Tag: climategate

GOP Senators Rick Scott and Ron Johnson go to California to Hear Pacific Palisades Fire Victims While Gavin Newsom Attends Climate Change Summit in South America 

Senators Rick Scott of Florida and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, both Republicans, just traveled to California to hear testimony from victims of the California wildfires in the Pacific Palisades.

Spencer Pratt, a reality TV star who lost his home in the fires was there to testify and remarked about the fact that Republicans came from thousands of miles away to listen while Democrat leaders in California were nowhere to be found.

In fact, California Governor Gavin Newsom is at a conference in South America focused on climate change, which he still insists was responsible for the fires.

Breitbart News has details:

Thursday’s senate hearing was part of a congressional investigation into the genesis of the fire and what went wrong before and after the conflagration by the various California governments responsible for warning residents and putting out the flames.

The hearing was led by Senators Johnson and Scott (R, FL), who are looking into the fire. Six Pacific Palisades residents who lost their homes also delivered powerful remarks. California Senators Alex Padilla and Adam Schiff were not at the hearing.

One of those who spoke at the confab was The Hills reality show star Spencer Pratt, who has become a leading advocate for the victims of the fires.

“By the grace of God, my family survived,” he said during his testimony.

“My family has not lost our hope, but we did lose our home and everything we own in the Palisades fire,” Pratt said during the hearing, wearing a hat with the words, “Newsom will never be president.”

“It’s been 10 months,” Pratt said, “and our government leaders, instead of helping us rebuild, have only served to make the rebuilding process so painful and slow that many just quit and are forced out of their hometown through attrition so vultures like Gavin Newsom and [state Sen.] Scott Weiner have a blank slate to remake the Palisades in the vision of their wealthy donors and foreign investors.”

Keep reading

At COP30, Countries Sign First-ever Declaration to Control Info on Climate

Germany, France, Canada, and Belgium are among 12 nations that signed on to the “Declaration on Information Integrity on Climate Change,” documenting the so-called “threats” that free speech and the free press pose to what U.S. President Donald Trump refers to as the climate “con job.”

Signed at the United Nations’ COP30, the UN’s annual climate confab, the declaration marks the first time that “information integrity” has been on the docket for COP’s Action Agenda.

The rise of independent media, social media, and the internet has created a source of non-establishment news that has elevated legitimate criticism of the so-called man-made climate-change agenda.

Rather than addressing concerns about the UN’s horrible track record of climate predictions, the failure of “green” energy, and the astounding hypocrisy of climate evangelists’ jet-setting across the globe in private jets emitting mass amounts of carbon, the UN has instead turned to censorship and narrative control.

Defeating the “Obscurantists”

In the opening address at COP30, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva targeted anyone who dares to question the man-made climate-agenda.

“In the era of disinformation, obscurantists reject not only scientific evidence but also the progress of multilateralism. They control algorithms, sow hatred, and spread fear. They attack institutions, science, and universities. It is time to once again defeat the denialists,” he said.

Arguing that “obscurantists” control algorithms beggars belief. In fact, it is the UN that has openly admitted to rigging algorithms with Google to prioritize UN narratives regarding climate change.

“We partnered with Google,” said Melissa Fleming, the UN’s under-secretary-general for global communications. “For example, if you Google ‘climate change,’ you will, at the top of your search, you will get all kinds of UN resources.”

Fleming revealed that the collaboration started when UN officials were “shocked to see that when we Googled ‘climate change,’ we were getting incredibly distorted information right at the top.”

Pushing Propaganda

But how will the UN “defeat the denialists” who are allegedly controlling the narrative? First, the declaration acknowledges the necessity of narrative control to continue the UN’s climate doomsaying:

[We are] concerned by the growing impact of disinformation, misinformation, denialism, deliberate attacks on environmental journalists, defenders, scientists, researchers and other public voices and other tactics used to undermine the integrity of information on climate change, which diminish public understanding, delay urgent action, and threaten the global climate response and societal stability.

