Sea Level is Stable Around the World thumbnail

Sea Level is Stable Around the World

By Jay Lehr

We have been studying climate change and potentially associated sea level changes resulting from melting ice and warming oceans for a half century. In the 1970s our primary concern was global cooling and an advancing new ice age. Many believe that increasing quantities of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere could result in rising levels of the sea in general. The record does not show this to be true. There is no evidence whatever to support impending sea-level-rise catastrophe or the unnecessary expenditure of state or federal tax monies to solve a problem that does not exist.

The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has updated its coastal sea level tide gauge data which continue to show no evidence of accelerating sea level rise. These measurements include tide gauge data at coastal locations along the West Coast, East Coast, Gulf Coast, Pacific Ocean, Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico, as well as seven Pacific Island groups and six Atlantic Island groups, comprising more than 200 measurement stations.

The longest NOAA tide gauge record on coastal sea level rise measurements is in New York at the Battery, with its 160-year record which is shown below with a steady rate of sea level rise of 11 inches per century. A slightly slower rate of sea level rise occurs at nearby Kings Point, New York, whose 80-year record also appears below.

Tidal gauges at the Battery ( and Kings Point ( show sea level rising at a pace of 11 inches per century ( Both locations show a steady pace of increase, with the same pace of increase holding steady despite periods of relatively rapid temperatures increase and periods of cooling. The Battery measurements date back to 1855, showing the same pace of sea level rise well before the existence of coal power plants and SUVs.

NOAA data provide assessments with a 95% confidence level at all measured locations which demonstrate the consistent behavior of location-specific sea level rise over time. The 2016 updated NOAA tide gauge data include four long-term periods between 92 and 119 years for California coastal locations at San Diego, La Jolla, Los Angeles and San Francisco. The actual measured steady rates of sea level rise at these locations vary between four inches and nine inches per century.

In contrast to the steady but modest rise in sea level, revealed in long-term measurements, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) speculates that sea level will almost immediately begin rising significantly more than in the past and present. NOAA records contradict such claims. This pattern of steady but modest sea level rise extends throughout the world, throughout times of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, and throughout periods of accelerated warming and cooling.

The IPCC and global warming activists have a difficult time scientifically supporting speculation about accelerating sea level rise, as warming temperatures have yet to push sea level rise beyond one foot per century. Current sea level trends are not significantly different from what they were seven to nine decades ago, when atmospheric CO2 levels were 310 parts per million by volume (ppmv) or less. Dire predictions made decades ago of dramatically accelerating polar ice loss, and an ice-free Arctic Ocean have not come to pass. As Dr. Steven E. Koonin, former Undersecretary for Science for the Obama administration, noted in 2014, “Even though the human influence on climate was much smaller in the past, the models do not account for the fact that the rate of global sea-level rise 70 years ago was as large as what we observe today.”

Fortunately, we don’t need to wonder who is right and who is wrong in the debate over future sea-level rise. We can test the rising-seas hypothesis with real data collected from 10 coastal cities with long and reliable sea level records. Those cities are Ceuta, Spain; Honolulu, Hawaii; Atlantic City, New Jersey; Sitka, Alaska; Port Isabel, Texas; St. Petersburg, Florida; Fernandina Beach, Florida; Mumbai/Bombay, India; Sydney, Australia; and Slipshavn, Denmark.

This article was published by CFACT and is reproduced with permission.

First Small Modular Reactor Gets Certification From Nuclear Regulatory Commission thumbnail

First Small Modular Reactor Gets Certification From Nuclear Regulatory Commission

By Jeremy Beaman

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission announced the first-ever certification Friday of a small modular reactor design, a big step in the process of developing a new generation of new and more flexible nuclear reactors.

The NRC approved the reactor design from NuScale Power, making it the first SMR design to be certified by the regulator and only the seventh reactor design cleared for use in the United States.

“SMRs are no longer an abstract concept,” said Kathryn Huff, assistant secretary for nuclear energy at the Department of Energy. “They are real, and they are ready for deployment thanks to the hard work of NuScale, the university community, our national labs, industry partners, and the NRC.”

NuScale is one among many nuclear energy companies working to re-imagine the legacy nuclear reactor technologies developed in the 20th century by scaling them down, with one leading motivation being to make the construction of nuclear power plants more cost-effective.

The company, which was awarded a contract to build an SMR power plant on-site at DOE’s Idaho National Laboratory, celebrated certification of the design Friday of its advanced light-water reactor. The reactor uses power modules that each can generate 50 megawatts of electricity.

By comparison, the two new reactors at Plant Vogtle in Georgia are each rated at 1,250 megawatts.

The Biden administration has prioritized the advancement of new nuclear technologies, as well as the preservation of existing and operating power plants.

The Inflation Reduction Act, Democrats’ new green energy and healthcare spending law, offers a mix of tax incentives to nuclear power generators and funding to produce the uranium necessary to fuel advanced reactors…..


Continue reading this article at Washington Examiner.

Hanoi Jane Fonda: ‘There’d Be No Climate Crisis if It Wasn’t For Racism’ thumbnail

Hanoi Jane Fonda: ‘There’d Be No Climate Crisis if It Wasn’t For Racism’

By Discover The Networks

This week on NBC’s The Kelly Clarkson Show, actress/activist/Vietnam-era traitor Jane Fonda has declared that the current “climate crisis” is a result of racism, because “everything’s connected.”

“Well, you know, you can take anything -– sexism, racism, misogyny, homophobia, whatever, the war, and if you really get into it, and study it and learn about it and the history of it and — everything’s connected. There’d be no climate crisis if it wasn’t for racism,” she said.

Asked to elaborate, Fonda replied, “Where would they put the shit? Where would they put the poison and the pollution? They’re not gonna put it in Bel Air. They’ve got to find some place where poor people or indigenous people or people of color are living. Put it there. They can’t fight back. And that’s why a big part of the climate movement now has to do with climate justice.”

This is a ridiculous simplification of the issue and doesn’t address where the vast majority of pollution comes from (it doesn’t come from “shit” put in black neighborhoods), but it’s par for the course for climate activists.

This isn’t the first time Hanoi Jane has tried to make bad weather a social justice issue. In a December appearance on MSNBC’s The Beat, she claimed — again without evidence — that racist and misogynistic “mindsets” are causing the “climate crisis.”

Jane Fonda

147 Known Connections

Supporting the Black Lives Matter Movement

In late May 2020, while scores of American cities were being ravaged by violent Black Lives Matter– and Antifa-led riots in the aftermath of the infamous police-involved death of a black Minneapolis man named George Floyd, Fonda claimed that most of the protests were non-violent. “I think it’s important for us to recognize that the media cameras may be focused on the breaking of windows and the burnings and the fires, but the vast majority of people at least in the cities where I talked to people and from what I have seen on tv, it’s non-violent,” she told CNN’s Don Lemon on May 31. “These are people who are white. They are Latino. They are old. They are young. They are in wheelchairs, they have children with them. They have dogs with them. And it’s organized. Black Lives Matter, Color of Change, they don’t want violence. I don’t know who the people are that are doing the violence, but I think what matters is that more and more white people are getting it.”

To learn more abut Jane Fonda, click here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

They Really Believe You’ll Be Happy thumbnail

They Really Believe You’ll Be Happy

By Michael Watson

As the World Economic Forum (WEF) hosts [hosted] its annual conference of political officials, corporate bigwigs, and leaders of the professional Left-dominated nongovernmental organization world, the organization has come into focus. We brought some of the scrutiny, examining recent writings of WEF leader Klaus Schwab and critics of his “Great Reset.”

But when scrutinizing Schwab and the Forum it is important to separate the true from the false and observe distinctions, not only to not “look crazy” to normal people but also to better understand the professional-managerial class adversaries of individual, limited government. It is important to keep in mind that the WEF, Schwab, and its associates sincerely believe their efforts and managerial ideology will lead the world to a better place. Far from comic-book-movie villains, they would be the “omnipotent moral busybodies” about which C.S. Lewis warned.

So is the WEF a secret conspiracy to replace private ownership with utopian Marxism? No, though there’s less distance between a Danish MP’s infamous op-ed that the WEF published and the vision laid out by Schwab in The Great Narrative than critics will find comforting. WEF is hardly secret, given that it publishes its advocacy in book form and is best known for a highly public conference. But it is at least somewhat misleading for the WEF to defend itself, as WEF executive committee member Paul Smyke did, as just a place of discussion among ideologically diverse stakeholders.

Will We Own Nothing?

Much of the criticism of the Forum falls on its vision of a world in which “you’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy,” possibly because the citizenry will eat bugs instead of meat. Here the Forum’s defenders have ground to stand on; the Forum does not explicitly advocate these things. It has, however, offered prominent public figures space to opine about the future. In the notable case of an op-ed written in 2016 about a possible future set in 2030, the writer was Ida Auken, a former Danish environment minister and sitting member of parliament.

And when people write about the future, it is reasonable to think that they are, at least to some degree, writing about a future that they hope and expect to make and see. That is, after all, what Klaus Schwab did at book length in The Great Narrative. So it is worth looking at what that former minister thought the world of eight years from now might look like six years ago, in a piece the WEF thought worthy of publication.

The headline is stark: “Welcome to 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy and Life Has Never Been Better.” The piece suggests that a mere decade and a half from its writing, a Star Trek–style non-economy economy will be in full swing, with free communication, free transportation, free housing, and free food—all underwritten by free clean energy.

Now, from the vantage point of slightly less than halfway to this vision, one question arises: “How?” How did humanity develop free energy from almost nothing in only a decade and a half? And if it would have been so easy, how did the entire world—not just recalcitrant Americans, who occasionally elect Florida men to high public office, but even good Europeans, even Danes!—miss this boat to utopia?

Well, like Schwab’s own predictions about inflation and unemployment in the wake of COVID-19, it was just a bad prediction. But it was a predictably bad prediction: There is no such thing as a free lunch, and there has never been one since humanity entered this vale of tears. Why would one appear ex nihilo in less than half a generation? But if it reflects what the social-democratic green movement (often called “watermelons” by critics) sincerely believe is on the horizon, heaven help us.

That assumes the piece is in fact a prediction; the op-ed reads like a dorm-room bull session product. (The author’s apparent channeling of Karl Marx’s The German Ideology in her musing “When AI and robots took over so much of our work, we suddenly had time to eat well, sleep well, and spend time with other people” also seems worthy of the dormitory.) The concerning thing about this is that the writer is not a sophomore undergraduate writing for a campus literary magazine, but a former cabinet minister published under the auspices of a multi-million-dollar nonprofit.

