Silencing the Global Warming Skeptics
The suppression of opposing viewpoints doesn't add credibility to an argument.

Global warming is currently such a fashionable political cause that the people who doubt its dire ramifications are being ostracized and squelched by environmental activists and their friends in the so-called news media.  But the validity of global warming is still up for debate, because there are plenty of reasons to question the one-sided arguments coming from the political left and the rash presuppositions of environmental activists.

There is no reason to quibble about global warming any further, because the warming has already stopped, all by itself.

"It is our freedom as Americans, particularly the freedom of speech, which generally allows us to express our views without fear of government sanction."

— United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit,    
October 28, 2015.

Facebook Censoring Climate Dissent Again.  We've often cited the work of Roger Pielke, Jr. of the University of Colorado, who science Substack, The Honest Broker, is essential reading.  What you should know about Roger (whom I know quite well) is that he is a centrist-liberal Democrat, believes climate change is a genuine future risk, and supports a carbon tax and other measures to fight it.  But he also [is skeptical of] a lot of climate extremism and exaggeration.  His work has been cited by the "official" "consensus" scientific reports of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and he even forced Al Gore to change some of the claims Gore used to make about thermageddon.  For these heresies from Climate Groupthink, he is hated by the Climate Cult.  One of the Wikileaks dumps a few years ago revealed that the deranged Tom Steyer worked assiduously on a pressure campaign on Nate Silver to get Nate to cancel Roger as a contributing writer for Silver's, which unfortunately succeeded.  Today Roger has a new essay up at his Substack, "Climate Science is About to Make a Huge Mistake," which reviews a lot of technical work on climate scenario modeling.

Fanatics Call for Climate 'Deniers' to Be Jailed.  Comedy environmentalist Jim Dale and Dale Vince have both suggested that climate 'denial' should be a criminal offence.  It gets them clicks and attention on cable and mainstream news, and it plays into a wider push by green billionaire-funded lawfare outfits using the courts to enforce Net Zero industrial shutdown.  But it begs the question: what are the climate 'deniers' actually denying?  Dale is a climate campaigner who points to bad weather as evidence that the climate is collapsing before our very eyes.  But the evidence suggests no such thing.  Data since 2000 show that there has been no increase in extreme weather, no increase in loss of life and no increase in economic costs.

Washing away the Climate Lunatics.  At the same time that the climate fanatics are encountering irresistible political headwinds, the intellectual arguments of the climate skeptics are becoming steadily more unanswerable.  A brief filed with the court of appeals in The Hague in November by three eminent, American climate-related academics, Richard Lindzen of MIT, William Happer of Princeton, and Steven Koonin of New York University, the Hoover Institute, and former climate adviser to President Obama, challenged the finding of a lower court and held that scientific analysis, as opposed to an aggregation of "government opinion, consensus, peer review, and cherry-picked or falsified data," shows that "Fossil fuels and CO2 will not cause dangerous climate change, there will be disastrous consequences for people worldwide if fossil fuels in CO2 emissions are reduced to net zero, including mass starvation."  They assert that the poor, future generations, and the entire West will suffer profoundly from any such policy.

Mark Steyn appeals hockey stick verdict.  Climate bully Michael Mann, with mixed results, has been suing those who criticize his "hockey stick" graph of climate history.  This 1998 graph purported to show that global temperature was stable until about 1900 when human-induced warming struck.  In February, Mann scored a $1 million libel judgement against Canadian columnist Mark Steyn in a court in the District of Columbia.  Steyn has responded with an appeal.  Punitive damages are typically calculated as a ratio to actual damages.  With only $1 in actual damages, the ratio in this case is a staggering million to one.  This amount is so excessive that there doesn't seem to be any precedent for it, according to Steyn's appeal.  On the other hand, the appeal does cite numerous precedents to support a decision to reduce an excessive award.

Astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon Is Censored After Challenging Climate Change in Tucker Carlson Interview.  Dr. Willie Soon — an astrophysicist, geoscientist, and expert on solar phenomena and global climate — was attacked online after making controversial statements about his climate change research in a recent Tucker Carlson interview.  Dr. Willie Soon (aka Dr. Wei-Hock Soon) is an astrophysicist and geoscientist.  He is a leading authority on the relationship between solar phenomena and global climate.  In 2018, he founded the Center for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences ( in order to tackle a wider range of issues and topics without fears nor prejudices.  From 1991-2022, Dr. Soon was an astrophysicist at the Solar, Stellar and Planetary Sciences Division of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.

The Hockey Stick Trial:  Science Dies in a DC Courtroom.  Excerpt: "Science," wrote the philosopher Karl Popper, "is one of the very few human activities — perhaps the only one — in which errors are systematically criticised and fairly often, in time, corrected."  The sub-title of Popper's 1963 book Conjectures and Refutations, in which he argued that science progresses through inspired conjectures checked by attempts to refute them through criticism, is "The Growth of Scientific Knowledge."  Now, a six-person jury in Washington, DC has refuted Popper's formulation of the uniqueness of science, finding in favor of climate scientist Michael Mann in the defamation suit he brought against Rand Simberg and Mark Steyn dating back to 2012.  Central to Mann's case was his attempt to reconstruct global temperature over the previous millennium — the iconic "hockey stick" graph.  The graph shows global temperatures purportedly falling for centuries and suddenly shooting upwards with the advent of the Industrial Revolution.  Mann's hockey stick representation was derived principally from selected tree ring data based on the assumption that tree rings constitute accurate proxies for temperature and are not contaminated by confounding factors such as rainfall, seasonal variability, and levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.  The results that Mann produced are also sensitive to decisions on and application of statistical techniques.

The Verdict Against Mark Steyn Effectively Stifles Speech In America.  Michael Mann co-wrote a paper in 1999 using tree-ring data as a proxy for temperature (thicker rings, warmer temperatures) to show that over the last 1000 years, temperatures declined slightly until 1960 when they dramatically spiked up — the shape of what would infamously be called the "Hockey Stick."  The IPCC featured Mann's work prominently in their 2001 report.  It catapulted Mann to stardom and ignited the radical climate-industrial-political complex.  The resulting Green agenda has consumed trillions and turned everyone's life upside down.  The problem was that hundreds of scientists were highly critical of Mann's work.  Stephen McIntyre, for one, an Oxford-educated PhD in mathematics, published several papers, one in the same journal that published Mann's original paper, concluding Mann's result "lacks statistically significance," and worse, he showed that Mann's data manipulation "is so strong that a hockey-stick ... is nearly always generated from (trendless) red noise."

Global Boiling Era: when fact-checking goes silent.  [Scroll down]  Nick Hudson, the creator of PANDA, has aptly concluded that when a phenomenon or event is presented as a global crisis with only global solutions, accompanied by censorship of dissent, it is definitely and exclusively a scam.  The Western world has been going from one crisis to another in the last decade, so it is no wonder that the situation with freedom of expression is becoming increasingly cloudy.  Whenever the authorities start to curb free speech, a sweet-sounding justification is always found — be it the fight against 'misinformation' or the defence of 'minorities'.  This rhetoric is attempted to be subsumed under the banner of harm reduction.  Sounds convincing, doesn't it?  But in general, the core of the harm — i.e. what and how significant the harm is — remains always unanswered.  And in particular, no attention is given to the harm that is caused by the restriction on free speech in the society, because each restriction on free speech almost always leads to another.  Much of the labelling to misinformation and disinformation is based on the work of so-called fact-checkers, whose number has grown from 11 organisations in the last 15 years to 424 by 2022.

Does the Earth have a fever?  Is it boiling?  Have we hit the tipping point?  The answer is clearly no.  The green agenda is based on the lie that "the science is settled" that humans, rising CO2, and our use of oil, coal, natural gas, eating beef and a huge number of other things cause dangerous warming.  There are no scientific facts to support those statements.  Most of the media is guilty of promoting these lies that will substantially harm the poor and middle class.  They just repeat what they are told without doing research or asking questions.  That is dangerous and no more valuable than a wooden puppet.  They clearly don't care about facts as they seek to silence anyone who tells the truth that the climate has always changed cyclically and naturally by disparaging them as climate change deniers and anti-science.

Is the 'manmade' climate crisis a scam?  These deep-thinking TV presenters, high on their abilities to read pre-written scripts to camera, spoke with the shallow authority of primary school teachers on the cost benefits of wind power, without for a moment asking their puppeteers what happens when it isn't windy.  It doesn't matter how cheap magic beans are if they can't grow a beanstalk.  You can build over fertile farmland and desecrate beautiful horizons with endless wind farms, but you can't create actual wind.  Obviously, it's not the debut for mainstream media serving as a megaphone for the climate crisis cult.  Professor Norman Fenton, the risk and mathematics expert, also had his own run-in with the BBC on a documentary called Climate Change by Numbers.  The producer of the programme even made clear before filming that the BBC no longer allowed any sceptical commentary on climate change as it deemed the 'science was settled'.

The Distortion of Science To Support the Globalists' Climate Change Agenda.  We all know what climate change is.  The truth is that the UN, most globalists and a wide range of ["]world leaders" blame human activities for climate change.  Whether or not climate change is real or that human activities are enhancing climate change is not important to this discussion.  That is a subject for another day.  Most climate change scientists receive funding from the government.  So they must comply with the government edict and policy position that human activity-caused climate change is an existential threat to both humankind and global ecosystems.  When these "scientists" publish studies supporting the thesis that human activities cause climate change, they are more likely to receive more grant monies and therefore more publications, and therefore to be academically promoted (or at least to survive in the dog-eat-dog world of modern academe).  Those who produce a counter narrative from the government approved one soon find themselves without funding, tenure, without jobs, unable to publish and unable to procure additional grants and contracts.  It is a dead-end career wise.  The system has been rigged.

Junk Climate Science.  Global warming religion originates in well-financed scientific organizations such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).  The scientific basis of the catastrophe theory is junk science made to seem authoritative by dressing it up with lengthy reports based on dubious computer models. [...] As exhaustively documented by the websites and there is nothing new about climate doomsday predictions.  What's worse the official climate records of the government are both unreliable and tampered with.  Global warming orthodoxy emphasizes CO2 as the main driver of climate.  But other well-known factors such as solar cycles, cosmic rays, and the overturning circulation of the oceans are capable of influencing climate.  The Danish scientist Hendrik Svensmark has built a convincing climate theory based on changes in the sun's magnetic field that influence cosmic ray bombardment of the Earth and subsequently the formation of clouds.  Svensmark is attacked or ignored by the establishment faith.

