Tag: climategate

Three Graphs That Show There Is No “Climate Crisis”

As the West fitfully weakens industrial civilisation by trying to eliminate oil, coal and natural gas as energy sources, the scientific basis for Net Zero is based more on ‘general agreement’ than hard data. Climate scientists nevertheless sound optimistic about the progress that’s being made in destroying society’s carbon energy base.  

There are of course criticisms of the idea of a carbon-dioxide-induced apocalypse, largely supported as it is by general circulation (i.e., whole-earth) planetary models. There are too many different GCMs all with too many free parameters (aka ‘fudge factors’), as well as wildly divergent readings of historical climate records: Are violent climate events really more frequent, and how does weather actually relate to climate? The popular press cries havoc, but the data are not so clear. The looming economic costs of a Net Zero target are leading to some political pushback. Nevertheless, the recent jury acquittal of nine Extinction Rebellion vandals shows that passionate belief in the imminent dangers of CO2 is not limited to activists.

Climate science is complicated, but the key question is simple. The climate does seem to be getting warmer, but are we responsible? Does the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide have a major effect on the temperature of the earth? The standard answer is “yes, of course”. But in fact there are good reasons for doubt. 

Popular accounts of the ‘climate emergency’ rarely show quantitative data. Yet there are widely available graphs that anyone can understand. Here are three graphs which suggest that the answer to the question is probably “no”. It is likely that beyond a certain point, carbon dioxide has a relatively minor effect on planetary temperature. 

Keep reading

Tiny Fraction Of Global Elites Emit As Much Carbon As Bottom Two-Thirds Of Humanity

Critics who rail against the hypocrisy of wealthy global elites jet-setting on carbon-spewing private planes while pontificating about the need for the rest of us to cut our climate footprints just got a boost from a new study.

It turns out that the world’s richest 1 percent emit about the same amount of carbon as the world’s poorest two-thirds, according to an analysis from the nonprofit Oxfam International.

This means that a small sliver of global elites, or 77 million people, have produced as much carbon as the 5 billion people that make up the bottom 66 percent by wealth, per the study.

The study also estimates that it would take roughly 1,500 years for someone in the bottom 99 percent to produce as much carbon as the wealthiest billionaires do in just one year.

The study was based on research compiled by the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and examined the emissions of various income groups up to 2019. In summary, it suggested that the private jet-setting class of global leaders and policymakers, who take private planes to lead summits addressing the assumed dangers of climate change, may warrant charges of hypocrisy.

The analysis was published as global leaders prepare to meet for climate talks at the COP28 summit in Dubai later in November, where, much like other climate conferences, some elite participants will likely pontificate on the need for ordinary folk to end their reliance on cheap fossil fuel energy to make their ends meet.

Keep reading

Recycling Eco-Myths Is The Existential Threat

By promising a relatively simple solution to an alleged problem, it has enabled the left to control behavior through a made-up morality that stigmatized dissent – Only bad people refuse to recycle.

Like most progressive interventions – from welfare policies that destroyed families while increasing dependency, to drug use reforms that have filled city streets with desperate addicts – recycling plans that sound good on paper (and plastic) have continuously collided with reality so that even liberal outlets such as the New York Times (“Your Recycling Gets Recycled, Right? Maybe, or Maybe Not”), NPR (“Recycling plastic is practically impossible — and the problem is getting worse”) and the Atlantic magazine (“Plastic Recycling Doesn’t Work and Will Never Work”) have finally admitted its failures.

The same dynamic is now at work regrading a far more significant green fantasy: the left’s push to decarbonize the U.S. and other Western industrial economies during the next few decades and attain an eco-purity calculus known as Net Zero. While brandishing the moral cudgel with full force – President Biden describes climate change as “an existential crisis,” i.e., every person and puppy will die if we don’t submit to his agenda – the left also suggests the transition will be easy-peasy: Just build some windmills, install some solar panels, and swap out your car, stove, and lightbulbs for cleaner and cheaper alternatives.

Though much of the cheerleading media downplays this fact, it is already clear that Biden’s enormously expensive, massively disruptive goal is a pipe dream. In a recent series of articles, my colleagues at RealClearInvestigations have reported on several of the seemingly intractable problems that the administration and its eco-allies are trying to wish away.

The dishonesty begins with the engine of the green economy – the vast array of wind and solar farms that must be constructed to replace the coal and gas facilities that power our economy. James Varney reported for RCI that the Department of Energy’s official line is that the installations required to meet Biden’s goal of “100% clean electricity” by 2035 will require “less than one-half of one percent of the contiguous U.S. land area” – or roughly 15,000 of the lower 48’s roughly 3 million square miles. However, Varney noted, “the government report that furnished those estimates also notes that the wind farm footprint alone could require an expanse nine times as large: 134,000 square miles. That is equivalent to the land mass of Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky combined – plus all of New England.

