Tag: climategate

Politico Deeply Disappointed That Democrats Are ‘Retreating’ on Climate Change – Especially in California

The liberal outlet Politico is deeply disappointed that Democrats seem to be ‘retreating’ on the issue of climate change, especially in deep blue California.

This completely ignores the fact that over the last six months, we have seen leftists set electric vehicles and dealerships on fire, not to mention the car fires in the anti-ICE riots in Los Angeles. Politico realizes that people saw these things happen, don’t they?

How can anyone take the left seriously on their pet issue of climate change ever again? Their concerns obviously go right out the window the moment they want to start burning cars to make a political point.

From Politico:

Democrats retreat on climate: ‘It’s one of the more disappointing turnabouts’

SACRAMENTO, California — Donald Trump is coming for California’s signature climate policies — and so is California.

Stung by the party’s sweeping losses in November and desperate to win back working-class voters, the Democratic Party is in retreat on climate change. Nowhere is that retrenchment more jarring than in the nation’s most populous state, a longtime bastion of progressive politics on the environment.

In the past two weeks alone, California Democrats have retrenched on environmental reviews for construction projects, a cap on oil industry profits and clean fuel mandates. Elected officials are warning that ambitious laws and mandates are driving up the state’s onerous cost of living, echoing longstanding Republican arguments and frustrating some allies who say Democrats are capitulating to political pressure.

“California was the vocal climate leader during the first Trump administration,” said Chris Chavez, deputy policy director for the Coalition for Clean Air. “It’s questionable whether or not that leadership is still there.”

Keep reading

Media’s perverse focus on heat deaths is leading to wrongheaded climate policies

Across the United States and Europe, the media are warning of dangerously high temperatures.

“Extreme Heat Is Breaking America,” warns the New York Times. “Lethal heat is Europe’s new climate reality,” adds Politico.

It’s an annual routine: Expect to be inundated with alarming stories about heat domes, heat deaths and heat waves, pointing to the urgency of climate action.

But this narrative will tell you only a misleading fraction of the story.

The impacts of heat waves are stark and immediately visible, meaning they are photogenic and coverage is click-worthy.

Heat kills within just a few days of temperatures going up, because it swiftly alters the electrolytic balance in weaker, often older people.

These deaths are tragic and often preventable, and we hear about them every summer.

But the media seldom report on deaths from cold.

Cold kills slowly — often over months. In low temperatures, the body constricts peripheral blood vessels to conserve heat, raising blood pressure.

But deaths from cold far outnumber those from heat. The most comprehensive Lancet study shows that while heat kills nearly half a million people globally each year, cold kills more than 4.5 million — i.e., nine times more.

Yet, perversely, global media instead write nine times more stories about heat waves than cold waves.

We deserve to know which is the bigger threat.

We should know, for example, that the United States sees more than 80,000 deaths from cold each year, vastly outweighing its 8,000 heat deaths.

In Latin America and Europe, cold deaths outweigh heat deaths 4 to 1. In Africa, astonishingly, it’s 46 to 1.

Even in India — where the Western media have fixated on extreme heat this year — cold deaths outnumber those from heat 7 to 1.

Keep reading

Peter Thiel Warns: One-World Government A Greater Threat Than AI Or Climate Change

In a wide-ranging interview on the future and global existential risks, billionaire technology investor Peter Thiel raised alarms not only about familiar threats like nuclear war, climate change, and artificial intelligence but also about what he sees as a more insidious danger: the rise of a one-world totalitarian state. Speaking to the New York Times’ Ross Douthat, Thiel argued that the default political response to global crises—centralized, supranational governance—could plunge humanity into authoritarianism.

Thiel, co-founder of PayPal and Palantir, shared his worries using examples from dystopian sci-fi stories. “There’s a risk of nuclear war, environmental disaster, bioweapons, and certain types of risks with AI,” Thiel explained to Douthat, suggesting that the push for global governance as a solution to these threats could culminate in a “bad singularity” – a one-world state that stifles freedom under the guise of safety.

Thiel critiqued what he described as a reflexive call for centralized control in times of peril.