Auken concedes her utopia is not perfect. “Nowhere can I go and not be registered,” asserts the citizen of 2030’s “our city,” which goes unnamed and un-located; one assumes it is not Copenhagen, since “in the past we filled all free spots in the city with concrete.” Or New York. Or Washington. Or Boston. Or Paris, or London, or Berlin. Or Mexico City, or Cape Town, or Kyoto. Come to think of it, where is this formerly all-concrete “our city” anyway?

But the surveillance dystopia is not the darkest part of the vision. That honor lies with “all the people who do not live in our city”—the narrator’s “greatest concern.” All who “felt obsolete and useless when robots and AI took big parts of our jobs” or who “got upset with the political system and turned against it” live beyond a sort of invisible city wall, in “little self-supplying communities” or in “empty and abandoned houses in small 19th century villages.”

At least it isn’t the gulag. Or rather, it isn’t the gulag yet—our citizen whose dreams are recorded betrays fear that “I just hope nobody will use it against me” even as our citizen asserts “all in all, it is a good life. Much better than the path we were on.”

One can award the same partial credit to Auken that one might give to Schwab for acknowledging that surveillance might very well lead to dystopia, while wondering why they suggest the world will and perhaps ought to employ this “one ring” anyway. Perhaps, like Tolkien’s hobbits, the “little self-supplying communities” have the better of the world of 2030 than the citizens of the dehumanizing, dystopian “our city.” The best that can be said is that at least the WEF isn’t trying to build it.

Yes, The WEF Has an Agenda

So, if the World Economic Forum isn’t about surveilling our dreams and using our living rooms for other people’s business meetings, what is its agenda? If you, like the Washington Examiner did, ask WEF executive committee member Paul Smyke, the answer is that the Forum doesn’t have one. This is an odd position to take for a man whose other title is WEF head of the regional agenda, North America.

To the extent what Smyke told the Examiner is true, it is true only in an incredibly misleading rules-lawyered literal sense in that the WEF does not have a formal policy program that all attendees endorse. It does have an ideology, and creditably, Klaus Schwab has been open about that ideology for 50 years, since he published the first Davos Manifesto on stakeholder capitalism, a forerunner to today’s environmental, social, and governance (ESG) movement.

As is made clear in COVID-19: The Great Reset and The Great Narrative for a Better Future, the Forum’s leader is a stakeholder capitalist who hopes to advance ESG, to see greater power lie with organized labor and the (overwhelmingly professional managerial class-oriented and politically liberal-to-socialist) nonprofit sector, and to harness the technologies of the “Fourth Industrial Revolution,” which he believes is now upon the world, to advance his ski-chalet environmentalist and chardonnay socialist policy goals.

It is true that the annual Forum meeting at Davos meeting is a place for policymakers and businesspersons of various ideologies to gather and discuss. But the people with whom one discusses determines the outcome of those discussions. If, as Schwab and co-author Thierry Malleret did in The Great Narrative, one discusses the path to a better future with left-of-center academics, former officials involved in the Chinese Communist Party–aligned Chinese People’s Consultative Conference, and environmentalist campaigners, one will find one answer. If one consulted with Republican governors; Hungarian, Polish, and Italian government ministers; industrialists (even soft-environmentalist ones like Elon Musk); or Abrahamic religious leaders, one would receive a quite different answer. When one discusses the world with left-wing, utilitarian, environmentalist, and animal liberationist philosopher Peter Singer, one knows (or should know) to expect different answers than if that discussion is with Catholic conservative philosopher Robert George. To choose a discussant is to decide the discussion.


The World Economic Forum’s position and aspirations—think “Great Reset”—invite justified scrutiny. Schwab may be one of the most influential nongovernmental figures in the world, simply because events like the Davos meeting put him and his organization adjacent to the “room where it happens” in dozens of countries and corporate boardrooms.

To the Forum’s credit, its ideology and events are largely public and subject to public criticism. To the Forum’s discredit, when that scrutiny is hostile, the Forum has hidden behind its most “out-there” critics to invalidate by association more level-headed disputation. But while it is not the secret governance of the whole world some claim, it is more than just a discussion forum for the world’s high and mighty.

Davos man,” a reference to the annual WEF Davos meeting, has become a common metonym for a certain bien-pensant, liberal, trendy environmentalist, and redistributionist ideology because that is the technocratic ideology that underpins the World Economic Forum, even if not all Davos attendees subscribe to it. (During his presidency, Donald Trump, who does not hold that ideology, attended Davos twice, in 2018 and 2020.) One can discern the ideology that underpins Davos because one can read Schwab’s books, look at the WEF’s marketing materials that promote possible breakthroughs toward an environmentalist future, and read op-eds the Forum saw fit to publish. That that ideology might lead to places the public does not want to go—something Schwab admitted in The Great Reset about digital COVID contact-tracing surveillance regimes and something Auken’s narrator concedes about “our city”—does not make it a conspiracy.

This article was published by Capital Research Center and is reproduced with permission.

Great Food Reset: ‘Lab-Grown Meat’ Harvested in ‘Massive Steel Vats’ Edges Closer to Fed Approval thumbnail

Great Food Reset: ‘Lab-Grown Meat’ Harvested in ‘Massive Steel Vats’ Edges Closer to Fed Approval

By Marc Morano

European Union approves worms and crickets for human consumption.

The Great Food Reset: ‘Lab-grown meat’ harvested in ‘massive steel vats’ edges closer to fed approval & U.S. dinner plates – As EU approves human consumption of worms & crickets

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano: “You Will Eat lab-grown ‘meat’ and bugs — and Be Happy. Or so the forces of the Great Food Reset believe. Bill Gates is gobbling up U.S. farmland (now the single largest owner) and the World Economic Forum pushes eating bugs, and the U.S. FDA and USDA edge closer to approving lab-grown ‘meat’ — Bon appetite?!

A food crisis and transformation are just the ticket for even more chaos that the WEF can exploit for their Reset agenda. The World Economic Forum is so eager to promote synthetic ‘meat’ that they are touting numerous ways to print up to 6 kilograms of the fake meat an hour. As part of this new coerced Great Diet Reset, the WEF has advocated eating bugs to save the planet. The Davos-based group has explained, “Why we might be eating insects soon.”

Our future is being planned by our overlords, load up on eating bugs to save the planet! It is a future that will happen, only if we allow it. It’s time for the Great Reject. Rise up and defy the Great Reset.”

By: Marc Morano – Climate Depot

January 26, 2023 9:46 AM

Climate Depot Special Report

Lab-grown meat moves closer to American dinner plates – ‘Grown in enormous steel vessels called bioreactors & processed’ into meat-like substance– Eat lab-grown meat from ‘massive bioreactors’ to save the earth! ‘Our planet is in crisis’ – Restaurateur Andrés, known for his work on global food security, told Reuters he wants to sell cultivated meat because of its environmental benefits. “We can see in what is happening all around us, in every country around the globe, that our planet is in crisis,” he said.

(Reuters) – Once the stuff of science fiction, lab-grown meat could become reality in some restaurants in the United States as early as this year. Executives at cultivated meat companies are optimistic that meat grown in massive steel vats could be on the menu within months after one company won the go-ahead from a key regulator. … Cultivated meat is derived from a small sample of cells collected from livestock, which is then fed nutrients, grown in enormous steel vessels called bioreactors, and processed into something that looks and tastes like a real cut of meat. Just one country, Singapore, has so far approved the product for retail sale. But the United States is poised to follow. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) said in November that a cultivated meat product – a chicken breast grown by California-based UPSIDE Foods – was safe for human consumption. …

Another draw is that growing meat in a steel vessel instead of in a field could reduce the environmental impact of livestock, which are responsible for 14.5% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions through feed production, deforestation, manure management, and enteric fermentation – animal burps – according to the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).


Bill Gates wants to stop cows from burping & farting in latest investment – Funds Australian-based company to reduce livestock emissions

European Union Approves Mealworms & Cricket Powder For Use in Bread, Crackers, Chocolate, & Soups Despite ‘Inconclusive’ Allergy Data

Europeans now also allowed to eat cricket powder and small mealworms – Earlier in January, the Commission also approved the use of small mealworms. The small mealworm may be used as (spread) paste, frozen, dried and powdered. Powdered mealworm larvae will also serve as a food supplement.

Daily Wire: Cricket powder will now be permitted in a number of food products, such as multigrain bread, crackers, cereal bars, biscuits, beer-like beverages, chocolates, sauces, whey powder, soups, and other items “intended for the general population,” according to the new regulation. Cricket One, a company that asserts that the insects are “nutritionally more efficient” and serve as a more reliable “source of alternative protein” than livestock, submitted the original application.

Watch: Morano on OAN TV on Great Food Reset – U.S. soon to be eating ‘lab-grown meat’ – Broadcast January 25, 2023 – OAN TV – In Focus With Addison Smith

Op-ed: The Great Food Reset – By Marc Morano

The Great Food Reset has arrived: Expect ‘real’ food shortages, Biden declares – Meanwhile, Bill Gates & China buy up U.S. farmland– Climate Depot’s Morano: “If the Davos crowd of the World Economic Forum were looking for a better global environment on which to enact their central planning vision of a Great Reset, it would be hard to imagine a more conducive chaotic time than right now.”  See: Watch video: World Economic Forum’s utopian Great Reset vision of 2030 – ‘You’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy’ – ‘Whatever you want you’ll rent & it’ll be delivered by drone’ – Meat will be ‘an occasional treat’.

Also see: ‘Americans May Have to Say Goodbye to Steak & Burgers as Beef Costs Rise’ as inflation soars – Just what the climate activists always wanted!

Watch: Morano’s 20 min. speech on The Great Food Reset Takeover of Our Farms & Food Supply

Great Food Reset: Watch: School kids munch on insects as cricket snacks introduced to 1000 schools to ‘help save the planet from global warming’

Kid’s manipulated with bug-eating PSYOP: ”Chips are great aren’t they, and these chips are even better, because I think they are better for you, did you know that? Yeah, that way you know, mum and dad might let you have more chips. Good stuff” the interviewer said.

[ … ]

”Many children have the power of pester, so in some cases can be great agents of dietary change within the family” said Verity Jones from the University of the West of England in Bristol.

Marc Morano commented: “The Great Reset is happening here and now. This is not circa 1991, when we we were talking about a shadowy secretive vision of a New World Order. This is 2022 now and we are seeing a ‘new normal’ being imposed upon the world.

