Scientific Facts: Truth about Climate Change, Climate Change Hoax

Scientific Facts:

Truth about Climate Change, Climate Change Hoax

Lunacy from the Climate Stack

Rush Limbaugh

In science there is no consensus because scientific reality is not up for a vote.

Not Scientific Fact

Now to the Climate Change Stack. I’ve been alluding to this, and here’s the value of this. You know, when you boil it down, folks, what is climate change? Climate change is a political issue. It is not scientific fact. It is not settled science. It requires them to say they have a “consensus of scientists” that agree that X = Y = Z.

But in science there is no consensus because scientific reality is not up for a vote.

  • Water is H2O. It’s not something else.
  • The earth is round, it’s not flat, and if somebody thinks it’s flat and you put it up for a vote, it doesn’t mean that the earth is round because there’s a consensus of scientists who say so. It’s round because it is and it has been established and proven scientifically.

Well, climate change can’t be proven scientifically because the predictions of it say it will not happen for the next 30 to 40 years. It’s all computer models.

There is no empirical data.

There is none. These people don’t realize it but they tell us climate change is gonna happen the next 30 to 50 years, maybe even the end of this century.

 

Other Climate Change Hoax Lunacies

STUDY: Concern Over Climate Change Linked to Depression, Anxiety — ‘Restless nights, feelings of loneliness and lethargy.

Cleaning Up Air Pollution May Strengthen Global Warming.”

FOXNews: CNN Claim that an Unmonitored Asteroid Could Slam into Earth During Government Shutdown is Debunked

Wikipedia Censorship

Wikipedia Erases Record of Accomplished Scientist — ‘Censored’ for His Intelligent Design Position

 

Advertisements

History Facts: Predictions on Climate Change proven False; Global Warming Hoax has Origin in Nazi Germany

History Facts:

Predictions on Climate Change proven False; Global Warming Hoax has Origin in Nazi Germany

O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times? A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it. ~Jesus Christ, Matthew 16:3-4

 

Here’s How Wrong Past Predictions on Climate Change Have Been

Walter E. Williams

Daily Signal, Heritage Foundation

Each year, Earth Day is accompanied by predictions of doom.

Let’s take a look at past predictions to determine just how much confidence we can have in today’s environmentalists’ predictions.

Earth Day  Predictions in 1970: Death of 100-200 Million People

In 1970, when Earth Day was conceived, the late George Wald, a Nobel laureate biology professor at Harvard University, predicted, “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.”

Also in 1970, Paul Ehrlich, a Stanford University biologist and best-selling author of “The Population Bomb,” declared that the world’s population would soon outstrip food supplies.

In an article for The Progressive, he predicted, “The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next 10 years.”

He gave this warning in 1969 to Britain’s Institute of Biology: “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.”

On the first Earth Day, Ehrlich warned, “In 10 years, all important animal life in the sea will be extinct.”

Despite such predictions, Ehrlich has won no fewer than 16 awards, including the 1990 Crafoord Prize, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences’ highest award.

1975: New Ice Age Predicted

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Legal Insurrection.com for his great cartoon

In International Wildlife (July 1975), Nigel Calder warned, “The threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind.”

In Science News (1975), C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization is reported as saying, “The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed.”

In 1970, ecologist Kenneth Watt told a Swarthmore College audience:

The world has been chilling sharply for about 20 years. If present trends continue, the world will be about 4 degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990 but 11 degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.

2000: Earth will burn up from Global Warming

In 2000, climate researcher David Viner told The Independent, a British newspaper, that within “a few years,” snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event” in Britain. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he said. “Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past.”

In the following years, the U.K. saw some of its largest snowfalls and lowest temperatures since records started being kept in 1914.

Extinction of Animal Life

Also in 1970, Sen. Gaylord Nelson, D-Wis., wrote in Look magazine: “Dr. S. Dillon Ripley, secretary of the Smithsonian (Institution), believes that in 25 years, somewhere between 75 and 80 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct.”

” Gold and Silver to Disappear”

Scientist Harrison Brown published a chart in Scientific American that year estimating that mankind would run out of copper shortly after 2000. Lead, zinc, tin, gold, and silver were to disappear before 1990.

Erroneous predictions didn’t start with Earth Day.

” Oil and Natural Gas Depleted”

In 1939, the U.S. Department of the Interior said American oil supplies would last for only another 13 years. In 1949, the secretary of the interior said the end of U.S. oil supplies was in sight.

Having learned nothing from its earlier erroneous claims, in 1974 the U.S. Geological Survey said the U.S. had only a 10-year supply of natural gas.

The fact of the matter, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, is that as of 2014, we had 2.47 quadrillion cubic feet of natural gas, which should last about a century.

