antarctic continent has not warmed in the last seven decades, despite a monotonic increase in the atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases."

The scientists also observe that over the past several decades, "Antarctic sea ice area has modestly expanded."

The scientists report that the topography of Antarctica, and particularly the size and distribution of Antarctic mountain ranges, play a large role in Antarctica's stable (actually modestly cooling) environment.

The scientists published the image below, which shows how temperatures have changed during the past 30 years, compared to temperatures recorded between 1950 and 1980.
Clearly, the vast majority of Antarctica is cooling, with warming occurring over just a small portion of the continent that juts out into the Southern Ocean.

Antarctic temps

Article and video: Tony Heller on the insanity of global warming alarmism - Jerm Warfare

Tony Heller is a scientist and software engineer, and runs RealClimateScience.com, in which he analyses climate change claims and debunks propaganda and alarmism using historical data and trends.

I’ve spoken to a few great minds, such as solar physicist Valentina Zharkova and Greenpeace cofounder Patrick Moore, and the reality is that, as Tony reiterates,

  • humans do not influence Earth’s climate in any meaningful way;
  • climate change has occurred for millennia;
  • there is no evidence of significant sea-level rise;
  • extreme weather has not been all that extreme over the last century;
  • the Arctic and Antarctic are doing fine; and
  • the climate change narrative has nothing to do with climate change, and everything to do with fear and control and taxation.


Video: James Corbett Interview - The Climate Change Gambit & Its Transhumanist Roots

Video: Extinction Rebellion: £400 A Week To Protest, Bourgeoisie Climate Alarmism

Regarding the Rockefellers, the following quotes are from the Executive Summary of a report titled The Rockefeller Way which was prepared by The Energy & Environmental Legal Institute in 2016:

The Rockefellers are arguably the wealthiest and most powerful family in the history of the United States. For more than 100 years, they have shaped and directed America’s economic, financial, political, and public policy while simultaneously amassing one of the largest family empires in the modern era.

Most Americans hold the billionaire philanthropists in high esteem, associating the Rockefeller name with “oil” and “capitalism.” In reality, the Rockefellers are intent on controlling nearly every major institution in America, using philanthropy as a means of increasing their influence on the world stage under the guise of advancing various social causes.


Through the Rockefellers’ web of family foundations, universities, and institutions, as well as huge grants to other charities, they have gained unprecedented influence in healthcare, pharmaceuticals, agriculture, energy, and the environment.


As the most prolific benefactors of the climate activist movement, the Rockefellers’ impact on the energy industry sees no bounds, as the family’s objectives permeate throughout federal and state energy policy, as well as international social engineering globalist compacts such as Agenda 21. With the immeasurable influence that accompanies mass wealth and power, the Rockefeller empire has proven an effective puppeteer of advancing its main objective: the destruction of the fossil fuel industry to increase its clout over the energy sector.

To understand why the Rockefellers, who founded Standard Oil, would divest from the fossil fuel industry, i highly suggest watching the documentaries, How & Why Big Oil Conquered The World by James Corbett.

Video: How Big Oil Conquered The World

Video: Why Big Oil Conquered The World

There is an excellent paper titled Report From Iron Mountain which i suggest reading. While its authenticity is debatable, like The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, whether it is a fiction or not is irrelevant since it presents a disturbingly accurate picture of the world we live in today and why governments, economies and societies are operated as they are.

The primary purpose of the report was to answer the question of what would happen in the absence of war. The answer included the statement that a states ability to rule over its people is directly proportionate to its war-making capability. How many of those in power do you think are willing to give up that power? Do we not have a war economy?

The "man-made global warming" nonsense was fabricated as a distraction for the masses. Those with deficient analytical abilities will never see the Big Picture which includes Agenda 21, Codex Alimentarius, the United Nations, the World Health Organization, globalization, smart cities, technocracy, trans-humanism, eugenics, and think tanks like the Club of Rome and people like Bill Gates, George Soros and the Rockefellers. When you hear world leaders talking about a "New World Order", who do you think the beneficiaries will be?

Video: UN Agenda 21 Exposed - Rosa Koire

Video: Carbon Eugenics

The solutions to the problems the world is facing, whether manufactured or genuine, are foisted upon the public under the guise of impending doom, or as an improvement in the convenience in their lives. The true reasons however are so diametrically opposed to the propaganda that they can hardly be imagined by the masses, or are dismissed out of hand as "conspiracy theories" regardless of the fact that institutions like the Club of Rome publish their motives in black and white for all to see should they care to look.

