Tag: climategate

EU to Scrap 2035 Combustion-Engine Cars Prohibition, as Even Brussels Establishment Begins to Covertly Adopt Rightwing Policies

EU Commission walks back some suicidal ‘green’ policies.

The measure of the success by the right-wingers in Europe expresses itself not only by the high popularity numbers that the anti-Globalist parties are showing – leading in Germany, France and the UK.

There’s also the fact that leftist-liberal-Globalist politicians all over the continent are rushing to present some semblance of policy changes that mimic the successful right-wing ideas that deeply resonate with the voters.

The two most relevant examples deal with unchecked mass migration and ‘climate change/Net zero’ lunatic policies.

This basically demonstrates that patriotic forces come armed with better ideas and more effective policies.

To see the EU now defending the creation of ‘return hubs’ for illegal migrants – a clear copy of UK’s former PM Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda plan – is very significant.

And then, we have the promised EU ban on new combustion-engine cars starting in 2035, which has just been ditched, in one of the EU’s biggest walk-backs from its ‘green’ policies in recent years.

Reuters reported:

“The move, which still needs approval from EU governments and the European Parliament, would allow continued sales of some non-electric vehicles. Carmakers in regional industrial powerhouse Germany and in Italy had sought easing of the rules.”

Keep reading

Climate Change Forever

Earth’s weather and climate have always been in a perpetual state of flux. These changes are driven by shifting ratios of land and sea over geological epochs, tectonic forces, and external influences such as the Sun and the planets — “wandering stars” — of our solar system. Science has significantly advanced our understanding of the intimate relationship between the Sun’s energy outputs and Earth’s weather and climate systems.

However, it is troubling that anti-science organizations and global governments are now promoting the notion that Earth’s climate must remain static and unchanging. These groups argue that the climate is deteriorating due to rising carbon dioxide levels since the onset of the Industrial Revolution some 240-260 years ago. This belief is pushed despite the lack of direct or indirect evidence proving that carbon dioxide is causing dangerous global warming. Nonetheless, these elements have succeeded in convincing a largely disengaged public that we must stabilize Earth’s climate by reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide, without defining what concentration is desirable or specifying the “correct” global temperature to maintain.

On July 9, from the garden of Laudato Si’ Village, Pope Leo XIV delivered a homily stating:

We must pray for the conversion of so many people, inside and outside of the church, who still don’t recognize the urgency of caring for our common home. … We see so many natural disasters in the world, nearly every day and in so many countries, that are in part caused by the excesses of being human, with our lifestyle.

The pope also issued a warning ahead of the September 1 World Day of Prayer for the Care of Creation:

Our earth is being ravaged. On all sides, injustice, violations of international law and the rights of peoples, grave inequalities and the greed that fuels them are spawning deforestation, pollution and the loss of biodiversity. Extreme natural phenomena caused by climate changes provoked by human activity are growing in intensity and frequency.

I feel compelled to remind readers of what I wrote when the encyclical Laudato Si’ was released by the late Pope Francis 10 years ago: “Only around 2% of the encyclical addresses climate change — 4 out of 246 items — and even these contain half-truths. Half-truths are the enemy of science and must be eradicated.”

Keep reading

Another Faulty ‘Climate Change’ Study Gets Busted

This time of year, it’s not unusual for parents of younger elementary school kids to start having discussions of when their son or daughter will get wise to the reality of Santa Claus. At some point, one parent may say to another, “How old were you when you quit believing?” 

That brings me to the same question, different myth. How old were you when you quit believing in man-made climate change? Or man-made global warming? Or man-made global cooling? 

Before going any further, since we do have our share of lib readers, I want to make one thing absolutely clear to them before the fake misinterpretations happen. Conservatives don’t dispute that the client shifts day to day. That’s called “the weather.” And we don’t dispute that the planet’s climate isn’t constantly evolving. We are not Ice Age deniers. 