    1. Our current energy system is being intentionally collapsed ;
    2. Our transportation system is being intentionally collapsed; (and our freedom of movement is being stripped away)
    3. Our First Amendment free speech rights are being collapsed by government & corporate collusion;
    4. Our high-yield agricultural system is being intentionally collapsed to create man-made food shortages and chaos; and
    5. The ability to eat meat is being banned to compel us to eat ‘lab-grown’ fake meat and eat insects. Artificially caused food shortages will create demand for insect eating.  And our betters are using our children as hand-picked little ministers of propaganda to promote insect eating and ‘pester’ adults to comply with the agenda. (See:The Great Food Reset has arrived: Expect ‘real’ food shortages, Biden declares – Meanwhile, Bill Gates & China buy up U.S. farmland)

Watch: Morano on Fox News on the Great Food Reset: China & Bill Gates buying up U.S. farmland – Pushing fake meat & bugs – ‘Unfiltered w/ Dan Bongino’

Dan Bongino: Here to weigh in is the author of the upcoming book, The Great Reset…Marc, no one knows more about the Great Reset than you, you literally wrote a book on it, we just showed the cover. …Is what we are seeing in the Netherlands a sign of things to come if the climate activists get their way here in the U.S. and other places?

Marc Morano: ‘We know that Bill Gates’ goal is to get us to stop eating meat and get us to start eating lab-grown, vegetable oil-processed fake meat. The same with Al Gore. The same with the World Economic Forum. They are pushing insect-eating as well. The United Nations, the World Economic Forum…That’s been their goal, the whole entire goal. First of all, you have the World Economic Forum which Bill Gates is a prominent member. You have Bill Gates buying up farmland — the single largest American farmland owner now, according to NBC News. I know no one likes a monopoly so don’t worry Dan. China is also gobbling up American farmland. So it’s a competition. We actually have good old market competition — China versus Bill Gates. Who do you want to win that battle? …

This will have devastating consequences because as the old Chinese proverb says, ‘When food is on the table there are many problems. When there is no food, there is only one problem.’


Great Reset By Marc Morano – Chapter 12 Excerpt: ‘COVID Lockdowns Morph to Climate Lockdowns’

The Great Food Reset: ‘They really *do* want you to eat bugs’ – ‘They’ve made meat expensive & launched a PR campaign to promote bug-eating’

Michael Shellenberger: ‘I mean look at these guys. They’re obsessed’

‘Green Elitism Behind Farmer Crackdowns’ – ‘What role is the World Economic Forum playing?’

Listen: Morano on DC’s WMAL talks Biden’s ‘climate emergency’, lockdowns & the Great Food Reset: You Will Eat Nothing & Be Happy

Analysis: The Lies Behind Lab-Cultured Fake Meat – A Great Food Reset – ‘Aim is to control populations by creating dependence on private companies that control the food supply’

How to feed a nation – The miracle of the modern food supply

Copyright © 2023 Climate Depot, All rights reserved.

Don’t miss this: ‘A Wildflower Super-Bloom for the Ages’ thumbnail

Don’t miss this: ‘A Wildflower Super-Bloom for the Ages’

By John Eidson

With parts of California recently inundated by more rain than any time in the last quarter-century, the climate crisis industry is portraying the unusual weather event as more proof that the much ballyhooed climate “tipping point” is finally upon us. A few years back, they were making the same bogus claim about a stubborn drought that gripped the state from 2012-15. Below are two short articles I wrote about that massively over-hyped dry spell.

California: A Wildflower Super-Bloom for the Ages

In 2012, California was hit with a statewide drought that lasted 4 years. Over that period, The Los Angeles Times ran a relentless barrage of dire stories predicting that unless the U.S. immediately—immediately!—enacted massive carbon taxes, the drought would drone on forever.

Act now! voters were told, or vegetation in the state would be wiped out by a permanently parched environment, snow would be a thing of the past, and every river and lake in the state would dry up.

Despite a deafening crescendo of frantic, man-made hysteria, no carbon taxes were enacted. And guess what? Much to the consternation of the climate crisis industry, the California drought hit a stone wall in 2016, when plentiful rainfall returned to the state.

After failing to sufficiently terrify voters, red-faced editors at the LA Times had no choice but to report that California is flourishing again:

“It’s official: California is 100% drought-free. For the first time since 2011, the state shows no areas suffering from prolonged drought and illustrates almost entirely normal conditions, according to a map released Thursday by the U.S. Drought Monitor.”

The article continued:

“Reservoirs are full, lakes are full, the streams are flowing, there’s tons of snow.”

Thanks to Earth’s ever-changing climate, droughts come and droughts go. Unusually hot temperatures in the state gave way to cooler ones—Los Angeles just experienced its mildest February in recorded history, with not a single day above 70 degrees.

After being told that vegetation in the state would be permanently wiped out, Californians are now enjoying one of the most spectacular wildflower super blooms ever seen. Take a deep breath before looking at the pictures below, and don’t forget to thank God for climate change.

How could a dying planet produce a magnificent nature show like the one shown below?


Drought Fizzles: After 4 Years of Environmental Hyper-Ventilating by Climate Fear Industry , California’s Lakes Are Back at 100% Capacity

“A lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.” – Lenin

Feb. 2017: Since December 2015, sustained rainfall has caused water to flow into the spillway at California’s Lake Berryessa.

For the last four years, California votes were repeatedly told in increasingly frantic terms that the drought that began in 2012 was nail-in-the-coffin proof that the climate collapse “tipping point” had finally been reached.

Progressives in government, academia, Silicon Valley, Hollywood, and the media relentlessly trumpeted dire warnings that California’s lakes would permanently dry up unless Americans agreed to immediate remedial action in the form of massive new taxes on carbon energy. Such taxes were never enacted, so did California’s lakes permanently dry up, as ominously predicted?

No, they didn’t. Not even close.

Last week, an official of the Data Exchange Center of the California Department of Water Resources told me the water level of the 47 selected reservoirs measured by the state are collectively 109% above historical averages.

One of the state’s most famous lakes, previously dried-up Lake Tahoe, joined the party with its largest water level rise in recorded history. In recognition that most of California’s lakes have returned to full capacity, the state’s Democrat governor was left with no choice but to declare an official end to the heavily-hyped drought.

Below are side-by-side pictures of Almaden Reservoir in Northern California near San Jose. One was taken before the drought started, the other when the drought was in full swing. This image is typical of the kind of visual terror progressives use to frighten voters into acquiescing to stratospheric new energy taxes.

Lake Almaden

But before enough voters could be sufficiently frightened, Mother Nature dealt progressives a devastating setback. In December 2015, rain returned to California, lots of rain, something that wasn’t supposed to happen unless massive new taxes were enacted.

By spring 2016, Lake Almaden was back at full capacity, exactly where it was in 2011, and exactly where voters were told it would never be again unless they submitted to crushing new taxation. According to the Santa Clara County Water District, as of May 1 of this year, Almaden and other reservoirs in the District were at 106% of historical average capacity.

Contrary to what progressives would have you believe, even the most severe droughts eventually end. And even though they know better, progressives would also have you believe another Big Lie, that extreme droughts were scarce as hen’s teeth until man began burning fossil fuels.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Nothing.

Ancient mega-droughts

Here’s part of California’s drought history that progressives try to hide at all costs: Studies of tree rings, sediment and other natural evidence have documented multiple extreme droughts in California over the last 1,0000+ years, including several that lasted more than 20 years–that’s FIVE TIMES longer than the relatively puny 4-year drought of 2012-15.

Twenty years is a long time, but some California droughts lasted even longer. Much longer.

One that began in the year 850 AD droned on for a staggering 240 years, and that mega-drought occurred 1,140 years before progressives of the 1980s invented the climate crisis industry out of whole cloth.

The drought of 850 wasn’t alone. Fifty years before it began, another mega-drought, one that lasted 180 years, was just winding down. Here’s an inconvenient truth progressives will never share with you: the region now known as California has been plagued for eons by extreme droughts, 100% of which eventually came to an end.

Why won’t Democrats tell you about California’s drought history? Because it would blow a hole bigger than Grand Canyon in another Big Lie they repeatedly tell, that extreme weather events in recent years are worse than at any time in Earth’s history.

Not a single one of their apocalyptic climate predictions has even come close to happening, yet they keep using Lenin’s teaching that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth.

©John Edison. All rights reserved.

The Cult of Davos thumbnail

The Cult of Davos

By Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow

“Davos”, the joke goes, “is where billionaires tell millionaires what the middle class thinks.”

The mega-elites in Davos have invested completely in climate, prompting CFACT policy advisor Joanne Nova to describe the gathering as, “what it would look like if a doomsday cult had a billion dollars to spend on a skiing holiday.”

Headlining Davos this year were the comedy team of Kerry and Gore.

Gore’s global warming exaggeration traveled far beyond the pale:

We’re still putting 162 million tons into it every single day, and the accumulated amount is now trapping as much extra heat as would be released by 600,000 Hiroshima class atomic bombs exploding every single day on the Earth… That’s what’s boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers and the rain bombs and sucking the moisture out of the land and creating the droughts and melting the ice and raising the sea level and causing these waves of climate refugees predicted to reach 1 billion in this century… Look at the xenophobia and political authoritarian trends that have come from just a few million refugees. What about a billion? We would lose our capacity for self governance on this world.

Phew!  Have you been to the ocean lately?  Was it “boiling?”

Maybe Gore and the Davos crowd are confusing the ocean with the hot tubs at their swanky resorts (although hot tubs don’t “boil” either).

Kerry tried to one-up Gore with bizarre rhetoric which soared right off the planet.

“It’s so… almost extra-terrestrial to think about, saving the planet.” President Biden’s Climate Envoy said, “If you say that to most people, they think you’re just a crazy tree hugging and lefty liberal, you know, do-gooder, whatever.”

Kerry’s “most people” are absolutely right about him.

Could Kerry and Gore be any more out of touch with climate reality or the hard-working Americans they purport to speak for?

CFACT’s Marc Morano summed up Davos perfectly on Dan Bongino’s Show on Fox saying, “We’re living in a time now where conspiracy realities outnumber conspiracy theories.”


The WEF is now calling for millions of cats and dogs worldwide to be killed in an attempt to reduce the “carbon footprint” that they produce as a result of eating meat. They’re introducing an international policy that would require most pet owners to euthanize their animals.

