Archive for the ‘propaganda’ Category


Somehow this apparently innocuous non-problem has to be hyped up into a crisis of epic proportions. To help achieve this, an army of climate spin doctors is always on hand to attempt the never-ending task of blaming humans for any kind of unpleasant weather.

When American climate alarmists claim to have witnessed the effects of global warming, they must be referring to a time beyond 14 years ago, says James Taylor @ RealClear Energy.

That is because there has been no warming in the United States since at least 2005, according to updated data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

In January 2005, NOAA began recording temperatures at its newly built U.S. Climate Reference Network (USCRN). USCRN includes 114 pristinely maintained temperature stations spaced relatively uniformly across the lower 48 states.

(more…)


‘You first’ might be one response. Once again the BBC, like a lot of the media, tries to frame ‘greenhouses gases’ and ‘pollution’ as the same thing, which confuses the reporting even more. Note the capital letters: ‘Zero Carbon’. All part of the make-believe future they are trying to sell to the public, but now exposed as unrealistic.

MPs say people will have to stop driving if the UK is to meet its Zero Carbon goals by 2050, reports BBC News.

The Science and Technology Select Committee says technology alone cannot solve the problem of greenhouse gas emissions from transport.

It says the government cannot achieve sufficient emissions cuts by swapping existing vehicles for cleaner versions.

The government said it would consider the committee’s findings.

In its report, the committee said: “In the long-term, widespread personal vehicle ownership does not appear to be compatible with significant decarbonisation.”

(more…)


Some expensive ways of trying to ‘solve’ a non-existent problem, namely reducing the amount (currently about 0.04%) of the vital trace gas CO2 in the atmosphere, which gets spuriously linked to pollution. These proposed so-called solutions usually turn out to be not sufficiently ‘mature’ or ‘advanced’ – yet – suggesting it’s only a matter of time, or is that wishful thinking?

P2X, P2Y, PtG, PtL, power-to-gas… These somewhat cryptic terms stand for energy conversion processes that can be used to store surplus power from renewable sources and help meet climate targets.

But whether they will actually reduce emissions depends on many  different factors, EURACTIV Germany reports.

(more…)

Photosynthesis: nature requires carbon dioxide


More of the usual propaganda about ‘human-induced climate change’. Not mentioned is the fact that most of their so-called ‘greenhouse gas’ is water vapour, which has little or nothing to do with human activities, and much of the carbon dioxide has always been due to natural factors.

A major report says the West’s high consumption of meat is fuelling global warming, reports the BBC.

But scientists and officials stopped short of explicitly calling on everyone to become vegan or vegetarian.

They said that more people could be fed using less land if individuals cut down on eating meat.

(more…)

Misfits


It had to happen, didn’t it? ‘Project Fear’ merchants love to cite climate change and Brexit, so for them combining the two into yet another disaster rant is better still. Cue non-bendy bananas and missed emissions targets.
– – –
Boris Johnson’s leadership increases the likelihood of a hard exit from the EU, shattering the bloc’s solidarity and empowering a radical deregulation agenda, says Climate Home News.

The new UK prime minister, Boris Johnson, seems intent on leaving the EU with or without a deal on 31 October. The repercussions of a no-deal Brexit for the UK’s domestic climate policy – and its global climate leadership – could be disastrous.

For three decades, the UK has played a central role within the EU, consistently aligning itself with the green grouping of member states.

It contributed more than its fair share of the EU’s climate efforts, is penciled in for a significantly above-average contribution to the EU’s Paris Agreement pledge, and it has decarbonized faster than any other member state.

In a no-deal Brexit, the obvious first order impact is that the UK’s influence over the EU’s climate policy would end, and its successes at cutting emissions would no longer count to the bloc’s targets.

The loss of the UK’s influence at the table will be a major blow to European climate solidarity. It will undercut the EU’s future climate ambition by tilting the balance of power towards less ambitious member states – the likes of Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia. This will damage the ability of the EU to project global leadership.

Even if the EU may be weakened, the UK government has been adamant that its climate diplomacy will fill the gap. It recently committed to reach “net zero” emissions by 2050, and to hosting Cop26 UN climate talks at the end of 2020.

However, in an ultra-hard Brexit, the one now on the table, the lofty ambition of UK leadership – like so much else associated with post-Brexit Britain – may be revealed as wishful thinking.

We must not forget the fantasy at the heart of Brexit – that the EU is rife with “Brussels bureaucrats” hell bent on regulating everything from the transport of smoked kippers to the bendiness of bananas.