But when you come out every presidential cycle and predict the end of the world in the next ten years (conveniently the time it takes for a run-up campaign and two presidential terms), we’re skeptical. Not because we’re scientists or science experts. Rather, it’s because we are used to being lied to, and we know how that goes. The tip-off for us, usually, is when all of your climate solutions focus on raising taxes and increasing government restrictions on American citizens. Then later, when we see all this money going to NGOs and a whole “climate change” economy, it kinda feels like a massive grift. 

So excuse us if we’re nonplussed when we see that the journal Nature has had to retract a 2024 study that sought to estimate the amount of harm global warming will do to the global economy in the decades to come. I mean, the very premise of the study already raises a red flag. Did the study seek to estimate actual climate impacts on the economy, and how do you do that? Or did it seek to estimate the impact climate alarmists would have on the global economy through their own push for increased regulation and higher taxes? 

That’s like when people talk about how the pandemic impacted the economy, when in fact it was government’s overreaction to a novel cold virus that actually devastated the economy. 

As for Nature, here’s what happened. Researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) contributed a paper to Nature, and it was published April 17, 2024 under the title “The Economic Commitment of Climate Change.” The paper projected the economic costs of climate change by the middle of this century by relying on historical temperature, precipitation and economic data. 

On Dec. 3 of this year, not even two weeks ago, Nature officially announced the paper was retracted, because “post-publication reviews” found the results were so off-target that a simple correction of the paper’s errors wouldn’t suffice. 

In other words, the paper was a joke, and once it saw the light of day, some smart people caught some glaring errors, and Nature couldn’t cover for it. 

Keep reading

At the end of the climate change illusion lies the poverty trap

The German government has shifted into hyper-mode to defend its green patronage economy. To pay for it, heirs, high performers and savers are being drafted into service. The end of the eco-socialist nightmare will be convulsive and chaotic.

On Friday, the federal cabinet agreed to introduce a new EV subsidy. Roughly three billion euros are set to flow into this bloodless market segment over the coming years – a drop in the bucket compared to the vast sums used to artificially keep the green patronage complex alive. But it is a signal.

A Negatively Sloped Learning Curve

The decision joins a long list of political misfires in recent months – a list unlikely to end with subsidised industrial electricity, heat pumps or refinancing packages for wind turbines. The state simply has too much money at its disposal to be forced to abandon its wasteful, destructive project.

For Bavaria’s minister-president Markus Söder, the revival of this failed subsidy instrument was cause for a small celebration. He promised a “huge boost” for the domestic market, claiming state intervention would secure value creation and jobs – a thoroughly “Söderized” view of reality.

Once again, Söder proved that his personal learning curve has flattened into a downward-sloping line – a phenomenon broadly visible across European politics.

Debt Union And Professional Manipulators

Germany’s EV subsidy stands pars pro toto for the broader European situation. Public debt is exploding across nearly all EU member states. Next year, Germany will post net new debt of around 5.6% of GDP – placing it among Europe’s top debt creators.

This figure is honest – and shows the true fiscal position once the government’s accounting tricks, exemptions, “special funds” and skyrocketing municipal debts are properly added back in.

France and the UK look equally grim. Even once-disciplined Finland is stumbling toward 90% debt-to-GDP with a similarly large deficit. It can no longer be denied: Europe is trapped in a debt spiral.

Schäuble and the Troika

How times have changed. Some may recall the theatrically staged visits of former German finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble and the Troika, who – with maximal media firepower – pinned the sovereign debt crisis squarely on Greece.

In reality, it was perfect camouflage – designed to divert attention from the bailout of Germany’s banking and insurance sector, which had sailed into heavy waters due to political mismanagement.

The public was never meant to see what is now obvious: the EU has degenerated into a debt club trying to execute its ideological mega-projects – like the green transition – through a credit pump, with taxes and inflation serving as the extraction mechanism from ordinary citizens.

Heirs, asset holders, small business owners and the productive middle will pay the bill. The emotionally charged debate over inheritance taxes – and the faux rhetoric about “fairness” – reveals that the political class is now openly planning the confiscation of accumulated private capital.