— 🇺🇸 Eye of the Day 🇺🇸 (@daisy061512) January 22, 2023

At the WEF, UN regulator issues a stern warning to @ElonMusk:

If you don’t comply and regulate speech, the UN will issue sanctions

— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 22, 2023


It’s a cult: The WEF are the “select few” touched as saviors of the world to master the future

Morano on Bongino’s Fox News show talking Davos WEF

The Biden Administration finally admits its mistake in canceling Keystone XL

A seismic climate connection?

EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Great Reset and Its Critics: The Technocrats thumbnail

The Great Reset and Its Critics: The Technocrats

By Michael Watson

In mid-2020, after COVID-19 and lockdown policies to (unsuccessfully) stop it had spread across the world, the World Economic Forum (WEF) leader Klaus Schwab, along with the man now known as King Charles III of the United Kingdom, announced the Forum’s “Great Reset Initiative” to guide a state-managed, environmentalist, and corporate-aligned reconstruction of the world economy. Schwab built on the initiative with a book co-authored with French economist Thierry Malleret titled COVID-19: The Great Reset. In their book, they made predictions about how the pandemic and ruling regime it ushered in would “reset” society to the benefit of environmentalism and management of the economy by a concert of state and “stakeholder.” The sequel, The Great Narrative, proposed an approach to selling the WEF’s reset agenda based on Schwab and Malleret’s discussions with 50 mostly left-wing, mostly academic thinkfluencers; It calls for more global governance. The radicalism of the “reset”—it’s right there in the name—and the influence of Schwab and the WEF, have elicited firm opposition.

Few quotes stick in the conservative or libertarian craw. quite like the infamous musing of incoming White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to President Barack Obama, “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things that you think you could not do before.” For Emanuel, the Obama administration, and Democrats’ generational-scale majorities in both houses of Congress, that meant enacting the fiscal stimulus, a then-outrageous $787 billion boondoggle of building projects; regulatory legislation like the Dodd-Frank banking act; and Obamacare, the statist restructuring of health care finance.

The Technocrats

But the quote sticks because the impulse is far from Emanuel’s alone. Nothing in the COVID-19 pandemic period so vividly demonstrated the impulse “to do things that you think you could not do before” as the name given to a project launched at a 2020 virtual conference of the World Economic Forum (WEF), the think tank and business league based in Europe best known for hosting the annual Davos meetings at which international politicians and corporate bigwigs lay out their visions for the world.

That name was “The Great Reset.” Demonstrating the WEF’s influence over a European metropolitan left-leaning sort, the project was launched by Klaus Schwab, the German academic who has led the WEF and been a leading opponent of shareholder primacy in corporate governance since 1971, and then-Prince of Wales, now King Charles III of the United Kingdom. The project, in the words of International Monetary Fund managing director Kristalina Georgieva, aspires to frame the emergence from the COVID-19 pandemic in the creation of “a greener, smarter, fairer world.”

Later in 2020, Schwab and French economist Thierry Malleret published COVID-19: The Great Reset­, a book-length examination of the changes in society the authors presumed were likely to happen and perhaps desirable as a result of the pandemic. Increased power of the state and left-wing activism were presumed certain; rapid adoption of environmentalist-aligned, “stakeholder”-influenced corporate practices was presumed to be a necessity.

Schwab has opposed “shareholder primacy,” the view that corporate management owes shareholders the greatest profits that can be obtained in obedience to law and custom, since the 1970s. Like the financial crisis of 2008 did for Emanuel’s American Democrats, the crisis created by the COVID pandemic and the unprecedented-in-modern-times attempts to suppress it offers Schwab and the WEF the opportunity to press home their environmentalist and statist goals.

But can central planners remake a world that they cannot accurately predict? From the perspective at the turn of 2023, many of Schwab and Malleret’s predictions of the world that COVID would bring into being have not come to pass, perhaps none more crucially than one on page 70: “At this current juncture [mid-2020], it is hard to imagine how inflation could pick up anytime soon.”

Schwab and Malleret’s sequel to COVID-19: The Great Reset, titled The Great Narrative, does little to diminish such suspicions. The “narrative” is essentially a repackaging of the same warmed-over environmentalist tropes all have heard before with little connection to the actual production of things, which makes sense given that the book is based on discussions with 50 global thinkfluencers or government officials, not with industrialists or even manufacturing-trades labor unionists. The result is a mix of technocratic gibberish and Greenpeace-in-a-suit environmentalism with the solutions for “a better future” having little to offer the Western middle and working classes beyond handwaving about a “just transition” and promises that weather-dependent energy technologies are much more stable and productive than traditional fuels. (Just ask Europeans trying to heat their homes amid an energy crisis how well that claim has aged.)

The authors’ barely veiled desire to exploit the COVID crisis to pursue left-wing ends has provoked alarm and responses, at least two of book length. publisher and longtime critic of environmentalism Marc Marono released The Great Reset: Global Elites and the Permanent Lockdown while Michael Walsh released a compilation of essays tiled Against the Great Reset: Eighteen Theses Contra the New World Order. Both focus less on Schwab’s “reset” itself than the broader agenda of ski-chalet environmentalism and chardonnay socialism popular with the professional-managerial technocratic class that is overrepresented at World Economic Forum gatherings and among the speakers at TED Talks. The right-leaning opponents’ fears are summarized in a line from a pre-COVID-era WEF video on predictions for the world in 2030: “You’ll own nothing, and you’ll be happy.”

The WEF is adamant that it does not advocate this; the line is derived from an op-ed by a Danish Social Democratic politician published by the WEF that is headlined, “I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy And Life Has Never Been Better.” Many would still respectfully dissent from such a vision.

This article was published by Capital Research Center and is reproduced with permission.

What Is Behind the Soaring Price of Eggs? thumbnail

What Is Behind the Soaring Price of Eggs?

By Neland Nobel

Price is largely determined by the interaction of supply and demand and the cost of the factors of production.  In the case of eggs, it is primarily a drop in the supply of eggs, while demand has been fairly constant.  However, there also has been a rise in the cost of the factors of production as well.

It is more than just a price problem.  In some stores, eggs are simply not available or they are available at certain times and then disappear.

The primary cause for the near tripling of the price of eggs is the Avian Flu, which has reportedly killed about 60 million egg-laying hens. That egg-laying hens have been the focal point of the flu explains why the shortage of chickens has not caused a commensurate increase in the cost of chickens we eat for meat.  To be sure that cost is up as well, but not as much. And since it takes a while for a chick to grow into a mature hen, the new egg supply will likely take until summer before we should see substantial improvement.

The rise in the cost of eggs of course directly influences the cost of breakfast for many.  But eggs are also used extensively in baked goods, mayonnaise, and processed foods.

However, there are other factors making things worse.  About 10 states have passed rules, either through legislation or initiative, that require chickens to be provided more space by law.  While well-intentioned, this can substantially increase the cost of having chickens as a commercial endeavor.  Much of the initiative for this movement is coming from the Humane Society.

Many farmers provide both cage-free eggs and eggs free of antibiotics to those consumers who prefer them.  Those concerned about the treatment of chickens and/or concerned about health issues have choices. Eggs meeting this criterion usually carry a premium price in the market, but we think that is fair.  It also is an important signal telling farmers there is rising demand for cage-free eggs, encouraging them to produce more eggs in the desired manner.

We have nothing negative to say about people who are willing to pay more of their own money to get eggs from a source they consider more humane or healthy. However, they do not have a right to impose their views by force (that is what a law is) and make everyone else subsidize their opinions.

Many of the states that have passed such legislation or initiatives are left-of-center states such as Michigan, California, Oregon, and Nevada.  But Arizona is the 10th state to do so.  This movement raises an interesting question: why should space requirements be limited to chickens and who decides the optimum space that can be defined as humane?  Should some voters impose costs and viewpoints on others by force when the marketplace already provides people with voluntary choices?

Some people think making animals subservient to people (as in food, zoos, and rodeos) is wrong and they become vegans.  That is their prerogative. However, they have no right to impose those views on others.  And once again, the free market allows for voluntary choice.  If a person wants to eat fake meat grown in a laboratory, they are free to do so.  However, once again we see the environmental movement opposed to beef because belching and farting cows supposedly add to global warming. However, substituting beans as a form of protein may well lead to the same alleged problem for the environment.

The history of such movements is it starts with hectoring, leads to subsidization and regulation, and ends in compulsion.

There just are no areas of life left where Left Wing do-gooders do not feel they have a right to impose themselves on others.

Environmental and ESG requirements have additionally starved traditional hydrocarbon energy sources of capital, causing the price of oil and natural gas to rise.  Increased fuel costs cause overall farming costs to rise.  Tractors don’t run on solar panels.  Thus, grains that make up a substantial part of the cost of feeding chickens, have risen substantially.  Natural gas, from which fertilizer is produced, has also gone up in cost, also adding to the cost of raising feed in the first place.

Everything about moving and producing food requires energy.

All increasing input costs have to passed along to the consumer by the farmer, the distributor, and finally the retail store.

Rising costs for labor also increase the cost of eggs in every stage of production, aggravating the situation.

Speaking personally, I am willing to pay extra for free-range eggs and those free of antibiotics.  However, I do not feel I have the right to impose that view on others and force them to bear the cost.

Meanwhile, the government could help by rejecting extreme environmentalism, turning loose America’s energy production, balancing the budget to slow down money printing, and reducing the costs of regulation.

As for the bird flu, it will just have to run its course and the hen population will need to recover.

The answer to high prices is more production, that is if the government and coercive do-gooders don’t get in the way.

The Latest Madness: Coffee Is Contributing To Climate Change thumbnail

The Latest Madness: Coffee Is Contributing To Climate Change

By The Geller Report

Researchers Claim Coffee Is Contributing To Climate Change

By Anthony Scott, Gateway Pundit, January 19, 2023:

First red meat, then gas stoves, and now coffee.

Researchers from Canada are currently analyzing coffee’s “contribution to climate change”.

The new analysis was published by researchers from the University of Quebec at Chicoutimi in a piece titled “Here’s how your cup of coffee contributes to climate change”

In their analysis researchers concluded “Limiting your contribution to climate change requires an adapted diet, and coffee is no exception. Choosing a mode of coffee preparation that emits less GHGs (greenhouse gases) and moderating your consumption are part of the solution.”

I’ll give up my extra coffee when the elites give up their private jets and coastal mansions — which were supposed to be submerged in rising tides ten years ago.