The signatory nations also refer to the Global Digital Compact, adopted by UN members at the Summit of the Future in 2024, which sets forth a global framework for digital cooperation for artificial intelligence, controlling algorithms, and digital control.

Encouraging policies that will bolster climate propaganda at both the international and local level is crucial, the declaration states.

Through promoting and supporting the “sustainability of a diverse and resilient media ecosystem,” the signatory nations affirm that the man-made climate-change narrative cannot survive scrutiny without “equitable access to accurate, consistent, evidence-based, and understandable information on climate change for all stakeholders.”

Keep reading

Immigration and Climate Activists Want a Nation of Renters

It’s harder than ever to buy a home, thanks to immigration, environmental regulations, and zoning restrictions. The word “crisis” gets used too often, but housing certainly qualifies.

On the heels of an election won by Democrats who stressed “affordability,” the Trump administration has floated the idea of introducing 50-year mortgages to lower the entry cost of buying a home. Is that a good idea?

“I bought my first condo in the early 1990s in Washington, DC. Paid $115,000 for it. It was in McLean, Virginia, a nice area, and it was three times my income,” says Peter Schweizer, host of The DrillDown podcast. “How many people today could say they can take their income, triple it, and buy a house for that price?”

Co-host Eric Eggers does the math. “Don’t get a 50-year mortgage,” Eggers cautions. “On a $350,000 house at 6 percent interest, you would pay $250 a month less, but you would spend an extra $367,000 in interest.”

Housing costs have risen for many reasons, but immigration is a big factor. Since 1995, immigrants — legal or illegal — to the U.S. have risen by about 30 million people and now account for 15.8 percent of the population, according to Pew Research. That adds demand for housing.

Environmental restrictions and zoning restrictions are another large factor. A recent study quantified their effects on housing prices. In San Francisco, as the hosts note, restrictive zoning laws added $400,000 to the cost of a home. “In Seattle, Los Angeles, New York City, it’s much better: it’s only $200,000 added to the costs there,” Schweizer adds.

Keep reading

Most Germans Oppose Combustion Engine Bans And Meat Reduction Measures To Save The Planet

A majority of Germans oppose key government climate protection proposals such as banning combustion engines, restricting meat consumption, or imposing flat-rate taxes on air travel, according to a YouGov poll conducted shortly before the 30th UN Climate Change Conference in Belém, Brazil.

The survey suggests that citizens are more likely to back environmental measures that either benefit them directly or avoid placing major financial burdens on households.

As reported by Stern, 69 percent of respondents said they opposed a ban on diesel and petrol vehicles, while 68 percent were against limiting weekly purchases of meat and dairy products, while 56 percent rejected the idea of higher air travel costs through a flat-rate ticket tax.

Conversely, strong majorities supported subsidies for energy-efficient housing (69 percent), measures to strengthen domestic production (71 percent), bans on single-use plastics (69 percent), and higher taxes on high-emission companies (66 percent).

The German government has pledged to reach climate neutrality by 2045 — sooner than many industrialized nations—but its progress in reducing emissions has slowed, particularly in the transport and housing sectors. According to the survey, while most Germans agree that climate change is a serious issue and largely caused by human activity, the willingness to change personal behavior remains limited.

Only around a quarter of those surveyed said they would voluntarily reduce air travel or meat consumption, or switch to an electric car. Even fewer expressed willingness to stop eating animal products altogether or to buy only second-hand clothing. Measures that are convenient or low-cost — such as avoiding single-use plastics or adding greenery to balconies — were far more popular.

Despite a reluctance to alter lifestyles, 46 percent of Germans believe the worst effects of climate change can still be prevented if drastic changes are implemented, while 16 percent think the status quo is sufficient, and 15 percent believe it is already too late to avert the crisis.

