Google+ Followers

Thursday, June 29, 2017

Hey Al Gore Report Confirms – Carbon Capture and Storage Is Not the Magic Cure for Global Warming

 Image result for al gore laughtings



Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) – the miracle technology which will supposedly allow us to burn more coal while saving the planet from global warming – is a complete waste of time and energy.

It’s so expensive that it makes even renewables and nuclear look cheap.
These findings – from a report by Professor Gordon Hughes, Professor of Economics at the University of Edinburgh and a former adviser to the World Bank – vindicate a recent call by President Trump to cut the 2018 budget for CCS research by 77 percent.

They also make a mockery of the grandiose schemes proposed by the International Energy Agency and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to decarbonize the global economy in line with the Paris Agreement. Both organizations have made heroic assumptions about the value of CCS technology in helping to meet their CO2 reductions targets.

Here, for example, is the ex-head of the IPCC Rajendra Pachauri touting it at the time of the last IPCC Assessment Report in 2014:
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) – the nascent technology which aims to bury CO2 underground – is deemed extremely important by the IPPC. It estimates that the cost of the big emissions cuts required would more than double without CCS. Pachauri said: “With CCS it is entirely possible for fossil fuels to continue to be used on a large scale.”
This, we can now see from Hughes’s detailed report for the Global Warming Policy Foundation, is just more of the kind of “harnessing-the-magical-power-of-organic-unicorns”-style nonsense we’ve come to expect from the IPCC. (And the similarly green-compromised IEA, for that matter).
The idea of CCS – capturing carbon-dioxide from industrial processes and then storing it underground where it can never been released – has been around for nearly 40 years. But it has never worked on a commercial scale and now almost certainly never will.
Already very expensive – in the UK, Hughes estimates, it would add around £10 to £15 (around $20) per MWh to the price of electricity, adding between £3.5 billion and £5 billion ($4.5 billion and $6.5 billion) to electricity bills – it has been rendered even more financially unviable by renewables, which are propped up with so much subsidy and which have distorted the market so badly that there simply isn’t any realistic possibility of still more money being found for the white elephant that is CCS.
Up till now the U.S. Energy Department has been spending $200 million a year researching CCS. Trump is proposing to cut this annual spend to $30 million.
When this was announced, Trump inevitably took flak from the usual vested interests.
Since the announcements, coal companies are being deferential to the White House, but quietly shifting their emphasis to Congress to save CCS funding in the budget.
Rick Curtsinger, a spokesman for coal company Cloud Peak Energy, said that Trump has been “extremely supportive of America’s coal miners” and that he “has a difficult task in prioritising issues and balancing the budget.”
But, Curtsinger added in an email: “We are hopeful that Congress will support the further development and commercialisation of the carbon capture technology that we believe is necessary for coal to be able to play a long-term role in providing secure, reliable, and affordable electricity while addressing concerns about CO2 and climate.”
But whoever is advising Trump on energy and climate issues is clearly very well informed. However much coal producers might wish it, Carbon Capture and Storage is not the panacea that is suddenly going to make their product eco-friendly.
Does this mean that Trump is about to renege on his election trail compact with the coal-producing states?
Not necessarily. As the below chart shows, stories about the death of coal have been greatly overdone. They are largely put about by the oil and gas industry, which is now keener than almost anyone to promote the climate change scare because it sees it as a means of stealing coal’s market share.

