Skip to main content

The climate change agenda is political and economic, not scientific.

Note: This may be my first and last article on climate change, unless something new comes up that deals with economics. The entire movement is based more on politics than science. The estimated cost of "fixing" our climate is estimated to be between $11 trillion and $100 trillion. It will hurt the poor more than the rich. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is not a pollutant. It only accounts for .041 percent by volume of the atmosphere and is at one of the lowest concentrations when geologic time periods are studied. Water vapor has more influence. Should we ban this also?

When someone says the "debate is over" and the "science is settled" I know there is something else going on. I do not deny the climate is changing or that we need to be good stewards of our planet. Other than that, it's probably biggest hoax of all time. I've spend countless hours and days reading and studying the literature. The science IS NOT settled. 

Those pushing for aggressive government intervention in the name of fighting climate change often claim that “the science is settled” and dismiss any dissenters as “deniers.” The so-called “consensus” is codified in the periodic reports issued by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The alarmist camp’s repeated references to “peer-review” and the number of organizations behind the IPCC are rhetorically very effective; they have done a great PR job in making it look as if their political solutions really do flow naturally from what the scientists in white lab coats are reporting. But allegations from IPCC authors show that politics and not science drive the process at the IPCC.

I'm not a conspiracy nut. But I have studied comments made by officials of the IPCC who state that their goal is political power, the overthrow of capitalism and the redistribution of world-wide income. 

For example, climate expert William Happer, from Princeton University has stated:  "No chemical compound in the atmosphere has a worse reputation than CO2, thanks to the single-minded demonization of this natural and essential atmospheric gas by advocates of government control and energy production. The incredible list of supposed horrors that increasing carbon dioxide will bring the world is pure belief disguised as science."

Did you know?
  • The reported 97 percent scientific consensus was pulled from thin air?
  • Over 250 skeptical scientists were featured in a Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee report?
  • A former UN IPCC official called global warming "my religion."
  • An analysis found that more than 250 scientific papers about global cooling where published from the 1960s to the 1980s.
  • Science groups that are nearly 100 percent dependent on government funding endorse the "consensus."
  • Ice ages haven occurred when carbon dioxide levels were up to 10 times as high as they are today.
  • Rising temperatures preceded CO2 levels in ice core data.
  • Polar bears are doing so well that climate campaigners have dropped them as their icon.
  • Antarctica is gaining ice.
  • The 1990 UN climate report showed a Medieval Warm Period warmer than the 20th Century.
  • "Hottest year" claims in 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2016 were based on statistically meaningless year-to-year differences essentially within the margin of error.
  • Global warming has seen a slowdown or pause since 1998. 
  • Tampering with the temperature record has been so widespread that the current climate era has been jokingly called the "adjustocene" era.
  • Most computer models - which are based on assumptions -- are not accurate and are based on "faulty" software
  • Scientific American branded a climatologist who changed her mind about global warming a "heretic." Just one example.
  • Leading UN IPCC scientists were caught manipulating the peer review process to create an artificial "consensus."
  • Landfalls of major hurricanes to the United States have declined over the past 140 years.
  • Instances of F3 or larger tornadoes have been in decline since the 1970s.
  • In the 1980s, the UN warned that by the year 2000 "entire nations would be wiped off the face of the Earth" by rising seas.
  • A top UN IPCC official said climate policy is to "redistribute the world's wealth."
  • The Paris Climate Accord would theoretically postpone global warming by four years and cost $100 trillion.
  • Climate skeptics defeated legislation and international treaties -- only to see Obama impose them without the benefit of Congress. 
  • Climate policies are denying life-saving technology to the world's poor. One in three Africans still don't have electricity. 
There's more, but I'm sorry, the science is not settled. That's not how science works. It's how religion works.


Popular posts from this blog

What happened when a Trump Supporter Challenged Me About the Wall

Vicky Alvear Schecter wrote in Medium | Poltics on Dec. 27, 2018 using her headline above. I thought it was pretty well written -- at least she made an attempt to keep her liberal bias out of it -- regardless of a few illogical fallacies

But she does make an attempt, in an effort to avoid her liberal bias, as she ponders  " order not to be accused by bias, I explained that I would only use conservative sources to prove my point."

To me, that's bias to start out with that premise. And I believe her premise is that she is against the wall. That's her stance. But she makes some good points, but some are skewed, even though she attempt to take a "conservative" approach, even by citing some "conservative" sources in her footnotes.

Here's the first problem: if she wanted to avoid bias, why not just stick to the the historical facts as written (when you can find them without bias), and not concern oneself with bias. "I must reject that becau…

Weekly wrap for Nov 9

After Thursday and Friday, it might seem the markets are down, but the weekly numbers tell a different story, with the three major indices up for the week. The Nasdaq, with its tech exposure, had the smallest increase. The tech sector is obviously under recent pressure. 

IndexNov 2Nov 9+/-%S&P 5002,723.062,781.01+ 57.95+ 2.12%Nasdaq7,356.997,406.90+ 49.91+ 0.67%DOW 3025,270.8325,989.30+ 718.47+ 2.84%
Over the last 12 months, the Dow is up 10.77 percent, the SP 500 up 7.6 percent, and the Nasdaq up 9.7 percent.  

The weekly chart of the SPY still indicates a long position in the broader market. (The blue line is the 34-week moving average; the red is the 13-week moving average).

While the U.S. economy still seems to be just fine from most reports, investors seemed to worry about a couple of things on Thursday and Friday: 1) The Eurozone, 2) trade with China, and 3) the Fed and interest rates. Another topic of interest has been oil. 

First, it seems that the Fed has really not indicated …

U.S. Top Oil Producer, Thanks to Obama

\ You read that right.

The U.S. is now the largest oil producer in the world, according to the EIA, producing some 15 million BOE per day, surpassing Russia and Saudi Arabia. (Remember back when Jimmy Carter said in 1979 the answer to our energy problems was to wear a warmer sweater...but you probably don't. He actually said this on national TV).

The United States is the top oil-producing country in the world, with an average of 14.86 million b/d, which accounts for 15.3% of the world's production. This is down from 15.12 million b/d in 2015, but it was enough to land the United States in the No. 1 spot, which it has held for the past four years running. (Source: Investopedia.)

Guess who takes credit for it? Granted, this increase in production began in 2012, but only because of private industry and the fact that the price of oil was at nearly all-time highs. And it dipped in 2016 because of Obama's anti-oil policies! 

But here he is again

Former President Barack Obama sure l…