Concern about global warming has nonetheless declined: 63 percent say they are worried about the issue, the lowest figure for two years, as global conflicts, inflation, and energy prices take center stage.

Keep reading

The False Temperature Claims That Underpin the COP30 Alarmist Agenda

The next two weeks of COP30 will see three favourite climate scares relentlessly broadcast to promote the fast-fading hard-Left Net Zero fantasy. They are: breaching a 1.5°C global ‘threshold’ leading to runaway temperatures; human-caused tipping points producing unimaginable natural disasters; and attribution of single-event bad weather to the use of natural hydrocarbons. The 1.5°C figure is a meaningless number invented by politicians and activists to concentrate Net Zero minds; tipping points are climate model codswallop; and ditto attribution crystal ball-gazing. None of them are backed up by credible scientific evidence and observation. Which of course is why political elites have trashed the scientific process of inquiry, banned and cancelled any dissenting discussion and declared the matter ‘settled’.

The foundation scam is temperature. The world is said to be warming dramatically, leading to tipping points and worsening extreme weather. Changes are said to be occurring at unprecedented rates and are caused primarily by humans increasing atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide. In fact the temperature rise is small, about 1°C over 200 years (making allowance for all the fake temperature estimates and urban heat-ravaged measurements) and similar rises are commonplace in both the historical and paleo record. The recent ‘hottest evah’ rises have been seen in the past – sudden changes in temperature are caused by sudden local events such as volcano eruptions. As it happens, the underwater Hunga Tonga volcano released vast quantity of water vapour into the upper atmosphere in 2022, a ‘greenhouse’ warming event that would have been helped along by a recent strong El Niño oscillation. Recent accurate satellite measurements show the overall global temperature has been falling during 2025.

Don’t take my word for all this natural movement. Professor Mark Maslin is a Professor of something termed Earth Systems Science at UCL and one of the authors of a recent tipping point report timed for COP30. This particular computer model-based bilge suggested that warm water corals may already be crossing their “thermal tipping points”, despite the fact that coral has been around for hundreds of millions of years and survives in waters between 24-32°C. This would appear to be the same Mark Maslin who as a humble geography lecturer in 1999 wrote a paper that said possibly most of the large climate changes involving movements of several degrees occurred at most on a timescale of a few centuries, sometimes decades, “and perhaps even a few years”. These days he whines that “Earth is already becoming unliveable”, while climate change politics helps build “a new political and socio-economic system”. In 2018, he was one of a number of eco-activists who signed a letter to the Guardian saying they would no longer “lend their credibility” by debating climate science scepticism.

No wonder people like Maslin – needless to say a BBC regular on all learned climate Armageddon matters – walked away from climate science debate. Tying CO2 levels to rising temperatures to make Left-wing political capital relies on observations from just a few recent years. Widen the observations out to hundreds and then hundreds of millions of years gives a different picture. Sometimes temperatures rise and fall at the same time as CO2, sometimes not. Sometimes even CO2 levels rise before the following temperatures, more often than not they don’t. The simple explanation that warming gases such as CO2 become ‘saturated’ once they pass certain concentrations, with heating falling off a logarithmic cliff, is a scientific hypothesis or opinion, but it has much to offer when past observational evidence is considered.

Keep reading

Cows Drop Like Flies After Greenie Gov’t Policy Promotes Drugged Feed

Cows are reportedly collapsing and in some cases being euthanized in Denmark following the implementation of a climate policy aimed at reducing a cow’s greenhouse gas emissions, according to a Danish media report.

The Nordic country promoted policies financing large dairy farms to adopt synthetic additives to feed after Jan. 1 2025 to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions, according to Agriland. However, farmers are reportedly voicing concerns now that their cows have started giving less milk, collapsing and in some instances getting so ill that they need to be euthanized, according to the Danish media outlet Jyllands-Posten.

“We have so many people who call us and are unhappy about what is happening in their herds,” Kjartan Poulsen, chairman of the National Association of Danish Dairy Producers, told the publication. 