“The default political solution people have for all these existential risks is one-world governance,” Thiel observed, pointing to proposals for a strengthened United Nations to control nuclear arsenals or global compute governance to regulate AI development, including measures to “log every single keystroke” to prevent dangerous programming. Such solutions, the investor warned, risk creating a surveillance state that sacrifices individual liberty for security.

Keep reading

EPA faces scientific backlash: Climate skeptics challenge 40-year consensus

On June 11, climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen of MIT and Princeton physicist Dr. William Happer delivered a 45-page critique to the EPA opposing proposed carbon capture regulations for power plants. Their blunt assertions—that climate policies rest on dubious science, wasted subsidies and a biased process—mark a critical moment in a decades-long debate. Their challenge reverberates with historical context: the first Senate hearing on global warming was in 1988, and is now widely criticized by skeptics as a setup. As the Biden administration accelerates climate regulations, Happer and Lindzen argue that trillions in subsidies and emission targets lack scientific grounding, urging a return to empirical rigor.

EPA’s carbon capture rules draw fire as “science-based” attack

The EPA’s May 2023 proposal mandates that coal- and gas-fired plants capture 90% of CO? emissions by 2038 or cease operations. Happer and Lindzen’s filing calls this a costly misstep, asserting that reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs) has negligible climate impact and jeopardizes global food security. Their May 2025 paper, “Physics Demonstrates That Increasing Greenhouse Gases Cannot Cause Dangerous Warming,” argues that CO?’s warming effect has been overstated due to flawed models and agenda-driven consensus. They emphasize a counterintuitive truth: higher atmospheric CO? levels could boost global crop yields by 40%, benefiting millions while producing “trivial” warming.

“Eliminating fossil fuels would be disastrous for the world’s poorest,” Lindzen warned. “Instead of taxing carbon, policymakers should trust markets and basic physics.”

The 1988 hearing that fueled the climate hubbub

The EPA’s current regulations trace their lineage to Congress’s 1988 hearings, a pivotal moment now scrutinized for manipulation. Led by Sen. Timothy Wirth (D-CO) and Sen. Al Gore (D-TN), the hearings coincided with Washington’s hottest recorded day—a deliberate scheduling choice, according to Wirth’s 2015 memoir. “We opened the windows overnight to ruin the room’s air conditioning,” Wirth disclosed, ensuring attendees were sweltering and receptive to climate alarmism.

Critics argue this marked a broader shift: replacing scientific debate with “consensus ideology.” The hearings excluded dissenting voices like former NOAA scientist Dr. Patrick Michaels, who was barred days before testifying despite years of Senate collaboration. Dr. Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute called the proceedings “a press conference in disguise,” setting a pattern of “censored science” that persists today.

Keep reading

EU plans to add carbon credits to new climate goal, document shows

The European Commission is set to propose counting carbon credits bought from other countries towards the European Union’s 2040 climate target, a Commission document seen by Reuters showed.

The Commission is due to propose a legally binding EU climate target for 2040 on July 2.

The EU executive had initially planned a 90% net emissions cut, against 1990 levels, but in recent months has sought to make this goal more flexible, in response to pushback from governments including Italy, Poland and the Czech Republic, concerned about the cost.

An internal Commission summary of the upcoming proposal, seen by Reuters, said the EU would be able to use “high-quality international credits” from a U.N.-backed carbon credits market to meet 3% of the emissions cuts towards the 2040 goal.

The document said the credits would be phased in from 2036, and that additional EU legislation would later set out the origin and quality criteria that the credits must meet, and details of how they would be purchased.

The move would in effect ease the emissions cuts – and the investments required – from European industries needed to hit the 90% emissions-cutting target. For the share of the target met by credits, the EU would buy “credits” from projects that reduce CO2 emissions abroad – for example, forest restoration in Brazil – rather than reducing emissions in Europe.

Proponents say these credits are a crucial way to raise funds for CO2-cutting projects in developing nations. But recent scandals have shown some credit-generating projects did not deliver the climate benefits they claimed.