Inflation as a Hidden Tax

The permanent crisis will inevitably lead to a growing state apparatus – a debt-financed Leviathan that accelerates the inflation spiral with every intervention. No one is supposed to notice how quickly money loses value in this environment. The seigniorage – the hidden gain – goes to the biggest debtor of all: the state.

With every new green initiative, every EV subsidy, every publicly funded wind turbine, the bill rises. Only the delayed price effect helps politicians obscure cause and effect and decontextualise the economic damage of their intervention.

Von der Leyen, Merz, Macron & Co. rely heavily on this effect. They hope the majority of voters never add one and one together – and never question the soft-edged tax squeeze and deliberate erosion of their savings.

Keep reading

India Plans Coal Expansion Through 2047 Despite Supposed “Climate Goals”

It’s funny how no one actually seems to care about climate change malarky when there isn’t an environmentalist Democrat in the White House to try and impress…

Along that vein, India is weighing a major expansion of coal power that could extend new plant construction until at least 2047, according to people familiar with ongoing discussions between the power ministry and the government policy think tank NITI Aayog. The move would represent a sharp departure from earlier projections that expected additions to peak around 2035, Bloomberg reported this week.

The talks align with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s push to make the country energy independent and reclassify it as a developed nation by its 100th year of independence. With domestic reserves expected to last a century, officials see coal as the most reliable option to support that goal. Total capacity could reach 420 gigawatts by 2047 — roughly an 87% increase from today, the people said.

Keep reading

Climate Groups Falter, Bill Gates Recalibrates, But Al Gore Soldiers On

It’s been an interesting few weeks on the climate hysteria front. Organizations associated with climate alarmism have recently found themselves engulfed in turmoil. Bill Gates has recanted earlier predictions of gloom and doom. But the Father of Climate Panic, former Vice President Al Gore, remains steadfast, if increasingly marginalized.

Let’s start with probably the best-known environmental organization in the world, the Sierra Club. According to a recent New York Times report, the club thrived when it seemed laser-focused on the environment. But then, during Donald Trump’s first term, “its leaders sought to expand far beyond environmentalism, embracing other progressive causes. Those included racial justice, labor rights, gay rights, immigrant rights and more.”

As a result of the effort to morph into a catch-all for a myriad of social justice causes, the Times noted that by 2022 the Sierra Club “had exhausted its finances and splintered its coalition.” By August, according to the Times, the number of Sierra Club “champions” – “a group that included dues-paying members as well as supporters who had donated, signed petitions or participated in events” – was “down about 60 percent from its high in 2019.”

Despite the upheaval, few lessons seem learned. The Times noted that “in recent weeks, supporters who clicked on the group’s website for ‘current campaigns’ were presented with 131 petitions, some out of date, like calls to support clean-energy funding that Mr. Trump has already gutted, or to support a voting-rights bill that died in 2023.”

Asked whether he had any regrets, the club’s current board president, Patrick Murphy, summoned the spirit of Kamala “not a thing comes to mind” Harris and replied, “I have a hard time pinpointing how I believe we should have made different choices.” Alrighty then.

Also falling on hard times is 350.org, which first gained notoriety for its successful efforts to block the Keystone XL oil pipeline during the Obama administration. As Politico reported this month, the group “will ‘temporarily suspend programming’ in the U.S. and other countries amid funding woes.”

Executive Director Anne Jellema said 350.org “had suffered a 25 percent drop in income for its 2025 and 2026 fiscal years, compelling it to halt operations,” and would subsequently reduce its global staff by about 30 percent.

“The group had endured economic hardship over the years, including problems of financial management and several rounds of layoffs that eroded its influence,” Politico reported. Jellema said the organization was facing its challenges “with our ambition intact.” But apparently not much else.

An implosion of a different kind is from the world of “green banking.” NBA star Kawhi Leonard’s endorsement contract with the pro-environment group Aspiration is alleged to have been a vehicle for Leonard and the Los Angelas Clippers to skirt NBA salary cap rules.

