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 COlevels 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

Under Trump, US Will Not Send High-Level Delegation to UN’s ‘Climate Hoax’ Conference Cop30 in Brazil

No more indulging in climate fairy tales to funnel money to Globalists/leftists.

Once Donald J. Trump achieved his historic return to the US Presidency, everyone knew he was going to break the backbone of the main Globalist Hoaxes in place, from ‘open borders lunacy’ and unchecked migration to criminal gender propaganda for children – going through all the other narratives, including the ‘Net-Zero’ Obsession of the Climate-Hoax proponents.

And Trump’s combat of these demented ideas is not limited to destroying these legislations and regulations – he is also prompting his European ‘allies’ to the same, and is also deflating the international accords and conferences.

You can read our reports in TGP on NO MORE CLIMATE HOAX: Trump Ramps Up Pressure on the EU Against Its ‘Corporation Greenhouse Gas Pollution’ Regulation, and Bullet Dodged: Attempt by United Nations to Force Massive Climate Tax Down the Throats of Americans Goes Down in Flames Thanks to President Trump.

So, now, no one is surprised as it arises that Trump will not send top officials to Cop30 Conference in Brazil.

The Telegraph reported:

“Donald Trump will not send any top officials to the Cop30 climate talks in Brazil this month as he goes all-in on fossil fuels.

The US president, who withdrew from the Paris climate agreement for a second time upon his return to the White House, called climate change a ‘hoax’ and a ‘con job’ at a speech to the UN General Assembly in September.”

Keep reading

Kamala Harris Pushes to Lower the Voting Age to 16 Because of CLIMATE CHANGE — Claims Teens ‘Fear They’ll Be Wiped Out’ and Are Too Afraid to Have Kids

Kamala Harris is making headlines this week for all the wrong reasons — again.

Failed 2024 presidential candidate Kamala Harris is pushing to lower the voting age to 16 because of CLIMATE CHANGE.

During an interview with YouTube host Steven Bartlett on “The Diary of a CEO,” Kamala Harris argued that teenagers should be granted the right to vote, citing what she called “climate anxiety” among young people.

Harris described Generation Z as a “specific generation” poised to “impact our nation and the world,” noting that many of them will face instability in the job market and therefore deserve a stronger voice in shaping policy.

She further claimed that young people are “rightly impatient” with Trump’s administration, and insisted that lowering the voting age would push politicians to prioritize issues such as climate change, artificial intelligence, and affordable housing.

While Harris frets over “climate anxiety” preventing teens from having kids, her party’s policies, like sky-high inflation, open borders, and endless regulations, are the real barriers to family formation and prosperity.

Americans know that climate change is a hoax, and hysterical claims of impending doom are just excuses for more government control, higher taxes, and green energy boondoggles that enrich globalists.

Kamala Harris:
I think we should reduce the voting age to 16. I’ll tell you why. Gen Z — their age is about 13 through 27. They’ve only known the climate crisis. They missed substantial parts of their education because of the pandemic. If they’re in high school or college, especially in college, it is very likely that whatever they’ve chosen as their major for study may not result in an affordable wage.

They’ve coined the term “climate anxiety” to describe fear — not only of being unable to buy a home, but fear that it’ll be wiped out by extreme weather, and fear of having children. It is expected that Gen Z will have 10–12 jobs in their lifetime. They are a larger number than Boomers. They’re a specific generation of people who are going to impact our nation and the world.

I think we must invest in them, but I think they are rightly impatient with a lot of what is the tradition of leadership right now. If they were able to vote — because they know everything that’s happening right now is going to impact them more than anybody older than them, for the most part — in terms of how these systems work.

If they’re voting right now, at 16 and up, they’re going to be talking about the importance of climate. They’re going to be talking about the importance of figuring out how AI is going to affect the future of the workforce. They’re going to be focused on what we are really doing about affordable housing.

Basically, in politics, here’s the hard truth about this: there are two centers of power that tend to influence how politicians think — groups that vote the most, and people who write the most checks. To go every day with the people, the people, and think about how do we strengthen people actually going to the polls and voting.

Keep reading

“We Just Won”: Trump Gloats After Bill Gates Admits Climate Change Won’t End World

In the late 1970s, after ‘global cooling’ armageddon science fell out of fashion, a well-oiled machine comprised of billionaire-funded NGOs, the MSM, Hollywood, woke Wall Street, and a robust fact-checking / censorship cartel – started pushing a cult narrative about the planet’s imminent demise in a hellish inferno of global warming. They’ve blamed everything from cow farts and Taylor Swift’s private jet to two-stroke chainsaws, petrol-powered cars, and whatever else these climate Marxists wanted banned – and forced people into authoritarian bullshit like ‘electric stoves only’ and ’15 minute cities’ and ‘eat the bugs,’ etc. 

Now, as data centers are coincidentally projected to need record amounts of electricity, Bill Gates has changed his mind about all of that.

And of course the climate cult was one giant grift – or as one former DOGE worker put it, “a heist on the U.S. Treasury” carried out through propaganda that allowed ‘virtuous’ climate bills to be passed easily. 

To see this machine in action, look no further than the number of news articles which warned of a “climate crisis” going back 10 years: 

And yet, despite decades of gospel over melting ice caps and doom, Gates simply shreds it and decides it’s ackshually not such a big deal.

Keep reading

ExxonMobil Sues California Over Climate Regulations

Energy giant ExxonMobil filed a lawsuit on Oct. 24 against California officials—including Lauren Sanchez, chair of the California Air Resources Board, and Attorney General Robert A. Bonta—accusing the state’s climate disclosure regulations of harming the company.

The complaint, filed in the District Court for the Eastern District of California, is about two climate laws approved by Gov. Gavin Newsom in October 2023: SB 253 and SB 261.

SB 253 requires businesses with total annual revenues of more than $1 billion that operate in California to disclose their greenhouse gas emissions, while SB 261 requires businesses with more than $500 million in annual revenues operating in the state to develop a report on their climate-related financial risks.

The bills are scheduled to come into effect in 2026.

“Both bills require ExxonMobil to espouse California’s preferred framing for issues of immense public concern,” the company said in its lawsuit.

The bills require the company to “serve as a mouthpiece for ideas with which it disagrees,” it said, while using frameworks that place “disproportionate blame” of emissions and climate risks on companies like ExxonMobil just for “being large.”

Keep reading