— wdwpro (@wdwpro1) January 19, 2023

In their study, the researchers compared the climate impact of traditional filter coffee, Encapsulated filter coffee, Brewed coffee (French Press) and Soluble coffee (instant coffee).

The study concluded traditional coffee has the highest carbon footprint.


Pamela Geller


The Elite Want To Cut The Carbon Footprint of Coffee

— The Triune Times (@TriuneTimes) January 19, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Islamic Republic of Iran: Leading Imam Says Drought Has Come Because Women Aren’t Wearing Hijab thumbnail

Islamic Republic of Iran: Leading Imam Says Drought Has Come Because Women Aren’t Wearing Hijab

By Jihad Watch

This kind of magical thinking lends itself to fanaticism. If one assumes that Allah is withholding rain because women aren’t wearing hijab (which must also be why it never, ever rains in non-Muslim countries), then one may also assume that one suffers any misfortune or setback in life because of disobedience to Allah. Someone who thinks that way will become ever more vigilant in his observance of Islam, and of course the pinnacle of observance of Islam is jihad.

A hadith has a Muslim asking Muhammad: “Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward).” Muhammad replied, “I do not find such a deed.” (Bukhari 4.52.44)

Iran Imam Says Less Rain Result Of Women Without Hijab

Iran International, January 13, 2023 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

The Supreme Leader’s representative in the city of Karaj says the reason for low precipitation in the country is a lack of hijab observance of hijab, after many women took off their veils following months of protests.

Mohammad-Mehdi Hosseini Hamedani, the Friday prayer imam of the city, reiterated that observance of hijab should be enforced strictly in society.

Describing anyone who unveils in public as an enemy, he emphasized that all such people must be confronted by the state. “It is not possible to imagine that we are living in an Islamic country when we enter some institutions, shopping malls, pharmacies, etc.!” he said, calling on the authorities to warn shops and malls that serve women who have removed their hijab and close them down if warnings did not suffice.

This is not the first time that the Islamic Republic’s hardliners are linking Islamic rituals to drought or natural disasters….

Prosecutor General Mohammad Jafar Montazeri in 2019 said, “The judicial system does not allow women to unveil in public, because it causes natural disasters such as floods and earthquakes in the country.”…




WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM UPDATE: John Kerry Says to Stop Climate Change We Need “Money, Money, Money, Money, Money, Money, Money”

— The Gateway Pundit (@gatewaypundit) January 17, 2023


WEF Promotes Scientist Behind False “Billions Will Die” From Climate Change Claim

German-Egyptian Scholar Hamed Abdel-Samad: Islam Was Born With The Seed Of Civil War And Has Failed To Come Up With A Plan For Coexistence

Biden’s Taliban: Face Coverings Now Required Even for Mannequins

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Unhinged in Davos: Kerry Likens Self to ‘Extraterrestrial’ Here to ‘Save the Planet’ thumbnail

Unhinged in Davos: Kerry Likens Self to ‘Extraterrestrial’ Here to ‘Save the Planet’

By Marc Morano

Gore blames ‘climate change’ for Xenophobia.

Watch: John Kerry Says WEF Davos Elite Are Like ‘Extraterrestrials’ Here to ‘Save the Planet’ – Touts himself as one of a ‘select group of human beings’

John Kerry at the World Economic Forum:

“And when you stop and think about it, it’s pretty extraordinary that we select group of human beings…are able to sit in a room and come together and actually talk about saving the planet. I mean, it’s so almost extraterrestrial to think about quote ‘saving the planet.’ If you said that to most people, most people they think you’re just a crazy tree-hugging lefty, liberal, you know, do-gooder or whatever, and, and there’s no relationship. But really, that’s where we are.”

Marc Morano comment:

“Kerry and the World Economic Forum, the UN, and Al Gore all seem to believe they are the chosen ones to save the planet. But, Kerry actually said something we can all agree with when he noted, ‘most people they think you’re just a crazy tree-hugging lefty, liberal’. Yes, Kerry is correct, most people do think that.

We have heard this type of elitism before. See: Klaus Schwab At 2022 WEF: ‘The Future Is Built By Us, By A Powerful Community As You Here In This Room’Klaus Schwab Opens the 2023 World Economic Forum Annual Meeting with a Call to “Master the Future”

Morano: “The Great Reset crowd assembling in Davos genuinely believe themselves to be above the rest of humanity and are able to own multiple mansions and fly private jets while spewing ‘saving the planet’ rhetoric or even picking up environmental awards.

Kerry may be on to something! Kerry’s friend and fellow climate activist Al Gore was born nearly nine months after the Roswell, New Mexico incident, so there may be a linkage to Extraterrestrials! The Roswell incident was on July 8, 1947. Al Gore was born on March 31, 1948.”

Flashback 2015: Aliens Could Attack Earth to End Global Warming, NASA Scientist Frets – The thought-provoking scenario is one of many envisaged in a joint study by Penn State and the NASA Planetary Science Division, entitled “Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis.”

Flashback: Activists compare climate change to alien attack: Former Calif Gov. Jerry Brown: ‘This is almost like we’re suffering an attack from Mars’ & MSNBC’s Joy Reid: If ‘aliens…come & attack us, it’s going to be because we destroyed the planet’

Flashback: UN IPCC Chief Pachauri okes about sending climate skeptics to outer space — ‘When leaders are unable to deal with reality, they just get the critics sent somewhere else’

Money, including philanthropic capital, is key to tackling climate crisis, John Kerry, Al Gore tell World Economic Forum – “The lesson I’ve learned in the last years … is money, money, money,” Kerry said during a panel discussion. “One of the keys to this is philanthropy and public money. But there is no way we can win this battle without partnerships [with the private sector].”

‘Enough already! Enough!’ Watch: Al Gore at WEF Davos rants ‘we need desperately to scale down anti-climate finance’

©2023 Marc Morano – Climate Depot. All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: CAUGHT HIM! Rebel News pummels Pfizer CEO with questions at World Economic Forum

The Climate Money Monster Cabal may be starting to unravel… Vanguard flees GFANZ thumbnail

The Climate Money Monster Cabal may be starting to unravel… Vanguard flees GFANZ

By Joanne Nova

Only a week after Ron de Santis pulled $2 billion in Florida funds from BlackRock, Vanguard, the second biggest asset manager in the world, has abruptly pulled out of GFANZ.

Vanguard has $7 trillion in assets under management, and GFANZ is a conglomerate cabal of bankers insurers and asset managers that has snowballed into a 550 member cabal with a jawdropping, obscene, 150 trillion in assets. Together, for a moment, they almost created the illusion of a One World Government by Bankers. After all, the GDP of the United States of America is only $23 trillion. So when an organization with six times the pulling power tells the world to go Net Zero, which company, which government would say “No”? Well, Ron de Santis did — and 18 other US states are working on it too.

The key weakness to the $150,000 billion dollar GFANZ monster is — as I said last week — that it’s an illusion. They are wielding other people’s money — using their clients own pension funds to indirectly punish their own clients, and the good guys […]

Good News: The best hope of unwinding the unholy alliance between Big-Money and Big-Government comes from the US States and they are starting to sink their teeth in.

BlackRock is the defacto Global Climate Police — but disguised as a monster investment fund. The way to break it is to expose that its primary interest is not in making money for its clients but as a Woke political tool.

BlackRock are able to intimidate most of the world with $10 trillion dollars in assets. They are effectively the third biggest “country” in the world by GDP. But it’s an illusion. They are wielding other people’s money — using their clients own pension funds to indirectly punish their own clients. And once those clients figure it out and pull their funds, BlackRock will become an empty shell. Couldn’t happen to a nicer company…

It’s a scam where BlackRock target legal corporations in states that voted to use fossil fuels to effectively undo what the voters wanted. A few months ago, 19 States in the USA started asking BlackRock and the US SEC some hot and hard legal questions. West Virginia announced they would boycott firms that boycott fossil fuels, and […]

This article was published by CFACT and is reproduced with permission.

The Real Cause of Climate Change thumbnail

The Real Cause of Climate Change

By Bud Hancock

Can there possibly be one human who has not by now heard those fear-inducing, horrific words, “Climate Change”? Just in case you  have not heard that term, it is the same as the one previously used by the fear-mongers: “Global Warming”.

The whole uproar over changes in our global climate have caused a serious divide between those who are certain that unless we “do something immediately” to “save the planet” and those who completely deny any climate change is occurring. The doom-speakers demand we all act quickly or we are all going to die as a result of the catastrophic events they say are coming on the earth. The deniers seem to be content to remain unaware of any changes in the climate or the reason for those changes (hint: it AIN’T about carbon emissions).

Personally, I have been more amused than worried about the effects of “global warming/climate change”. After nearly eighty years of life on this planet, and having lived in several areas of the US, as well as visiting several foreign countries from near the arctic circle to the equator, I can assure you  that, indeed the climate is changing; in fact it is changing on a daily basis. News reports, especially in the past several years offer concrete proof that the weather is getting more and more topsy-turvy and totally unpredictable.

A Little History

When our recorded history began, the earth was in a condition that no human has ever witnessed. But God, the creator of all things, wanted that condition to be known so that He could prove to all mankind that His true nature is to provide a perfect, peaceful, comfortable and productive environment for his prized creation: the human race.

God’s word does not provide many details of the means He used to bring about what is called a “chaotic void”, or the words “Tohu va bohu” in the Hebrew (Genesis 1:2 KJV). The English translation of “tohu va bohu” is “without form” (tohu/chaotic) and “void” (bohu/empty). This is the description of the earth when, in God’s perfect timing, He moved upon the scene and began the recreation/renovation of the earth we now inhabit.

Even though we are not told the details of the catastrophic event that produced “tohu va bohu”, we know that a massive amount of water that was previously gathered into specific places was allowed to cover the earth and bring utter destruction to anything that had previously been living on the earth’s surface.

However, we do know that Satan (Lucifer), one of God’s highest creations, full of splendor, beauty and even ‘music’, before pride brought him down, was responsible for the destruction that caused the ‘tohu va bohu’ condition of the earth due to his rebellion and foolish attempt to elevate his throne (on earth) above that of God.

After the flood that eliminated all beings on earth prior to the recreation of Genesis 1:1-3, God decided to make a being, “in His image” and “after His likeness”. That creature was named Adam, and he had the same genetic bodily characteristics (shape and fashion) of God. The Hebrew words used as image in Genesis 1:26, tselem (Strong’s 6754, pronounced tseh’-lem) and likeness, dmuwth, (Strong’s 1823, pronounced dem-ooth’) both indicate  something that has or is, a  shade, a phantom, a resemblance, hence a representative figure of the original. If man was created perfect (uncorrupted) as God declared, then the genetic structure of Adam was also as perfect and as uncorrupted as was God’s.