Wrongthink to Avoid.  [Scroll down]  And whatever you do, don't question "climate change". No, the fact that meteorologists can't accurately predict whether it will rain tomorrow, much less predict what the weather will be like in a hundred years, should not disturb you.  Ignore the increasingly corpulent heads of our armed forces prattling on about climate change being our biggest enemy, as opposed to, say, China, Russia, North Korea, or Iran.  And look the other way at the hypocrisy of fat-cat millionaires traveling to climate change symposiums in their gas-guzzling private jets and yachts.  When it comes to climate, "We're doomed!" is the only correct view.  And you'd better not forget it.  George Orwell correctly predicted a world where wrongthink could doom a person, and that's the world we now live in.  Either learn all the right views and spout them publicly — lawn signs are a nice touch — or have a steel front door installed.  In today's America, it's one or the other.

How Laudate Deum Fails.  Pope Francis's apostolic exhortation, Laudate Deum, is a hard document to characterize. [...] Pope Francis implies that time is running out.  Ocean levels are rising, and ice caps are melting.  Humanity is responsible for this disaster and must immediately act.  It is an angry document stemming from a failure to convince a skeptical public.  One has the impression that the first part is written as if engaged in a personal debate with an unknown, invisible (presumably American) climate denier whose rational and scientific arguments are too compelling for the pope to refute. [...] Perhaps this is why Pope Francis mercilessly attacks this invisible debater's stands by denouncing those who ridicule, "deny, conceal, gloss over or relativize the issue."  The pope asks his readers to disregard these unenlightened ones.  He evangelizes with harsh zeal, calling upon all to convert to the climate change gospel.  Pope Francis affirms the reality of climate change with an air of scientific infallibility.  Thus, the document is punctuated with phrases like "no one can ignore that," "it is verifiable that," or "it is no longer possible to doubt that."  No one can question the climate alarmist dogma, even in its minute details.  The scientific doubters, and there are many, including Nobel laureates, receive no acknowledgement on the journey to sustainability.

Era Of 'Unquestioned And Unchallenged' Climate Change Claims Is Over.  Leading voices in the climate community are in an uproar as their warming hypothesis comes under fresh assault by new scientific papers.  The authors of the papers are being attacked and say that "activist scientists" threatened by the new findings are "aggressively conducting an orchestrated disinformation campaign to discredit the papers and the scientific reputation of the authors."  Indeed, from insults on social media and furious blog posts to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests demanding emails from a journal editor and federal scientist, the controversy is getting heated.  Several scientists who spoke with The Epoch Times expressed shock at the tactics used against those whose latest research is casting renewed doubts on the official climate narrative.  William Happer, Princeton professor emeritus of physics and former climate adviser to President Donald Trump, wasn't surprised by the response to the new findings.  "Of course the climate cult will be dismissive of any information — no matter how scientifically correct — that is politically incorrect," he told The Epoch Times, noting that the new findings made important and valid points.

Lies and Polling Questions.  [Scroll down]  The personal vilification is the most offensive part I think.  I understand the argument, the other side calls us names so we have to do the same.  Maybe it truly is necessary to fight dirty if your opponent chooses to do so.  Arguably that strategy worked for Donald Trump.  But I want no part of it.  I don't want it to support my views or to contradict other views. [...] For those of us who believe that decarbonizing society would be a costly, tremendously harmful error, the atmosphere in the United States today is not unlike that of Orwell's 1984.  The relentless narrative takes the place of O'Brien in this dystopia, and as scientists we're not being asked to say that two plus two equals five, we're being shouted down whenever we try to explain that 2.128 + 2.128 can equal four when you include important concepts like significant figures, rounding conventions, etc.  The emergency can tolerate no dissent, no questions, no alternative plans of action.  That this is precisely the excuse used by tyrants from Sulla through Mao and beyond seems to have been entirely forgotten.

Here's the Climate Dissent You're Not Hearing About.  As the Biden administration and governments worldwide make massive commitments to rapidly decarbonize the global economy, the persistent effort to silence climate change skeptics is intensifying — and the critics keep pushing back.  This summer the International Monetary Fund summarily canceled a presentation by John Clauser, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist who publicly disavows the existence of a climate "crisis."  The head of the nonprofit with which Clauser is affiliated, the CO2 Coalition, has said he and other members have been delisted from LinkedIn for their dissident views.  Meanwhile, a top academic journal retracted published research doubting a climate emergency after negative coverage in legacy media.  The move was decried by another prominent climate dissenter, Roger Pielke Jr., as "one of the most egregious failures of scientific publishing that I have seen" — criticism muffled because the academic says he has been blocked on Twitter (now X) by reporters on the climate beat.

Here's the global warming dissent that top institutions are suppressing.  As the Biden administration and governments worldwide make massive commitments to rapidly decarbonize the global economy, the persistent effort to silence climate change skeptics is intensifying — and the critics keep pushing back.  This summer the International Monetary Fund summarily canceled a presentation by John Clauser, a Nobel Prize-winning physicist who publicly disavows the existence of a climate "crisis."  The head of the nonprofit with which Clauser is affiliated, the CO2 Coalition, has said he and other members have been delisted from LinkedIn for their dissident views.  Meanwhile, a top academic journal retracted published research doubting a climate emergency after negative coverage in legacy media.  The move was decried by another prominent climate dissenter, Roger Pielke Jr., as "one of the most egregious failures of scientific publishing that I have seen" — criticism muffled because the academic says he has been blocked on Twitter (now X) by reporters on the climate beat.

Calling Climate Sceptics 'Climate Deniers' is an Admission You've Lost the Argument.  The advocates of government action to virtually eliminate human-related greenhouse gas emissions generally believe that such emissions are harmful and, unless sharply reduced, will cause catastrophic global warming sometime over the next century and beyond.  They further claim that this emissions reduction can be achieved by all the countries of the world given current and likely-to-be-available technologies at a moderate cost.  Within OECD countries that represent a 32% (and declining) share of global GHG emissions, a further claim is that citizens should take extraordinarily expensive measures to reduce their emissions even if the rest of the world does not.  To believe this, one would have to accept a long series of related arguments.

Scientific Paper Challenging Climate Emergency Narrative Retracted After Complaints by Climate Cult.  A perfectly reasonable and peer-reviewed paper by four Italian scientists is now being retracted by the European Physical Journal Plus, which is owned by scientific media company Springer.  What, exactly, was wrong with the paper?  It came to the unthinkable conclusion that, despite breathless media reports, it's simply far too early to declare that we are currently in the midst of a climate crisis.  The New American covered the paper's release last September.  Among its conclusions was that it is irresponsible to hyperventilate about climate emergencies when there is no clear evidence that we're experiencing such a thing yet.

Canada's former environment minister calls anyone who opposes carbon taxes 'arsonists'.  On last night's [8/24/2023] episode of The Ezra Levant Show, guest host Sheila Gunn Reid spoke about some of the comments made by Liberals on the necessity of a carbon tax.  In a bizarre tweet, Justin Trudeau's former environment minister Catherine McKenna said that, "Conservative politicians want to fight about a price on carbon pollution?  You want to make it free to pollute while Canadians pay with their lives threatened, homes destroyed and their communities obliterated?  SO what are you going to do?  You are the arsonists."  [Tweet]

Scientific Censorship Reaches New Heights.  On February 15, 2023, David Malpass, the president of the World Bank, announced that he would retire one year early on June 1, 2023.  On July 21, 2023, Pablo Moreno, the director of the Independent Evaluation Office of the International Monetary Fund, read the flyer that described the address that Dr. John F. Clauser was scheduled to give to the IMF on July 27, 2023.  As a result, he summarily canceled Dr. Clauser's planned address.  What do Malpass and Clauser have in common?  They have both acknowledged that they do not believe in the global warming hypothesis.  What do these two organizations have in common?  Historically, they have both loaned substantial amounts of money to developing countries to fight health crises, hunger, and conflict.  What do certain U.S. and world politicians want to see changed to the lending practices of both organizations in the future?  A dramatic shift to funding alternative energy investment initiatives "to fight climate change."  The United States has contributed $117 billion to the IMF quota.

The Suppression of Discussion Continues to Degrade Science.  Apart from some scientific journals, lack of important data and discussion continue to take their toll among members of the media and its viewers.  Recently, Fox host Stuart Varney — believing that 19 straight days above 110 degrees in Phoenix, Arizona is the result of climate change — is surprised that climate skeptic and journalist Marc Morano disagrees.  "This is not outside the normal bounds of hot summer weather.  Yes, it's a record year.  It could be one of the hottest, but here's the thing... Joe Biden's EPA has a chart of the heatwave index going back to the 1930s.  The 1930s are probably 8 to 10 or 12 times hotter in the United States than anything we're currently seeing."  Not only did Biden's EPA show that the 1930s heat waves were worse than such waves today, many studies have shown that the Roman Warming Period (250 BC to AD 400) and the Medieval Warm Period (10th to 13th centuries) were as warm or warmer than today.  The United Nations acknowledged this in 1990.  But, evidently the Medieval warming period proved too much an inconvenient fact as the data was altered and, ultimately, erased.

The climate witch trials.  We don't even say the word witch anymore.  No, we prefer to speak of 'climate criminals'.  'Thirteen climate criminals who should be in jail', as the headline in a radical magazine put it a few years ago.  The list included everyone from Donald Trump to Big Oil CEOs to broadcasters like Jeremy Clarkson.  Clarkson's crime was a speechcrime — to suggest climate change is a 'fiction'.  For that, he and the other 'real climate offenders' should be imprisoned, we were told.  'The internet is finally turning on celebrity "climate criminals"', chirped a headline in a fashion magazine in July 2022.  That piece had a distinctly witch-hunting vibe, arguing that 'it is right to be outraged' about these people 'who are most responsible for the climate crisis'.  We must 'stop the climate criminals who are causing the worst emissions', says a writer for the Guardian.  One left-wing outlet calls for the jailing of 'climate criminals' on the basis that they played a part in conjuring 'floods... fires, heatwaves and other extreme weather events'.  These are the new Agnes Sampsons.