Dishonesty—the End Justifies the Means

Hoodwinking Americans is part of the environmentalist agenda. Environmental activist Stephen Schneider told Discover magazine in 1989:

We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. … Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest.

In 1988, then-Sen. Timothy Wirth, D-Colo., said: “We’ve got to … try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong … we will be doing the right thing anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.”

Americans have paid a steep price for buying into environmental deception and lies.

Global Warming Hoax has Origin in Nazi Germany

Revealed – How Renewables and the Global Warming Industry Are Literally Hitler

James Delingpole

Nazi vision of windmill

Have you ever wondered what kind of sadistic, totalitarian mentality you might need to want to carpet the countryside with bat-chomping, bird-slicing eco crucifixes in order to save the planet from an imaginary problem?

This book, unearthed by David Archibald at American Thinker, offers a clue: Unfortunately, Archibald reports, the scheme foundered for practical reasons. Just one of these towers would have required 27,500 tons of steel – “approaching the amount used in the Scharnhorst.” So the Germans put their renewable energy drive on hold in 1936. It was, of course, revived five decades later in their Energiewende – an ingenious scheme to replace fossil fuels with energy powered by wind and the sun in which Germany is so abundant sometimes for as many as two or three days each year.

But Nazi Germany’s contributions to the modern climate change industry did not stop with gigantic wind turbines. No. One of the earliest proponents of man-made global warming theory was none other than the Luftwaffe High Command’s chief meteorologist Hermann Flohn.

To be fair, some of us have been well aware for quite some time of the green movement’s connections with Nazi Germany: Himmler’s embrace of organic food; Hitler’s partial vegetarianism; Goering threatening to send animal abusers to the death camps; agricultural minister Richard Darre’s obsession with “Blood and Soil”; the ban on smoking on public transport; the Reich Nature Protection Law; etc. (I wrote about this in Watermelons)

Who the Real Nazis Are

After all, people on the conservative/skeptical side of the argument are far too often being accused by ignorant leftists of being literally Hitler. And I do think it’s important, every now and again, to remind these historical illiterates who the real Nazis are.

Delingpole: Revealed – How Renewables and the Global Warming Industry Are Literally Hitler

 

Moral Support: Religious Freedom supported, Defund Planned Parenthood, Trump Immigration Policy, Economic policy vindicated

Moral Support:

Religious Freedom supported, Defund Planned Parenthood, Trump Immigration Policy, Economic policy vindicated

Dogs bark, but the wagons roll on. ~Louis L’Amour

 

Religious Freedom and Traditional Family; Defund Planned Parenthood

VP Pence Breaks Senate Tie over Planned Parenthood State Funding Mandate

by Dr. Susan Berry

Justice Dept. Drops Pro-Transgender Lawsuit

by Neil Munro

Good Friday: Trump Appoints Religious Liberty Defender to Head HHS Office for Civil Rights

by Dr. Susan Berry

Feds Promise to Protect Half a Million American Girls from Genital Mutilation

The Department of Justice is committed to stopping female genital mutilation in this country, and will use the full power of the law to ensure that no girls suffer such physical and emotional abuse,” the acting Assistant Attorney General of the justice department’s criminal division, Kenneth Blanco, said April 13.

POTUS Signs Repeal of Obama Planned Parenthood State Funding Mandate

Ancestry.com helps family of dead boy find man posing as him

 

Trump Immigration Policy Vindicated

Lansing, Michigan, Will No Longer Declare Itself a ‘Sanctuary City’

by Katherine Rodriguez

Most Americans, especially minorities, say no to sanctuary cities

Poll: Only 1 in 3 wants own community to protect illegals

http://www.wnd.com/2017/03/most-americans-especially-minorities-say-no-to-sanctuary-cities/

Ann Corcoran: Trump Effect: More Central American migrants want asylum in Mexico, not moving on to US

And, that is how asylum is supposed to work.

Anyone who meets the legal definition of a refugee*** is supposed to seek asylum in the first safe country they reach—

National Security

 

Donald Trump and Israel PM Netanyahu

Bibi Welcomes New U.S. Amb. — ‘to Jerusalem’

 

Foreign Policy: Trump Has a Strategy for Destroying Islamic State – and It’s Working

 

Trump Economic Policy, Drain the Swamp

Trump Admin Releases ‘Drain the Swamp’ Guidance

Ben Garrison

Trump Halts U.S. Funding of UN Population Fund

Trade Deficit Falls by 10% as U.S. Factories Benefit from Economic Stability

Shock Berkeley Poll: California Voters Want DemS to Work with Trump

EPA Chief Pruitt Calls for ‘Exit’ from Paris Climate Agreement

 

Science Facts: Most Global Warming is Junk Science, no Scientific Method used

Science Facts:

Most Global Warming is Junk Science, no Scientific Method used

Study: <1% Of Papers in Scientific Journals Follow Scientific Method

Allum Bokhari

 

When I was in college 40 years ago, all science was conducted using the scientific method. It was a matter of integrity. Now everything is based on political opinion. Most so-called scientists don’t even know what the scientific method is. ~C.D

Fewer than 1 percent of papers published in scientific journals follow the scientific method, according to research by Wharton School professor and forecasting expert J. Scott Armstrong.