Is starvation, disease and the lack of basic resources in third world countries not solvable in a matter of a few months or years? Do we not already posses the technology to virtually eliminate our use of fossil fuels in a way the benefits the human family instead of a few elitists? Do you think it's an accident that the quality of the education system in the U.S. ranks near the lowest among developed nations? Why is life expectancy falling in the U.S.? These questions have very clear answers but those answers are not shared with the public by governments or their mouthpieces in the mainstream media. Even the majority of the alternative media gets it wrong.

Instead of addressing the welfare of the planet and realizing the potential of the human species, governments happily spend billions and trillions on war and environmentally destructive industry as dictated by their masters, collectively known as the deep state.

If governments or the hypnotized masses wanted to address a real and pressing environmental threat, they might focus instead upon the environmental impact of manufactured wars financed by the international banking cartel or radiation produced from nuclear bomb testing or catastrophic disasters resulting from nuclear power plants like Fukushima and Chernobyl. Why doesn't the media report in depth about the ongoing disaster at the Daiichi nuclear power plant and the millions of gallons of radioactive water that's been dumped in the ocean since the accident? Why aren't these topics trending on Facebook instead of useless memes like "storm Area 51"?

From an article by Professor Michel Chossudovsky titled, Global Warming and the Ozone Layer: What’s More Dangerous, CO2 or Nuclear War?:

The Impact of Radioactivity on Climate

Are increased CO2 emissions from fossil fuel the only cause of climate change and environmental degradation?

In this article, we focus briefly on the impacts on the Ozone Layer resulting from the explosion of nuclear bombs, an issue which has not been addressed by the New Green Deal, as well as radiation from nuclear power plants.

Radiation from Nuclear Power Plants (Fukushima)

The dumping of highly radioactive water into the Pacific Ocean constitutes a potential trigger to a process of global radioactive contamination.

In this regard, since 2011, amply documented, marine life as well as species loss has been affected by the release of radioactive plutonium into the Pacific Ocean following the Fukushima-Daichi disaster.

Radioactive elements have not only been detected in the food chain in Japan, radioactive rain water has been recorded in California.

Nuclear Testing and Radioactive Fallout

The testing of nuclear weapons has been ongoing throughout the post WWII era. Among the more than 2000 tests, a large number of these tests are “not underground” or “underwater”, i.e the testing in the atmosphere.


The nitric oxides produced by the weapons could reduce the ozone levels in the Northern Hemisphere by as much as 30 to 70 percent. Such a depletion might produce changes in the Earth’s climate, and would allow more ultraviolet radiation from the sun through the atmosphere to the surface of the Earth, where it could produce dangerous burns and a variety of potentially dangerous ecological effects.

It has been estimated that as much as 5,000 tons of nitric oxide is produced for each megaton of nuclear explosive power. [...]

The 2008 Simulation of Nuclear Conflict. Impacts on Ozone Layer

In a major 2008 study by Michael Mills et al entitled Massive global ozone loss predicted following regional nuclear conflict (Academy of Sciences of the United States) a simulation was conducted (largely based on the concepts outlined in the TTPS 1983 study) of a nuclear conflict involving 100 Hiroshima sized bombs. The simulation confirmed that the nuclear explosions “could produce long-term damage to the ozone layer, enabling higher than “extreme” levels of ultraviolet radiation to reach the Earth’s surface, (see GSN, March 16, 2010).


Those concerns have largely been excluded from the Climate Debate and the Extinction Rebellion.

The Extinction Rebellion Protest Movement has its eyes riveted on the rising emissions of Carbon Dioxide (from fossil fuel), heralded as “the most dangerous and prevalent greenhouse gas”.

All other variables are excluded. Scientific lies by omission.

Children are being exploited and turned into unwitting political whores for the uneducated masses to dote over while the Big Picture remains well outside the narrow field of view projected by our televisions and radios and governments and corporate controlled social media platforms.

Pedophrasty: "Argument involving children to prop up a rationalization and make the opponent look like an asshole, as people are defenseless and suspend all skepticism in front of suffering children: nobody has the heart to question the authenticity or source of the reporting. Often done with the aid of pictures."

Video: Top 10 Reasons Why Greta Thunberg Is a Fraud - Red Ice TV

Video: Greta "i see carbon dioxide" Thunberg without a script: stumped when asked what her message is

From an article on Vigilant Citizen, The Elite Machine Behind Greta Thunberg:

In the matter of a few months, Greta Thunberg went from a lone girl protesting in front of the Swedish parliament to an international phenomenon. Although mass media is making it seem as if this meteoric rise to prominence happened organically, this is simply not true.