As reported by ESPN, Aspiration Partners was a company founded in 2013 to provide “socially-conscious and sustainable banking services and investment products.” Their slogan was, “Do Well. Do Good.” Catchy. Operating like an environmentally conscious digital bank, Aspiration promised to “never fund fossil fuel projects like pipelines, oil rigs and coalmines.” The company’s products included “an option to plant a tree with every purchase roundup.”

According to ESPN, Clippers owner Steve Ballmer invested $50 million in Aspiration. The subsequent allegation is that Leonard signed a $28 million endorsement deal with Aspiration “as a way to circumvent the league’s salary cap.” Ballmer has denied any knowledge of the deal, according to the report. Leonard has also denied any wrongdoing.

ESPN reported that Aspiration filed for bankruptcy in March, and co-founder Joe Sanberg pleaded guilty to two counts of wire fraud after “federal prosecutors said Sanberg defrauded investors and lenders out of $248 million by fraudulently obtaining loans, falsifying bank and brokerage statements and concealing that he was the source of some revenue booked by the company.”

The NBA is investigating. How many trees Aspiration planted is unknown.

Keep reading

How Epstein Channeled Race Science and ‘Climate Culling’ Into Silicon Valley’s AI Elite

ewly released Jeffrey Epstein files reveal that an apocalyptic worldview – blending racial hierarchy, genetic “optimisation” and even climate-driven population culling – was circulating inside the elite, founder-linked networks shaping Silicon Valley’s rise.

These ideas appear most starkly in the convicted sex offender’s private exchanges with the AI theorist Joscha Bach, and sit alongside the longtermist and transhumanist philosophies championed by other influential figures in the same circles.

Joscha Bach, whose work on cognitive architectures and machine consciousness has shaped advanced AI research and influenced figures such as Elon Musk, appears in the documents engaging Epstein in sweeping discussions about race, hierarchy, genetic engineering and the supposed ‘utility’ of mass death, including under conditions of climate stress.

Meanwhile, another philosopher whose ideas underpin much of modern longtermism and whose work helped shape Silicon Valley’s early thinking on artificial general intelligence, Nick Bostrom, moved through the same intellectual and institutional ecosystem.

His published arguments on eugenics, selective population strategies and existential “optimisation” reveal a parallel strand of thinking within that milieu, financed and legitimised by many of the same networks.

Both men were also financed by Epstein.

Taken together, the Bach correspondence and the longtermist ideas circulating in this environment show that human hierarchy, population thinning and genetic destiny were not fringe provocations, but part of the ambient intellectual air inside the circles designing the next generation of AI.

Keep reading

Major Climate Crisis Study Retracted Over “Inaccuracies” As Doom Narrative Collapses

A widely hyped climate-doom study published in Nature in April 2024, and then amplified by left-wing corporate media outlets (CNN, Bloomberg, you name it), desperate to push the “green” narrative and weirdly obsessed with driving Americans into a state of severe climate shock, has now been embarrassingly retracted.

On Wednesday, Nature retracted the study titled “The economic commitment of climate change“ after economists discovered that flawed data from Uzbekistan had heavily skewed the results.

If Uzbekistan data were excluded, the paper’s eye-popping forecast of a 62% collapse in global economic output by 2100 under unabated emissions would only fall to 23%.

The retraction should intensify the debate over how accurate long-term climate forecasts actually are – and by our estimates, Al Gore, thirty years and counting, is still very wrong.

For 20 months, the study was touted by Bloomberg, CNN, Forbes, and countless MSM outlets, and even cited by the World Bank and the OECD. This helped manufacture a wildly misleading narrative of an impending climate catastrophe.

The study’s authors, led by Leonie Wenz of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, and Maximilian Kotz, a postdoctoral researcher at the institute, wrote in a retraction notice that the issues were “too substantial for a correction,” forcing the paper’s withdrawal.”

Keep reading

They have been pushing for carbon labelling on food for years – why?

Carbon food labels are rapidly moving from experimental initiatives to a mainstream trend, with significant developments indicating they are poised to become widespread. The global market for carbon-labelled packaged meals is projected to reach USD 1,252 million by 2035, reflecting a growing consumer demand for climate-conscious food choices.