The disruptive climate activists of Letzte Generation are thinly veiled agents of the state.  It is hard not to laugh at the self-gluing climate lunatics of Letzte Generation.  Their members often make incredibly naive public statements and beclown themselves with stupid public actions, their environmental concerns are incoherent and unsupported, and their membership is larded with young middle-class women who quickly forget their apocalyptic obsessions when the school holidays roll around.  This makes it easy to overlook the fact that they are deeply embedded in the dense NGO climate-change network.  Key activists receive salaries from a Berlin organisation called the Wandelbündnis (the 'Alliance for Change'), which channels money from the Climate Emergency Fund.  The latter, co-founded by American oil heiress Aileen Getty, funds similar activist organisations in other countries, like Renovate Switzerland and Just Stop Oil in the United Kingdom.  It's an international web of activist organisations funded from the very centre of empire — where, mysteriously, it seems that such protests rarely if ever occur.

The Shameless Attack on a Climate Change Dissenter.  In 2021, the physicist and New York University professor Steven E.  Koonin, who served as undersecretary for science in the Obama administration's Energy Department, published the best-selling Unsettled: What Climate Science Tells Us, What It Doesn't, and Why It Matters.  The book attracted extremely negative reviews filled with ad hominem attacks, such as a short statement appearing in Scientific American and signed by 12 academics that, instead of substantively rebutting Koonin's arguments, calls him "a crank who's only taken seriously by far-right disinformation peddlers hungry for anything they can use to score political points" and "just another denier trying to sell a book."  We couldn't find a single negative review of Unsettled that disputed its claims directly or even described them accurately.  Many of the reviewers seem to have stopped reading after the first few pages.

Opposing the Climate Inquisition.  Climate alarmists falsely claim to uphold the sanctity of scientific integrity while simultaneously violating the scientific method by suppressing debate, scientific inquiry, and the free exchange of ideas.  Spokespersons for the "Climate Inquisition" (CI) do this, they say, because they have cornered the truth concerning the causes and consequences of climate change.  Because of this, the CI tars climate realists and skeptics — those who, because they follow the scientific method, point to various gaps in knowledge about climate and weaknesses in the argument that the earth is on the verge of a climate catastrophe — with various offensive labels, perhaps the most opprobrious being, "climate denier."

The Left Is Using Science 'Consensus' To Shut Down Free Speech in America.  It was about eight to 10 years ago that the Left made a unilateral decision to shut down all opposition and any skepticism about climate change by pronouncing that the debate was over.  The "scientific consensus" had been reached, as if sent down on tablets from God, that mankind was causing the rapid warming of the planet.  Period.  End of argument.  Doubters will be denounced as science deniers and stripped of their science credentials and muzzled by the speech police.  This idea of a scientific consensus is, of course, the diametric opposite of what scientific inquiry is all about.  It is completely ahistorical.  History's greatest minds and inventors were people who challenged the conventional wisdom of the day. [...] The irony of the modern-day inquisitionists is that they are the very people who were the doomsayers of the 1970s who have been so consistently wrong about the future.  These were the people who peddled the "population bomb," which fizzled.  They were the ones who said the Earth was cooling and that we were headed into another Ice Age.  They were the ones who said we were running out of energy, food and farmland, and we were headed to a Malthusian nightmarish future.  Wrong.  Wrong.  Wrong.

Skeptical of global warming?  Shame... you are mentally ill.  In communist dictatorships like the Soviet Union, shame was institutionalized.  There was even a term for it, prorabotka, a ritualistic public shaming or rather character execution that took place in schools, universities and workplaces.  After Stalin's death, such methods became more sophisticated.  An extreme form of using shame as a weapon was to "diagnose" those who thought wrong as mentally ill. [...] The communist dictatorships then, like the globalists today — who are identical in spirit — would like to give the appearance that everyone thinks like them.  This is why the establishment media systematically avoids reporting on protests against Corona restrictions or against rampant living costs and Russia sanctions this autumn.  Now the favorite method of the communists, the globalists, the technocrats, the God-haters — with the same goals in different guises — is back.  Climate skeptics are mentally ill, says an "expert", and we must trust the established "science" of the establishment, they demand.  This is reported by Australian Sky News, which, unlike its sister channels in other countries, has been unexpectedly critical of Corona restrictions and the climate narrative.

The Climate Crisis Lie.  [Scroll down]  Climate scientists think they are engaged in one of the hard sciences.  But climate science is actually a soft science because its conclusions depend on the statistical analysis of noisy and dubious data using complicated and opaque computerized models.  It is the perfect setup for confirmation bias, the tendency for scientists to arrive at conclusions that support their preconceived prejudices.  Worse than confirmation bias is lying and fakery in the pursuit of money and power, also not unknown.  There are plenty of climate scientists who have doubts, but they have to keep their doubts hidden.  They are employees of large institutions and they have families and mortgages.  The scientists that speak out are either retired or have impregnable positions due to exceptional scientific accomplishment.

Climate Hysteria: A Mass Delusion to Demonize Carbon Dioxide.  Climate hysterics like to throw around the world "denier" to castigate those who don't get with the green agenda.  The term is deliberately intended to echo the phrase "Holocaust denier" to those anti-Semites who like to insist that the Holocaust never happened.  While the comparison is obscene, it's certainly true that the Holocaust, like the climate agenda, have something in common:  They both reflect a blind fanaticism untethered to actual facts. [...] The Holocaust was a past, documented event.  In contrast, the contention that the world might end because we burn hydrocarbon fuels that emit CO2 is a theory based on debatable simulations of future climate possibilities.  The hard reality is that radical leftists, like Hitler's "National Socialist" Nazis, will kill tens of millions to assuage their fears.  Using the "denier" language to tar those who do not take a knee to concede to this global warming, climate change irrational fear is a monumental, inexcusable insult to the memory of the six million Jews pointlessly murdered in the insane racial hysteria of the Shoah.

Green Fascists Are Destroying the World.  Earlier this summer, the CO2 Coalition was banished from LinkedIn.  The CO2 Coalition, with only three full-time employees and an annual budget of under $1 million, had committed the unpardonable sin of sharing contrarian perspectives on climate science.  Its work, produced by a network of volunteers that includes dozens of distinguished scientists, offers indispensable balance on a topic that requires honest debate now more than ever.  Among the many comments that followed LinkedIn's decision, the mentality of the climate crisis mob came through loud and clear.  If "the science is settled," then any contrary perspective is dangerous and must be silenced.  A typical comment:  "Why does LinkedIn allow so much Climate Disinformation to persist throughout its platform?"  Brigades of these content wardens continuously log complaints with LinkedIn against climate skeptics.  The impeccable work of Bjorn Lomborg is one of their next targets.

Google pulls ads on meteorologist tracking climate for 'unreliable and harmful claims'.  A meteorologist who worked on climate studies at NASA says satellite observations show the Earth is warming at the "bottom end" of climate models — but Google has demonetised his website.  Dr Roy Spencer said Google was "not specific about what claims" led to the decision.  "What their website tells me is that all of my whole website basically is unreliable and harmful claims," he said.  "If people like myself don't buy into the narrative that global warming is not only occurring but it's going on at a catastrophic rate and we have to do something about it, if you don't go along with that narrative, you get thrown under the bus."  Dr Spencer, formerly a senior scientist for climate studies at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Centre, told Sky News Australia his global temperature dataset started with John Christy over 30 years ago is unlike any other because it's from satellites and "covers the whole Earth".

America would not have become the superpower that it is without abundant oil.  Presently, the majority of our power is produced with relatively inexpensive American natural gas, which we have more of than anyone else.  Biden seeks an end to our ability to develop our own energy by depending on foreign countries to fill the gap until the realization of his Green New Deal's completion.  To say this is a huge gamble may be the greatest understatement of all time.  Questioning this monumental shift is considered blasphemy today.  Climate catastrophe deniers are dismissed out of hand, even as virtually every previous prediction made by these experts has turned out to be wrong so far.  What has happened is akin to a parlor trick as old as the hills.  Take a real fact and then attribute causation to the wrong factors.  When questioned, refer back to the truth of that fact without addressing causation.  Not just an entire house of cards, a world of cards, billions of lives, and an entire economic and social system are up for grabs.  And, it's Biden and his acolytes who are determined to make you believe that 1 plus 1 equals 3.  Americans are not buying it.

Al Gore Says 'Climate Deniers' Are Like Uvalde Police Officers Who Didn't Rescue Children.  Former vice president and global warming activist Al Gore claimed in a pre-recorded interview Saturday that those who deny climate change are comparable to police officers who refuse to enter a school to stop a shooting.  In an interview set to air on Sunday, Gore told NBC, "You know the climate deniers are really in some ways similar to all of those almost 400 law enforcement officers in Uvalde, Texas, who were waiting outside an unlocked door while the children were being massacred.  They heard the screams, they heard the gunshots, and nobody stepped forward."

The Global Warming Golden Goose.  Global warming provided the professors and academic administrators with a junk science golden goose.  They were determined to stop anyone from killing the goose.  A narrative was developed to crush "deniers" who dared to question the global warming narrative.  The deniers were depicted as agents of the international oil companies.  This is somewhat comical since the oil companies were constantly searching for someone to accept their surrender.  The oil companies not only had no chance of winning a propaganda war with academia and the media, they didn't want to try. [...] Professional climate scientists who are openly critical of the global warming narrative are either retired or so scientifically distinguished as to be impossible to fire.  To my knowledge there is no such thing as a critical early career climate scientist.  Such an aspiring scientist would not last long.

Climate Skeptic Banker Becomes Latest 'Cancel Culture' Victim.  Stuart Kirk, a top executive at HSBC Holdings announced on July 7 that he had resigned from his position after facing backlash from climate groups.  Kirk, who was the global head of responsible investments at the bank's asset management business, had been suspended after criticizing central banks and regulators for overstating the financial risks of climate change.  At a Financial Times conference in May, the British banker said central bankers are inflating the financial risks of climate crisis in an effort to "out-hyperbole the next guy."  During a presentation titled "Why investors need not worry about climate risk," Kirk remarked that in his 25-year career, "some nut job" was always telling him about the end of the world.  "But what bothers me about this one is the amount of work these people make me do, the amount of regulation coming down the pipes" to deal with the financial risks of climate change, he told during the conference.  The bank promptly suspended his job after his presentation sparked backlash from climate activists.

LinkedIn Bans Geologist for Posting Facts About Carbon Dioxide.  The Silicon Valley thought police are at it again.  On July 6, geologist Gregory Wrightstone, the current executive director of the CO2 Coalition, announced that he had been banned from LinkedIn, the online employment and professional social networking platform.  Wrightstone's "crime" was, apparently, that he posted graphs that show that the life-giving molecule known as carbon dioxide was much more plentiful in Earth's atmosphere in the past.  Climate hysterics believe that carbon dioxide — a molecule essential for life on Earth — is a major culprit in global warming.  Wrightstone announced his banishment from LinkedIn on Twitter on July 6: "It is official.  I have been permanently banned from LinkedIn.  The last straw apparently was one of the two charts I posted yesterday," Wrightstone wrote.