Echoing the 19th century adage that figures don’t lie, but liars figure, the discrepancy mostly involves estimates of what can be built around the windmills. Each turbine’s footprint is relatively small, but they have to be spaced far apart. The DOE’s smaller number is based on the fanciful assumption that all the surrounding land can be used for agriculture and other purposes, while the larger figure assumes none of it will. The truth probably is somewhere in between. That the government is trumpeting the impossibly small number – while ignoring the additional land needed to build transmission lines which will carry the current to end users – is telling and troubling.

Keep reading

A Short ESG Guide: Introduction

The murky precepts of Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) criteria wield growing influence in investing and in regulation. Those who want to understand the reshaping of our financial landscape, especially as a means to resist it, should be familiar with ESG’s terms, goals, vocabulary, and advocates. Below, I sketch out several dimensions.

ESG advocates want to reshape the world in profound ways — from how we travel and heat our homes to what businesses must prioritize and whom global supply chains should benefit. They want to move the world to a “low-carbon” economy built on renewable energy. They also favor dramatic redistribution of wealth and power from the “haves” to the “have nots.” Increasingly, they make business their ally (willingly or unwillingly) in carrying out their plans.

To address these concerns with nuance and thoughtfulness, rather than simply reacting, we must raise  awareness of ESG criteria, how they are being used, and what kinds of problems they will create. ESG will likely be around for a long time, so it’s worth taking some time to understand it thoroughly.

Keep reading

Police Raid Man’s Home For Heating It With S9, Charged With Intentional Climate Change

The Bitcoin mining industry is being thrown into chaos as a Canadian man has been arrested for heating his home with an Antminer S9. The man posted a video of his setup on Twitter which lead to law enforcement visiting his home and arresting him. He faces up to 3 months in jail and $600 in fines for “Causing distress to the community” and “intentionally warming the climate.”

The officers raiding the home arrived heavily armed, and even shot the man’s dog who was barking in the hallway after they kicked the door down. Body cam footage shows police laughing after shooting the dog, and one officer exclaimed, “Wow I finally got my first one.” Unfortunately, in Canada, shooting peoples pets is a protected action under qualified immunity.

Canada has been a hotbed for Bitcoin mining, but now many miners are fearful they too will be charged with similar charges. The Canadian government has been unclear about what their intentions are and whether this applies to all Bitcoin miners or just people who post their miners on Twitter. There are also rumors that the Canadian government is going to be rolling out an emissions system to test miners for carbon production, and will be requiring registration.

Many have pointed out how similar Bitcoin miners are to other applications such as space heaters, large data center servers, and just about any application that consumes electricity. Bitcoin miners produce just as much carbon as electric vehicles, yet they are being treated very differently, suggesting the move is targeted. Despite that, the issue of climate change is of upmost concern. If sea levels rise, it will destroy all the billionaires beach front property and secret Caribbean islands.

Elizabeth Warren applauded the move and stated, “1 s9 running emits 4 units of climate change an hour. 1 Bitcoin transaction emits 16 units of climate change. We must be like Canada and stop the madness.” Senate Republicans are currently organizing to censor Warren’s comments on the subject until she passes a basic literacy test.

Keep reading

17 Questions to Challenge the Climate Change Crisis

We are forever getting told of a forthcoming major climate change crisis. How we are destroying our planet by unwittingly contributing to potential catastrophic famines, flooding and heatwaves… through our negligence to climate change.

Many have challenged this climate change crisis claim: It has been said that the human-led climate change crisis is a monumental lie. A deceptive Deep State tool. A PSYOP used to control the sleeping masses to get their compliance as they blindly walk into an engineered dystopia under the guise of saving the world.

In reflection of this, here are 17 truth-seeking questions to challenge the climate change crisis claim and its related implications that something desperately needs to be done to prevent the so-called predicted catastrophic events.

Keep reading

Bloomberg Pushes Climate Doom As Reason Why You Must Eat Bugs

The US is one of the world’s largest exporters of agricultural products. Still, the corporate press continues to promote ‘climate change’ disinformation (read: here) to accelerate the normalization of insects and lab-grown meat into the food supply.

Bloomberg is the latest corporate media to use fear to sell what might be a World Economic Forum agenda of introducing bugs and lab-grown meat into the food supply: 

“You may see lab-grown meat and insects on the menu in future decades, as the world grapples with challenges to food security posed by climate change and conflict.” 