So coal is here to stay as a significant part of the global energy mix. But it’s going to do so on the basis that it’s cheap and abundant rather than on the basis that by waving a magic wand called CCS it will somehow be transformed into something that makes Greenpeace happy.
Trump’s rejection of CCS technology, then, ought not to be seen as a betrayal of his voter base. Rather it should be seen as encouraging evidence that he gets environmental and energy issues in a way that no president has done for decades. Boondoggles like CCS are very much part of the swamp that Trump has promised to drain.
CCS – and let’s hope that Congress understands this as well as Trump – is a joke. It’s a Solyndra-style dead-end scheme designed to siphon taxpayers money into the pockets of a few cod-scientific institutes with a begging bowl marked “further research funding needed…”.
The only reason anyone still thinks CCS is viable – against years of evidence that it’s not, not remotely – is because they so dearly want it to be true. If CCS were real then, yes, it would be possible for us all to have our cake and eat it by burning lots of fossil fuels and simultaneously boasting about how “carbon-neutral” we are.
But CCS, like the tooth fairy, like Santa Claus, like socialism that works, is a myth.

Wednesday, June 28, 2017

Hey Al Gore, This Now You Save The The Planet? PICTURES: Here's What Environmentalist Leftists Leave Their Campground Looking Like, Wow, We Seen This All Before Back in 2010 With Occupy Wall Street

Image result for al gore thumbs up

More than 1,000 volunteers are assisting in cleaning up litter after the Glastonbury Music Festival (GMF) in the United Kingdom.

In addition to the volunteers, £785,000 will be spent on the cleanup; it is unclear if taxpayers are footing the bill.
View images of the aftermath below (descriptions via Getty Images).
Litter-picking staff collect discarded rubbish from the area in front of the Pyramid Stage at the end of the Glastonbury Festival of Music and Performing Arts.

Festival-goers prepare to leave the site at the end of the Glastonbury Festival of Music and Performing Arts on Worthy Farm near the village of Pilton in Somerset, South West England.
Matt Cardy/Getty Images
Litter pickers begin the job of clearing the fields at the Glastonbury Festival site at Worthy Farm in Pilton near Glastonbury, England. Glastonbury Festival of Contemporary Performing Arts is the largest greenfield festival in the world. It was started by Michael Eavis in 1970 when several hundred hippies paid just £1, and now attracts more than 175,000 people.
Matt Cardy/Getty Images
Matt Cardy/Getty Images
A man walks through a field covered in litter as he leaves the Glastonbury Festival site.
Matt Cardy/Getty Images
Seagulls fight over food scraps left in front of the Pyramid Stage as festival goers leave the Glastonbury Festival site.
Discarded nitrous oxide (laughing gas) canisters are scattered on the ground in front of the Pyramid Stage at the end of the Glastonbury Festival of Music.
The GMF's organizers push left-wing causes; hyping "climate change" and being "green."
Michael Eavis, founder of the GMF, frames his operation as environmentally conscientious:
We hope that we can continue to lead the way [in finding solutions to environmental concerns] by making Glastonbury as green and as sustainable as we are able to, given the restrictions of the site, and also by spreading the word to Festival goers about what will really make a difference to the environment.
Promotional posters for the GMF urge patrons to "leave no trace" of litter.
screenshot/Glastonbury Music Festival
screenshot/Glastonbury Music Festival
Left-wing and state-funded agitation organizations such as Oxfam and Greenpeace are aligned with the GMF.

Monday, June 26, 2017

Calling Al Gore, What happen, Here? NOAA: Record 140 Straight Months Without Major Hurricane Strike

 Image result for AL Gore mad

-- Saturday, June 24 marked the completion of a record 140 straight months since the last major hurricane made landfall in the continental United States, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

The last major hurricane to hit the continental U.S. was Hurricane Wilma, which struck Florida on Oct. 24, 2005. According to NOAA, four major hurricanes hit the continental United States that year. They included Wilma, Rita, Katrina, and Dennis.

But since Wilma, no Category 3 or above hurricane has made landfall in the continental United States, making June 24, 2017 the end of a record 140 months without a major hurricane strike.
Prior to this 140-month stretch without a major hurricane strike, the longest major hurricane drought was the 96 months between September 1860 and August 1869.

NOAA has published data on all hurricanes striking the United States since the year 1851.
A "major hurricane" is defined as one that is Category 3 or above on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale, which means it has sustained wind speeds of more than 111 miles per hour and is capable of causing damage that is “devastating” or “catastrophic.”