Why The Biden Admin Wants Censorship Of Renewable Energy Critics.  In a talk with Axios, Biden Administration Climate Advisor Gina McCarthy said, "The tech companies have to stop allowing specific individuals over and over again to spread disinformation."  After an Axios reporter asked, "Isn't misinformation and disinfo around climate a threat to public health itself?" McCarthy responded, "Oh, absolutely... We are talking, really, about risks that no longer need to be tolerated to our communities."  McCarthy pointed specifically to those who criticized the failure of weather-dependent renewables during the blackouts in Texas in February 2021.  But many of those criticisms were factual.  Over the last decade in Texas, investors sunk over $53 billion on weather-dependent energy sources, mostly wind turbines, which alongside frozen fossil fuel plants were largely unavailable during the cold snap in February.  That was only partly because of the cold and mostly because of low wind speeds.  McCarthy claimed that the critics of renewables are funded by "dark money" fossil fuel companies, which she compared to Big Tobacco.  She claimed the critics are being paid to "fool" the public about "the benefits of clean energy."  "We need the tech companies to really jump in," she said, because criticizing renewables is "equally dangerous to denial because we have to move fast."

Dems want to ban telling the truth.  In a virtual Axios event on Thursday, Gina McCarthy, Joe Biden's top climate official, urged tech companies to suppress truthful information about climate issues:  "The tech companies have to stop allowing specific individuals over and over again to spread disinformation," she told Axios' Alexi McCammond at a virtual event that aired Thursday.  "We need the tech companies to really jump in," McCarthy said.  "Really jump in" means to ban, suspend, delete and censor views on climate issues different from those of the Biden administration's extremists, like McCarthy.  ["]McCarthy said that overall, the problem of disinformation has shifted from disputing the reality of climate change...["]  No one has disputed the "reality of climate change." [...] The issue is not climate change per se, but rather the theory of Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming that is in dispute.  On that issue, the realists are winning out over the alarmists.

How the big banks fell to climate panic.  HSBC has suspended one of its most senior global risk managers.  At an industry event last week, Stuart Kirk — global head of responsible investments at HSBC Asset Management — took aim at how risk managers and central banks have exaggerated the risks posed by climate change.  Within hours, he was hung out to dry.  In his presentation, Kirk warned that he was going to utter a 'heresy' — that 'climate change is not a financial risk we need to worry about'.  Kirk, who had cleared his presentation with HSBC management, emphasised that he wasn't challenging the IPCC's scientific assessments or the likelihood of more extreme climate events — 'there will be fires', he said, for example.  He also urged the financial industry 'to make money from the transition'.  Kirk's ire was directed at the quality of the industry's risk analysis, much of which, he said, wildly exaggerates the potential damage from climate change.

HSBC suspends exec who slammed 'nut job' climate change risk warnings.  British banking giant HSBC has suspended a top executive who argued during a recent public presentation that the financial risks of climate change were overblown and exaggerated by central bank officials and other policymakers.  The suspended employee, Stuart Kirk, is global head of responsible investment at HSBC's asset management division.  He made the remarks during a presentation titled, "Why investors need not worry about climate risk."  Kirk stated his view that warnings about climate change have "become so hyberbolic that no one really knows how to get anyone's attention at all."  "I wouldn't normally mind that.  Twenty-five years in the finance industry, there's always some nutjob telling me about the end of the world," Kirk said.

Climate Activist Celebrated for Self-Immolation Outside SCOTUS.  Climate change fanatics celebrated a man who set himself on fire and died to bring awareness to "the climate crisis," praising his suicidal "sacrifice" as a "fearless act of compassion."  [Tweet]  Boulder, Colorado man Wynn Bruce, 50, self-immolated in front of the Supreme Court on April 22, Breitbart reported.  The Capitol Police, the Metro Police Department, and the Supreme Court Police responded to the man's attempted suicide and airlifted him to a hospital, but he died from the burns shortly after arriving.

Twitter bans ads that contradict science on climate change.  Twitter says it will no longer allow advertisers on its site who deny the scientific consensus on climate change, echoing a policy already in place at Google.  "Ads shouldn't detract from important conversations about the climate crisis," the company said in a statement outlining its new policy Friday [4/22/2022].  There was no indication that the change would affect what users post on the social media site, which along with Facebook has been targeted by groups seeking to promote misleading claims about climate change.  The announcement coinciding with Earth Day came hours before the European Union agreed upon a deal requiring big tech companies to vet their sites more closely for hate speech, disinformation and other harmful content.

The Editor says...
If I raise doubts about flawed computer models, failed predictions of doom, and a wide variety of events blamed on global warming, am I making "misleading claims about climate change?"

COVID, Gender, Climate, and the Collapse of Science.  Consider climate change.  I'm not concerned here with the details and accuracy of the claims made by scientists who study the problem.  My subject is the reaction of many of those scientists to the questions and doubts of other scientists as to the correct assessment of their data and the predictions that could be made with reasonable confidence from those data.  The typical response of those who purport to speak for the majority of serious climate scientists is to try to silence those who object to their interpretations or who say the data are ambiguous.  Steven Koonin is currently a professor at New York University. [...] After he wrote an essay in the Wall Street Journal which concluded that the science is insufficient to make useful projections about how the climate will change over the coming decades, much less what effect our actions will have on it, an effort was made to have NYU fire him.  He's written a book, Unsettled, on the subject.  The book may cause bricks to fly through his windows.

Democrats, Green Activists Pressure Big Tech to Censor More Climate 'Misinformation'.  A House Democrat leading an investigation of oil industry "misinformation" blames social media companies for blocking legislation to counter climate change, even as Big Tech corporations move to demonetize and suppress debate on climate-related issues.  Google acted to demonetize "climate denial" information.  Facebook upped its fact-checking of climate-related posts, and emails obtained by watchdog groups show it targeted conservative site PragerU and independent journalist John Stossel.  Twitter promised to be a forum only for credible content on climate change.  Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., is chairman of the House Oversight and Reform Committee's subcommittee on the environment, which has conducted two hearings on oil "misinformation" and postponed a third.

If You Thought The COVID Thought Police Were Bad, You Ain't Seen Nothin' Yet.  The COVID pandemic unleashed Big Tech censors in a big way.  Day after day, a handful of 20-something Silicon Valley leftists tweaked their algorithms to block, demonetize, and de-platform anyone who dared say anything that wasn't in sync with government talking points, on the grounds that such "misinformation" posed a serious threat to public health. [...] Already, Big Tech is sharpening its algorithms to go after the next target — imposing speech codes regarding "climate science."  A new report from a United Nations global warming "working group" complains that "misinformation" spread on social media poses a dire threat to humans because it's contributing to "delayed action."  "Rhetoric and misinformation on climate change and the deliberate undermining of science have contributed to misperceptions of the scientific consensus, uncertainty, disregarded risk and urgency, and dissent," the report says, and "has sowed uncertainty, and impeded recognition of risk."

Stop Letting Environmental Groups Funded By Russia Dictate America's Energy Policy.  In 2017, congressional investigators found that a money trail linked Russia to millions of dollars funding U.S. nonprofits to work against U.S. shale gas in order to influence the U.S. energy market.  Specifically, investigators found that NRDC, Sierra Club, and Climate Action Network were all found to have received millions of dollars of funding in grants from a shady San Francisco-based company called "Sea Change" that a money trail linked back to the Russians.  Indeed, it is an open secret that Russians have funded anti-fracking and anti-natural gas propaganda in America for decades, as environmental groups funded the campaigns of Democrats and pressured them to ban fossil fuels.  These same environmental groups relentlessly attacked President Trump and his appointees (I was one) as "anti-science," "enemies of the EPA," and "climate change deniers," pulling out all the stops to frame President Trump's pro-American energy agenda as harmful to the environment.

Biden's Energy Department:  People Who Do Not Embrace Climate Change Are Spreading 'Misinformation'.  The latest narrative in the ongoing claims that policy disagreement amounts of misinformation now includes climate change.  Those who do not see weather as an existential threat are spreading misinformation — this time about solar and wind energy.  Taxpayer-funded National Public Radio (NPR) is jumping on the misinformation bandwagon with a story on Tuesday about Biden's Energy Department and other climate-change promotors warning that opposition to alternative energy is making headway because of people allegedly not telling the truth.  "The spread of misinformation about solar and wind energy is leading some states and counties to restrict or even reject projects," NPR said in introducing the piece that rejects any criticism of climate change or the radical policies to fight it like the Green New Deal.  "The Energy Department calls it a key threat to decarbonizing the grid."

The Strategic Threat from Net-zero Emissions.  [Scroll down]  The growth of the internet greatly facilitated the unpersoning of climate skeptics.  For instance, Wikipedia, founded by a pornography merchant, was swiftly captured, whereupon the biographies of climate skeptics were tampered with[.]  A single fellow-traveler rewrote the biographies of more than 2000 skeptics, including mine, to recast us as knaves, rogues, idiots or all three.  The intelligence community tracked down the agent via his incautious membership of a rowing club in a tiny Cambridgeshire village.  He was banned from interfering with Wikipedia entries.  However, as the Communists tightened their grip on Wokipedia, driving out the pornographer's co-founder in despair at its sullen, far-Left prejudice, the agent was reinstated.  YouTube and FaceTwit began shadow-banning skeptics by preventing their internal search engines from returning entries related to or posted by anyone questioning the Party Line on climate.

White House moves to fight climate 'denialism' amid calls to end fossil-fuel crackdown.  The White House held a brainstorming session on how to combat climate "denialism and delay" even as the Russian invasion of Ukraine fueled pressure on President Biden to end his crackdown on domestic oil-and-gas production.  The White House released Friday a readout from the previous day's first-ever roundtable discussion held by the Office of Science and Technology Policy [OSTP] on "the scientific understanding of why arguments for delaying action on climate change are appealing and how they can be countered effectively."  "It's clear that a variety of special interests have had a vested interest in sowing doubt on climate change and feeding denialism and delay," said White House senior adviser Neera Tanden in a statement.  "We need to confront that reality."