Professor Armstrong, who co-founded the peer-reviewed Journal of Forecasting in 1982 and the International Journal of Forecasting in 1985, made the claim in a presentation about what he considers to be “alarmism” from forecasters over man-made climate change.

“We also go through journals and rate how well they conform to the scientific method. I used to think that maybe 10 percent of papers in my field … were maybe useful. Now it looks like maybe, one tenth of one percent follow the scientific method” said Armstrong in his presentation, which can be watched in full below. “People just don’t do it.”

Armstrong defined eight criteria for compliance with the scientific method, including full disclosure of methods, data, and other reliable information, conclusions that are consistent with the evidence, valid and simple methods, and valid and reliable data.

8 Criteria for Scientific Method (Empiricism)

Digging deeper into their motivations, Armstrong pointed to the wealth of incentives for publishing papers with politically convenient rather than scientific conclusions.

“They’re rewarded for doing non-scientific research. One of my favourite examples is testing statistical significance – that’s invalid. It’s been over 100 years we’ve been fighting the fight against that. Even its inventor thought it wasn’t going to amount to anything. You can be rewarded then, for following an invalid [method].”

They Cheat

“They cheat. If you don’t get statistically significant results, then you throw out variables, add variables, [and] eventually you get what you want.”

“My big thing is advocacy. People are asked to come up with certain answers, and in our whole field that’s been a general movement ever since I’ve been here, and it just gets worse every year. And the reason is funded research.”

“I’ve [gone through] my whole career, with lots of publications, and I’ve never gotten a research grant. And I’m proud of that now.”

Armstrong concluded his talk by arguing that scientific evidence should be required for all climate regulations.

Why?

According to Armstrong, very little of the forecasting in climate change debate adheres to these criteria. “For example, for disclosure, we were working on polar bear [population] forecasts, and we were asked to review the government’s polar bear forecast. We asked, ‘could you send us the data’ and they said ‘No’… So we had to do it without knowing what the data were.”

According to Armstrong, forecasts from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) violate all eight criteria.

“Why is this all happening? Nobody asks them!” said Armstrong, who says that people who submit papers to journals are not required to follow the scientific method. “You send something to a journal and they don’t tell you what you have to do. They don’t say ‘here’s what science is, here’s how to do it.’”

Truth Matters: Science Facts vs. Fake News, Global Warming Hoax

Truth Matters:

Science Facts vs. Fake News, Global Warming Hoax

Another Huge Global Warming Data Scandal

Rush Limbaugh

global-warming-hoax1

RUSH: I need to tell you something that you’re not going to see in the Drive-By Media, and it’s huge. In setting this up, I want to remind you why I have spent so much time on the whole subject of climate change and global warming throughout the entirety of this program, 29 years.

A Front for Socialism

It is because that issue, climate change, contains every element of extreme liberalism and socialism that needs to be understood and opposed. Climate change, if they succeed in this, climate change is close to health care in terms of, if you get nationalized climate change, nationalized health care, then you are very close to totally controlling the way people live their lives.

You have succeeded in restricting people’s liberty and freedom in perhaps the greatest way you can. That’s why climate change or global warming, whatever you want to call it, is of such paramount importance to me, because it’s not just a single issue. It’s every wet dream the left has encapsulated in an issue. It has government control, it has tax increases, it has the expansion of government, it has decisions and mandates of what kind of car you can and can’t drive, what kind of food you can and can’t eat, what you can do with your own private property. It would go a long way to eliminating the concept of private property.

NOAA manipulated land readings

NOAA manipulated land readings

The unstable land readings: Scientists at NOAA used land temperature data from 4,000 weather stations (pictured, one in Montana, USA). But the software used to process the figures was bug-ridden and unstable. NOAA also used ‘unverified’ data that was not tested or approved. This data as merged with unreliable sea surface temperatures

I mean, it’s just horrible. And it turns out there’s yet another scandal of totally fake data that was purposely made up and lied about right before the Paris accords that was designed to sway duped nations into spending, wasting millions of dollars in implementing policies designed to stop runaway temperature increases when there have not been any. And the fake data came from the United States. It came from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA, the people that give you your weather forecast.