NOAA is currently predicting that an "above normal Atlantic hurricane season is likely for this year.”
"For the upcoming Atlantic hurricane season, which runs from June 1 through November 30, forecasters predict a 45 percent chance of an above-normal season, a 35 percent chance of a near-normal season, and only a 20 percent chance of a below-normal season," NOAA says on its website

Thursday, June 22, 2017

AL Gore, Al Gore What Have You be looking In The Sun To Long? With Summer Heat, Climate Alarmism Boils Over

As heat waves move across the U.S. from the northeast to the southwest and in much of western Europe, climate alarmists are responding predictably by blaming hot temperatures not on true meteorological causes but on the nebulous bogeyman of “climate change.”

Image result for al gore mad

The lazy person’s answer to explaining weather phenomena is to forego the grueling task of trying to assess the virtually limitless variables involved in climatological events and to attribute everything instead to the all-encompassing catchall of global warming. Whereas past generations spoke of an “act of God” to explain extraordinary weather occurrences, now we point to the more scientific-sounding but equally vague notion of “climate change.”

Convincing people that “climate change” threatens the world as we know it becomes all the easier when hot summer days play into the narrative that the world is getting inexorably warmer. Thirty or forty or a hundred years ago, hot summers were just hot summers and people understood that. Now they are an omen of something huge and scary and out of control.

“Deadly heat waves are going to be a much bigger problem in the coming decades,” warns CNN, “becoming more frequent and occurring over a much greater portion of the planet.”

“Extreme heat waves,” CNN continues, “are frequently cited as one of the most direct effects of man-made climate change.”

Some climate change alarmists go further still, predicting with astounding precision the effects that global warming will supposedly have on future generations decades from now. A new study from Nature Magazine, for instance, makes the remarkable claim that by the year 2100 exactly 74 percent of the world’s population will be exposed to climatic conditions exceeding a “deadly threshold” for at least 20 days a year, if we don’t drastically cut back on fossil fuel emissions.

If sociologists, biologists, or scientists in other fields attempted to make such ridiculously precise predictions for events eighty years in the future, they would be laughed out of the academy. But somehow, climate “scientists” get a pass. They can say almost anything they please and expect only respectful nods from their colleagues and adoring adulation from the mainstream media.

One supposes that the authors of such studies can rest easy, knowing that when their dire predictions fail to materialize they will already be dead and buried and no one will care that they terrified people with theories concocted in laboratories with radically fallible climate models.

For the record, the hottest temperature ever measured on the planet was 134 degrees Fahrenheit, in Death Valley National Park. This record was set on July 10, 1913—more than 100 years ago. Manmade global warming? Nope.

Then there was the 1936 heat wave that killed some 5,000 people in the midwestern United States and elsewhere in the nation. In Springfield, Illinois, temperatures reached triple digits on 29 days that year, including 12 consecutive days from July 4 through 14. This was before the days of air conditioning.

Some of the more recent climate frenzy is of course a knee-jerk reaction to President Trump’s commonsense decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accord. It is simply the nearest convenient stick with which to attempt to beat the sitting leader of the free world.

“Even if humans aggressively cut back on fossil fuel emissions, such as outlined in the Paris climate agreement,” CNN warns, “rising temperatures and humidity levels will combine to increase the intensity and frequency of deadly heat waves.”

For now, the summer is hot, as summers often are. If it makes people feel better or more responsible to link their sweat and lethargy to a major “ethical issue” of global dimensions, that’s fine.
Since the earliest days of recorded history, human beings have looked to myth to explain the unexplainable. The only difference now is that the myth has a very thin veneer of scientific respectability.