The dangers of challenging the climate change consensus.  One of the easiest things to do is to go along to get along.  This is true in so many areas of life, including knowledge of science topics.  If you don't have an in-depth knowledge of a particular area of science, the "easiest thing" kicks in rather effortlessly.  Alternatively, if you have a depth of knowledge on a particular science topic, things can get a whole lot harder, especially if you challenge the prevailing view on that topic.  We find ourselves in this situation today not only with disputes regarding the COVID-19 origin and strategies to counteract the virus, but with the pre-pandemic hot topic of climate change.  Presently, the ramp-up of the climate crisis is waiting in the wings for the exit of the malicious microbe.  As the spotlight turns from virus hysteria, the beam will shine back on climate angst and its attendant tactics like childish name-calling.

Google demonetizes meteorologist and researcher Roy Spencer.  The website has been demonetized by Google, its owner, climatologist and former NASA scientist Dr. Roy Spencer, announced in a blog post.  According to Spencer — who is considered a climate change skeptic but has rejected the label of being a "climate denier" — Google has cut his website off from Adsense for allegedly spreading unreliable and harmful claims.  Spencer notes that revenue he is now losing was low, but other aspects of this decision concern him more, although the scientist doesn't plan on appealing for the time being, believing that it would be an uphill struggle against what he calls "liberal arts educated fact checkers" — and Google's announced policy to stomp out content it labels as skeptical of the climate change theory.

Our World Gone (Climate) Mad.  Each day the media are filled with "news" stories blaming various events and conditions on "climate change," which are of course code words for "humans are overheating their planet."  Never do these reports offer evidence that mankind's carbon dioxide emissions are to blame.  That the press feels there's no reason to back its claims with facts indicates that a large segment of the West has bought fully and uncritically into the narrative.  Some days it seems as if it's useless to continue to fight the fight against global warming.  Politicians, "journalists," activists, activist scientists, celebrities, and a substantial portion of the public tell us that human activity is causing Earth to warm and there's no more to the story than that.  Skepticism is equated with denial.  Questions are verboten.  Aligning with the alarmists' account is the only acceptable response.

Washington Post Wants Facebook to Shut Down PJ Media and Others for 'Climate Denial'.  While the Washington Post piously reminds us that "democracy dies in darkness," it's busy shooting out the lights:  On Tuesday [11/2/2021] it published a lengthy call to Facebook to shut down dissident media, including PJ Media, because, you see, the non-Leftist publications are daring to spread "climate change denial" on the platform.  Not just democracy, but also the freedom of speech will die in darkness if the Post gets its way.  The Post article focuses upon a newly published study from one of the endless stream of far-Left advocacy groups masquerading as think tanks, the Center for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), which the Post hastens to assure us is a nonprofit.  Of course.  What else could it possibly be called?  Disagree with the Leftist establishment about the causes of and/or remedies for climate change, and what else could possibly be your motivation but "hate"?

Google bans ads, monetized content that questions 'scientific consensus' of climate change.  Google has released strict new guidelines regarding content on climate change on its platforms, promising to ban advertisements and demonetize YouTube videos that challenge "well-established scientific consensus around the existence and causes of climate change."  In a statement released Thursday [10/7/2021], Google published its new guidelines, "Updating our ads and monetization policies on climate change," seeing fit to disincentivize all content that characterizes claims of man-made climate change as "a hoax or a scam," in the process enforcing some of the most restrictive measures against dissenting from mainstream thought on climate change.  As of next month, any claims which deny that "long-term trends show the global climate is warming, and claims denying that greenhouse gas emissions or human activity contribute to climate change," will be subject to removal or demonetization.

Fake news is going to have a field day.  Global warming is highly questionable as a phenomenon. [...] It's obvious in the news commentators who attribute every natural and unnatural disaster, no matter how imaginary the facts, to global warming.  And it's most obvious in the suppression of anyone who questions the data, the cause of the data (such as sunspots), the unintended consequences of global warming legislation (such as bird Cuisinarts), the hypocrisy of China, Russia, the U.N., and Europe, which make few global warming sacrifices but demand that America make many, or the outrageous cost-benefit ratios, as in the case of California's failing power grid.  All such questioners are shut out of the news, marginalized, demonetized, if not denied a social media presence, or labeled as some kind of "denier" on a par with Nazi types who deny the Holocaust.  Suffice it to say a big industry with powerful forces and big dollars has sprung up to perpetuate this failing idea and questioning anything about it cannot be tolerated.

Plain English Lost on the High Court of Australia.  Coral reefs can be messy, and so can court cases.  And so it is with the case of Peter Ridd, sacked by James Cook University because he exercised his intellectual freedom.  The only thing that is neatly settled from this case is apparently 'the science', never mind that this is only because anyone who publicly disagrees with it is censored or sacked.  In the case of Peter Ridd, even after he managed to raise over A$1.4 million to appeal his sacking by James Cook University all the way to the High Court of Australia, he lost.  In a unanimous decision handed down this morning [10/13/2021], the Court concluded that Dr Ridd's right to intellectual freedom is constrained by the procedural requirements of James Cook University's Code of Conduct.  The High Court found his freedom of speech is limited only to his area of expertise.  Those freedoms do not extend to issues about how the University is run, or whether the pronouncements made by its research institutions are trustworthy.

Here's the Reason Google Is Going After "Climate Denial" Right Now.  Over the weekend, we learned that Google will ban any and all "climate deniers" from advertising on Google's Advertising platform — the largest such platform on the Internet.  True to form, media coverage appears to be largely in lockstep with Google and is wrote it less as a major tech story and more as a press release. [...] Google is under a lot of scrutiny right now in the tech world.  While companies like Apple are doing what they can to further and further protect private information, Google is making it easier than ever for its customers — advertisers — to get the information they need on you, the product they provide those customers.

Google Attacks Free Speech on Climate Claims.  Google is moving into full authoritarian mode, cracking down on digital ads promoting what they determine to be false climate change claims or being used to make money from such content.  The tech giant is claims it is hoping to limit revenue for alleged climate change deniers and stop the spread of so-called misinformation on its platforms.  Google and other Big Tech publishers have increasingly veered toward active censorship of positions that undermine leftist dogma.  Several of those, however, have later proven to be wrong, such as suppression of reports on Hunter Biden's laptop and the coronavirus lab-leak theories.  The company said Thursday [10/7/2021] in a blog post that the new policy will also apply to YouTube, which last week announced it would also be determining what is and isn't vaccine misinformation.

Google Announces They Will Monitor YouTube Videos For "Prohibited Claims" About Climate Change.  Comrade rebels, the Ministry of Truth is here to guide you in your correct thoughts.  Google, the world's largest internet search engine and owner of the YouTube platform, has announced their intent to demonetize any content providers who challenge scientific consensus on climate change and global warming.  According to CBS, any person who advances a "prohibited claim" will have ads on their their content removed.

YouTube demonetizes climate denialism content.  And while one can still deny that reality in their YouTube content, they won't be able to monetize or run advertisements for it.  On Thursday [10/7/2021], YouTube updated its ads and monetization policies to prohibit the monetization of climate denialism content.  The policy covers content that claims climate change is a hoax or a scam.  Creators will also be unable to monetize content that denies that the global climate is warming or that humans contribute to climate change.  Advertisements for this type of content are now also prohibited on YouTube.  YouTube says the policy decision was simple:  Advertisers and creators do not want to be associated with climate denialism.

LinkedIn Bans Geologist for Climate Change Posts: 'This Type of Content Is Not Allowed'.  Greg Wrightstone, a geologist and expert reviewer for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has posted content on LinkedIn for years.  It would often spark discussions and debates among his followers — and the occasional trolls.  That changed last month.  Wrightstone, who serves as executive director of the CO2 Coalition, says he was banned from LinkedIn for posting factual information related to climate change.  His appeal was denied, leaving him without a voice on a platform where he had cultivated a significant following.  [Tweet]  Having been stripped of his ability to communicate on LinkedIn, Wrightstone now is speaking out and sharing his story publicly with The Daily Signal.

Facebook and Climate Feedback Sued for Defamation.  I hate lawsuits.  But last week, I sued Facebook and their activist "fact-checker" Climate Feedback.  Why?  Because they LIED in multiple careless "fact-checks," throttled my channel, and frequently smear others too.  It needs to stop.  [Video clip]

The 'Science' of Climate Change.  Why do politicians want to hype a nonexistent climate crisis?  In a word:  power.  By claiming that there is an urgent climate crisis the politicians can spend billions to fight the imaginary foe. [...] There is no such thing as an early career climate scientist that is skeptical concerning global warming.  I actually tried to find one and did a poster at a scientific meeting on the subject.  The reason is simple.  It is not because the science is so clear that only an idiot would question it.  It is because our early career climate scientist would soon be looking for a new job.  Interfering with the flow of money from Washington is grounds for dismissal.

John Stossel Sues Facebook Alleging Defamation Over 'Fact-Check' Label.  Former TV journalist John Stossel has reportedly filed a lawsuit against Facebook seeking at least $2 million in damages, alleging that the company defamed him by adding "fact-check" labels to two videos he posted related to climate change.  After Facebook's labels, the lawsuit claims "his viewership plummeted due to both Facebook's censorship and the reputational harm caused by the false labels."  Variety reports that former TV journalist John Stossel is suing tech giant Facebook for defamation, seeking at least $2 million in damages after Facebook added fact-checking labels to two videos Stossel posted relating to climate change.  A Facebook spokesperson told Variety in a statement:  "We believe this case is without merit and we will defend ourselves vigorously against the allegations."

'Fact Checks' by Non-Experts Are Shutting Down Genuine Scientific Inquiry.  We recently published a new climate change report in the peer-reviewed scientific journal Research in Astronomy and Astrophysics (RAA).  The nearly two dozen co-authors of our paper are experts in solar physics and climate science from 14 countries.  We were looking at the role of the Sun in climate change.  We found that, depending on which scientific datasets you choose, you could explain the global warming since the 19th century as being anything from mostly natural to mostly human-caused.  The huge uncertainty over such a key question is a major concern.  A few days after our paper was posted online, the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published their 6th Assessment Report (AR6).  The IPCC AR6 concluded that it was "unequivocal" that recent global warming was almost entirely human-caused.  The journalist Alex Newman was struck by the contrast between the two different reports.  He interviewed us, representatives for the IPCC, and several other scientists for an article in The Epoch Times.  People began sharing Newman's article on social media.  One of Facebook's "independent fact-checkers," Climate Feedback, quickly stepped in.  This "fact-checker" website, financially supported by Facebook, TikTok, Google News Initiative, and others, declared the article to be "incorrect" and "misleading."  Facebook then began censoring any posts sharing the link.

Fake Science:  COVID and Global Warming.  Given the COVID example, it is now not so incredible to think that the scientists promoting global warming have ulterior motives.  The Texas A&M University atmospheric sciences faculty sign a loyalty oath to global warming.  The editor of the academic journal Remote Sensing was forced to resign because he published a perfectly legitimate paper critical of climate models.  Cancel culture is strong among the global warming scientists.  Every effort is made to cancel dissenters.  There is no such thing as an early career scientist skeptical concerning global warming.  He could never get a job, even if somehow he could get his Ph.D. This is not because the science is solid.  It's because orthodoxy is ruthlessly enforced to protect the career interests of the global warming establishment.  In case you are wondering, the name "global warming" was changed to "climate change" because the globe wasn't warming.

An anti-global warming hysteria book is driving Norwegian warming hysterics nuts.  Gregory Wrightstone's 2017 book, Inconvenient Facts:  The Science that Al Gore Doesn't Want You to Know, was published in Norway and is being promoted by the Climate Realists, a Norwegian organization, which shares the author's view that modern warming is neither unusual nor unprecedented.  Backed with 90 illustrations and 15 pages of references, the book presents 60 footnoted facts inconvenient to the Western elite's absurd narrative about global warming.  Among them:  Most of the last 10,000 years have been warmer than today, including the Medieval Warm Period, when Vikings raised barley on Greenland, and the Roman Warm Period, when citrus grew in northern England.  After the Climate Realists announced plans to distribute the book to all 356 of Norway's mayors, two members of Norway's unicameral Stortinget — Tom-Christer Nilsen and Lene Westgaard-Halle — wrote the mayors a letter discouraging them from accepting a book that is popular "because lies are more entertaining" than the truth.

Green Fraud Meets The Big Shut-Up.  If you've seen Marc Morano interviewed by yours truly when I'm hosting on Fox, you'll know that the former is absolutely the sharpest critic of Big Climate and their plans for the rest of us.  (You can see our most recent conversation here.) So I was honored to be asked to write the introduction to Marc's new book, Green Fraud:  Why the Green New Deal Is Even Worse Than You Think.  Which it is.  Yet, in this cowed and craven never-quite-fully-unlocked-down Covid-without-end world, Big Climate figures it's easier to impose than ever.  But they don't want you getting a head's up on that.  So, having long lost the ability to debate their opponents, the warm-mongers are opting for their preferred method of disposal — get 'em canceled.

Green Fraud:  Why the Green New Deal Is Even Worse Than You Think.  Most Americans don't fully understand what's in the Green New Deal and what it will do to America.  A new book by Marc Morano, Green Fraud:  Why the Green New Deal Is Even Worse Than You Think, will tell you everything you need to know about the socialist green new deal.  Purchase it ASAP as the cancel culture is trying to get the book banned from Amazon.

The Climate Headline The Legacy Media Wouldn't Dare Write.  Barack Obama's undersecretary of energy for science has shattered the popular global warming narrative.  If he had worked in the Trump administration, he'd be labeled a "denier" and hounded like a suspected witch in 17th century Massachusetts.  But because he was an Obama appointee, the press simply ignores him.  Steve Koonin, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology- and CalTech-educated physicist, said last week that "discussions of existential threat, climate crisis, climate disaster are really at odds with what the official science says in reports that are issued by the U.N. and the U.S. government."  Shouldn't the press have picked up on this?  Koonin, in an interview on Fox Business with Larry Kudlow, busted the tale that humans are wrecking the planet and endangering themselves through their fossil-fuel burning habits.

Science in an Age of Fear.  [Scroll down]  We are immersed in an Age of Fear.  For decades, now, "scientists" have told us that the world is facing calamitous global warming because of industrialization.  I put "scientist" in quotes because the whole issue has little real technical support.  The so-called scientists who are pushing the idea that our carbon dioxide emissions are lethal have a political agenda, not a scientific one.  They are, in reality, "political scientists," not the real thing.  How do we know this?  That's easy.  We get statements like:  "Science says that wicked mankind is causing run-away global warming.  The case is closed.  There is no room for dissent."  We need not go into the technical issues to recognize that man-caused "climate change" is likely wrong.  We only need to recognize that no dissent is to be tolerated.  This is pure totalitarianism.  It tells us that the basic proposition is on shaky, and probably indefensible, grounds.

National Review Prevails against Michael Mann.  The D.C. superior court granted National Review's motion to dismiss climate scientist Michael Mann's long-running defamation suit.  More than eight years ago, Mann launched the suit against NR, writing privately that he saw it as an opportunity to "ruin" this "filthy organization."  The lawsuit stemmed from a blog post on The Corner by Mark Steyn back in 2012 criticizing Mann's work.  The climate scientist threatened a lawsuit unless NR removed the offending post and apologized, which it refused to do.  Mann then sued NR, Steyn, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute (Steyn quoted a CEI article in his post).  NR has maintained from the beginning that the post is not defamatory but is protected opinion, and that, besides, there's no way NR could have had malice when the post wasn't reviewed ahead of time and was posted by a nonemployee.

The farcical climate 'fact-checkers' who don't check facts.  Last week, an organisation called Climate Feedback attempted what it claimed was a factcheck of an article James Delingpole had written about a report we at the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) had published a few days earlier.  The report was about the impacts of climate change and had been put together by Indur Goklany, an American scientist whose involvement in climate goes back to 1990, when he was on the US delegation to the First Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).  The Climate Feedback article didn't garner much attention, but it's interesting to look at it because it is reveals the tactics that are used to try to discredit anyone who criticises the official 'narrative of doom'.  These tactics are now widely used in other fields too, so the story has relevance beyond the world of climate and energy.

Politicized 'Science' Is Not Science at All.  [Scroll down]  Alas, the Democratic Party, America's would-be "party of science," whose leading lights bellow, "Trust the science!" as an authoritative command akin to the tablet-bearing Moses' descent from Mount Sinai, missed the memo.  Whether the issue is climate change, COVID-19 mask mandates, pandemic-era school reopenings or any other number of issues, the Left browbeats its political opponents with the faux mantle of science and accuses those who have the temerity to ask questions as science "deniers."

Facebook will debunk myths about climate change, stepping further into 'arbiter of truth' role.  Facebook announced Thursday [2/18/2021] it will now debunk common myths about climate change, further leaning into the "arbiter of truth" role that the company once renounced.  The social media giant said it is adding a section to its climate change information hub that will features facts with accurate information about misconceptions and falsehoods.  This will include the fact that polar bear populations are declining because of global warming, as well as the fact that too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere harms plant life.  The company said it plans to rely on experts from George Mason University, the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication and the University of Cambridge to identify and debunk climate change myths.  Facebook has introduced these information hubs and relied on them as a key part of its tactic to combat the widespread problem of misinformation on its services.  It's a stark turnaround from CEO Mark Zuckerberg's statement last May, when he defended unfettered speech from politicians on the platform and said he did not think "Facebook or internet platforms in general should be arbiters of truth."

MA Climate Czar Says the Quiet Part out Loud in Private Meeting:  We Must 'Break Your Will'.  [Scroll down]  In yet another stunning "quiet part out loud" moment, a New England government official revealed the left's endgame in fighting the climate in an online meeting he assumed would remain private.  Massachusetts Undersecretary for Climate Change David Ismay participated in a meeting with the Vermont Climate Council back in January, where he admitted that when it comes to the big climate "offenders" in their region, there are no bad guys left to break.  Ismay went on to say that now the only ones left to "break" are the people. [...] If you are shocked that a public official would not only admit out loud that they happily broke the back of a job-producing industry in their state, but that they now need to break the back of the average American, you're not alone.  Ismay himself seemed surprised at the words coming out of his mouth, and in a stunning admission told attendees that he knew that was not something he could say out loud in public.

Why Disagreeing with Sheldon Whitehouse is Criminal.  [Scroll down]  U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-Rhode Island) [...] is calling for an investigation into the "climate corruption" of the Trump administration, according to E&E News.  Without a scintilla of evidence, the senator gratuitously raises the specter of bribes for supposedly lax regulation.  Outside the world of politics, this would be dismissed as a baseless smear.  Just as troubling for me is his intimating corruption — or at least bad behavior — in disputing progressive claims about global warming when he calls for a presidential commission to explore "climate denial," according to the article.  This suggests wrongdoing in believing that current global temperatures are not novel, that human activity is not leading to climatic disaster and that schemes to manipulate warming and cooling range from silly to economically destructive.  To Sen. Whitehouse I would be a climate denier.  I am more inclined to think of myself as a supporter of human flourishing, although I am certainly skeptical of climate alarmists who predict impending doom.  Over the last 100 years, those predicting our being baked alive have been interrupted occasionally by those forecasting a new ice age.  Both have been wrong 100 percent of the time.

Two Trump appointees are being investigated for posting reports denying climate change.  The Commerce Department's Office of Inspector General said it will investigate an incident earlier this month in which two former Trump appointees posted debunked scientific reports denying the existence and significance of man-made climate change, purportedly on behalf of the United States government.  Senator Mazie K. Hirono, Democrat of Hawaii, along with four other Senate Democrats, had requested the inquiry into potential wrongdoing around the postings and improper use of government logos.  In a letter Friday [1/22/2021] to the senator, the compliance and ethics staff of the inspector general's office wrote, "After careful consideration, we decided to review this matter further."  Days before the end of the Trump administration, David Legates, who served as the head of the United States Global Change Research Program, and Ryan Maue, a senior official at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (O.S.T.P.), were reassigned after they posted reports on a climate denialism website.  The Commerce Department is conducting the review because the two were on detail from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which is part of the Commerce Department.

Climate Censorship.  Big Tech will not tolerate any views that run counter to the "climate crisis" narrative.  It's obvious our Tech Betters are all ideologically aligned with the hard left.  But that philosophical alignment doesn't tell the full story.  [Video clip]

Science As God:  Tech Hearing And COVID Show Us Exactly Where Censorship Is Headed.  [Scroll down]  This has been ongoing for years in corporate media.  In 2019, Chuck Todd pompously announced his show would no longer "give time to climate deniers."  Two years before that, when The New York Times' Bret Stephens used his debut column to call out "The Climate of Complete Certainty" that seeks to shut down completely reasonable dissent, the paper faced vicious backlash labeling Stephens a "climate denier."  For more than a decade before this, more of the same — often trickling up, from activists to the reporters who sympathize to the powers that can truly silence voices. [...] Indeed, COVID policy has offered Americans a perfect preview of what will happen if climate alarmists get their way:  Science not as method, but as god.  And not the strong and mysterious God of the Jewish and Christian faiths, but a shifting one, whose every dictum and desire is whispered to the kings and enforced at their whims.

Analysis of the phrase, "Science Is Real".  Science is a process, a methodology employed to determine empirical facts and laws by which we can better understand the world around us. [...] The Science Is Real statement is a transparent reference to global warming, and global warming only.  The statement is meant to ridicule "climate deniers", i.e. those who "deny" the "settled science" that not only is the Earth warming at logarithmically catastrophic rates, but that mankind (particular Western man) is solely responsible.  These armchair Einsteins have little time for the sciences of biology, genetics, and economics because they don't conform to the narrative.  One problem with the global warming debate is that it, in its current metamorphosis, is far too politicized from which to derive much objective substance.  The vast majority of partisans on both sides understand very little of the actual science, and instead rely on either conspiracy theories or internet searches for whichever article or chart is tailored to fit their particular bias.

Germany Threatens Naomi Seibt With Prison Over Climate 'Denialism'.  Naomi Seibt is the non-alarmist counterpart of hysterical Greta Thunberg.  Naomi brings logic and facts to the table on climate change and encourages people to think, but she is the one who German authorities want to throw in jail.

Climate Activists Step Up Calls for Imprisoning Climate Realists.  Unable to win the debate in the court of public opinion, climate activists are increasingly calling for the imprisonment of climate realists.  The latest example is an article in The Carbon Brief titled "How climate change misinformation spreads online."  The authors, who are all University of Exeter professors, advocate fines and imprisonment for people publishing "climate misinformation" online.  They justify their call for imprisonment by claiming tremendous harm from "misleading information that is created and spread with intent to deceive."  That's one take, another take is that those who publish what the Left deems as "misinformation" are actually publishing what might be dubbed "inconvenient truths."  The 2006 film by Al Gore of the same name is a case in point.  Gore, not being particularly good at details, published a boatload of misinformation in that film, and social media responded to correct the record.  In one scene Gore used an animated clip of a polar bear in danger of drowning, trying to get onto a tiny ice flow made smaller, presumably by global warming.  Gore cited this as the new normal of drowning polar bears.  The reality?  Scientists documented one drowned polar bear at sea after an intense storm, something that hasn't been seen since.

CNN's Harwood Complains, Doctors Who Want to Reopen [are] Like Scientists Who Don't Believe in Global Warming!  This morning [5/20/2020] on CNN Newsroom, CNN White House correspondent John Harwood attacked Trump allies in the GOP for looking for doctors who support reopening the economy to appear on television and advocate this position.  CNN obtained this information from a leaked conference call between members of Trump's reelection campaign, discussing finding pro-Trump doctors who will go on television and advocate the need to reopen.  CNN Newsroom co-host Jim Sciutto posed skeptically to Harwood, "Trump's reelection campaign is now recruiting doctors?  Friendly doctors who serve as supporters to help Trump in that message?  What are you learning?"  Harwood complained how doctors who would advocate for reopening the economy are the same kind of crackpots who don't believe in global warming or think mail-in ballots lead to voter fraud.  He ended his smug rant by saying this is why "educated" voters aren't supporting Trump.

Climate experts call for 'dangerous' Michael Moore film to be taken down.  A new Michael Moore-produced documentary that takes aim at the supposed hypocrisy of the green movement is "dangerous, misleading and destructive" and should be removed from public viewing, according to an assortment of climate scientists and environmental campaigners.

Green Brownshirts Strike at Michael Moore.  Left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore has produced a documentary called Planet of the Humans.  The film (which I haven't yet seen) is basically an attack on "green" energy, i.e., wind and solar. [...] Despite his loony point of view, Moore is right about wind and solar: they are intermittent, unreliable, ridiculously expensive, and bad for the environment.  That message was too much for the lavishly funded "green" establishment, which has responded by trying to shut Moore up and ban his film.

Disaster or Mass Hysteria?  Depends on Who's Saying It.  The left reminds us that doctors and scientists hold the monopoly on truth.  Never mind that the data projections compiled by these scientists have been inaccurate or that, as we all know, science is always evolving.  And yet, for those on the left, laboratories are holy chapels and scientists, priests donned in laboratory coats.  To be sure, science is great and without it, we would be quite tragic.  No one on the right, however, denies its importance.  What they dare do, is question its assumptions and predictions.  But, dare to question the legitimacy of climate change and you are denounced an apostate of all that is progressive and socially just.

The Collapse of Intellectual Standards in Science.  Members of the academic and scientific communities that write about global warming, or renewable energy, cower in fear that they might say something that sounds skeptical.  It is difficult to do good scientific work if you are afraid of countering the dominant conventional wisdom.  The few public skeptics are ornery types with good pensions or fat bank accounts.  They are usually depicted as being slightly daffy or as being in the pay of oil companies.  The oil companies probably would probably be hesitant to issue a gas credit card to these skeptics, much less actually hire one for any reason.  These public skeptics are the real scientists.  The other are charlatans.

Climate-alarmist Group Creates Blacklist to Discredit Climate "Deniers".  Nothing frightens climate alarmists more than actual scientists and other influencers who might offer an opinion that counters the narrative that carbon dioxide emitted by mankind is causing catastrophic global warming.  Because of the fear of scientific nonbelievers, one climate-alarmist website has created a blacklist of scientists, politicians, journalists, and others who they say are engaging in "misinformation" in the climate-change debate.  The website Skeptical Science (SkS), founded by Australian cartoonist and self-described cognitive scientist John Cook, has created its own "climate misinformation by source" database, which is intended to offer a heads-up to universities, think tanks, and anyone else who might consider hiring or even listening to these "climate deniers."

The Academic Blacklist Climate Alarmists Don't Want You To Know About.  The global warming faithful are always quick with the talking points about a "scientific consensus" that doesn't exist, and the tale that 97% of scientists say man is causing the planet to overheat.  But we'll never hear them discuss publicly how researchers who don't agree with the narrative have been blacklisted.  What are they afraid of?  Of course the climate alarmists will never admit such a list even exists.  But Roger Pielke Jr., who teaches science, environment, and technology policy at the University of Colorado, says it does.  "A climate advocacy group called Skeptical Science hosts a list of academics that it has labeled 'climate misinformers,'" Pielke recently wrote in Forbes.  "The list includes 17 academics and is intended as a blacklist."

Media 'impartiality' on climate change is ethically misguided and downright dangerous.  In September 2019, the editor of The Conversation, Misha Ketchell, declared The Conversation's editorial team in Australia was henceforth taking what he called a "zero-tolerance" approach to climate change deniers and sceptics.  Their comments would be blocked and their accounts locked. [...] From the standpoint of conventional media ethics, it was a dramatic, even shocking, decision.  It seemed to violate journalism's principle of impartiality — that all sides of a story should be told so audiences could make up their own minds.  But in the era of climate change, this conventional approach is out of date.  A more analytical approach is called for.

The Editor says...
There is no such thing as "the era of climate change."  The climate always changes, and has always changed.  What the writer probably means is, "the era of climate change hysteria."

The Green Road to Serfdom.  What is new about this particular paean is how quickly it dispenses with the climate change façade to get to the activists' real agenda:  pushing bright-red socialism with a dab of green paint.  The Green New Deal sweeps away the Left's delicate 40-year plan to convince Americans that global warming has absolutely, positively nothing to do with socialism and goes for the jugular:  ["]The need for a Green New Deal is more pronounced than ever, as marginalized communities are impacted by intersecting crises of climate change, increasing income/wealth inequality, and rising white nationalism and neo-fascism.["]  And here you thought that climate change had something to do with the climate.  That's a big admission, considering just how often liberals once dismissed conservative climate skepticism as "right-wing conspiracy theories," as Salon put it in 2015.  In 2013, Britain's Guardian chided center-right fears of "watermelons" — green on the outside, red on the inside — as requiring "an impressive degree of paranoia."  And, of course, there's the Left's favorite blanket phrase for shutting up non-believers:  "climate change deniers."

The Era of 'Good' Fascism?  Jane Fonda is chronically furious.  This time she directed her wrath at those who disagree about the urgency of ending the entire fossil fuel industry and ruining the current economy.  Her idea is to put climate "deniers" on trial for incorrect speech.  So much for the First Amendment.  "Now, because of the fossil fuel industry, it's too late for moderation," Fonda says.  "And given the emergency, it's those who believe in moderation, in pre-Trump business as usual, who are truly delusional.  And those who lie and continue to lie about what they're doing to the environment should be put on trial."  Green teenage heartthrob Greta Thunberg has a different solution for those who disagree with her orthodox view on "climate change":  "World leaders are still trying to run away from their responsibilities, but we have to make sure they cannot do that.  We will make sure that we put them against the wall, and they will have to do their job to protect our futures."

Anti-railroad propaganda
A Major but Little-Known Supporter of Climate Denial:  Freight Railroads.  In the fight against climate change, the nation's freight railroads have painted themselves as heroes.  Rail is the "the most environmentally friendly way" to move cargo over land, says the Association of American Railroads, the industry's trade group.  The industry's four biggest companies agree:  "Railroads are essential to moving [climate] objectives forward," says CSX Transportation, the largest railroad east of the Mississippi.  Yet for almost 30 years, the biggest players in the freight-rail industry have waged a campaign to discredit climate science and oppose almost any federal climate policy, reveals new research analyzed by The Atlantic.

The Editor says...
[#1] It is futile to "fight against climate change."  If the climate's gonna change, all you can do it let it change, and adapt to it.  [#2] If the railroads are accused of waging "a campaign to discredit climate science," that probably means the railroads are trying to discredit phony science and fake studies that have a pre-determined outcome, mandated by those who are funding the so-called science.  In that regard, the railroads are just like any other company.  [#3] There is no transportation system that can replace the railroads, and there is no network of solar panels, batteries, and windmills that can replace diesel engines.  [#4] The article above is accompanied by an illustration (above) that purports to show six different colors of smoke coming from a locomotive.  Well...  at least two of the panels show white clouds, which are most likely water vapor coming from a boiler, not a locomotive, the one on the far right appears to be a volcanic eruption, and the one on the far left shows an old locomotive, obviously in a poor state of maintenance, most likely either in Russia or China.  Nice try.