Post-Brexit Britain, we have been reassured, is poised to “take back control” by casting off these pesky regulations.

Full article here.


This is a prelude to a new IPCC report. It’s an exercise in mixing problems that do exist, like biofuels using too much land, with ones that don’t, like excess trace gases in the atmosphere. The end product is the usual alarm-and-confusion brand of propaganda for man-made warming believers, with wild talk of meltdowns, deadly extremes and so forth. More like a Hollywood script than anything resembling reality – but over-the-top stuff like this seems to be standard fare in much of the media nowadays.

The overlapping crises of climate change, mass species extinction, and an unsustainable global food system are on a collision course towards what might best be called an ecological land grab, says Phys.org.

Coping with each of these problems will require a different way of using of Earth’s lands, and as experts crunch the numbers it is becoming unnervingly clear that there may not be enough terra firma to go around.

A world of narrowing options threatens to pit biofuels, forests and food production against each other.

(more…)

.
.
Whether the urban heat island effect is in fact warming ‘the climate’ is debatable, but in a propaganda war it can be made to seem so. In any case this needs as wide a coverage as possible, to offset at least some of the alarmist spin about supposed man-made warming that’s pushed down everyone’s throat on a daily basis.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

A new study by Nicola Scafetta shows that a considerable percentage of China’s global warming from 1940 to today is due to the phenomenon of urbanization. However, the models mistakenly associated this same warming to anthropogenic forcing:

image

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092181811930102X?dgcid=author

image

Near-surface temperature records show that China warmed by about 0.8 °C from 1950 to 2010. However, there exists an ongoing debate about whether this warming might have been partially due to urbanization bias. In fact, homogenization approaches may be inefficient in densely populated provinces that have experienced a significant urban development since the 1940s. This paper aims to complement previous research on the topic by showing that an alternative approach based on the analysis of the divergence between the minimum (Tmin) and maximum (Tmax) near-surface temperature records since the 1940s could be useful to clarify the issue because urban heat island (UHI) effects stress the warming of nocturnal temperatures…

View original post 228 more words


The climate apocalypse bandwagon first got going nearly as long ago as the first moon landing, but shows no signs of falling apart despite a dismal record of no-show of its forecasts, as Climate Change Dispatch explains. The urge to blame humans for any and all vagaries, real or imagined, of the climate seems deep-rooted despite this ongoing lack of predictive success.

This month, The Wall Street Journal celebrated its 130th anniversary by republishing salient articles spanning that period, including this retrospectively illuminating report from February 2, 1978:

A climatic disaster, triggered by the continued burning of oil and coal, could result in the submergence of much of Florida, Holland and other low-lying areas in the next 50 years, an Ohio State University scientist predicted… “I contend that a major disaster – a rapid five-meter rise in sea level caused by deglaciation of West Antarctica – may be imminent or in progress, after atmospheric carbon dioxide has only doubled,” John H. Mercer, a glacier geologist, asserted.

By some miracle, fortunately, Florida and Holland were still with us over a decade later.

(more…)

.
.
In short: polar bear scares by climate alarm propaganda merchants are busted.

polarbearscience

Straight from the horse’s mouth: all polar bear females tagged by researchers around Churchill in Western Hudson Bay last year were still on the ice as of 25 June. With plenty of ice still remaining over the bay, spring breakup will be no earlier this year than it has been since 1999. Contrary to predictions of ever-declining ice cover, the lack of a trend in sea ice breakup dates for Western Hudson Bay is now twenty years long (a hiatus, if you will) and yet these bears are repeatedly claimed to have been seriously harmed in recent years by a loss of sea ice.

Derocher 2019 WHB collared females 25 June all bears still on the ice

In fact, WH bears have faced relatively few ‘early’ years of sea ice breakup and breakup has never come before the 15th of June. The earliest recent spring breakup date did not come in 2012 – when sea ice hit a summer record low – but…

View original post 711 more words

.
.
How feeble are wind and solar power in the big energy picture i.e. not just electricity production? It could be much worse than we/you thought, but many policymakers don’t seem to know – or don’t want to know – about such realities.

PA Pundits - International

By Larry Bell ~

Those who believe in the existence of adequate non-fossil alternatives essential to achieve a “carbon-neutral” U.S. — much less global — energy balance anytime soon, or at any cost, are dreadfully misguided.

Nevertheless, there are very understandable reasons why such delusions continue to persist.