Behind Greta is a major machine, one that is controlled by major international actors and backed by major funds. This PR machine has allowed Greta to make the covers of magazines, become the subject of thousands of news articles while meeting with world leaders and giving speeches at elite places such as the United Nations.


In short, Greta is the face of a major marketing scheme – a tightly coordinated international effort to sell global warming under a specific lense: Through fear, panic, and urgency.

The perfect timing between Greta’s strike and the book release was not a coincidence. And Greta’s strike certainly did not go unnoticed.

On the very same day of the first strike, a picture of Greta was published on the Facebook page of We Don’t Have Time, a “social network for climate change”. The page is managed by Ingmar Rentzhog – a specialist in financial marketing.

Rentzhog is also a chairman of the Global Utmaning Board, a think tank that “promotes sustainable development within social, economic and environmental dimensions”. The Global Utmaning Board was founded by the Swedish politician and economist Kristina Persson, who is the daughter of the billionaire politician and entrepreneur Sven O. Persson.

Backed by this machine, Greta’s story garnered intense and immediate media attention in Sweden and, soon after, around the world. After a few months of weekly strikes, Greta took a year off from school to focus solely on climate change and began a tour of European cities.

During these events, a woman was often spotted “advising” Greta: Luisa-Marie Neubauer.

Neubauer is a member of ONE Campaign, an organization managed by Bill Gates and Bono, which is heavily funded by George Soros’ Open Society Foundation.

Through these powerful connections, Greta skyrocketed on the world stage. She gave speeches at Ted X talks, the European Parliament, the United Nations and she was even nominated for a Nobel Prize. She also met world leaders and celebrities across the world, including the Pope.


Although Greta might be genuinely concerned about climate change, those behind her have a much darker agenda: To create a generation of children riddled with anxiety and depression, giving the elite carte blanche for drastic measures, ranging from tax hikes to loss of personal liberty. And let’s not forget the main goal of it all (which is also the main goal of the elite organizations behind Greta): The creation of a single world government, ruled by the world elite.

From an article on the Collective Evolution website, Greta Thunberg Wants You To Be Scared & Big Business Will Make a Killing off It:

In the 1980s, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund became the sole authority of the global warming agenda. The fund boasts of being one of the first major global activists by citing its strong advocacy for both the 1988 formation of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the 1992 creation of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.

“The global elite have always benefited in some way shape or form from crises, we’ve seen it over and over again with war.

"What is important, however, is to acknowledge the role of the Rockefeller family –which historically was the architect of “Big Oil”– in supporting the Climate Change debate as well as the funding of scientists, environmentalists and NGOs involved in grassroots activism against “Big Oil” and the fossil fuel industry.

"Debate on the world’s climate is of crucial importance. But who controls that debate?

"There is an obvious contradictory relationship: Whereas “Big Oil” is the target of Global Warming activism, “Big Oil” through the Rockefeller Family and Rockefeller Brothers Trusts generously finance the Worldwide climate protest movement. Ask yourself Why?” – Michel Chossudovsky, Canadian economist and Professor Emeritus of Economics at the University of Ottawa

Exploiting uneducated, indoctrinated and, in the case of 16 year old Greta Thunberg, a mentally ill, co-opted actress born into a family of actors and actresses, is not only patently unethical, it is pure psychological warfare designed specifically to tug on the heart strings of the gullible masses and politicians who, even if bright enough to question such lunacy, are not going to be the ones opening themselves up to attack by challenging the claims of a passionate child. It is child abuse. This kind of deceitful and despicable propaganda utilizes animals to the same effect.

Video: Won't Someone Think of the Polar Bears?!? - Corbett Report

There are 31,000+ actual scientists with backgrounds and/or interests in climatology that have signed the following petition on the Global Warming Petition Project website. Why are they ignored?

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

I would encourage readers to review the Summary of Peer-Reviewed Research on the Global Warming Petition Project website.

More recently, 500 scientists have written to the UN to tell the body that "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.

If you want to understand why the data that the IPCC and other corporate and government funded institutions uses is heavily biased and outright wrong, visit the Real Climate Science and The Corbett Report websites.

In the following video, Tony Heller of Real Climate Science breaks down how climate data has been manipulated in order to fit a predetermined result.

Video: Data Tampering Complete : Mission Accomplished!

The latest version of NOAA's Global Historical Climatology Network, is the crowning achievement of a decades long effort to rewrite Earth's history and hide the heat of the past.