Denmark has aggressive climate goals that include reaching “climate neutrality” by 2050 and lowering emissions by 70% by 2030 as compared with 1990 levels.

The cow feed policy is a part of Denmark’s emissions-reductions goals, and reportedly one additive that is mixed in with cow feed called Bovaer may be the cause of the cows’ health decline, according to Jyllands-Posten.

Bovaer is a “synthetic organic compound that can be added to cattle feed in order to reduce the methane they produce and expel,” according to UC Davis.

Cow burps emit more methane than cow flatulence, according to NASA.

“Contrary to common belief, it’s actually cow belching caused by a process called enteric fermentation that contributes to methane emissions,” NASA’s website states. “Enteric fermentation is the digestive process in which sugars are broken down into simpler molecules for absorption into the bloodstream. This process also produces methane as a by-product.”

Notably, early drafts of the Green New Deal expressed concerns over cow farts.

Keep reading

The Climate Cult Fails Europe

The roadmap is already set: in the coming years, the EU and its member states will make both businesses and consumers pay even more for CO2 emissions. BASF CEO Markus Kamieth warns of the enormous destructive potential of this policy.

Truth comes on pigeon feet — Friedrich Nietzsche already knew that. And apparently, the same applies to European climate policy: slowly, but inevitably, the reality of the true costs of the green transformation and its impact on Germany’s industrial foundation is emerging.

On October 29, BASF’s CEO Markus Kamieth faced the press during the quarterly results presentation. What he announced was another cold shower for anyone still hoping for a new economic miracle.

Weak Results in a Stable Environment

The world’s largest chemical company reported a 3% decline in revenue in Q3 2025 compared to last year, while EBITDA fell by 5%. BASF is under massive pressure and has already cut 1,400 jobs to meet growing cost pressures.

BASF’s numbers have to be seen against the backdrop of a slowly recovering global economic cycle. The U.S. economy, growing nearly 4%, is driving strong demand. Economies in China and India continue to expand dynamically, particularly in sectors critical to the chemical industry.

While the global economy gains momentum, BASF — like much of Germany’s chemical sector and the broader industry — continues to lose ground.

The company’s main site in Ludwigshafen is hit hardest, leaving its 33,000 employees facing an uncertain future.

Criticism of the Climate Course

Kamieth was unexpectedly outspoken during the presentation. In addition to criticizing EU trade policy and rising energy costs in Germany, he struck at a rarely openly discussed wound: the EU’s climate policy.

Kamieth didn’t mince words, calling the European CO2 emissions trading system (EU ETS 2) what it is: an attack on Europe’s industrial foundation.

For BASF alone, if the current climate course within CO2 trading remains unchanged, annual additional costs of around €1 billion will arise from 2027 onward, when exemptions are removed — costs borne exclusively by European industry, while the rest of the world simply does not participate.

Kamieth hit a sore spot. EU industry is being financially squeezed by an ideologized CO2 policy. Deindustrialization is — whether unspoken or suppressed — the result of Brussels’ policies and their national enforcers, whose only response to their self-inflicted disaster is ever-new subsidies.

Keep reading

Associated Press Publishes Absurd Video Targeting Pet Ownership Due to Climate Change Hysteria

With everything going on in the world today, The Associated Press — the premier wire service and news institution in the English-speaking world — knows what’s really on your mind: Is Fido’s “carbon pawprint” too big?

In yet another bid to prove that even the most supposedly objective media cannot set priorities that aren’t bad or misplaced, the AP dedicated 32 paragraphs in five sections — along with a video on social media — to the climate change dangers that your furry friend allegedly poses. Because even childless cat ladies are driving us to extinction in ways that don’t involve not having kids, apparently.

“One of the most climate intensive decisions we make is whether to own a pet,” the AP’s Caleigh Wells reported in a piece published Tuesday.