Wednesday, June 14, 2017

So Sorry Al Gore New research shows the islands are growing, not receding Ocean Islands Are Not Sinking

Image result for al gore liar

Once a year or so, journalists from major news outlets travel to the Marshall Islands, a remote chain of volcanic islands and coral atolls in the Pacific Ocean, to report in panicked tones that the island nation is vanishing because of climate change. Their dispatches are often filled with raw emotion and suggest that residents are fleeing atolls swiftly sinking into the sea. No doubt, residents are leaving the Marshall Islands, but it is not because of climate change, reports Bjorn Lomborg. 1

New research shows the islands are growing, not receding

Using historic aerial photographs and high-resolution satellite imagery, Auckland University scientists Murray Ford and Paul Kench recently analyzed shoreline changes on six atolls and two mid-ocean reef islands in the Marshall Islands. Their peer-reviewed study revealed that since the middle of the 20th century the total land area of the islands has actually grown. 2
This is due to accretion, where coral broken up by the waves washes up on these low-lying islands as sand, counteracting the reduction in land mass. Research shows that this process is overpowering the erosion from sea-level rise, leading to a net land area gain.

This is not only true for the Marshall Islands. The researchers write that within the recently emerging body of shoreline change studies on atoll islands there is little evidence of widespread reef island erosion. To the contrary, several studies have documented noteworthy shoreline progradation (growth) and positional changes of islands since the mid-20th century, resulting in a net increase in island area. The most famous of these studies showed that of 27 Pacific Islands, 14% lost area, yet 43% gained area, with the rest remaining stable.

Representatives from the Marshall Islands have been vocal about the need for strong global action on climate. President Hilda Heine has told reporters that longtime residents are leaving the Marshall Islands because climate change is threatening the nation’s existence. It’s true that approximately one-third of the population has relocated to the US, but for reasons other than climate change. 1
Some 52.7% of the Marshall Islands population lives below the poverty line. Only 39.3% of the population age 15 years and above is employed. In its 2015 human-rights report on the island nation, the US State Department said that significant problems include: chronic government corruption and chronic domestic violence, along with child abuse, sex trafficking, and lack of legal provision protecting worker’s rights. Marshallese citizens also have an easy immigration pathway to America and can live, work and study in the US without a visa.
Policymakers who want to help the residents of the Marshall Islands should tackle issues like poverty, health care, corruption and domestic violence and avoid paying so much lip-service to climate.
Another island nation in the Pacific, Tuvalu, has also claimed it was drowning because of global warming. The prime minister has said that Tuvalu was ‘the world’s first victim of climate change,’ and that ‘the greenhouse effect and sea level rise threaten the very heart of our existence.’3

Tuvalu is a tropical island mess being run by slick politicians using global warming for a shakedown operation