"Man-made global warming" is a huge cash cow for the people pushing it. From the article, Al Gore Made Nearly $200 Million from the Global Warming Scam -- Likely to Become the World's First 'Carbon Billionaire':

Ten years after the release of Al Gore's Inconvenient Truth, none of the film's dire climate change predictions have come to pass.

However, in the decade since the documentary was produced, its creator has raked in millions of dollars from the entire "global warming" scam, and is now poised to become "our first carbon billionaire."

In the 2006 film, Gore made a number of wild claims regarding what we could expect to see happening over the next few years due to global warming, but virtually all of his alarmist prognostications have turned out to be false.


"Gore's wealth went from $700,000 in 2000 to an estimated net worth of $172.5 million by 2015 thanks to his environmentalist activism. Gore and the former chief of Goldman Sachs Asset Management made nearly $218 million in profits between 2008 and 2011 from a carbon trading company they co-founded. By 2008, Gore was able to put a whopping $35 million into hedge funds and other investments."

Yes, we are facing serious environmental problems and yes, these problems must be addressed sooner rather than later, but the think tanks and governments and billionaires that are founding, funding and pushing many of the the "solutions" are not serious people and are not interested in solving them. They have other plans. As George Carlin said, "It's a big club and you ain't in it".

Video: George Carlin - The big club

"Man-made global warming" is a politicized, fictionalized and monetized side show tossed into the invisibly barred cages for the masses to debate. It keeps them occupied while the real agendas are played out unnoticed except by those few who are willing research beyond the clickbait headlines and who are endowed with an attention span which exceeds that of a goldfish.

Article: Green Policy Expert Admits: 'Sorry, But I Cried Wolf on Climate Change' - 21st Century Wire

On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologise for the climate scare we created over the past 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.


Here are some facts few people know:

  • Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”
  • The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”
  • Climate change is not making natural disasters worse
  • Fires have declined 25 per cent around the world since 2003
  • The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska
  • The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California
  • Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany and France since the mid-1970s
  • The Netherlands became rich, not poor, while adapting to life below sea level
  • We produce 25 per cent more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter
  • Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change
  • Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels, and
  • Preventing future pandemics requires more, not less, “industrial” agriculture.

Article: U.N. Warns of Devastating Environmental Side Effects of Electric Car Boom

While the shift to electric cars reflects ongoing efforts to reduce the world's dependence on fossil fuels, the UN warns that the raw materials used to produce electric car batteries are highly concentrated in a small number of countries and their extraction and refinement pose a serious threat to the environment.

Article: Modern Grand Solar Minimum will lead to terrestrial cooling

In this editorial I will demonstrate with newly discovered solar activity proxy-magnetic field that the Sun has entered into the modern Grand Solar Minimum (2020–2053) that will lead to a significant reduction of solar magnetic field and activity like during Maunder minimum leading to noticeable reduction of terrestrial temperature.

Article: Embarrassing Predictions Haunt the Global-Warming Industry

Warnings have been issued for many decades now regarding catastrophic climate change that forecasted certain trends or occurrences that we should already have witnessed. Yet such predictions have turned out to be very, very wrong. This was certainly the case with the alarmist predictions of the 1960s and ’70s that man’s activities on Earth were causing a catastrophic cooling trend that would bring on another ice age. And it is also the case with the more recent claims about catastrophic global warming.

Video: Climate Hustle

Scorching temperatures. Melting ice caps. Killer hurricanes and tornadoes. Disappearing polar bears.

The end of civilization as we know it!

Are emissions from our cars, factories, and farms causing catastrophic climate change? Is there a genuine scientific consensus? Or is man-made “global warming” an overheated environmental con job being used to push for increased government regulations and a new “Green” energy agenda?

CLIMATE HUSTLE, reveals the history of climate scares including global cooling, debunks outrageous claims about temperatures, extreme weather, and the so-called “consensus;” exposes the increasingly shrill calls to “act immediately before it’s too late,” and in perhaps the film’s most important section, profiles key scientists who used to believe in climate alarm but have since converted to skepticism.

Video: An Inconsistent Truth (2012)

Interviewing multiple scientists on climate change, not only does this film cover the science and the facts, it explores the culture of the global warming movement and its motivation, and who stands to make millions.

Video: How Green Finance is Monopolizing the Planet with Whitney Webb

Whitney Webb returns to the program to discuss her recent work on the "green" transformation of the global financial system. From NACs to GFANZ, Webb and Corbett break down the latest attempt to monopolize the world's natural resources and how this financial scam represents the next step along the path to the Great Reset, Agenda 2030 and the 4th Industrial Revolution.

Video: Arctic Report Card

Further reading:


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *