THE Climate Scam Flow Chart

The CLimate Scam

Pic source : “Canberroo

THIS “climate loop” graphic delineates precisely the scandalous gravy train and self-perpetuating madness of “Climate Crisis Inc.” Where screaming “SAVE THE PLANET” promises a bounty of backslapping, group approval, and if deceitful enough, free access to trillions of dollars of taxpayers money; unchallenged, unlimited, guaranteed by the bank of virtue-signalling, environmentalism and political correctness.

H/T  🇦🇺 Canberroo  🇦🇺

•••

Climate Scam Related :

Advertisements

CLIMATE CHANGE – The Most Massive Scientific Fraud In Human History

GlobalWarmingFraud

We’ve got to ride this global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy.“ – Timothy Wirth, President of the UN Foundation

THIS brilliant piece of research and writing by, Leo Goldstein. Defeat Climate Alarmism, represents a truly definitive guide to what is, undoubtedly, the greatest pseudoscientific fraud ever perpetrated upon mankind – the empirically unproven theory of man-made “Global Warming” aka “Climate Change” aka “Climate Disruption”…

SUCH an important and pivotal (quick) read that needs to be spread far and wide, over and over and over again…


Those who can make you believe absurdities
can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire

Climate Realism Against Alarmism

A Realist Side of the Climate Debate. CO2 is a product of human breath and is plant food, NOT a pollutant.

CLIMATE alarmism is a gigantic fraud: it only survives by suppressing dissent and by spending tens of billions of dollars of public money every year on pseudo-scientific propaganda. Climate pseudo-science is wrong on physics, biology, meteorology, mathematics, computer sciences, and almost everything else. And even if the “climate science” were perfectly correct, climate alarmism politics would still be a tyranny and betrayal. Alarmists demand that the US and other Western countries unilaterally decrease their carbon dioxide emissions, while allowing unlimited increase to China and all other countries, which already emit more than 70% of carbon dioxide and almost 100% of other infrared-absorbing gases and soot.How could this happen? Carbon dioxide is exhaled by humans with each breath. How could the idea to call it a “pollutant” and to regulate its “emissions” get such traction in our society? How could a mad suicidal cult and its preachers obtain so much power in the academia and media, and become a cornerstone of the Democrats’ political platform, in the 21st century?

Many factors were in play.

  1. This takeover did not happen overnight, but took some 30-40 years.
  1. Climate alarmism was born and acquired power abroad. It was led by a bunch of non-governmental organizations of the environmentalist and “global governance” persuasion, acting in cahoots with certain United Nations agencies. It infiltrated the US through American branches of foreign NGOs and their fellow travelers, such as NRDC and EDF. Climate alarmism made a huge leap in 1993, when its fanatical disciple Al Gore became the Vice President. Nevertheless, climate alarmism has always been and remains an essentially foreign phenomenon.For example, the infamous Congressional testimony delivered by Dr. James Hansen in 1988, on invitation from Senator Wirth, was instigated by foreign enviros and diplomats in the run-up to the Toronto conference that happened a few weeks later. The climate dogma had been developing largely in lawless UN agencies and unaccountable transnational organizations, often using them as an extra-territorial operational base when national public demanded answers about its mischief.
  1. There is indeed a strong consensus among foreign governments in support of climate alarmism. This consensus has nothing to do with the science. Many governments are promised “reparations” from the United States for alleged harm; other countries expect to benefit from the damage to North American oil & gas exploration inflicted by climate alarmism; and another group of countries enjoys immunity from limitations that climate treaties impose on Europe and North America and receive fringe benefits in the form of outsourced manufacturing and/or preferential trade terms. Finally, many European countries are ruled by coalitions including influential Green Parties, and the rest are too small to resist.
  1. Over the last 8-10 years, climate alarmism has achieved its huge scale by spending tens of billions of dollars on its own public relations, including payments to public relations firms, pseudo-scientists, corrupt academics, university administrators, journalists, and media outlets. It has also created its own institutions with scientific-sounding names and taken over formerly highly-regarded organizations, including the National Academy of Sciences. Climate alarmism continues to demand more and more money, and spends most of it on self-promotion and intimidating its opponents.
  1. The leaders and pseudo-scientists of climate alarmism are driven by many motives. Fear of just punishment is quickly becoming the leading motive, as it should be. Their crimes start with tax evasion, theft of hundreds of billions of dollars, inflicting economic damage on the order of trillions of dollars, include an attempt to murder millions of Americans by shutting down the national energy infrastructure, and possibly include high treason. It is likely that they hide the truth even from their nominal party leaders – Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. That makes the current situation even more dangerous and unpredictable.
  1. The foreign interference, money, and some confusion about the subject matter were not the only factors in the meteoric rise of climate alarmism. Since the late 1980s, the global warming agenda has been accepted by the left as “their cause,” and received unconditional support. The majority of the scientists leaned left, and many of them accepted the alarmist claims (which were much more reasonable then than today) of the environmentalists and general media without suspicion. These scientists also bore old prejudices against conservatives, to whom they attributed all kinds of anti-scientific leanings. Although these prejudices provided enough breeding ground for alarmism, the scientific community successfully resisted climate alarmism in 1990’s. The Oregon Petition, signed by more than 30,000 scientists and other professionals knowledgeable in sciences, is just one example.
  1. In 2001, even the International Panel on Climate Change acknowledged that carbon dioxide emissions did not cause harmful climate change. It reacted to this “discovery” by removing the word “anthropogenic” from its definition of “climate change.” That did not stop climate alarmism from gaining momentum. Instead, climate alarmism finally parted ways with science, and declared its dogma to be the undisputed truth.
  1. Scientifically illiterate Al Gore was responsible for the science in the Clinton–Gore administration from 1993-2001. He evaluated scientists according to their agreement with his views on global warming. Not surprisingly, his appointments and budget decisions had effect of deadly poison, administered to the American scientific enterprise. (To tell the truth, it was not all Al Gore’s fault. The scientific enterprise came under fire from many directions, from the academic “social constructivism” theory to “diversity” politics.) The scientific institutions, already leaning left before Al Gore, just fell to the left after his reign.
  1. George W. Bush was too naïve to fight cunning enviros on the government payroll posing as scientists, and was allowed too little time for that anyway. Concerned with maintaining national unity in the aftermath of the enemy attack on 9/11, he appointed Democrat John Marburger as his scientific advisor (Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy). Marburger let government-financed scientific institutions slide further down and to the left, but his appointment did not save Bush from the usual accusations of “manipulating science for political purposes,” “censoring scientific results,” and “silencing the science,” all slogans shouted by the Union of Con Scientists and the rest of the attack pack.
  1. In 1997, the US Senate rejected the Kyoto pact, instigated by climate alarmism, by a 95–0 vote. The main reason was its discriminatory terms against the US. But these terms, demanding unilateral emission cuts by the US and few other countries, were more like an insult added to an injury. The injury was the corruption of the science by environmentalist quackery, of which the global warming catastrophism was just the latest example. This vote proved to be a palliative treatment. Many politically active leftist scientists, including distinguished ones, remained committed to the totalitarian ideals, wanted Congress to accept their beliefs as the science, and called for Congress to restore science to its appropriate place in government. But the First Amendment says: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. The leftist scientists either did not understand the First Amendment, decided that it applied only to religion of the “ordinary folk” and not to them, or were egged on by their comrades whose “science” needed “a place in the government” because it took place neither in nature nor in the lab. When the Senate passed a resolution not addressing alarmist beliefs directly, these scientists probably concluded that the Senators did not have scientific arguments against the alarmist beliefs, and acted out of some ulterior political motives. And they accepted the alarmist claims (which were much more moderate then than today) as real science, and opposition to them as politically or financially motivated. Since many of these scientists were quite distinguished and sincere in their ignorance and hubris, their opinion carried much weight with their colleagues.
  1. The lawless nature of the IPCC and other UN agencies allowed climate alarmists to pull off a trick which would be impossible in any national forum. It was like the “telephone” game played by kids. Scientists at the bottom of the IPCC structure were saying one thing, while Greenpeace and its accomplices at the top of the IPCC structure were telling the public something entirely different, and invoking the authority of the scientists. When elected officials disagreed with the Greenpeace allegations, many legitimate scientists thought that the politicians misunderstood the science, and sharply criticized them. The leftist media was only too happy to amplify such criticism.One example is the play on the definition of “climate change.” If climate change is understood as “dangerous anthropogenic global warming,” as in the UN Framework Agreement on Climate Change, then climate change does not happen. If climate change is defined to include natural climate variations, according to the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report (2001), then it happens and has been happening for billions of years, but is not alarming. And there are dozens or hundreds of mutually incompatible definitions of climate change, produced by climate alarmists and by scientists trying to get crumbs from the alarmist table.
  1. The extreme left apparently took over the Democratic Party in 2002-2005. The DNC started to court the foreign vote openly. Internet made that courting easy and convenient. Democrat Congresspersons welcomed foreign “observers” at the US elections. Al Gore started a hedge fund called Generation Investment Management in the UK, and founded an exchange to trade hot air (voluntary carbon credits). Gore and his minions publicly fantasized that the hot air would become the hottest commodity of the 21st century, and prepped themselves to become multi-billionaires. Unfortunately, they did not stop at fantasizing, but attracted some serious money, and put it at work to scare us into buying those carbon credits. In 2006, following Al Gore’s fraudumentary An Inconvenient Truth, climate alarmism started its own offensive against the US on the American soil. This offensive has been going surprisingly successfully, and led to the current situation.
  1. The recent Attorneys General gambit is a show of desperation, rather than strength. Greenpeace, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, and whoever else behind them have sacrificed three state Attorneys General – Eric Schneiderman, Maura Healey, and Kamala Harris – as if they were merely pawns.  Maybe they were.  Those who press an analogy between the energy companies and the tobacco companies just expose themselves as either hopelessly crazy or craftily malicious. Those who act on that analogy are either criminals or enemy agents. Tobacco is a harmful, addictive, and useless (for everybody but the smokers) product. This is why the unconstitutional and corrupt prosecution of the tobacco companies was successful twenty years ago. Oil, gas, and coal are exactly opposite to tobacco. They are energy sources necessary for the existence of civilized society, on which the lives of the majority of Americans depend. And not everybody in this country is an idiot, thinking that the power of his or her dreams can replace electricity and gasoline.By the way, the climate alarmist lobby opposes nuclear power and hydro power as fiercely as it opposes fossil fuels.