God’s Perfect Man Becomes Corrupted

After the sin of Adam, the curse placed upon humanity, the earth and the ‘serpent’ allowed that ‘the seed of the woman’ (Eve) would bruise the head of the serpent (Satan); God already had His plan of redemption ready for the time when it was needed. That plan required a sacrifice, a perfect human specimen that would be capable of satisfying God’s righteous demand for a perfect, undefiled and uncorrupted sacrifice. That sacrifice would need to be descended from the lineage of man ‘through a woman’ and would come through the womb of Eve’s direct descendants , a virgin we now know as Mary (Eve’s seed).

However, the corruption of humanity had already taken its toll on the human race with death having entered the picture and for the most part, the life expectancy of men having gradually decreased.

Obviously, God’s plan to redeem the human race was sometime into the future and when that time came, everything had to be as God had said it would be.

As Adam and Eve began to reproduce, multiplying the human race, a serious problem for the future of mankind was introduced by Satan and those fallen angels who, alongside Lucifer, rebelled against God and followed Lucifer in his future war against God.

Some of those sinful fallen angels ‘looked upon the daughters of men’, saw their physical beauty and chose them to marry and had intercourse with them, thus producing the giants spoken of in Genesis 6:4, who then reproduced and created a race of giants that were NOT of the pure DNA that Adam had received from God. The obvious intent of Satan was to corrupt the DNA of all men and thus deny God the means of introducing the promised Redeemer into the earth.

Having seen the condition of man, so totally depraved and wallowing in sin and disobedience, with mankind being so wicked and corrupted, God made the decision to wipe everything away and start over. The record of the condition of humanity when God made His decision shows just how successful Satan had been in his quest to destroy humanity and defeat God.

God’s Planned Destruction of Corrupted Mankind

As corrupted as all of mankind was, God still found in one man the pure lineage needed to produce His Messiah. Noah, the ninth generation of sons from Adam was described as being a ‘just man and perfect in his generations’. The word perfect is the English translation of the Hebrew word tamiym (Strong’s 8549, pronounced taw-meem’) and it is translated as without blemish (bodily), upright and undefiled; this is the same description of the Jewish animal sacrifices that God required to be ‘bodily perfect and without spot or blemish’.

We are told in Genesis 6:8 that Noah ‘found grace’ in the eyes of the Lord. The word ‘found’ is the English translation of the Hebrew word ‘matsa’ (Strong’s 4672, pronounced maw-tsaw’) and it means ‘to attain’, or to arrive at, to reach as a goal. God declared Noah to be “a just man, and perfect in his generations” indicating that, 1) it was God who was searching for the person needed to carry on the uncorrupted DNA of the original Adam, and 2) Noah himself, through his life as a devout God-seeker, a man who had kept himself  pure in ‘his generations’ with uncorrupted DNA, was counted worthy of God’s consideration.

Noah was descended from a lineage of men whose DNA had not been corrupted by mixing with that of the fallen angels, making him a candidate to continue the line from whom the Messiah would come. That lineage was as follows: Seth, Enos, Cainaan, Mahalaleel, Jared, Enoch, Methuselah and Lamech. Even though the fathers of each of these men had “other sons and daughters”, their names are mentioned first because they were the specific persons who would carry on the pure lineage through uncorrupted DNA. This info can be found in Genesis 5.

God’s Plan: The ARK of Safety

God then spoke to the man Noah and informed him of the coming destruction of all flesh and gave him the plan that was formulated before the foundation of the world, the plan to construct a shelter that would withstand the coming destruction and save eight souls alive, besides a selection of all clean animals.

So, What About Climate Change?

In Ecclesiastes 1:9, Solomon, the writer of Ecclesiastes declared: “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

Those who constantly run to and fro proclaiming the dangers of burning ‘fossil fuels’ (not to mention the absurdity of ‘cow flatulence’) that release copious amounts of carbon into the atmosphere resulting in the threatened destruction of the planet due to ‘climate change’ (formerly global-warming’), want us to believe that what we are seeing now with the changes in the global temperatures, massive storms in diverse areas and all manner of strange weather phenomena, none of which I deny, has never been seen before in the history of man.

However, we know from the record in Genesis that this is not true. When God recreated  the earth, it was perfect. There were no recorded strange weather phenomena mentioned from the recreation to the Flood of Noah.

So, what caused the sudden change that resulted in the flood and the destruction of all flesh save the eight souls and the animals that were saved along with them?

Genesis 6:5-7, “And God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And the Lord said, ‘I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repented me that I have made them’.”

The absolute depravity of mankind, who disobeyed God and refused to live according to His dictates, had brought the entirety of mankind to a place where God saw no value in them any longer and His creation no longer brought Him joy or pleasure. The answer was to destroy them all with a massive change of climate with “all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened” (Genesis 7:11 KJV) to cover the earth and wipe out all of those beings that were not safe in the ark.

We know that God directed the catastrophic weather event that flooded the entire earth and destroyed all flesh except those that were saved on the ark. And there are now those whose shallow knowledge of God has prompted them to claim that God was cruel to do so, but, they would be wrong.  Just as it was an act of God’s grace and mercy that drove the man from the Garden of Eden wherein was the tree of Life that, had it been accessed by man in his sinful state, it would have allowed mankind to live forever in that depraved fallen state, so was His decision to destroy all corrupted humans to save alive the ones who would go on to produce the body of Messiah.

Even though there are many in Christian circles who have fallen for the ‘Climate Change narrative’ that says man’s physical actions, burning carbon based fuels and other actions in the way he relates to the planet have caused the damage we see from the weather now being experienced, there is a far more reasonable explanation and it totally aligns with God’s word.

Just as the first earth which became ‘tohu va bohu’ as a result of Lucifer’s rebellion and sin against God, the same thing occurred in the centuries  leading up to the time of Noah where “God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.” (Genesis 6:5-6 KJV). This heart condition of God moved Him to make a decision that would allow the race of man to continue living until the Messiah could be introduced into the earth.

The time from Adam’s creation to the time of the flood of Noah has been estimated to be around 1650 years and during that time it is also estimated that approximately 500 million people had been born on the earth. Sadly, of that large number of souls, there were only a few that had remained uncorrupted in God’s eyes. Had God not mercifully sent the flood, there would have been none that remained capable of producing a saviour worthy to become the perfect sacrifice demanded by God’s righteousness.


Jesus’ disciples questioned Him about the “signs of His coming, and the end of the world” (Greek ‘aion’ or English ‘age’, meaning a period of time, NOT the end of the world or the earth as they will both continue forever), Jesus was speaking of the end of the Church age which takes place at the rapture when Jesus appears in the clouds to call His body home to be forever with Him.

In answer to their question, Jesus said: As the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be”. We know from scripture that in the days just before the flood came, all mankind had entered a period of total depravity and corrupted itself through sin, rebellion and utter disobedience against God. The mixing of DNA from fallen angels and human women had nearly corrupted the human DNA causing bodily impurity.

We are now living in the days mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 24. Just as wickedness was rampant in the days of Noah, today, with the increase in human knowledge leading to the attempt to clone a human being, DNA alterations aided by Artificial Intelligence and the constant introduction of more and more potentially dangerous pharmaceuticals that cause sometime irreparable damage to the human body, mutations that evil scientists are using to introduce ‘hybrid beings’ that are neither human nor  robot but a mixture of the two, the similarities between the ‘Days of Noah’ and our current time are startling and eye-opening.

The world is now being deceived by certain groups, e.g., the WEF, the CDC, the WHO and others who are trying to play God and utterly corrupt the current human DNA and allow the earth to be controlled by inhuman or transhuman monsters. The timing of the events that ‘imitate’ the times of Noah indicate that we are in the days leading up to “the coming of the Lord”.

Paul told Timothy, in 2 Timothy 3:12-13, “Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.” Every day we read of persecution against Christians around the world, and that will soon be coming to the US as well to all who choose to live Godly in Christ Jesus.

The deception the world is receiving is the absolute lie that some actions of evil men will create a perfect utopia on earth instead of bringing the destruction God has planned for all evil.

Unfortunately, some Christians are also accepting the deception and allowing themselves to be drawn into satanic behavior and religious apostasy instead of “living Godly in Christ Jesus”.

After Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives exited the ark, Noah built an altar and, of the clean animals he saved, He offered sacrifices to God. God then made a covenant with Noah promising that He would not ever again destroy the earth by a flood of water.

But just as man’s sin and rebellion caused the weather disasters recorded in God’s word in Genesis, the strange and unusual weather we are now witnessing is also a direct result of the increase of sin and rebellion against God and His word. We don’t know just how bad these weather events will become, but we know one thing for certain, the time leading up to the seven year period known as Daniel’s seventieth week, aka the Tribulation Period will bring destruction, devastation and loss of human life that has never been witnessed in human history.

Burt, DO NOT FEAR! As in the days of Noah God has a plan and neither man, nor Satan nor his demonic minions  have the power to stop that plan. Yes, evil will continue to become more evil and the catastrophic weather events will also continue and will cause men’s hearts to fear and fail, but we know that all who have entered into the “Ark of God’s Provision” will not only live, but will live eternally with God!

Blessings! And Maranatha!

©Bud Hancock. All rights reserved.

If I Wanted To Reshape The World To Have Fewer People → thumbnail

If I Wanted To Reshape The World To Have Fewer People →

By Vlad Tepes Blog

It occurs to me that our failings in the past decades all have one thing in common. We consistently and with a flawless record, fail to think as big as the people creating the problems facing us. That is to say, when we oppose a line of effort against us, we always treat the problem or issue as presented. When in fact it’s larger, and part of a much bigger planed assault on ourselves.

Take Global Warming.

There are a few layers of opposition. Those who know the science is fabricated and argue the science and try and get people to understand that Global Warming by man’s actions simply isn’t a real thing. That has nearly no chance of succeeding, but its one level of activism people can do.

Then, there are those who think Global Warming is a dialectic device to take control of especially Western industrial man using control of CO2 production as a means of ending productivity, or at least being in full control of it. One may notice that no alternatives to create of energy, such as nuclear or other means can be allowed. Only the problem of CO2 must remain in the forefront as a means to shape the future. Even when there are multiple ways to create the needed energy without producing it. Bad solutions, like electric cars are encouraged. Sorry, not bad solutions, things that kinda sorta look like solutions but actually make no difference or add to the problem and create new ones.