Bloomberg’s Keira Wright was covering Sydney’s South by South West festival earlier this month, when she said panelists were talking about lab-grown meat, edible insects, and vertical farming. 

Wright continued with more climate doom in the article: 

“Climate change has made weather more volatile and hotter in many parts of the world, damaging corn crops in the US, slashing wheat crop forecasts in Australia and even accelerating the spread of deadly pests in China.” 

However, did anyone tell Wright, the editors, or maybe even billionaire Mike Bloomberg about the inconvenient truth of 1,600 international scientists who said in August, “There is no climate emergency.” 

Meanwhile, Bezos’ The Washington Post recently advised Americans to eat ants and crickets. 

Keep reading

The Delusional Climate Countdown – A Holistic Appraisal of Real Climate Change

I have chosen to write this essay in the form of a question and answer dialogue so as to present clear answers to the falsifications presently dividing our world.

Q. Is the climate changing?

A. Yes

Q. In what way?

A. In many ways. Everything that exists is undergoing a continuous process of change.

Q. Can you explain..

A. This world, its biosphere and the universe within which the drama of life unfolds are fully interrelated and inseparable; all parts contributing to changes of the whole. Therefore to claim that any one factor, for example CO2. Is the causative agent of climate change, cannot be right.

Q. But there is some causative agent at work raising temperatures and provoking climate change, is there not?

A. In spite of global climate institutions like the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) placing a heavily biased emphasis on the burning of hydrocarbons as the chief causative agent behind Global Warming/Climate Change, this is a gross reductionist misinterpretation of the reality. These ‘scientists’ are incapable of providing empirical evidence concerning the nature of this change, or indeed, whether global mean temperatures are actually rising, falling or remaining approximately the same.

Q. So we can’t expect science, as formally taught in academic institutions, to have any answers?

A. Exactly. Nor should we give any credence to irresponsible politicians whose robotic response to any criticism of the CO2 story is “Follow the science.”

Only a basic grasp of quantum physics, with its recurring multi dimensional patterns of cause and effect, could begin to identify the causative agents behind discernible processes of change in the climate. Let alone qualify the existence of supposed ‘man made’ changes.

Q. But surely we can safely say that observable, more extreme climate events are taking place at this time?

A. There do appear to be more extreme events. There can be a number of reasons for these, none of which are down to one specific causal agent. For example, continual thinning of the ozone layer, specific solar activity, a weaker magnetosphere and/or the continual shifting of the magnetic poles. Any one of these, or all three, can play on the changes you mention.

Q. How is it possible that almost 100% of global political policy makers have uncritically accepted the veracity of computer modelling exercises (used by IPCC climatologists) as ‘absolute evidence’ of carbon dioxide being the key factor behind global warming?

A. To answer this requires an awareness of the psychological persuasiveness that operates behind an irrational belief in ‘science having the answer’. There is a great clamour for ‘a fixed remedy’ to any perceived problem, and when this doesn’t emerge, any invention is adopted that achieves consensus amongst like minded individuals and fits the parameters of the politically acceptable position of the day.

Keep reading

Harry and Meghan fly to Caribbean on a private jet… days after attending a conference where attendees were told ‘climate change is impacting our mental health’

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex flew off to a Caribbean island on a private jet just days after attending a conference discussing the impact of climate change on mental health.

Harry and Meghan used a Dassault Falcon 7X jet to fly from New Jersey to Canouan after attending the summit in New York on October 10, and again for the four hour hop between the exclusive retreat and Atlanta, Georgia. 

They attended the conference organised by Project Healthy Minds, during which Zak Williams, the son of comedian and actor Robin Williams told attendees that climate change was adversely effecting mental health, particularly in young people.

The couple have in the past been keen to highlight their green credentials. When interviewed by Oprah Winfrey two years ago, Harry identified climate change and mental health as the two ‘pressing issues’.

But the pair aren’t strangers to private jets either. In 2019 Harry and Meghan came under scrutiny for racking up four flights by private jet in the space of just 11 days, including one to Sir Elton John‘s home in Nice.

Keep reading

Climate Crisis Proponents Want to Criminalize Climate Change Doubts

Climate militants seek to criminalize any opinion or facts contrary to the religion of climate change.

Will the wrong ideas about climate change get you fined, jailed, or even worse?

Could voicing an opinion that questions the facts and fictions that surround the climate change hysteria soon become illegal, as in lawfully forbidden and a criminal offense?

It’s looking like that may become the reality sooner rather than later.

It would be one thing if such a monstrous idea were restricted to a small minority of powerless climate change fanatics, tree huggers, and earth worshippers. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case.

What’s more, this unbelievable and un-American notion is so irrational that it seems impossible to believe.

Keep reading