Once again, recent research says otherwise.
Paul Kench and colleagues analyzed six time slices of shoreline position over the past 18 years at 29 islands of Funafuti Atoll (the capital of the island nation of Tuvalu) to determine their physical response to recent sea level rise. Despite any so-called rise, no islands have been lost, the majority have enlarged, and there has been a 7.3% increase in net island area over the past century. There is no evidence of heightened erosion over the past half century. Reef islands in Funafuti continually adjust their size, shape and position in response to variation in boundary conditions, including storms, sediment supply, as well as sea level 4
On the other side of the world cries similar to those voiced for the Marshall Islands and Tuvalu are heard. The Maldives in the Indian Ocean have long been used by global warming alarmists to drive home the dangers of rising sea levels.
In spite of alarmist former President Mohammed Nasheed predicting his country will be under water in seven years, the tourist industry does not believe in the downfall of the Maldives. Thirty additional luxury class hotel complexes are planned for the next 6 to 10 years, not counting many smaller homes. Tourism is currently increasing 20% annually. 5
The developers are on safe ground in spite of Nasheed’s dire warnings. There is a lot of science supporting the tourism industry’s belief that sea level rise is not a problem. Flinders University in Adelaide had the task of settling the sea level situation once and for all by installing state-of-the-art tide gauge equipment on 12 islands. There was no overall change in sea level at any of the islands after sixteen years.6
One of the foremost sea level experts in the world, Swedish scientist Nils-Axel Morner says this, “As someone with some expertise in the field, I can assure the low-lying countries that this is a false alarm. The sea is not rising precipitously. I have studied many of the low-lying regions in my 45 year career recording and interpreting sea level data. I have conducted six field trips to the Maldives. I have been to Bangladesh, whose environment minister was claiming that flooding due to climate change threatened to create 20 million ‘ecological refugees’ in her country. I have carefully examined the data of ‘drowning’ Tuvalu and I can report that, while such regions do have problems, they need not fear rising sea levels. Our research is what the climate lobby might call an ‘inconvenient truth,’ it shows that sea levels have been oscillating close to the present level for the last three centuries. This is not due to melting glaciers: sea levels are affected by a great many factors. They rose in the order of 10 to 11 cm between 1850 and 1940, stopped rising or maybe even fell a little until 1970, and have remained flat every since.” 7
Regarding Tuvalu, Brian Sussman says, “Tuvalu’s problem is not climate change. Tuvalu’s mess is that the country was never meant for modern habitation. There is no fresh water available—only what can be obtained from rain. Much of the population on the main island uses a lagoon for its bathing and toilet facilities. The tiny nation ships its garbage to landfills in Fiji and New Zealand. Tuvalu is a tropical island mess being run by slick politicians using global warming for a shakedown operation.” 8
  1. Bjorn Lomborg, “About those non-disappearing Pacific islands,” The Wall Street Journal, October 13, 2016
  2. Murray R. Ford and Paul S. Kench, “Multi-decadal shoreline changes in response to sea level rise in the Marshall Islands,” Anthropocene, 11, 14, September 2015
  3. Patrick J. Michaels, Meltdown, (Washington, DC, Cato Institute, 2004), 203
  4. P. S. Kench et al., “Coral islands defy sea-level rise over the past century: records from a central Pacific atoll,” Geology, April 27, 2015, doi: 10.1130/G36555.1
  5. P. Gosselin, “Developers dismiss sea level rise claims—plan to build 30 new luxury hotels in the Maldives—Nasheed’s cash machine,”, November 3, 2013
  6. Michael Fox, “Maldives sea level fraud,” Hawaii Reporter, October 26, 2009
  7. Nils-Axel Morner, “Rising credulity,”, December 3, 2011
  8. Brain Sussman, “Cancun’s climate clock,” American Thinker, December 8, 2010

Al Gore Oceans, Climate Change Hysteria, and More Wealth Redistribution

Related image

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) held a “side event” on June 6, 2017 during the “first-ever” United Nations Ocean Conference. This side event’s topic was “Ocean Health, Climate Change and Migration: Understanding the Nexus and Implications for People on the Move.”
The World Wildlife Fund (WWF), the Permanent Mission of Madagascar and Ecuador partnered with IOM to promote the implementation of Sustainable Development, Goal #14 of U.N.’s Agenda 2030, “to conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.
The idea of all these U.N. sponsored conferences around the globe is that, if the United Nations is in control and is the ultimate decision-maker, all the goals of the Agenda 2030 can be easily implemented and the wealth redistributed to all third world nations while protecting Mother Earth from hysterical Armageddon.