One reason behind this facetious fantasy has resulted from massively funded “renewable energy” industry subsidy-seeking propaganda campaigns.

Another is due to great successes of ideological anti-fossil activists in conflating carbon dioxide emissions with “climate pollution,” polar bear perils, and virtually any other “crisis” de jour.

A third, and one that I find particularly disturbing, is because even information sources we should expect to trust, continue to perpetuate a disingenuous and dangerous myth that non-fossil “alternatives” can meet any truly significant U.S. energy needs.

In preparing for this article, I checked data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) with a very…

View original post 723 more words

Image credit: thebulletin.org


H/T The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)

Broadly speaking, two separate arguments bear the climate label. One is whether there is something wrong (whatever that may mean) with the climate, and the other is whether humans are causing changes to the climate. Of course the two are usually run together as one issue, or supposed issue. Here Canadian Professor Ross McKitrick looks at the first aspect, advising readers to ‘Clip out this column, keep it close at hand, and quote from the experts when the occasion arises.’ But most people find themselves exhorted to panic first and ignore all the underlying realities, despite the lack of anything worth panicking about.
– – –
On June 7, I published an op-ed on this page telling the story of Roger Pielke Jr., a U.S. climate expert whose research on climate change and extreme weather didn’t support many of the alarmist slogans on the subject.

Despite his findings being squarely in the mainstream of his academic specialty, for stating them publicly Pielke Jr. was vilified, bullied and eventually harassed into quitting the field.

Conservative MP Lisa Raitt tweeted a link to my article. As if to prove the point of the story, the climate mob quickly vilified, bullied and harassed her into deleting her tweet.

I wrote Lisa an open letter, hoping she would notice the pattern.

(more…)


UK schools would have to promote one political party’s policies. Whose climate ‘facts’ would they be relying on? ‘Tackling climate change’ may be a popular fantasy in schools but the reality is somewhat different, to say the least.

It has set out plans to ensure all young people are educated in schools about the social and environmental impacts of climate change, reports Energy Live News.

Shadow Education Secretary Angela Rayner has set out plans to ensure all young people are educated in schools about the social and environmental impacts of climate change if the party comes into power.

(more…)

.
.
Is climate alarm propaganda worse than we thought?

PA Pundits - International

From the team at CFACT ~

Newly published data gathered by NASA’s AIRS satellite confirm the Earth is warming more slowly than has been forecast by climate activists and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Data gathered from 2003 through 2017 confirm temperatures remained essentially flat from 2003 through 2015, finally rising briefly as a strong El Nino formed in 2015 and lasted into 2016 (https://ggweather.com/enso/oni.htm). Even with El Nino adding an illusory warming spike at the end of the period, temperatures still rose just over 0.2 degrees during the 15-year period. That pace works out to less than 1.5 degrees of warming per century.

IPCC initial forecasts called for 0.3 degrees Celsius of warming per decade, while skeptic forecasts have tended to hover around 0.1 degrees. As temperatures warmed more slowly than IPCC predicted, IPCC reduced its forecasts to meet skeptics in the middle…

View original post 270 more words

.
.
Expensive batteries were never an issue for electricity grids before renewables came along, for obvious reasons. Now that a fog of misleading climate propaganda has descended, too many leaders can’t seem to think straight any more.

STOP THESE THINGS

Almost as soon as Joe Public worked out that wind and solar can never work, RE rent seekers started babbling about giant batteries saving the day.

STT will keep smashing the line about giant batteries overcoming the chaotic delivery of wind and solar, while RE zealots keep pushing it.

The pitch from RE zealots is that solution to the chaos delivered by wind and solar is giant lithium-ion batteries, of the kind peddled by Elon Musk. The reefer-smoking, Californian carpetbagger managed to offload one unit in wind power obsessed, South Australia, collected $150 million, and was never seen again.

Bill Gates has called the idea complete and utter nonsense: Bill Gates Slams Unreliable Wind & Solar: ‘Let’s Quit Jerking Around With Renewables & Batteries’

Apply a little maths, physics and economics and it’s pretty clear that the mega-battery myth is just that. Norman Rogers picks up the thread below.

View original post 1,087 more words

.
.
As the author says: Deceit is the name of the game. To further the aims of propagandists with a political agenda, the harmless trace gas carbon dioxide gets branded as ‘pollution’ despite being essential and beneficial to plants, trees etc.