Keep reading

Eco-Hypocrites Take Hundreds Of Private Jets To Bezos Wedding

Around a hundred private jets carrying celebrities have descended on Italy to deliver eco-hypocrites including Leonardo DiCaprio, Oprah Winfrey and Bill Gates to the wedding of tech billionaire Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sanchez.

Bezos is holding a three day event, yes three days, in Venice at a cost of somewhere in the region of $50-100 million.

While the exact same people lecture you about taking the occasional economy flight for a family getaway, they’re literally chartering their own carbon spewing flights just for themselves to attend a piss up.

Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez are getting married in Venice, and the three-day wedding celebration will bring in nearly 100 private jets and a guest list full of billionaires and celebrities, including Oprah and Leonardo DiCaprio, Mercury News reports.

Streets have been closed, boats rerouted, and security teams stationed across the city for the event, taking place from June 26-28. Now, people who live there — and plenty of others online — are calling the whole thing over-the-top and extremely out of touch.

Keep reading

1900 Scientists Say ‘Climate Change Not Caused By CO2’ – The Real Environment Movement Was Hijacked

Millions of people worldwide are concerned about climate change and believe there is a climate emergency. For decades we have been told by the United Nations that Carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from human activity are causing disastrous climate change. In 2018, a UN IPCC report even warned that ‘we have 12 years to save the Earth’, thus sending millions of people worldwide into a frenzy.

Thirty-five years ago, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the (World Meteorological Organization) WMO established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide scientific advice on the complex topic of climate change. The panel was asked to prepare, based on available scientific information, a report on all aspects relevant to climate change and its impacts and to formulate realistic response strategies. The first assessment report of the IPCC served as the basis for negotiating the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Governments worldwide have signed this convention, thereby, significantly impacting the lives of the people of the world.

However, many scientists dispute with the UN-promoted man-made climate change theory, and many people worldwide are confused by the subject, or are unaware of the full facts. Please allow me to provide some information you may not be aware of.

Keep reading

GOP Senators Present Evidence China Bankrolls Environmentalist Lawsuits To Cripple U.S. Power

Senators met yesterday for a subcommittee hearing to discuss claims that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), foreign donors, and leftist legal activism are behind a “systematic campaign” to dismantle American energy dominance.

Throughout the hearing, Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, emphasized how foreign funding and activist litigation are undermining U.S. energy infrastructure, posing a national security threat. His four Democrat colleagues repeatedly dismissed the concerns as a “conspiracy theory,” instead focusing on energy costs and “global warming.”

The “assault by the radical left,” “paid for by the [CCP],” seeks to “seize control of our courts [and] to weaponize litigation against U.S. energy producers,” Cruz said. He noted the assault is “three-pronged,” weaponizing “foreign funding, mass litigation, and judicial indoctrination” against “American energy independence.”

In describing the first prong, Cruz highlighted a “strategic alliance … between leftist billionaires, radical environmental organizations, and the Chinese Communist Party.” He said, “One of the primary vehicles for this alliance is Energy Foundation China, which has funneled upwards of $12 million to U.S.-based climate advocacy groups since 2020.”

This money flows “directly to aggressive litigation outfits” that file lawsuits against American gas and oil companies, Cruz said. He later said the “second prong” of the assault is a “legal barrage” aimed at bankrupting such companies. Cruz said more than 30 lawsuits have been filed in “at least 15 Democratic-run jurisdictions, including by 12 states” against U.S. oil, gas, and coal producers.

Scott Walter, president of Capital Research Center, testified during the hearing. He said, “Many environmentalist groups funded by the multitude of left-wing billionaires have disturbing foreign ties,” citing big-money international players such as Neville Roy Singham.

Singham lives in Hong Kong and was investigated by the FBI in 1974 for being “potentially dangerous” because he engaged in “activities inimical to the U.S,” according to Influence Watch. Walter also highlighted Swiss billionaire Hansjörg Wyss, who spent $650 million on left-wing organizations, including “ClimateWorks Foundation, Earthjustice Legal Defense Fund, and Natural Resources Defense Council,” Walter’s testimony cites.

Climate lawfare groups suing American energy have raked in $500 million in 2023 from lawsuits, according to IRS forms Cruz cited during the hearing.

“They are using theories that are preposterous, legally speaking, and most of these theories will eventually hit a wall when they hit the final court,” Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach told The Federalist. Kobach said in his written testimony that some states have overstepped their bounds by “regulating conduct and industries far beyond their borders.”

Cruz said the “third prong” of the assault against American energy is “judicial capture,” primarily by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI), which holds “near total control over climate-related judicial training.” ELI’s Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) seeks “to ‘educate’—from a left-wing perspective—federal and state judges about climate change and related litigation designed to extract billions of dollars from energy companies,” Walter said in his written testimony.

The program claims to be nonpartisan but pressures judges into a specific “predetermined political narrative” and is funded by “left-wing bankrollers,” Cruz said. He said “more than 2,000 judges have participated” in the program.

“I’m skeptical that the CJP wants to help energy,” Walter said in response to a question from Cruz.

The four Democrat senators at the hearing unanimously wrote the CCP allegations off as a “conspiracy theory,” with Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois, saying global warming is the real threat Congress should address. Witness David Arkush, the director of the Public Citizen’s Climate Program at the left-wing Roosevelt Institute, also dismissed the CCP allegations as “conspiracy theory.” Arkush told The Federalist, “I don’t see why [CCP] would be funding litigation against the U.S. oil and gas industry.”

Keep reading

Trees Get Bigger Around the World Thanks to Higher CO2 Levels

Recent scientific investigation, curiously missing from constant mainstream media reports of ecological Armageddon, confirms that trees are getting larger around the world due to higher levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide fertilisation.

A little extra of the gas of life, nature’s bountiful plant food, has led to bigger trees and more leaf growth over the last few decades. The recent small recovery in the near-denuded level of CO2 that was a threat to plant and human life on Earth has led to an astonishing 15%-plus increase in overall global vegetation growth in the last 40 years. Plants including trees have evolved to thrive in levels of atmospheric CO2 about three times higher than the current 420 parts per million (ppm) and scientific evidence is clearly showing rising levels are leading to faster growth in flora that is both healthier and more resistant to nature’s hazards such as drought.

Fascinating results are starting to emerge from a controlled Free-Air Carbon Dioxide Enrichment (FACE) experiment conducted since 2017 by the Birmingham Institute of Forest Research. This involved increasing CO2 levels to 550 ppm across patches of a 180-year old Oak forest in Staffordshire, England. When compared to controlled plots without the CO2 boost, it was found that oaks fed with the extra plant food showed growth rates that were an astonishing 10% higher in the period 2017-2023. Most of the growth is attributed to wood production. Compared to trees making do with the current 420 ppm, the boosted oaks are estimated to have produced an additional 1.7 tonnes of dry matter per hectare per year.

Keep reading

City of Sydney BANS gas appliances for all  new homes: ‘Dirty fossil fuel that has no place in homes’

The City of Sydney council has banned gas appliances for all new homes and businesses built from January 2026. 

Lord Mayor Clover Moore’s council on Monday night unanimously adopted the motion banning gas from all new residential builds from December 31 to wean homes and businesses off the fossil fuel.

The council said the move would save each household up to $626 on their power bills every year. 

The change would see an update to development control rules for the use of electric stoves, ovens, heaters and coolers in all newly built apartments and houses. 

Gas hot water systems will still be permitted under the current regulations. 

‘We remain in a climate crisis, which means we need to pull every lever we have in order to keep reducing our emissions,’ Clover Moore said. 

‘To rely on gas means a continued cost for our hip pocket, a continued cost for our health and a continued cost for our planet. It is a price that we simply cannot afford to pay.’

It joins six other NSW councils which have already banned indoor gas appliances in new builds, while seven other councils are also working towards the same regulations.

The City of Sydney also proposed a ban on gas appliances in other developments including serviced apartments, new offices and hotels. 

Councillors voted on gathering public feedback on a plan which would ‘require’ the use of renewable energy in the developments if a ban on gas is passed. 

Keep reading