In a move that could reshape the food industry’s supply chains, Unilever announced in June a comprehensive plan to introduce carbon footprint labels on all 70,000 of its products, a major step toward transparency and sustainability, though a specific timeline for full rollout has not been clarified.

While the UK government currently has no plans for mandatory eco-labelling, industry-led schemes are gaining momentum, with companies like Oatly, Quorn and Just Eat already implementing carbon labels on products and menus.

Related: These Food Companies Put Their Carbon Footprint On Their Packaging, Ecochain, 25 June 2025

Voluntary initiatives are expanding across various sectors, including universities (e.g., Bournemouth University Food) and event venues (e.g., ExCeL London), where carbon footprint information is being integrated into menus and food service.

And carbon labelling fever is hitting Europe as well.  As part of its Single Market for Green Products Initiative, which was launched in 2013, the European Commission is advancing a mandatory Product Environmental Footprint (“PEF”) labelling scheme to standardise carbon and environmental data across food and other goods, creating a unified system across the European Union. 

PEF is supported by Product Environmental Footprint Category Rules (“PEFCRs”), which standardise calculations for specific product groups such as beer, clothing, IT equipment, leather and pet food.

The pilot phase of the PEF ran from 2013 to 2018.  From 2019, the project has been in the “transition phase” focusing on monitoring the implementation of existing PEFCRs, developing new ones and advancing methodological developments. The “transition phase” is expected to be concluded this year.  “After the transition phase, the [Environmental Footprint] methods are expected to enter a phase of more stability and gradually wider application,” the European Commission says.

Keep reading

He Says No Threat Exists, Then Tries to Block the Sun

Gates Tones Down the Scare Talk, Then Reaches for the Sky Controls

For years, Bill Gates pushed the idea that climate change ranks among the biggest challenges facing mankind. He wrote books about it and toured the world, urging nations to spend trillions on new energy systems. He stood with the crowd that warned of danger at every turn.

Then, without warning, he released a memo claiming that climate change won’t end humanity, calling for calm thinking and saying fear does more harm than good.

People who never bought into climate panic thought he had finally caught up with reality.

Afterwards, they watched him push the strangest idea yet: supporting research to dim the sun. Reports laid it out in detail, while describing his plan to scatter sunlight away from Earth.

What better way of describing a man who now downplays climate danger: funding a plan meant for a world on the verge of collapse.

Like Stephen Curry switching hands, it reads like someone who switched talking points without changing direction.

He Calms His Voice Yet Builds a Project Fit for Panic

“Stop panicking!” cries the man who panicked for years. He is claiming the world will adapt, while telling leaders to focus on fighting poverty and disease instead of chasing perfect temperature goals. A message that many people believe sounds reasonable.

Hidden behind that tone is an idea borrowed from a plot in a climate disaster movie. Solar geoengineering aims to weaken sunlight, an idea Gates has backed for nearly 20 years through scientists who want to spray particles into the sky to reflect the light. Gates supports research that many climate activists call reckless.

A strange picture emerges from his pivot: he’s telling people to relax while he pays for a project built for a world on fire.

As his words drift one way, while his money drifts the other, what path do you think people will follow?

Earth Needs Steady Light More Than It Needs Tech Experiments

Plants don’t vote, trees don’t care about debates, and algae in the ocean don’t follow climate politics. There’s one significant thing they share: they all need sunlight.

Algae alone produce a large share of the oxygen we breathe. That tiny life floating near the surface depends on a stable source of light to survive. Shade the planet, and algae shut down, breaking food chains, changing fish stocks, and sliding the weather balance out of whack. Heck, even a slight drop in sunlight worsens harvests, shifts rainfall, and hurts the poorest regions first.

Gates fixes software issues with updates, solving them in days, while mistakes with sunlight can last for generations, if we’re lucky.

His plan treats the Sun like a variable light switch he can dial back when he feels like it.

Keep reading