The Permanent Mission of Fiji noted that “the ocean is part of everyday life in Fiji – they are not only linked to livelihoods but are also an integral part of our cultural heritage.”
The event was moderated by Rosiland Jordan, U.N. Correspondent for Al Jazeera, and the audience was composed of “member state representatives, civil society, academics, scientists, journalists, and NGOs.”
Presentations were made by John Tanzer (WWF), Jean Randriannatenaina (Regional Maritime Information Fusion Center, Madagascar), Francoise Gail (Scientific Advisor, Ocean and Climate Platform), and Mariam Chazalnoel (IOM) on “direct consequences that climate change-related modification to the global ocean have on island and coastal populations as the environment, economy and livelihoods of many of these communities depend on oceans” and examples were given of changes that influence the “migration patterns of affected communities as well as the daily lives of communities receiving migrants.”
Ashraf El Nour, Director to the IOM Office of the U.N., discussed displacement of communities and the impact on human settlements located near or who depend on the world’s oceans for their survival. According to the Internal Displacement Monitoring Center, 24.2 million people were displaced in 2016 due to natural disasters in the world, mainly floods and storms, clearly weather events, claiming that “many of them were made worse by the climate change impacts in oceans’ coastal areas.”
We do know that such claims of global warming/anthropogenic climate change effects are false and were debunked by scientific data, many studies that contradict U.N.’s IPCC computer modeling and fear-mongering.

There are many stakeholders in this environmental fear mongering

This IOM side-event also noted that “slow environmental degradation in coastal areas, such as sea level rise or coastal erosion, are also expected to have long-term impact on migration, as people move preemptively to find alternative livelihoods or are forced to relocate inland.”
The topics discussed were specifically chosen to harmonize with the Partnership Dialogues of the Ocean Conference which must support Agenda 2030’s Goal 14:
  • Managing, protecting and conserving marine and coastal ecosystems (PD2)
  • Ocean acidification (PD 3)
  • Making fisheries sustainable (PD 4)
  • Increasing economic benefits to small islands developing states and least developed countries (PD 5) – more wealth redistribution schemes
There are many stakeholders in this environmental fear mongering. Additionally, the Ocean Conference was promoted as an opportunity to push migration and oceans in preparation for the COP23 climate change/fossil fuels negotiations in Bonn, Germany, in November 2017.
Instead of vilifying the gas of plant life, carbon dioxide (CO2), the discussion should have focused on the garbage pollution of the world’s oceans by the top eight countries in Asia, China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, and Bangladesh.

Garbage pollution of the world’s oceans by the top eight countries in Asia, China, Indonesia, the Philippines, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Malaysia, and Bangladesh

Millions of tons of plastic trash float into the world’s oceans yearly. A 2015 study published in the Science journal found that “Population size and the quality of waste management systems largely determine which countries contribute the greatest mass of uncaptured waste available to become plastic marine debris.
Without waste management infrastructure improvements, the cumulative quantity of plastic waste available to enter the ocean from land is predicted to increase by an order of magnitude by 2025.
China, for example, with its heavily coastal population, dumps approximately 1.3 million to 3.5 million metric tons of plastic into the oceans per year, mostly because of its mismanaged waste. According to the study, if the top 20 countries would cut their mismanaged waste by half, the mass of floating plastic would drop by 41 percent.
Sea mammals, fish, and even smaller invertebrates can gulp pieces of plastic or become entangled in fishing nets or plastic debris. Eventually some of the broken plastic trash sinks to the bottom.
“Quantifying the precise amount that ultimately washes out to sea is problematic, though, since there is a dearth of reliable data.”
“Few of the top contributing countries have adequate infrastructure for handling trash disposal, the study authors noted. Even with a well-developed infrastructure to handle solid waste, the U.S. contributed 40,000 to 110,000 metric tons per year, and ranked 20th, they found.

Sunday, June 4, 2017

AL Gore “Climate Change” Is A Bland Generic Label That Can Mean Anything, And Therefore Means Nothing, Got That Al Gore?

Image result for al gore mad

As of today, the United States will cease all implementation of the non-binding Paris Accord and the draconian financial and economic burdens the agreement imposes on our country.  Donald J. Trump 45th President of the United States
The Paris Climate Treaty has nothing to do with “climate” and everything possible to do with economics, globalism and the controlled redistribution of economic wealth as constructed through decades of advanced policies of multinational financial interests.
Posted by Sundance “Multinational Banks and Corporations Trigger Immediate Angst Over Trump Withdrawal From Paris Treaty
Caution: If you are a global warming enthusiast then I strongly advise you to stop reading, grab a cup of hot cocoa, and retreat to your nearest safe-space immediately.  Otherwise you will get triggered, guaranteed.