“It’s for the same reason that humans have a big impact: They eat every day. And most of them eat meat. The environmental impact of meat includes the land the animal lived on, the food it ate, the waste it generated and other factors.”

This is apparently being accelerated by a “trend toward refrigerated, ‘fresh’ or even ‘human-grade’ pet food,” with a reminder from the AP that “just like people, a pet’s impact on the planet can vary greatly depending on their diet.”

Now, amazingly, there’s a kernel of truth in here: the same ideology that has given us the archetype of the childless cat lady who foregoes kids to save the planet is still hurting the planet:

The marketing of higher-quality pet food suggests that it’s healthier.

But there isn’t much evidence to suggest refrigerated, fresh or human-grade food leads to better pet health outcomes, according to Alison Manchester, assistant clinical sciences professor at Cornell University’s College of Veterinary Medicine.

“I think a lot of it is playing on marketing and treating pets as members of the family,” said Manchester.

It’s almost like people want to have families. You will not be shocked to learn that this thread of thought goes unexplored by the AP in both the article and the video, which features pet food researcher Billy Nicholles.

In the video, Nicholles said that the problem was “their food, basically, and in particular, the ingredients in their food.”

“Dogs and cats both eat pretty highly meat-based diets,” he continued. “And what do we know about meat? It’s one of the key drivers of climate change.”

Keep reading

Ottawa spent $1.5M to find out who has air conditioning

It sounds like a parody headline, but it’s right there in black and white. According to a newly tabled order paper response (Q-335), the federal government spent $1.5 million on a Statistics Canada project studying which households in Canada use air conditioning.

The 2025 report, titled “A Heated Discussion: Who Uses Air Conditioning in Canada,” found that 68% of Canadian households have some kind of cooling system — a four-point increase from 2021.

The survey also broke down results by income, province and whether people rent or own their homes.

Ontario topped the charts, with 83% of households reporting AC access, while British Columbia lagged behind at 45% — likely thanks to its milder climate and sky-high hydro rates.

But the real heat came from Ottawa’s own wallet.

Despite being asked for details, the Industry Department refused to provide a line-by-line accounting of how the $1.5 million was spent, dodging questions on vendor names, contracts or whether the study was outsourced.

Keep reading

Climate Activists Who Vandalized Stonehenge Acquitted And Set Free

Within a progressive controlled nation, who gets punished by the law is greatly dependent on their political and ethnic affiliations.  Left leaning groups (and people like migrants who are useful to left leaning groups) enjoy a separate set of legal standards compared to people who oppose leftist ideology.  This has become a clear trend within the UK in recent years.

This two tier legal system helps the encourage future crimes by leftists and their allies while the hammer is brought down on conservatives and patriots to ensure they are fearful of stepping out of line in the slightest.  

This double standard is obvious once again in the recent acquittal of three Just Stop Oil activists who made headlines after they spraying down the historic site of Stonehenge with a mixture of powder and orange dye.  The dye cost around $1000 to clean but luckily did not leave lasting damage.  The stunt was allegedly designed to draw attention to JSO’s climate change agenda.

The activists, Rajan Naidu, Niamh Lynch and Luke Watson have been found not guilty this week of criminal damage and causing a public nuisance.  The suspects cited human rights law in their defense, arguing that they had a “reasonable excuse”, and they they are protected under Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights to freedom of speech and freedom to protest.

The judge emphasized that democratic protest rights can sometimes render otherwise unlawful actions lawful, even if disruptive.  In other words, suspects who commit a clear crime (such as vandalizing an ancient heritage site) will not be punished as long as they support causes that the current government agrees with.  UK patriots, on the other hand, will still get years in prison for posting memes on social media that are critical of mass immigration.

Just Stop Oil’s insanity was rampant across Europe over the course of the last few year until the group disbanded on the grounds that they had been “victorious” in achieving their primary goal (did they beat climate change?).  However, it is more likely they disbanded because of rising public anger over their disruptive tactics. 

Keep reading