PA Pundits - International

By Dr. Jay Lehr ~

From the very day that Al Gore signed his name to the well known book, An Inconvenient Truth, the general population was told that carbon emissions were going to destroy our planet. Gore, more or less, coined the term “carbon footprint” (while always hiding the enormity of his own footprint). Gore and his cohorts were never actually talking about carbon. They were talking about carbon dioxide.

Initially they understood that most people recognize that they exhale carbon dioxide and plants absorb it in order to live. Not a dark thought. So in a universally evil desire to scare the populace, they seized on using the term carbon as a synonym for carbon dioxide knowing it would conjure up visions of soot, lamp black and coal dust none of which were warm and fuzzy. Carbon is a solid. Carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless gas…

View original post 361 more words


The GWPF says: ‘Perhaps David Attenborough’s BBC show would better have been called “Climate: Change The Facts”’. The BBC thinks it has the right to be totally partisan in favour of climate alarmism for some reason, but probably wonders why viewers are abandoning it in droves.

There are times when climate propaganda – for this is what this was – calls to mind the apocalyptic prophets of the Middle Ages, who led popular movements by preaching that the sins of human beings were so great that they could only be redeemed by suffering, in order to create a paradise on earth. Perhaps this is how Attenborough, nature journalism’s Methuselah, sees himself. But climate change is too important to be handled in this manner. It needs rational, well-informed debate. Too often, cheered on by the eco-zealots of Extinction Rebellion, the BBC is intent on encouraging quite the opposite. —David Rose, Mail on Sunday, 21 April 2019
(more…)

.
.
Commiserations to anyone who managed to hold their noses and watch this attempt to brainwash the public into believing the UN-manufactured climate scare.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

image

The BBC continued its climate change propaganda season last night with David Attenborough’s well trailered “Climate Change – The Facts?”

The opening sequences, recorded against film of hot weather and including these quotes, left no doubt of where the programme was headed:

View original post 1,265 more words

Climate Hearsay

Posted: April 18, 2019 by oldbrew in alarmism, climate, Critique, propaganda, Temperature
Tags:

.
.
As the forces of climate alarm degenerate ever further into synthetic hysteria and absurdity, Ross McKitrick tries to restore some perspective.

Science Matters

In a legal proceeding, a witness can only testify to what he or she personally experienced. Anything reported to them by others is dismissed as “hearsay”, not evidence by direct observation, but rather an opinion offered by someone else.

In the current public commotion over global warming, almost all the discourse is composed of hearsay.  Ross McKitrick explains that the alleged changes in temperatures are so small that no one can possibly notice. Thus, their concern over global warming can only come from repeating hearsay in the form of charts and graphs published by people with an axe to grind. His article in the Financial Post is Hold the panic: Canada just warmed 1.7 degrees and … thrived. Excerpts below in italics with my bolds.

A recent report, commissioned by Environment and Climate Change Canada (also known as the federal Department of the Environment), sparked a feverish bout of…

View original post 847 more words

.
.

Days to go before his climate propaganda show on BBC TV and already his penchant for suspect alarmist stories has been exposed. Maybe he should stick to what he knows best.

Update – see: ‘Our Planet’ film crew is still lying about walrus cliff deaths: here’s how we know – by Dr. Susan Crockford (posted 14th April 2019)

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

 Our Planet has showcased hundreds of walruses falling off a 260ft cliff to a slow, agonising death in heartbreaking scenes

Our Planet has showcased hundreds of walruses falling off a 260ft cliff to a slow, agonising death in heartbreaking scenes

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tvandshowbiz/8800576/netflix-david-attenborough-our-planet-walrus-heartbreaking/

Last week, the new Netflix series, Our Planet, was launched with great fanfare. Narrated by David Attenborough, however, one segment made headlines around the world, showcasing hundreds of walruses falling off a 260ft cliff to a slow, agonising death in heartbreaking scenes.

Narrating the disturbing scene in the second episode, Attenborough began:

But the story quickly began to unravel.

View original post 1,371 more words


H/T The Global Warming Policy Forum (GWPF)
Is IPCC-oriented climate science running out of road in terms of public credibility, when measured against reality?

This is a story of climate science, tracing from its enthusiastic beginnings as a small field – warning of a global threat – to its rich and increasingly desperate present, writes Larry Kummer @ Fabius Maximus.

It is a long story, with a climax at the end.

The climate change campaign hits a dead end

On 24 June 1988, James Hansen’s testimony to the Senate began the campaign to fight anthropogenic global warming. During the following 31 years we have heard increasingly dire forecasts of doom.

(more…)