Climate alarmism’s Tower of Babel is falling. It is voluntarily supported by the Obama regime from inside, and by the Guardian from outside. The Guardian used to be a respectable newspaper of the British Left, but dropped to the tabloid level and is awaiting indictment for espionage. Other supporters of climatism are in it only for the money, or because they are chained to it as galley slaves to their oars, or because they are too stupid to run away from the falling tower.

Use the Climate Sanity Search to learn more.

(Climatism bolds)

Welcome | Climate Realism Against Alarmism

H/t @tan123

•••

Climate Chnage Fraud Related :


Reported Plunge in Renewable Costs Prompts Aussie Government to Pull Subsidies

“Of course, if claims of renewable and energy storage cost parity with fossil fuels all turn out to be a pack of marketing spin, with market normality restored most existing Aussie renewables businesses will die by the invisible hand of Adam Smith.”

ADAM Smith’s hand has just become the most feared wrecking ball within the green centrally-planned ‘Unreliables’ industrial gulag!

VIVA LA Capitalism and free market forces to finally drive down the obscene cost of Australia’s green-spiked power bills.

Watts Up With That?

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The Australian government is so impressed by the alleged plunge in renewable and battery storage costs they think it will no longer be necessary to subsidise renewables.

Coalition rethinks need for clean energy target as renewable cost plunges

The Turnbull government is rethinking the need to adopt a clean energy target, believing the rapidly falling cost of renewable energy means there may no longer be a requirement for subsidies.

In the keynote address to The Australian Financial Review National Energy Summit, federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg will highlight the falling costs of wind and solar energy, including battery storage capacity, as he stresses emissions reduction cannot come at the expense of reliability and affordability.

It is challenging but possible to simultaneously put downward pressure on prices and enhance the reliability of the system, while meeting our international emissions reductions targets,” he will…

View original post 377 more words


Australian Politics – Not Fit To Be Prime Minister

The emperor has no clothes.

PA Pundits - International

Bolt New 01By Andrew Bolt ~

Maurice Newman, former head of the Australian stock exchange, says Malcolm Turnbull has proved he is unfit to be Prime Minister:

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm TurnbullAustralian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull

Turnbull’s experience in business appears not to have prepared him for the sheer scale and complexity of politics, particularly government. He seems to be erratic, egocentric and divisive. His supersized ministry suggests people-management issues. His vacillation over Kevin Rudd’s UN candidacy is symptomatic of a chairman not in command of his cabinet. When careful reflection is needed, he finds a television program all that is required to immediately order a royal commission into juvenile detention in the Northern Territory.

Personal qualities aside, there is the further complication that this Prime Minister is a “progressive” liberal in a party that traditionally has been centre-Right, when the country desperately needs a fundamental change in philosophical direction.

His beliefs on climate change…

View original post 200 more words


Climate fear is being used to take away human freedom and empower governments

Another *must read* Paul Driessen…

PA Pundits - International

Climate fear is being used to take away human freedom and empower governments

Driessenprofile2By Paul Driessen ~

The Obama Administration is using climate change to “fundamentally transform” America. It plans to make the climate crisis industry so enormous that no one will be able to dismantle it, even as computer models and disaster claims totally lose credibility — and even if Republicans control Congress and the White House after 2016.

Obummers-628x353Numerous regulators, researchers, universities, businesses, manufacturers, pressure groups, journalists, and politicians now have such strong monetary, reputational, and authority interests in climate alarmism that they will defend its tenets and largesse tooth and nail.

They are pursuing this agenda even though global warming is dead-last in the latest Gallup poll of 15 issues: Only 25% of Americans worry about it “a great deal,” while 24% are “not at all” worried. By comparison, 46% are deeply concerned about the size and…

View original post 827 more words


How The Big Lie Is Being Constructed

Real Science

There are two key components to the big climate lie.

  1. Tampering with temperature data
  2. Lying about climate history. The goal is to convince people that the climate is “getting worse” and that it will continue to “get worse.

Climate change politics is straight out of the worst annals of human history, back to the days of burning witches for cooking the weather. Who could have imagined this would happen in the 21st century?

View original post


Claim : Global Warming Deaths To Quadruple By 2050

We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.

– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation

Screen Shot 2013-09-03 at , September 3, 1.58.35 PM

The success of Australia’s Carbon Tax has meant that global temperatures have not risen over the past 15 years despite Australia’s evil CO² emissions continuing to rise over the same period 1998-2011.

Note China’s CO² emissions have increased by 300% over the same period 1998-2011. However, their talk of an emissions trading pilot scheme has also played a crucial role in halting the rise of atmospheric temps over the past 15 years.

CO2 emissions 1998-2011

International Energy Statistics

RSS TEMP GODDARD

RSS data shows how BIG Government, EPA regulations, green schemes, green tape and trillions of dollars of your money are working together to save the planet from catastrophic global warming.  Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

australia-uah-summers

Despite soaring evil-CO² emissions, there has been no warming trend in Australian summers since satellite (UAH) records began.

Even though global temperatures have not risen over the past 15 years and there has been no warming trend in Australian summers since (UAH) satellite records began, we must not be complacent. We must continue to listen to emperor Rudd’s Government and Deputy Anthony Albanese, who warn us that by 2050 evil CO² related Global Warming (aka Climate Change) heat-related deaths will quadruple.

By 2050 ‘No child or pensioner will die of a heat-related illness’ and we will thank emperor Rudd’s Labor government for linking Australia’s carbon tax and energy prices to the European emissions trading scheme (ETS) – cutting the world’s temp even further and eliminating Australia’s “Angry Summers” forever.

Our grandkids future is more important than being able to afford electricity bills today. Our ‘great’ grandkids future is more important than pensioners being able to afford to use Air Conditioning during “The Angry Summer” or heating in winter.

We must not be concerned green central planning is killing Australia’s international competitiveness, destroying local manufacturing jobs, curtailing investment and sending jobs and industry off-shore to access cheaper, reliable and more efficient energy sources in China, India and elsewhere…

VOTE1 Kevin Rudd & Labor to STOP heat related deaths by 2050 !!

BACK to reality!

Albanese’s heat-related death forecast is classic fear-mongering and global warming alarmist propaganda BS.

Statistics and historical evidence show cold related deaths far outweigh those caused by heat by more than double. However if your government makes electricity unaffordable through draconian climate policy; Carbon Taxers, ETS air trading and heavily subsidised green schemes, you might expect heat related deaths to increase as societies most vulnerable are unable to afford air-conditioning. Heat related deaths would certainly rise if AC is regulated or banned altogether as recommended by UN bureaucrats and those members of the comfortable western climate change elite brigade.

The Facts on HEAT versus COLD related deaths:

The Deadliest U.S. Natural Hazard: Extreme Cold

Posted on December 18, 2008 by 

https://i0.wp.com/blog.kievukraine.info/uploaded_images/3195-734559.jpg

There’s a new essay from Indur Goklany in response to a recent Reuters news article.