But a real psychopath might take it to the next level.

Imagine being so committed to the idea that the world has too many people on it that you needed to embark on a serious plan to reduce the world’s population.

Imagine that you had convinced enough people that the world was warming, despite all the evidence to the contrary, to the point that no one would interfere with a plan to geo-engineer the atmosphere to block out solar radiation for a time that would significantly cool the Earth.

Imagine that you had managed to get millions of people from warm parts of the Earth to move to cooler parts, even though it would multiply their carbon footprint by a factor of FOUR and the resources needed for life are far greater for each individual in say, Canada than in Namibia.

Imagine that the people doing the geo-engineering to “solve Global Warming” know damn well it isn’t happening. They would also then know that a warmer Earth means more food and more plant life and more animal life. Especially if the level of CO2 goes up a few more parts per billion.

So what would happen to the available food supply if the temperature of the Earth’s most productive growing regions fell by a few degrees?

RELATED VIDEO: Frederik Jansen on the Frankfurter Schule – The Laughland Report

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column published by   is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Here Is The Climate Cult’s True Agenda thumbnail

Here Is The Climate Cult’s True Agenda

By The Daily Caller

With the Biden administration’s latest bid to ban gas stoves, many Americans might be asking themselves where they came up with this one. As usual, climate change is one of the culprits – despite Snopes telling you otherwise. This campaign comes as businesses argue it would annihilate the restaurant industry and drive up consumer prices. But that might be exactly the point.

Climate alarmism is calculated to achieve a series of goals that for too long have been considered the domain of “conspiracy theorists.” It’s easy to dismiss them as craziness when we’re treated to spectacles of activists gluing their nipples to pavement or defacing priceless works of Western art.

But ignore the theater and look at a blueprint for climate goals: the C40 2019 report titled “The Future Of Urban Consumption in a 1.5°C World.”

C40 defines itself as an alliance of “mayors and [their] cities … taking ambitious, collaborative and urgent climate action that aligns with science-backed targets.” It includes New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles – you know – the usual suspects. The World Economic Forum (WEF) gives it a platform, so you know it’s going to be good.

The report says people must reduce consumption to “mitigate climate change.” So far, no problem. After all, in consumerist America, the amount of polluting junk that ends up in landfills boggles the mind. But that’s not what C40 has in mind.

Instead, C40 calls for phasing out all meat and dairy consumption by the year 2030. Fortunately, the WEF has a solution: Eat the bugs. It’s more eco-friendly than raising livestock for meat and milk.

Now on to air travel. The C40 project calls for citizens to only take “1 short haul return flight (less than 1500 km) every three years per person.” That means you get one ~1,000-mile flight – a little more than a flight between Chicago and New York City. No more international travel for you.

As for cars, the goal is a grand total of zero private vehicles. For clothing, you get a total of three new clothing items per year, all by 2030.

Now, skeptics will say there is no way anyone will sign on to this. And they would be correct. That is where the coercive hands of government, “philanthropy” and the private sector combine to screw you over.

Americans can look to Europe for what the Biden administration is planning here. France has already banned short-haul domestic flights within the country. In the Netherlands, the government has moved to close nearly 12,000 family farms and cut the livestock capacity of roughly another 18,000. And if a buyout doesn’t work, the Dutch government has indicated it will expropriate the properties.

In America, such measures are already under consideration. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg, for all his incompetence in handling the various air crises, appears a willing player in this climate power grab, floating a mileage tax allegedly to help pay for infrastructure. However, anyone paying attention will realize that taxing mileage will disincentivize car ownership and aid towards the goal of zero private vehicles. When AOC talks about cow farts, she may sound stupid, but she is unwittingly pushing the same agenda as in the Netherlands.

And if people resist, there’s always the corporations ready to cut you off. Mastercard is already pioneering such an experiment with a “carbon limit” credit card (which is voluntary for now) that cuts your purchases off if you exceed your monthly limit. And the calculation tool is available to other banks, too. It’s not just Mastercard. Look at the list of the WEF’s partners and see how many brands you recognize that are involved in this “Great Reset.” This is how the C40 goals will be enforced. You will comply or be cut off from the financial system.

And if you think that’s bad, just wait until the Federal Reserve rolls out central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) to control and block any transaction you make. Sound like something out of Communist China? That’s because it is. It’s exactly how the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) social credit system is designed.

Yet, none of the climate alarmists follow these suggestions. When John Kerry visits Davos, Switzerland, for the WEF summit, he will be flying ~4,000 miles, likely on a gas-guzzling private jet. Davos attendees certainly won’t be eating the bugs. Despite touting a meatless menu, there will still be the option of steaks at expensive Swiss restaurants. And if and when global emissions regulations do kick in, they will always have the option of buying carbon credits to increase their allowances.

And the worst part is that none of this is a “conspiracy theory.” It’s all documented and suggests these guys have nothing but contempt for you. Just look at what they say vs. what they do. Jill Biden gets to use a gas stove, but you don’t. Ted Turner gets to have five children, but you only get one. Bill Gates gets a massive yacht, Kerry gets his private jet and Al Gore gets his mansion, but you get to fly once every three years, live in a pod and eat the bugs.

Pay no attention to the crazy climate activists. They are simply a cover for this agenda which certainly seems hellbent on making sure you own nothing and are happy.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.



Michele Gama Sosa is an opinion editor for the Daily Caller and a historian by training.


The face of pure evil

— ThēPrìcklyThìstle (@TheeThistle) January 13, 2023

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Media Blackout Over Islamic Terror Attack At Vegas Solar Power Plant thumbnail

Media Blackout Over Islamic Terror Attack At Vegas Solar Power Plant

By The Geller Report

A Muslim is facing terror-related charges after police said he rammed his car through a gate at a solar plant outside Las Vegas and set his car on fire, disabling the huge facility, the 8 News Now Investigators have learned. Nothing to see here. No media coverage – even though it was a SOLAR plant.

Las Vegas Metro police responded to the solar plant on U.S. 93 north of the Las Vegas Motor Speedway, sources told the 8 News Now Investigators. Employees at the plant said they found a car smoldering in a generator pit. The Mega Solar Array facility provides energy to MGM properties but is run by a company called Invenergy.

The driver, later identified as Mohammad Mesmarian, 34, is accused of ramming through a fence and setting the car on fire. The car is registered out of Idaho, documents said.

Mesmarian faces charges of committing an act of terrorism, arson, destroying or injuring real or personal property…..

Media Blackout Over Terror Incident At Vegas Power Plant

by Tyler Durden, Zero Hedge, Jan 07, 2023:

The US power grid is under attack as extremists shoot, sabotage, and vandalize electrical equipment at power stations. One of the highest-profile attacks was when two men used guns to paralyze a substation in Washington state on Christmas Day, leaving thousands without electricity. The incident made national news, but strangely enough, another attack last week on the Las Vegas power grid went unnoticed by the national press.

Mohammad Mesmarian, 34, rammed his car through the gate of a solar power generation plant outside Las Vegas on Wednesday and set his car on fire, intending to damage a massive transformer, 8 News Now reported.

“Employees at the plant said they found a car smoldering in a generator pit,” 8 News Now said, adding the Mega Solar Array facility provides power to 13 properties on the Las Vegas Strip, all belonging to MGM Resorts.

Investigators believe Mesmarian “siphoned gasoline from his car to put on wires at the transformer,” 8 News Now said, citing documents from investigators.

“Mesmarian clarified he burned the Toyota Camry,” police said. “Mesmarian said he burned the vehicle at a Tesla solar plant and did it ‘for the future.’”

Here’s security camera footage of Mesmarian lighting his car on fire next to a giant transformer.

The US power grid is under attack as extremists shoot, sabotage, and vandalize electrical equipment at power stations. One of the highest-profile attacks was when two men used guns to paralyze a substation in Washington state on Christmas Day, leaving thousands without electricity. The incident made national news, but strangely enough, another attack last week on the Las Vegas power grid went unnoticed by the national press.

Mohammad Mesmarian, 34, rammed his car through the gate of a solar power generation plant outside Las Vegas on Wednesday and set his car on fire, intending to damage a massive transformer, 8 News Now reported.

Read more.


Pamela Geller

RELATED ARTICLE: Biden Regime Gives ‘Temporary’ Amnesty to Thousands of Somalis Living in U.S.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEOS: The Great Reset and The Green Fraud thumbnail

VIDEOS: The Great Reset and The Green Fraud

By Jamie Glazov

Climate Depot’s Marc Morano discusses The Great Reset and The Green Fraud, exposing The global elites’ pernicious agenda.

Please watch our 10-Part Series on The Hidden Agenda Behind the “Pandemic”

[1] Dr. Paul Alexander: Presidential Takedown – How Anthony Fauci, the CDC, NIH, and the WHO conspired to overthrow President Trump.

[2] Dr. Paul Alexander: Zero Covid and Tiananmen Square 2.0?

[3] Leo Hohmann: The “Next” Pandemic – How do the G20 leaders know it’s coming?

[4] Leo Hohmann: ‘SMART Cities’ Converting into Concentration Camps.

[5] Naomi Wolf: The Vax’s War on Human Intimacy and Survival – The injection’s assault on human love.

[6] Dr. Naomi Wolf: The Vax’s Crippling of Human Sexual Organs – How Medical experts are exposing the globalists’ vicious assault on human reproduction.

[7] Leo Hohmann: The Biggest Propaganda Operation in Human History – How the Biden admin recruited ‘trusted messengers’ everywhere to pressure Americans to get injected with the experimental vax.

[8] Patrick Wood: The Globalists’ Take-down of Humanity Via Technocracy – A harrowing glimpse at the global elitists’ plan to rip the world apart and rule it. 

[9] Dr. Vladimir Zelenko: The Globalists’ Transhumanist Agenda.

[10] Dr. Carrie Madej: Horror – Covid ‘Vaccine’ Vials Under the Microscope.

Subscribe to

EDITORS NOTE: This Glazov Gang column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Washington Post Now Claims Climate Is ‘Not Warming’ But It’s ‘WORSE For the Planet!’ thumbnail

Washington Post Now Claims Climate Is ‘Not Warming’ But It’s ‘WORSE For the Planet!’

By The Geller Report

So here we how, thirty years of this manure and it’s never mind, but wait, it’s worse than that!

They shit on you with impunity. They are destroying everything we value in our civilization with this insulting, contemptuous lie.