With that out of the way, let me get into the meat of this article, which is, as the title suggests, a short lesson on a few of the more egregious lies connected with the global warming scam.  Just a day spent on the Internet doing due diligence on this topic with an open mind will convince anyone with half a brain that global warming is a criminal shakedown of historic proportions.
Rather than go at the topic of global warming with hammer and tongs I will just briefly visit a few of its more popular talking points – simply to steer any interested readers in a profitable direction.

The Science is Settled

Balderdash!  (My inner editor/censor instantly popped to attention at my initial, sadly deleted, remark and insisted on a quick fix).  The science (and “science”) surrounding global warming, or climate change, or whatever the term du jour is, is NOT settled – it is, in fact, far from being settled. 
This is as good a place as any to point out that the word science does not possess the hard and fast definition that most of us think it does.  There is a whole branch of philosophy that deals with just that question – what science is, and what it is not.
This is a topic that is apt to induce a bout of narcolepsy in a number of my readers, so I will hurry on and wrap this segment up.  Let me just say that if we accept a very general definition of science – that it is a search for what is true and factual in the physical realm – then most of the “science” behind global warming is no science at all.  It is agenda-driven pseudo-science—not true open-minded scientific research so much as an attempt to funnel findings down a profitable (and prestigious) channel to a predetermined end.

s climate change a real phenomenon?  Of course.  No sensible person would argue otherwise.  But is it primarily caused by humanity, or are other factors more to blame, such as electromagnetic solar activity and radiation, volcanic eruptions, oceans, and so forth?
After studying some of the various deceitful ploys used by global warming “scientists” over the years, I simply no longer trust their word about anything. Which is a shame, because I have no doubt that many, perhaps most, of the scientists promoting man-made climate change are sincerely concerned about the earth. That doesn’t mean that they are right though, and it does not excuse the many lies used to force-feed us global warming.

Carbon Dioxide is a Dangerous Pollutant

Balderdash again! NEWS FLASH: The earth has experienced much higher carbon dioxide levels in the past—long before any “Industrial Revolution.” The idea that increased CO2 levels are something new, or inextricably linked to fossil fuels alone is simply rubbish.
Periodically, carbon dioxide levels have been considerably higher throughout earth’s long history, and humanity didn’t have a darn thing to do with it. And what’s more, the increased CO2 levels did not ruin the planet.
In fact, plant life flourishes under increased CO2 levels. If carbon dioxide is truly a dangerous pollutant, then the earth would have suffered grievously eons ago.

Climate Change Deniers Are Guilty of Hate Speech

First of all, as I point out above, no one is saying that the weather doesn’t change. I’ll gladly swear on a stack of Bibles that, yes, the weather does indeed change from time to time. I noticed that all on my own some years back.
What is in question, however, is the hypothesis that climate change is primarily caused by carbon dioxide, fossil fuels, and/or humanity as a whole.  Also, there is no doubt that climate change “science” has put its thumb on the scale in order to promote its one-sided and debatable claims.
That is not hate speech. It is simply what common sense, logic, and due diligence have shown me to be the truth. Unfortunately, the truth is all too often obscured and twisted, when it is not being ignored or hidden, by the more nefarious proponents of AGW.
If I were to engage in hate speech you would know it, trust me. You would have no doubt whatsoever about where I was coming from.
The truth is only “hate speech” to those who hate the truth—a simple meme, but nonetheless true.


I will conclude by saying that I thank God every day that we have a president who cares more about what is good for the United States and its citizens then catering to political correctness and kissing globalist butt. May God continue to guide, bless, and protect President Trump, his family, and his aides.