Data Science,Climate and satellites Consultant  John J Bates at his home in Arden North Carolina Picture Chris Bott

Data Science,Climate and satellites Consultant John J Bates at his home in Arden North Carolina Picture Chris Bott

It was exposed by a whistleblower in the organization who had seen enough, a scientist named Bates, a Dr. Bates, and he had had his fill of the lies and the distortions.

The Daily Mail on Sunday in the U.K. revealed a landmark paper exaggerated global warming. It was rushed through in time to influence the Paris Agreement. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration broke its own rules.

RUSH: To the global warming hoax. I want to remind you that Donald Trump is ridiculed to this day for claiming… All my little buddies on their tech blogs and many places on the left still ridicule Trump for claiming that global warming is a hoax started by the ChiComs to make American businesses uncompetitive. Now, global warming is a hoax. It is a hoax perpetrated on an unsuspecting population of the world who have been blamed for doing great damage to our climate through no fault of their own.

Liberal Lies

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Legal Insurrection for another great cartoon

cartoon-global-warming-hoaxThe CO2 is pollution. The stuff that you exhale is pollution. Barbecue pits and driving around your SUVs emits the greenhouse gas. The earth is broiling! The earth isn’t gonna be habitable in another 35 years. But there is redemption, and that is if you let government take over and if you stop driving these behemoth cars and let government tell you what kind of car to drive.

Stop eating Big Macs, beef, and all this other stuff and agree to tax increases and globalization. Let the United Nations basically determine how nations can function; then you can redeem yourself. And for every Prius you see on the road — for the most part, not all, but for the most part — you see a dupe. You see somebody who actually thinks they’re saving the planet, doing good. Everybody wants their lives to have meaning — and if you can save the planet, man, can you feel proud of yourself! You feel like your life has meaning.

So you go out, you buy an electric car or you keep your thermostat at 79 or 80 in the summer, and at 65 in the winter — and you sweat your butt off and then you freeze — and you’re saving the planet and all that. It’s bohunk. We don’t have the power to stop climate change, which means we don’t have the power to affect it at all. We can’t stop it. Lord knows we’ve been trying. Anyway, the point of all this is that there’s enough clear evidence out there that it is a hoax, that data is faked, that data is forged. But the Drive-Bys will not believe ’cause it’s a leftist cause, folks.

The reason that I’m so devoted to explaining this issue over and over is because it contains practically every aspect of liberalism that is dangerous.

That’s why it is a seminal issue to the left. Everything they want is wrapped up in it. Every bit of power, every bit of control. You couple climate change and health care, and freedom as you have known it ceases to exist. It is that evil, and it is that dangerous. And I’m gratified most polling data today shows that we’re nowhere near a majority of Americans who accept it or believe it or even consider it to be crucial.

It doesn’t stop the media from portraying it is an issue that all the right people agree with, that all the smart people agree on. If you don’t see this, then you’re a denier, you’re a kook, you’re equivalent to people that didn’t admit the Holocaust and so forth. The first substantive indication we had that this stuff is all faked and phonied up was a hack of an email server at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. in which the whistleblower there was somebody within the climate change movement, the so-called scientific community.

By the way, there’s another reason that… It’s real simple how this is not science. All you have to hear them say, “A consensus of scientists agree.”

There is no consensus in science. Science is not a democratic thing. It doesn’t get a vote.

A consensus of scientists thinking the earth is flat, for example, it doesn’t make the earth flat. There is no vote. A consensus of scientists doesn’t mean anything. In this issue, it means that they found all the scientists who are being paid via the grant process to produce research that the sponsors want.

global-warming-hoax4-moneyAnd they get their consensus. Algore has become filthy rich off of this hoax. The emails at East Anglia indicated — emails from scientist to scientist back and forth, back and forth — indicated and illustrated how they were changing and faking data from the Medieval period. They have to show throughout history temperatures much lower than today in order to make people believe that there’s an unstoppable warming going on that can be tied to industrialization. You go back to the Medieval period when we didn’t have any industrialization at all.

There were no fossil fuels, for example, so the only thing putting CO2 in the atmosphere was cows via methane and humans exhaling. But aside from that, you know, ’til the railroads came along and the Industrial Age. Smokestacks, factories, and this kind of thing. So they want to try to tie this unstoppable, dangerous warming to the invention of the combustible-fuel engine and progress related to that, as a means of indicting capitalism.

global-warming-hoax5-leaders-dupedClimate change is basically an anti-capitalist, pro-communist enterprise.

 

Truth unreported

You haven’t seen it yet, and I doubt you will see it. I know you won’t see this in the New York Times, and therefore my little tech blogger buddies will never see it. You won’t see it at BuzzFeed, which means my tech blogger buddies will not see it. You will not see this in the Washington Post; you won’t see it on the ABC, CBS, NBC. It’s in the Sunday edition of the U.K. Daily Mail. Headline:Exposed: How World Leaders Were Duped into Investing Billions Over Manipulated Global Warming Data — The Mail on Sunday can reveal a landmark paper exaggerated global warming.