Yesterday Reuters reported on a study which claimed that heat is the deadliest form of natural hazard for the United States. However, this result is based on questionable data.  The study used results for mortality from extreme heat and cold that can be traced to the National Climatic Data Center. But these data are substantially different from mortality data from the Center for Disease Control (CDC) based on the Compressed Mortality File for the United States. The latter uses death certificate records, which provide the cause of each recorded death (based on medical opinion). It is reasonable to believe that regarding the cause of death, particularly for extreme cold and heat, medical opinion as captured in death certificate records is more reliable than determinations made by the meteorologists in the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s NCDC (even if they have Ph.Ds.).

The essay draws on data from the CDC database of mortality in the USA. See this table:

Combining data from the CDC database for extreme cold and extreme heat, and various arms of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for floods, lightning, hurricanes, and tornadoes, Goklany has shown that extreme cold, rather than heat, is the deadliest form of extreme weather event. In fact, from 1979-2002, extreme cold was responsible for 53 percent of deaths due to all these categories of extreme weather, while extreme heat contributes slightly more than half that (28%).  For more, see The Deadliest U.S. Natural Hazard: Extreme Cold.

Of course we all know that the human race has historically done better during warm periods. While we’ve seen a sloght warming in the last century, we’ve also seen a worldwide improvement in the human condition.

Warm – what’s not to like?

Also this:
In an article entitled, “The impact of global warming on health and mortality,” published in the Southern Medical Journal in 2004, W.R. Keatinge and G.C. Donaldson of Queen Mary’s School of Medicine and Dentistry at the University of London note:

“Cold-related deaths are far more numerous than heat-related deaths in the United States, Europe, and almost all countries outside the tropics, and almost all of them are due to common illnesses that are increased by cold.”

“From 1979 to 1997, extreme cold killed roughly twice as many Americans as heat waves, according to Indur Goklany of the U.S. Department of the Interior,” Singer and Avery write. “Cold spells, in other words, are twice as dangerous to our health as hot weather.”

Read more:  http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Does_Hot_weather_or_cold_weather_cause_more_deaths#ixzz1SWXgP7qR

THE CHANGING OF THE GOAL POSTS:

During the 1970’s the Global Cooling scare was to bring drought and starvation:

ScreenHunter_51 Jul. 13 06.31

MAJOR world climate changes were under way that would cause economic and political upheavals “almost beyond comprehension”, an internal report of the Central Intelligence Agency has warned the US Government.

“The new climatic era brings a promise of famine and starvation to many areas of the world”, the report warns.

Its basic premise is that the world’s climate is cooling and will revert to conditions prevalent between 1600 and 1850 — when the earth’s population was less than 1,000 million and its rural, pre-industrial era civilisations were largely capable of feeding themselves.

A return to cooler temperatures in today’s fragile, . interdependent global economic structure would mean that India, China and the Soviet Union’ — among other northern hemisphere nations — will be hard pressed to feed their populations.

The report notes that’ “the change of climate is cooling some significant agricultural areas and causing drought in others. If, for example, there, is a northern hemisphere drop of one degree centigrade, it would mean that India will have a major drought every four years and can only support three-fourths of her present population”.

“The world reserve would have to supply 30 to 50 million metric tons of grain each year to prevent the death of 150 million Indians”, the re port said.

“China, with a major famine every five years, would require a supply of 50 million metric tons of grain. The Soviet Union would lose Kazakhstan for grain production, thereby showing a yearly loss of 48 million metric tons of grain.

“Canada, a .major exporter, would lose over 50 per cent of its production capability and 75 per cent of its exporting capabilities. Northern Europe will “lose 25 to 30 per cent of its present production capability while the Common Market countries would zero their exports”.

The report, which was concerned with possible political and economic threats the United States could expect from such drastic events, said the starvation and famine would lead to social unrest and global migration of populations.

21 Jul 1976 – C.I.A. WARNING Changes to climate to bring uphea…

UPDATE

Reader Bill confirms the Government’s alarmist projections:

Want to read something really interesting? Compared Figure 4-1 in the State of Australian Cities report with the original source which is a 2011 Pricewaterhouse Coopers report. The caption for Figure 4-1 claims it shows projected annual heat related deaths but it doesn’t, it shows “extreme heat events” which are “rare”. In other words it shows projected deaths from rare severe heat waves. Australia has only had ONE in the last 70 years and that was in 2009.

The PWC report says that annual heat related deaths will increase to between 170 and 200 annually with much of the increase due to population increase and an ageing population. So the stories claiming that heat related deaths will “quadruple” to “2000 annually” are off by a factor of 10!

Here’s the link to the 2011 PWC report. See Figure 1 and Figure 3.

http://www.pwc.com.au/industry/government/assets/extreme-heat-events-nov11.pdf

•••

Related: