Climate Hoax

climate change hoax

climate warming hoaxThe governments of Italy, France, and Germany Thursday flatly rejected U.S. President Donald Trump’s offer to renegotiate the Paris climate accord.  “We deem the momentum generated in Paris in December 2015 irreversible and we firmly believe that the Paris Agreement cannot be renegotiated, since it is a vital instrument for our planet, societies and economies,” the leaders of the three countries said in a joint statement.

Earlier Wednesday, Trump had announced that the U.S. would withdraw from the Paris agreement and immediately begin negotiations to re-enter on terms that are “fair to the United States.”

The statement by French President Emmanuel Macron, Italian Prime Minister Paolo Gentiloni, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel indicates that Europe would rather keep the U.S. out of the Paris climate agreement than permit the U.S. to re-enter on more favorable terms. That likely means that the U.S. will remain out of the agreement for the foreseeable future.

This talking points memo is designed to arm people with the latest information on some important facts so they can better engage in climate change debate with those advocating the UN/Al Gore position. Footnotes are provided to substantiate all the claims made in this document.

Global warming hype and hysteria have for some time dominated the news media, academia, schools, and institutions like the UN and the U.S. government. Many of the arguments put forth by global warming advocates either embellish or distort the true facts on a host of issues, ranging from rising sea levels and record temperatures to melting polar caps and polar bears, among others.

Claims of an alleged “97% consensus” of scientists are “pulled from thin air”

There is absolutely no scientific “consensus” about catastrophic manmade climate change. Claims that 97% of scientists agree are not backed up by any credible study or poll.

UN IPCC lead author Dr. Richard Tol: “The 97% is essentially pulled from thin air; it is not based on any credible research whatsoever.”1

The claim that “97% of scientists agree” is in part based on 77 anonymous scientists from a survey. So at least one of the 97% “consensus” claims is not based on thousands of scientists or even hundreds of scientists – but only on 77.2

Another study, authored by blogger John Cook, claimed that 97% of climate studies agree on climate change. But scientists were quick to debunk it. Climatologist Dr. David Legates of the University of Delaware and three coauthors reviewed the same studies as did Mr. Cook and their research revealed “only 41 papers — 0.3% of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0% of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1% — had been found to endorse” the claim that humans are to blame for a majority of the current warming.3

CO2 is not the “control knob” of the climate

There is scant connection between higher levels of CO2 and warming. During the Ice Age, CO2 levels were 10 times higher than they are today.4

There are many, many factors which impact climate – including volcanoes, wind oscillations, solar activity, ocean cycles, volcanoes, tilt of the Earth’s axis, and land use. CO2 is just one factor, and not the control knob of the climate.

Today’s levels of roughly 400 parts per million (PPM) of CO2 are not alarming. In geologic terms, today’s CO2

1 UN IPCC lead author Dr. Richard Tol. Testimony to U.S. Congress: Full Committee Hearing – Examining the UN Intergovernmental

2 UN IPCC lead author Dr. Richard Tol. Sept. 3, 2015.

3 Joseph Bast and Dr. Roy Spencer . “The Myth of the Climate Change ‘97%’.” The Wall Street Journal – May 26, 2014.

4 Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore. in Testimony before the U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee. Feb. 25, 2014.

levels are among the lowest in earth’s history.5

University of London professor emeritus Philip Stott: “Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically selected factor (CO2) is as misguided as it gets. It’s scientific nonsense.”

According to Greenpeace co-founder Dr. Patrick Moore: “We had both higher temperatures and an ice age at a time when CO2 emissions were 10 times higher than they are today.”

Claims of “hottest year on record” are based on hype

Global temperatures have been holding nearly steady for almost two decades, according to satellites from the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) and the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH).6

Global warming proponents, based on heavily altered surface data, declared 2005, 2010, 2015, and 2016 to be the “hottest years” on record. But a closer examination revealed the claims were “based on year-to-year temperature data that differ by only a few HUNDREDTHS of a degree to tenths of a degree Fahrenheit – differences that were within the margin of error in the data.”7

MIT climate scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen ridiculed these “hottest year” claims. “The uncertainty here is tenths of a degree. It’s just nonsense. This is a very tiny change period,” Lindzen said. “If you can adjust temperatures to 2/10ths of a degree, it means it wasn’t certain to 2/10ths of a degree.”

In addition, the “hottest year” claims are based on surface data only dating back to the late 19th century. They also ignore the temperature revisions made by NASA and NOAA that have enhanced the warming trend by retroactively “cooling” the past.8

Many peer-reviewed studies have found the Medieval Warm Period was as warm or warmer than current temperatures.9

In February 2017, a NOAA whistleblower, Dr. John Bates, revealed a temperature ‘Pausebuster’ scandal. Dr. Bates detailed how a federal study “exaggerated global warming” and “was timed to influence” the UN Paris agreement. NOAA stands accused of manipulating temperature data to hype so-called “global warming.”10

5 Geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack, former chair of Department of Earth and Environmental Science at the University of Pennsylvania. 6 Climatologist Dr. Roy Spencer. “The Pause Lives on: Global Satellites: 2016 not Statistically Warmer than 1998.” –– Jan. 4, 2017.

7 Dr. David Whitehouse noted the ‘temperature pause never went away’ – Jan. 19, 2017.

8 Climate analyst Tony Heller – Real Climate Science – Feb. 14, 2017.

9 ‘More than 700 scientists from 400 institutions in 40 countries have contributed peer-reviewed papers providing evidence that the Medieval Warm Period was real, global, and warmer than the present.’ – Mar. 8, 2013.

10 David Rose. UK Daily Mail. Feb. 12, 2017.

Prominent scientists are bailing out of the so-called “consensus” on “global warming”

Renowned Princeton Physicist Freeman Dyson: “I’m 100% Democrat and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on climate issue, and the Republicans took the right side.” Dyson also said: “What has happened in the past 10 years is that the discrepancies between what’s observed and what’s predicted have become much stronger.”11

Nobel Prize-winning scientist Dr. Ivar Giaever, who endorsed Obama, now says President Obama was “ridiculous” and is “dead wrong” on “global warming.” Dr. Giaever also said: “Global warming is a non-problem … I say this to Obama: Excuse me, Mr. President, but you’re wrong. Dead wrong.” He further said, “Global warming really has become a new religion.”12

Green Guru James Lovelock reverses belief in “global warming,” and now says, “I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy.” He now condemns the Green movement: “It’s a religion really. It’s totally unscientific.”13

UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning Ph.D. environmental physical chemist: “Global warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in history … When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.”14

UN IPCC Lead Author Dr. Richard Tol bolts warmist narrative, calls Gore’s claims “complete madness.” “It disturbs me hearing people like Al Gore say that he is worried about the future of his grandchildren. Complete madness.” 15

EPA and UN policies are not an “insurance policy” against “climate change”

Would anyone purchase fire insurance on their home with a huge up-front premium but virtually no payout if their home burned down? Only those who answer YES to such an “insurance” policy would like the “climate” regulations “deal” offered by Congress, the EPA, and the UN. If we actually did face a manmade climate crisis and we had to rely on the U.S. Congress or the United Nations to save us, we would all be DOOMED.

The UN’s Paris climate agreement and EPA regulations can’t control the climate

University of Pennsylvania Geologist Dr. Robert Giegengack has noted, “None of the strategies that have been

11 UK Register. Oct. 11, 2015.

12 65th Nobel Laureate Conference in Lindau, Germany. July 1, 2015. 13 UK Guardian. Sept. 30, 2016 .

14 Climate Depot Special Report. Aug. 21, 2013.

15 Climate Depot. Special Report. Jan. 7, 2016.

offered by the U.S. government or by the EPA or by anybody else has the remotest chance of altering climate, if in fact climate is controlled by carbon dioxide.”16

Danish statistician Dr. Bjorn Lomborg, the President of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, noted in 2017 about the UN Paris agreement: “We will spend at least one hundred trillion dollars in order to reduce the temperature by the end of the century by a grand total of three-tenths of one degree … the equivalent of postponing warming by less than four years … Again, that is using the UN’s own climate prediction model.”

Lomborg added: “If the U.S. delivers for the whole century on President Obama’s very ambitious rhetoric, it would postpone global warming by about eight months at the end of the century.”

In 2015: President Obama’s EPA Administrator admitted the regulations have no measurable climate impact. “One one-hundredth of a degree?” EPA Chief McCarthy defends regs as “enormously beneficial” – Symbolic impact.

Former Obama Department of Energy Assistant Secretary Charles McConnell slammed EPA climate regulations as “falsely sold as impactful … All U.S. annual emissions will be offset by 3 weeks of Chinese emissions.”

Instead of debating climate, activists have now been calling for jailing skeptics

Instead of engaging in debates, prominent climate activists now call for jailing skeptics. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., declared he wanted to jail climate skeptics. “They ought to be serving time for it,” Kennedy said in 2014.

And Bill Nye “The Science Guy” entertained the idea of jailing climate skeptics for “affecting my quality of life” in 2016, while U.S. Senators and top UN scientists called for RICO-style charges against skeptics.

The UN and other organizations push manmade “global warming” fears to further a political agenda

The UN and EPA regulations are pure climate symbolism designed to promote a more centrally planned energy economy. The UN and EPA regulations are simply a vehicle to put politicians and bureaucrats in charge of our energy economy and “save” us from bad weather and “climate change.”

UN official Ottmar Edenhofer, co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III, admitted what’s behind the climate issue: “One must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy … One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.”17

In 2009, former Vice President Al Gore touted U.S. cap-and-trade legislation as a method to help bring about “global governance.”18

UN climate chief Christiana Figueres declared in 2012 that she was seeking a “centralized transformation” that 16 Climate Depot. Special Report. November 2016.

17 Interview with UN IPCC’s Ottmar Edenhoffer. Nov. 13, 2010.

18 Al Gore. Remarks at Oxford during the Smith School World Forum on Enterprise and the Environment. July 7, 2009.

is “going to make the life of everyone on the planet very different.”19

The UN IPCC climate panel is a political organization masquerading as a scientific body

After extensive analysis, climate data analyst John McLean concluded: “The UN IPCC is, in fact, no more than a craftily assembled government-supported lobby group, doing what lobby groups usually do.”20 Essentially, the UN IPCC is a lobbying organization that seeks to enrich the UN by putting it in charge of “solving” climate change. If the UN fails to find manmade global warming to be a problem, it no longer has a reason to continue the climate panel and therefore cannot be in charge of proposing “solutions” to climate change.

The alleged global warming “solution” of limiting emissions does not control climate but hurts poor nations

Attempting to control weather and climate will have no impact on climate, but the so-called “solutions” of global warming that would limit development and ban many forms of life-saving carbon based energy will have huge impacts on economic development of poor, developing nations. Prof. Roger Pielke, Jr., warned that climate activists “promote green imperialism that helps lock in poverty” and that “climate policy robs the world’s poor of their hopes.” 21An estimated 1.1 billion people still live without running water and electricity.22

The New Yorker in 2016 dubbed it “the Climate Summit of Money” at the UN – “It will cost sixteen & a half trillion dollars for world to meet its collective Paris goals.”23

Climate activists and the media confusing carbon dioxide with “pollution”

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is not “pollution.” The term “carbon pollution” is unscientific and misleading. CO2 is a harmless trace essential gas in the atmosphere that humans exhale (after inhaling oxygen).

Princeton Physicist Dr. Will Happer has said: “To call carbon dioxide a pollutant is really Orwellian. You are calling something a pollutant that we all produce. Where does that lead us eventually?”24

Polar bear extinction fears not based on data

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature estimates the current polar bear population at 19. UK Guardian. Nov. 21, 2012.

20 Climate data analyst John McLean. “The IPCC’s Fatal Founding Flaw.” – Quadrant Online, Jan. 17, 2013.

21 Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr., and Daniel Sarewitz. “Climate policy robs the world’s poor of their hopes.” Financial Times, Feb. 26, 2014.

22 Reuters. One in seven people still live without electricity. World Bank. May 19, 2015.

23 Katy Lederer. “The Climate Summit of Money,” The New Yorker, Feb. 24, 2016.

24 Dr. Will Happer’s remarks at climate summit sponsored by the Texas Public Policy Foundation – Nov. 19, 2015.

between 22,000 and 31,000, which has been called “the highest estimate in 50 years.”25

Evolutionary biologist and paleozoologist Dr. Susan Crockford of the University of Victoria wrote: “Polar bears have survived several episodes of much warmer climate over the last 10,000 years than exists today.”26

She also wrote, “There is no evidence to suggest that the polar bear or its food supply is in danger of disappearing entirely with increased Arctic warming, regardless of the dire fairy-tale scenarios predicted by computer models.”

Extreme weather failing to follow predictions

In 2017, Prof. Roger Pielke, Jr., testified to Congress there was simply “no evidence” that hurricanes, floods, droughts, tornadoes are increasing.27

In his 2014 testimony on the current state of weather extremes, Prof. Pielke said: “It is misleading, and just plain incorrect, to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, or droughts have increased on climate timescales either in the United States or globally.”28

Tornadoes failing to follow “global warming” predictions

Big tornadoes have seen a drop in frequency since the 1950s. The years 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, and 2016 all saw at or near record low tornado counts in the U.S.29

Actual NOAA tornado data for 2016 revealed the year was one of the quietest since records began in 1954, and below average — for 5th year in a row.

Hurricanes are not getting worse

NOAA: U.S. Completes Record 11 Straight Years Without Major (Cat 3+) Hurricane Strike: This streak is the longest since record-keeping began, according to NOAA data going back to 1851.30

Atmospheric research scientist Dr. Philip Klotzbach’s research also revealed no trend in global accumulated cyclone energy (ACE) in the past 30 years.31

In 2017, a NOAA study reported: “It is premature to conclude (that manmade global warming has) already had a detectable impact on” hurricanes.32

25 Susan Crockford, an adjunct professor at the University of Victoria in British Columbia. The Washington Times, Jan. 9, 2017. 26 Climate Depot Special Report. 2016 State of the Climate Report. November 2016.

27 Prof. Roger Pielke, Jr. Congressional Hearing – House Science Committee on Science, Space and Technology. Mar. 29, 2017. 28 Prof. Roger Pielke, Jr. Testimony to U.S. Senate Environment & Public Works Committee. July 18, 2013.

29 NOAA Tornado data: 2016 ‘one of the quietest years since records began in 1954’ – Below average for 5th year in a row. Nov. 12, 2016.

30 NOAA data – – Oct. 24, 2016.

31 Atmospheric research scientist Dr. Philip Klotzbach. Sept. 20, 2016.

32 Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory/NOAA . Global Warming and Hurricanes – An Overview of Current Research Results. Has

The Southern Hemisphere also saw its quietest hurricane season on record during the 2016-2017 season.33

Droughts are not getting worse

“Droughts have, for the most part, become shorter, less frequent, and cover a smaller portion of the U.S. over the last century,” Prof. Roger Pielke, Jr., observed.34

A 2015 study found Megadroughts in past 2000 years were worse and lasted longer than current droughts.35 In 2017, drought conditions in the U.S. dropped even more as they were limited to only 1.6% of the

continental U.S. — and California’s “Permanent Drought” came to an end.36

Antarctica melting fears not based on data

A 2015 NASA study found that Antarctica was NOT losing ice mass and “not currently contributing to sea level rise,” but was actually reducing sea level rise.37

The NASA study also found that the ice mass gains of the Antarctic ice sheet are greater than their losses.

Arctic sea ice not disappearing, despite “ice-free” predictions

In 2016, Arctic summer sea ice was 22% greater than it was at the satellite era low point of 2012.38

The 2016 Arctic sea ice minimum is now in a 10-year “pause” with “no significant change in the past decade.”39

Sea level rise not following predictions

Sea levels have been rising since the last ice age.

Global sea levels have been naturally rising for ~20,000 years. There is no evidence of an acceleration of sea level rise, and therefore no evidence of any effect of mankind on sea levels.

Global Warming Affected Hurricane or Tropical Cyclone Activity? Last revised Mar. 17, 2017. 33 Meteorologist Dr. Ryan Maue. Apr. 4, 2017.
34 Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr. Drought analysis. Sept. 24, 2012.

35 The Earth Institute at Columbia University. Nov. 6, 2015.

36 Meteorologist Paul Dorian. Vencore Weather. Apr. 10, 2017.

37 NASA Study. Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses. Oct. 30, 2015.

38 Danish Meteorological Institute. Sept. 15, 2016.

39 David Whitehouse, UK Global Warming Policy Foundation Science Editor. Sept. 16, 2016.

According to tide gauges, sea levels are rising LESS than the thickness of one nickel (1.95 mm) per year or about the thickness of one penny (1.52 mm) a year. 40

Global warming does not cause wars, and it is not a national security threat

The data and studies reveal that warm periods coincide with less conflict.

This same argument was used by the CIA in 1974 to claim that “global cooling” would cause conflict and terrorism.41

The Center for Strategic and International Studies report noted the opposite of recent claims regarding “global warming” and war. “Since the dawn of civilization, warmer eras have meant fewer wars.”42

40 Hockey Schtick website – Aug. 25, 2014.

41 CIA 1974 National Security Threat: Global Cooling/Excess Arctic Ice Causing Extreme Weather. 42 Center for Strategic and International Studies report – Dec. 21, 2012.