“It was rushed through and timed to influence the Paris agreement on climate change. America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration broke its own rules.” In other words, the culprit in the latest exposing of the hoax is NOAA! They run all the weather satellites supposedly collecting all the temperature data.

FAKE NEWS:

chickenlittle1“The report claimed the pause in global warming never existed, but it was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.

“The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 … never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected.” In other words, up until this report came out, there hadn’t been any warming, and the climate change people were alarmed.

This report says the fact that there was no warming was a mistake, that there was no pause, that record heat breaking had continued to happen when everybody thought there was no warming taking place. And they said instead of the fact that no warming took place that in fact temperatures have been rising faster than anybody expected.

This report was “launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

TRUTH:

global-warming-hoax2-big-gov” The problem these people are all having is there hasn’t been any warming in the last 15 to 18 years. Actually (sigh), even to say that gives their existence some credence. (sigh) But it has to be done to illustrate this.

There hasn’t been any warming! Their climate models said that by now temperatures would be X degree warmer and sea levels would be X centimeters higher.

None of it’s happened, and so they have to come up with an excuse for it. They have to come up with a reason for the “pause” in the warming. “The Mail on Sunday today reveals astonishing evidence that the organization that is the world’s leading source of climate data,” which is NOAA, “rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change.

“A high-level whistleblower has told” the Daily Mail… This is an American scientist. His name is [Dr. John] Bates, he works at NOAA, and he’s fed up seeing what he’s seeing. He told the U.K. Daily Mail “that [NOAA] breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and [U.K. Prime Minster] David Cameron at the U.N. climate conference in Paris in 2015,” . . . .

which, by the way, Trump says we’re pulling out of and we’re not gonna live by, and thank goodness for that.

But the whistleblower, Dr. John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.”

chickenlittle2They made it up, just exactly what happened with the email chains and threads at the University of East Anglia in the U.K. The report that was submitted to scientists and world leaders before the Paris meeting was never subjected to rigorous internal evaluation, the kind that this whistleblower himself had devised. This is the old peer review. They had not run the new report by anybody to let them review it, to make sure that it was right. It was not evaluated. Somebody just wrote it up and submitted it.

“Dr. Bates’ vehement objections to the publication of the faulty data were overridden –” He objected at the time, “You can’t do this. You can’t do this. We’re lying, it isn’t right.” But his superiors at NOAA overrode his observations in what he says is “a blatant attempt to intensify the impact of what became known as the Pausebuster paper.”

Again, the Pausebuster paper is the paper presented to people like Obama and others before the Paris meeting is to say, “You know what, that pause that we think we’ve had for 15 years, it actually hasn’t been a pause. We have been setting heat records these last 15 years. We need to act even faster than we ever knew.” It was all lies. There was no truth to it.

science-fraud-money-not-truth“The whistleblower’s disclosures are likely to stiffen President Trump’s determination to enact his pledges to reverse his predecessor’s ‘green’ policies, and to withdraw from the Paris deal. … In an exclusive interview, Dr. Bates accused the lead author of the paper, Thomas Karl, who was until last year director of the NOAA section that produces climate data.”

 This does not surprise me. I think this whole movement is fraudulent because I don’t think that they can accurately tell us what global temperatures were in the 1600s and 1700s, the 1800s, just not possible. The tree trunk data, tree ring data, ice core, it’s all made-up stuff to be beyond our ability to comprehend. They’re scientists, they wear the white coats, we, therefore, believe them.

Cooler Today

global-warming-hoax5-noaa-adjusted-readingsThe ‘adjusted’ sea readings: Average sea surface temperatures are calculated using data from weather buoys (pictured). But NOAA ‘adjusted’ these figures upwards to fit with data taken from ships – which is notoriously unreliable. This exaggerated the warming rate, allowing NOAA to claim in the paper dubbed the ‘Pausebuster’ that there was no ‘pause’

The fact of the matter is it has been much warmer previous times on earth than it is today. That cuts against every theory they’ve got about industrialization and burning of fossil fuels creating CO2. But before you even get to that this whole thing is bogus to me because I don’t believe that we human beings are capable of doing what we are being accused of doing. Because if we were, we would be able to stop the process.

By the way, and I’m not convinced that the warming is bad, even if it is happening. And we know it is. The climate is never constant. You know, the big question for me, folks, is one about the vanity and the arrogance of all this. These people in the scientific community promoting this hoax have got everybody believing that the temperatures and the climate and everything as of this moment in the history of the earth is what’s normal, and any deviation from the present is a crisis.

 How do we know what is normal? You know, ice ages have lasted 10, 20, hundreds of years, and they ended. How did they end? What caused the ice to melt way back when before there was fossil fuel? Way before there was humanity living lives of progress, what ended ice ages? What brought about warming areas when we weren’t doing anything to cause it? The answer is, it’s way beyond our pay scale.

Hoax

global-warming-hoax3-swindleWe just simply don’t have the ability to do this. And the evidence is — to show you how inept they are, we supposedly have had a pause — this is how stupid they are, folks. Listen to me, look at me. We supposedly had a pause for 15 years. During those 15 years, why didn’t they say, “See? Our research is working. See? Our suggestions are working. Our reduction of CO2, our elimination of SUVs, our increased usage of the electric car, whatever, is working, we need to do more of this.”

Why did they greet the pause as a problem, instead of looking at it, “Wow, we can say we’re succeeding, we can say that we’re on the right track, we need to double down on the kind of restrictions we’ve already –

They’re so stupid politically they didn’t even realize an opportunity to claim success and credit. They saw a pause as panic city. I’m telling you, folks, this is the biggest bunch of fraud, one of the biggest hoaxes that has been perpetrated on a free people in I don’t know when.

https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2017/02/06/another-huge-global-warming-data-scandal/

 

Related Links

Science Facts, Global Warming Hoax, and a Fable with a Moral

Science Facts, Global Warming Hoax, and a Fable with a Moral

keyMoral of the Story: The birds are eaten by the fox; the fable is interpreted as a warning not to believe everything one is told.

He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red. and in the morning,  It will be foul weather today: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times? ~Jesus, Matthew 16:2,3

chickenlittle2CHICKEN LITTLE was in the woods one day when an acorn fell on her head. It scared her so much she trembled all over. She shook so hard, half her feathers fell out.

Chicken Little was so scared she started shouting: “Help! Help! The sky is falling! I have to go tell the king!”

So she ran in great fright to tell the king. Along the way she met Henny Penny.
Henny Penny asked, “Where are you going, Chicken Little?”
Chicken Little yelled, “Oh, help! The sky is falling!”
Henny Penny asked, “How do you know?”
Chicken Little replied, “I saw it with my own eyes, and heard it with my own ears, and part of it fell on my head!”
Henny Penny yelled, “This is terrible, just terrible! We’d better hurry up.”
So they both ran away as fast as they could. Soon they met Ducky Lucky.
chickenlittle4Ducky Lucky asked, “Where are you going, Chicken Little and Henny Penny?”
Chicken Little & Henny Penny yelled, “The sky is falling! The sky is falling! We’re going to tell the king!”
Ducky Lucky asked, “How do you know?”
Chicken Little replied, “I saw it with my own eyes, and heard it with my own ears, and part of it fell on my head.”
Ducky Lucky joined in the yelling, “Oh dear, oh dear! We’d better run!”
So they all ran down the road as fast as they could. Soon they met Goosey Loosey walking down the roadside.
chickenlittle5Goosey Loosey seeing the group said, “Hello there. Where are you all going in such a hurry?”
Chicken Little shouted, “We’re running for our lives!”
Henny Penny shouted, “The sky is falling!”
Ducky Lucky yelled, “And we’re running to tell the king!”
Goosey Loosey asked, “How do you know the sky is falling?”
Chicken Little yelled, “I saw it with my own eyes, and heard it with my own ears, and part of it fell on my head!”
chickenlittle6Goosey Loosey joined in the yelling and shouting, “Goodness! Then I’d better run with you.”
And they all ran in great fright across a field. Before long they met Turkey Lurkey strutting back and forth..
Turkey Lurkey said, “Hello there, Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Ducky Lucky, and Goosey Loosey. Where are you all going in such a hurry?”
Chicken Little screamed, “Help! Help!”
Henny Penny shouted, “We’re running for our lives!”
Ducky Lucky quacked, “The sky is falling!”
Goosey Loosey yelled, “And we’re running to tell the king!”
chickenlittle1Turkey Lurkey asked, “How do you know the sky is falling?”
Chicken Little yelled, “I saw it with my own eyes, and heard it with my own ears, and part of it fell on my head!”
Turkey Lurkey joined in the noise, “Oh dear! I always suspected the sky would fall someday. I’d better run with you.”
So they ran with all their might, until they met Foxy Loxy.
Foxy Loxy slyly asked. “Well, well. Where are you rushing on such a fine day?”
Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Ducky Lucky, Goosey Loosey, Turkey Lurkey (together) all yelled, “Help! Help!” It’s not a fine day at all. The sky is falling, and we’re running to tell the king!”
chickenlittle3Foxy Loxy was surprised, but asked, “How do you know the sky is falling?”
Chicken Little shouted, “I saw it with my own eyes, and heard it with my own ears, and part of it fell on my head!”
Foxy Loxy saw an opportunity and said, “I see. Well then, follow me, and I’ll show you the way to the king.”
So Foxy Loxy led Chicken Little, Henny Penny, Ducky Lucky, Goosey Loosey, and Turkey Lurkey across a field and through the woods. He led them straight to his den, and they never saw the king to tell him that the sky is falling.

Moral of the Story: The birds are eaten by the fox; the fable is interpreted as a warning not to believe everything one is told.

RushGlobalWarmingObamaLiberal Lies about Global Warming

Limbaugh Letter, July 2015, 11

Lie # 1: The earth has a fever, caused by people (mostly Americans) building factories, driving SUVs, wasting energy.

Fact: EARTH WARMS AND COOLS

The planet has been warming and cooling periodically since the beginning of time. ~Principia Scientific International

Lie #2

Apocalypse is coming! Climate models predict dramatic increases in global temperature.

Fact: COMPUTER PREDICTIONS= OOPS

To date, the computer models have been massively wrong. ~Prof. John Christy, University of Alabama, [UK] Daily Mail

Lie #3 This is the warmest year on record! It’s the hottest decade ever!

Fact: WARMING IS “ON HOLD”

Actual measurements show o warming for over 18 years. ~Climate Depot

icecappolardoubles1_JPGLie #4: Global warming is killing the polar ice caps!

Fact: THE ICE CAPS ARE FINE

Ice caps are not shrinking; in fact, Antarctic sea ice is expanding. ~Climate4you.com, university of Oslo Department of Geoscience

Lie #5: Global warming is causing extreme weather, including massive worldwide drought!

Fact: THE WEATHER IS NORMAL

The planet is experiencing normal variations in precipitation. ~EPA, Watts Up with That

 

Truth Zone: Propaganda Examples, Global Warming Hoax, and Delusional Mass Communication

Truth Zone:

Our Overnight Orwellian Unraveling

Truth-Detectors

Rush Limbaugh Radio

PC-TruthRUSH:  George Orwell captured the whole notion of this mass delusion and propaganda, the twisted logic of the politics of collective delusion.  He put it this way.  Well, I’m paraphrasing.  But his point was that if you believe something that differs from the social consensus — and look at the social issues that are harping out there.  They’re all rooted in this apparent crisis of inequality.  Somehow the masses that we’re talking about here, the propagandized have been convinced that America is the land of inequality, the land of unfairness.

 

Propaganda Examples: Delusional Mass Communication

obama-orwell-nightmareNow, here’s how it begins.  “How To Escape The Age Of Mass Delusion,” which is what this is all being described as being.  “Mass delusion is an important tool of oppressors because they can’t survive free expression. That’s why the First Amendment’s a target. Nearly 100 years ago, Walter Lippmann wrote about ‘the manufacture of consent’ in his classic work, ‘Public Opinion.’ On the heels of that book, Edward Bernays penned a little volume called ‘Propaganda,’ in which he stated that an elite would always be responsible for making the public aware of ‘new ideas’ which the public would then act upon as the elite nudged them into it. Related, but more in-depth is Jacques Ellul’s 1962 book, ‘Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes.’

Media Propaganda on Global Warming Hoax

hoaxglobalwarmingMedia propaganda urging that everybody accept the false — the demonstrably false — version of an event.  There’s no real debate on the merits or policies that depend on blind faith in man-made global warming.  If you disagree with it, you’re called a denier, even though it cannot be proven!  There is no man-made global warming.  It cannot be established; it cannot be proven.  In fact it’s been established to be a hoax, and the man leading it claims to be a scientist.  He’s not.  Algore!

Fraud!

RushGlobalWarming4corners-deceitEverywhere on these left-wing movements, fraud makes up a vast amount of it.  But the fraud succeeds in propagandizing, and as this piece points out: Refuting all this stuff with reason and logic just doesn’t seem to make a dent.  Which is why people obsessed and possessed with reason and logic reach a frustration level and give up.  “My gosh, if reason and logic are not gonna inform people, convert people, and get people back off of this stuff, then I don’t know what to do.” So they check out, go move behind the gated community and hope the cops don’t show at their swimming pool.

 

obamafraudHow about the”consensus of scientists” who all agree that global warming is man-made?  And what are the people that don’t adopt and support and abide by the consensus?  Well, they’re deniers, or kooks, or weirdos.  You know Obama? You know the way he involves himself in this?  Obama uses rhetoric to destroy people.  He has these fake straw men.  He’ll use a technique along the lines of… He’ll make up a group of people who think something, but you don’t know who the group is and you know what they’re doing.

 

Propaganda and Censorship

 

Sir Tim Hunt, Nobel Laureate, Offender for a Word

They that make a man an offender for a word, and lay a snare for him that reproveth at the gate [lay traps for those who testify against evil], and turn aside the just for a thing of naught. ~Isaiah 29:20-21

 

free-speech1Because, remember, they’re all about conformity, propaganda.  They’re not about reality and free speech.  Those are their enemies.  Reality and free speech are their enemies.  The one person who doesn’t go along with the consensus is the weirdo, is the kook, is the insane one.  So if the consensus believes something that’s absolutely insane and untrue, those who come along and point that out become the dangerous freaks who need to be dealt with.  Tim Hunt.  This is a story from the UK Guardian.

“As jokes go, Sir Tim Hunt’s brief standup routine about women in science last week must rank as one of the worst acts of academic self-harm in history. As he reveals to the Observer, reaction to his remarks about the alleged … tendencies of female researchers has virtually finished off the 72-year-old Nobel laureate’s career as a senior scientific adviser.” Here is what he said.  The guy’s British.  He’s been fired from his job.  So was his wife.  Here’s what he said.

“Sir Tim reportedly described himself as a ‘chauvinist pig’ at the World Conference of Science Journalists in Seoul and argued in favor of single-sex laboratories.” He said, “Let me tell you about my trouble with girls. Three things happen when they are in the lab: you fall in love with them, they fall in love with you, and when you criticize them they cry.” That is it.  That is what he said.  And for saying that, he and his wife are now literally ruined.  Their careers are over for trying to have a little levity about a point that he believed. 

Certainly the speed of the dispatch of Hunt — who won the 2001 Nobel prize in physiology for his work on cell division — from his various academic posts is startling.”

twitterstormListen to this paragraph: “His treatment also demonstrates the innate cruelty of social media, and in particular the savage power of Twitter, which first revealed the scientist’s transgression. The tale also demonstrates how PR departments, in trying to protect the reputation of institutions, often do so at the expense of the [people] who work for or make up those bodies.”

In other words, everybody caves.  Everybody just caves!  The guy goes out and makes a little joke. The people wound too tight literally go nuts. The sewer of Twitter comes alive.

That’s the thing that has surprised me about all of this cultural rot, deterioration, the mass delusion, propaganda we’ve been talking about, the thing that surprises me is how fast powerful institutions are to cave.  Rather than stand up and oppose it, everybody just caves.

Twitter Savagery is Fraud

liesEven if you give them the facts.  Even if you tell ’em it’s not tens of thousands of people on Twitter. It’s five or 10 using algorithms to make themselves look like tens of thousands.  It’s stunning to me.  I remember when I was growing up, the adults of that generation did not put up with this crap.  But something’s happened to transform it. The point is it’s more than cultural evolution taking place here.  This is not a natural cultural evolution. 

It’s not natural change.  It is change, but I think it’s brought about by artificial means, which is what propaganda is, lies.  Delusion is delusion.  I mean, delusion is what it is. 

Related post:

Church and State: American Culture, Communism and Religion

 

Abortion, Creation, and Global Warming Hoax

From Rush Limbaugh Radio Show
creationhandsRUSH: John Kerry, our esteemed secretary of state, said that climate change is our challenge, “a challenge to our responsibilities as the safe guarders of God’s creation.” The safe guarders. It would obviously be the safe guardians. The safe guarders. So John Kerry says that climate change is a challenge to our responsibility as the safe guarders of God’s creation. What about God’s creation called a fetus, Secretary Kerry? What is your responsibility as a safe guarder there?
See, in my humble opinion, folks, if you believe in God, then intellectually you cannot believe in manmade global warming. You must be either agnostic or atheistic to believe that man controls something he can’t create. It’s always, in fact, been one of the reasons for my anti-manmade global warming stance. The vanity, I mean, these people on the one hand, we’re no different than a mouse or a rat. If you’re listening to the animal rights activists, we are the pollutants of this planet. If it weren’t for humanity, the militant environmentalist wackos, if it weren’t for humanity, the earth would be pristine and wonderful and beautiful. Nobody would see it. According to them, we’re different. We are not as entitled to life on this planet as other creatures because we destroy it.
But how can we destroy it when we’re no different than the lowest life forms? And then on the other end, the vanity and the arrogance, we are so powerful and we are so omnipotent, that we can destroy. We can’t even stop a rain shower, but we can destroy the climate. And how? With barbecue pits and automobiles, particularly SUVs. It’s absurd. But nevertheless the esteemed secretary is running around saying that climate change is a challenge to our responsibilities as the safe guarders of God’s creation. Just ask him, what about God’s creation called a fetus?