A new climate reality: Less warming, but worse impacts on the planet

The most severe climate change scenarios now appear less likely, but extremes are nonetheless poised to overwhelm societies, scientists say

By Scott Dance, Washington Post, January 6, 2023:

In the not-so-distant past, scientists predicted that global temperatures would surge dramatically throughout this century, assuming that humans would rely heavily on fossil fuels for decades. But they are revising their forecasts as they track both signs of progress and unexpected hazards.

Accelerating solar and wind energy adoption means global warming probably will not reach the extremes once feared, climate scientists say. At the same time, recent heat, storms and ecological disasters prove, they say, that climate change impacts could be more severe than predicted even with less warming.

Researchers are increasingly worried about the degree to which even less-than-extreme increases in global temperatures will intensify heat and storms, irreversibly destabilize natural systems and overwhelm even highly developed societies. Extremes considered virtually impossible not long ago are already occurring.

Scientists pointed to recent signs of societies’ fragility: drought contributing to the Arab Spring uprisings; California narrowly avoiding widespread blackouts amid record-high temperatures; heat waves killing tens of thousands of people each year, including in Europe, the planet’s most developed continent.

It’s an indication that — even with successful efforts to reduce emissions and limit global warming — these dramatic swings could devastate many stable societies sooner, and more often, than previously expected.

“We see already that extremes are bringing about catastrophe,” said Claudia Tebaldi, an earth scientist at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, Wash. “The question is: How are we going to possibly adapt and lower the risk by turning the dial of what we can control?”


Pamela Geller


EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Settled Science and the Politics of Knowledge thumbnail

Settled Science and the Politics of Knowledge

By Adam Ellwanger

Climate catastrophe keeps getting delayed, yet our doom remains imminent.

Over the last decade, “The Science is Settled” has been a major refrain of American life. As so many critics have noted, this phrase is not an empirical statement. People who challenge the “settled” state of science explain that science is a process of discovery and not a conclusion. They aren’t wrong, but they unfortunately assume that “the science is settled” is meant in good faith. It’s not. The slogan is a form of rhetorical bullying. Its singular purpose is to create an illusion of certitude in order to preempt any meaningful debate about the natural world, public policy, and the role of scientific knowledge in democratic deliberation.

“The Science,” we are told, is “settled” about many topics, but global climate change is the one where the science is most settled. The Earth is getting dangerously hot (and cold), and if we don’t take decisive action immediately, civilization as we know it may end. But as the years pass with no “comprehensive” action taken to fight climate change, the moment of civilizational collapse is quietly moved down the line, in increments of a few years at a time. The climate apocalypse is always just close enough that we should all be terrified, and just far enough away that we still have time to get serious and implement the sweeping (leftist) reforms that could save us. Convenient, isn’t it?

Nevertheless just because the logic is ludicrous doesn’t mean that the science isn’t settled. There is, in fact, a broad consensus of scientific experts on climate change. A popularly-cited statistic is that 97 percent of experts believe global climate change is manmade and that it presents a considerable threat. The unstated premise of “The Science is Settled” is that if there is a large consensus, then the consensus view must be right. Fortunately, though, there are ways to measure experts’ degree of certitude when it comes to the consensus on climate change. This is because the scientists can’t resist the urge to prophesy. The implementation of the Left’s broad climate policies depends on conveying the urgency of the problem, which requires that “the Science” depict the hell that awaits us if we opt for inaction.

Scientists would be horrified at my use of the term “prophesy.” They call their predictions “projections.” It’s true that there is a small difference: prophets have more skin in the game. After all, a prophet is discredited when his predictions don’t come to pass. By calling their prophecies “projections,” scientists get to be wrong without undermining their credibility. When they (wrongly) prophesied that there would no longer be glaciers in Glacier National Park by 2020, they were simply extrapolating from the best data available at the time, which was fed into models. Strange though that when it comes to climate change, the “best data available at the time” always leads to projections that we realize (after the fact) overestimated the effects (rather than underestimating them). This tendency toward hyperbole begs the question: just how much certitude is required for the science to be “settled”?

The Prophecy of “NCA4”

By law, the U.S. Global Change Research Program must provide a “National Climate Assessment” report to Congress “no less than every four years.” As empirical documents, these reports naturally quantify the level of confidence that the experts have in the accuracy of their prophecies. The last report (referred to as “NCA4”) was submitted in early 2019, which means that we are due for NCA5 later this year. Indubitably, NCA5 will receive significant media attention since its covert purpose is to draw attention to (and therefore advance) the climate agenda. Thus climate reports are decidedly rhetorical documents despite experts’ insistence that science has no interest in rhetoric.

NCA5 will allow us to assess the accuracy of the prophecies foretold in NCA4, and we’ll also learn whether the apocalypse is unfolding on schedule. But in preparation for the new report, we not only have a duty to revisit the “projections” of NCA4, we must refresh our memories on just how much confidence experts had in those projections to begin with. The answer, it seems, is “not much.”

NCA4 was full of dire predictions. For example, the report warned, “Many millions of Americans live in coastal areas threatened by sea level rise; in all but the very lowest sea level rise projections, retreat will become an unavoidable option in some areas” (emphasis added). Note the certainty of the phrasing: “will become.” Although the quote explicitly acknowledges that some “projections” don’t foresee the U.S. coast being inundated, the writers make sure to emphasize that these (allegedly flawed) projections don’t undermine the “scientific consensus.” But then what of the curious assertion that “retreat will become an unavoidable option”? Here we see the rhetorical sleight of hand: by definition something that is “unavoidable” is not an “option.” And if retreat will be an “option,” then the hypothetical flooding would necessarily be negligible.

Elsewhere, though, the report stresses that there is no uncertainty about these matters at all: “Across the United States, many regions and sectors are already experiencing the direct effects of climate change. For these communities, climate impacts—from extreme storms made worse by sea-level rise, to longer-lasting and more extreme heat waves, to increased numbers of wildfires and floods—are an immediate threat, not a far-off possibility.”

Oddly, the bold prophecy quoted above comes after an admission: “The world we live in is a web of natural, built, and social systems—from global climate and regional climate; to the electric grid; to water management systems […]; to managed and unmanaged forests; and to financial and economic systems. Climate effects many of these systems individually, but they also affect one another, and often in ways that are hard to predict. […] A key factor in assessing risk […] is that it is hard to quantify and predict all the ways in which climate-related stressors might lead to severe or widespread consequences.”

Even the oft-repeated platitude that climate change causes more severe storms (an idea routinely touted as “settled science”) is cast in doubt: “Some storm types such as hurricanes, tornadoes, and winter storms are also exhibiting changes that have been linked to climate change, although the current state of the science does not yet permit detailed understanding.”

“Projection” and the Confidence Game

What, then, are we to think? How reliable are these (often contradictory) prophecies? Fortunately, the report gives some guidance. The writers say that the reliability of each “projection” is determined by two metrics: “confidence” and “likelihood.” The former is a qualitative measure of how confident researchers are in a given conclusion; the latter is a quantitative assessment of the statistical probability that the prophecy will come to pass.

When it comes to “confidence,” the report classifies its predictions with one of four descriptors: low, medium, high, or very high confidence. When you hear someone say that they have “high confidence” in a particular outcome, you probably think that means “almost certain.” But when readers peruse the fine print that explains how the report defines these terms, they find that only “moderate evidence” and “some consistency” in research findings is required in order to designate a “high confidence” prediction. Not only that, but “high confidence” projections are ones where “methods vary” in the supporting research “and/or documentation [is] limited.” Finally, the report says that its “high confidence” conclusions are drawn from a “medium consensus.”

In short, then, the definitional threshold for “high confidence” only seems to require a modicum of evidence. By design, readers of the report would miss this little trick unless they read the fine print in the preliminary materials of the report. And on the off-chance that a journalist was aware of the shockingly-low level of certitude required for such “high confidence,” most reporters wouldn’t mention it. After all, that would undermine the entire rhetorical purpose of the document. So much for the measure of “confidence.”

How do we fare on the scale of “likelihood”? Here the report offers five descriptors: “very likely” (defined as “≥ 9 in 10” chance), “likely” (defined as “≥ 2 in 3” chance), “as likely as not” (“1 in 2”), “unlikely” (“≤ 1 in 3”), and “very unlikely” (“≤ 1 in 10”). Of course, this scale is completely useless as the deliberative weight of these measures wholly depends on the case in question.

If a bag held nine red slips of paper and one green one and you told me that if I draw the green one wearing a blindfold that I will win a million dollars, I would see “1 in 10” as surprisingly good odds. I wouldn’t call winning the million a “very unlikely” outcome (as the report’s metric would). In the same vein, if you told me that a horse had a 66 percent chance of winning the race, I wouldn’t necessarily call this a “likely” outcome (as the report would), and I certainly wouldn’t place a large bet on it. After all, “experts” often make “very likely” predictions with a 99 percent chance of happening—only to get it wrong. Let’s assume, though, that scientists’ estimates of likelihood are accurate when it comes to climate change. Is a 70 percent chance of catastrophe a high enough likelihood to justify costly, sweeping reforms that would fundamentally change the nation’s way of life?

With all its inconsistencies and misdirection, the authors of the report still find ways to congratulate themselves: “climate models have proven remarkably accurate in simulating the climate change we have experienced to date, particularly within the past 60 years or so when we have greater confidence in observations.” Older readers might find this praise strange given that the expert narrative as recently as the late 1970s was that we were entering a new ice age. Has the reliability of their prophecies improved since then? It doesn’t look like it. Some who are inclined to climate alarmism will be tempted to think that I am cherry-picking. Maybe I’ve just chosen isolated, egregious passages from NCA4? Maybe other climate reports don’t play these rhetorical tricks? Readers who harbor these doubts can read my much longer analysis that demonstrates the same tendencies in reports from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Resisting Scientific Clerisy

The NCA5 will be just as thick with prophecies, masquerading as “projections” that never seem to come true. It will surely warn us that the global threat is even more dire than it was when NCA4 was published, but it will also silently move doomsday a few more years down the road to give us time to pass the preferred legislation. Who knows? Perhaps the climate apocalypse really is “the day after tomorrow.” But the deep, dark secret of climate science is that it will always be the day after tomorrow. That’s because when it does arrive, there will be no more research funding to be had for climate research. Worse, all hope for passing a “Green New Deal” would be extinguished. Those things can’t happen, so the charade rolls on.

This article was published by The American Mind and is reproduced with permission.