Climate derangement syndrome:  Academic suggests UN use military to enforce climate agenda.  What's the carbon footprint of a military invasion?  And where's the army that the U.N. would use to invade a country that emits the CO2 that makes the world greener and greener?  This guy makes me even happier that I ditched academia after getting my Ph.D. and teaching at Harvard.

California Burns, Gavin Newsom Fiddles.  It is convenient for liberals to blame all shortfalls on a heating planet, a condition for which they hold humans — especially those in capitalistic societies — largely responsible.  Any caveats are dismissed in the dictatorial manner of rigid religious who condemn all opposition as heretical.  (Perhaps they believe that all dissenters should be put to the stake.) [...] Those who are allowed an opinion on the subject must first pledge allegiance to "global warming" as Public Enemy Number One.  (Next to Trump himself, of course!)  On the other hand, those who question the extent of man's role in climate change are labeled "flat earthers" by a global warming establishment that unscientifically cherry-picks opinions among scientists and excludes those that contradict the party line.

Clearing the Air on Climate Change.  Now that a Swedish teenager has testified before Congress and school children across the globe have walked out of classes in protest of lack of action on climate change, I'm sure we all have a much better understanding of climate science.  Indeed, with all the recent talk from Democratic presidential candidates and stories in the news media, it is astonishing how few real facts are ever discussed.  Instead, we are treated to the fiction that any prediction of doom is based on "the science" and any skepticism of any such scenarios comes solely from ignorant "deniers."

Scared Yet?  Greta Thunberg Poses as Herself to Intimidate 'Angry Climate Crisis Deniers'.  Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg took to Twitter on Halloween to mock her detractors by posing as herself — saying she terrifies her critics.  The teenager, who has left school to travel the world preaching her message of climate salvation, said she scared "a bunch of angry climate crisis deniers" without having to dress up.  Posing in a black-and-white photo with her trademark "school strike for climate" placard, she said she did not celebrate Halloween in Sweden but "thought I might give it a try'" if it meant she could affront her critics.

The Derangement Syndromes of Our Time.  There was once a time when the lunatic screaming in the streets that the world was about to come to an end was the extremist, and those of us who believed the world was not about to come to an end were considered moderate and sane.  No longer.  Today, a lavishly financed, petulant teenage truant from Sweden can hector the intelligentsia of the world and receive adoring media coverage, while at the same time the patient logic of one of the preeminent economists of our time is scandalized as a "lukewarm" because he "denies" that the end of the world is nigh.

University dumps professor who found polar bears thriving despite climate change.  Nobody has done more to sink the claim that climate change is endangering polar bears than zoologist Susan Crockford — and she may have paid for it with her job.  After 15 years as an adjunct assistant professor, Ms. Crockford said the University of Victoria rejected without explanation in May her renewal application, despite her high profile as a speaker and author stemming from her widely cited research on polar bears and dog domestication.  Ms. Crockford accused officials at the Canadian university of bowing to "outside pressure," the result of her research showing that polar bear populations are stable and even thriving, not plummeting as a result of shrinking Arctic sea ice, defying claims of the climate change movement.

The Global Warming-Climate Change Scam.  [Scroll down]  The global warming project has been characterised by fake data, dirty tricks and relentless dishonesty, including a penchant for sensational and ludicrous claims of extreme weather events which foretell human extinction, climate meltdown.  There is a shift of emphasis once claims are debunked — the prophesies of a six degree rise in global temperature have given way to warnings that even a two degree increase in temperature will result in catastrophic consequences for life on earth.  The many thousands of scientists who have protested the corruption of science and the demonisation of CO2, through articles, petitions and letters to world leaders, have had no impact in the face of the billions spent at every level of propaganda.  The change in emphasis from 'global warming to 'climate' was not just to duck the issue of the failure of nature to deliver the said warming.

Ice-pack of lies.  Unfortunately, critical scientific research does not always filter through to the public.  Consequently, climate alarmists are getting away with blue murder pretending that we are on the edge of a climate precipice.  These activists argue we are in a new era of catastrophic climate change.  Make any reference to the historic past to gain some perspective and you will be howled down.  Persist and you will be told that the pace of modern climate change is so rapid any perspective gained from examining the past is meaningless.

Dr Tim Ball Defeats Michael Mann's Climate Lawsuit!  Supreme Court of British Columbia dismisses Dr Michael Mann's defamation lawsuit versus Canadian skeptic climatologist, Dr Tim Ball.  Full legal costs are awarded to Dr Ball, the defendant in the case.  The Canadian court issued it's final ruling in favor of the Dismissal motion that was filed in May 2019 by Dr Tim Ball's libel lawyers.  The plaintiff Mann's "hockey stick" graph, first published in 1998, was featured prominently in the U.N. 2001 climate report.  The graph showed an "unprecedented" spike in global average temperature in the 20th Century after about 500 years of stability.  Skeptics have long claimed Mann's graph was fraudulent.

End of the Peer Show.  Dr Tim Ball appears to have won the long legal jihad launched against him by climate mullah Michael E Mann.  Because his court follows "the English rule" as opposed to the stinkeroo "American rule", the loser (Mann) will have to pay costs — which is as it should be after a decade of entirely meritless litigation.  But what if there's a more effective way to silence your critics?  Say, by proving scientifically that they should be expelled from polite society.

Michael Mann, creator of the infamous global warming 'hockey stick,' loses lawsuit against climate skeptic, ordered to pay defendant's costs.  Michael Mann, a climatologist at Penn State University, is the creator of the "hockey stick graph" that appears to show global temperatures taking a noticeable swing upward in the era when humanity has been burning fossil fuels and dumping CO2 into the atmosphere.  The graph was first published in 1998, prominently featured in the 2001 UN Climate Report, and formed part of Al Gore's 2006 movie, An Inconvenient Truth.  The graph's methodology and accuracy have been and continue to be hotly contested, but Mann has taken the tack of suing two of his most prominent critics for defamation or libel.  One case, against Mark Steyn, is called by Steyn likely to end up in the Supreme Court.  But another case, against Dr. Tim Ball was decided by the Supreme Court of British Columbia, with Mann's case thrown out, and him ordered to pay the defendant's legal costs, no doubt a tidy sum of money.

The Editor says...
Who is "dumping CO2 into the atmosphere"?  Everybody!  Where else are you supposed to put it?

Michael 'Hide the Decline' Mann Loses Defamation Lawsuit.  Professor Michael Mann — the litigious climatologist who invented the discredited "Hockey Stick" chart and was implicated heavily in the Climategate scandal — has lost a long-running lawsuit against Canadian climate sceptic Dr Tim Ball.  Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, had taken exception to a joke made by Ball in a 2011 interview, that he "should be in the State Pen, not Penn State."

Michael Mann Refuses to Produce Data, Loses Case.  Some years ago, Dr. Tim Ball wrote that climate scientist Michael Mann "belongs in the state pen, not Penn State."  At issue was Mann's famous "hockey stick" graph that purported to show a sudden and unprecedented 20th century warming trend.  The hockey stick featured prominently in the IPCC's Third Assessment Report (2001), but has since been shown to be wrong.  The question, in my view, is whether it was an innocent mistake or deliberate fraud on Mann's part.  (Mann, I believe, continues to assert the accuracy of his debunked graph.)  Mann sued Ball for libel in 2011.  Principia Scientific now reports that the court in British Columbia has dismissed Mann's lawsuit with prejudice, and assessed costs against him.

Censorship! AOC-Aligned Climate Group Wants 'Deniers' Squashed in News Stories.  On Monday night [8/19/2019], national radio host Mark Levin read from a frightening article by Tyler O'Neil at PJ Media headlined "AOC-Aligned Climate Group Demands Media Silence 'Climate Deniers'."  A group called The Climate Mobilization which advocates for a dramatic "World War II-scale" takeover of the economy to fight global warming, condemned the media for pursuing "objectivity" by giving air time to "climate deniers." [...] What makes this more amusing is [Margaret] Klein Salamon is a psychologist, not a climatologist.  Her co-founder Ezra Silk has a Bachelor's Degree in History.  Her advisory board includes the "former executive vice president of The Cheesecake Factory," a minister who's president of the Hip Hop Caucus and Adam McKay, the movie director who recently made the Cheney-trashing movie Vice.

Climate Activists:  Giving Skeptics Media Coverage Is 'Dangerous' For the Planet.  Citing a new study arguing that the media give too much prominence to climate skeptics in their coverage of climate issues, a group advocating for governments to declare a climate "emergency" says those responsible for such editorial decisions are "sacrificing the future of our planet for the sake of appearing objective."  "This idea of equating climate deniers with scientific experts is a dangerous practice which frames the threat to our planet, our existence as an ongoing debate," said Margaret Klein Salamon, founder and executive director of the New York-based The Climate Mobilization (TCM).

A Directory of Inconvenient Climate Information Websites.  Conservative free speech advocates have been rightly concerned about internet censorship, but the focus of those concerns has been relatively narrow.  Conservatives are pushing back against big tech suppression of online critics of globalism, mass immigration, and identity politics.  They are pushing back against Big Tech suppression of pro-Trump commentators.  But there is another collection of online voices that quietly and very effectively have been suppressed:  climate-change skeptics.

A Sophomoric Look at Climate Change.  [Scroll down]  Everyone was giddy — except for that one guy who was taking the course merely for grade inflation potential.  He asked questions like "What if the effect of the sun caused climate change?" and "Who caused the climate change that caused the last ice age?" and "What if the Earth has a natural ability to balance these variables?"  Suddenly, the entire class was discombobulated.  The instructor, too, was flustered, and he quickly dismissed the class, but he kept the skeptic behind.  The next morning started one student short, and no one cared.  This led to a secret corollary to mission success.  No one will be allowed to dissent from the consensus.

Our Free Speech Crisis.  [Scroll down]  Today, there is growing contempt for free speech, most of which is found on the nation's college and university campuses.  [Gettysburg College professor Allen C.] Guelzo cites the free speech vision of Princeton University professor Carolyn Rouse, who is chairperson of the department of Anthropology.  Rouse shared her vision on speech during last year's Constitution Day lecture.  She called free speech a political illusion, a baseless ruse to enable people to "say whatever they want, in any context, with no social, economic, legal or political repercussions."  As an example, she says that a climate change skeptic has no right to make "claims about climate change, as if all the science discovered over the last X-number of centuries were irrelevant."

Peter Ridd:  The Great Barrier Reef has about the same amount of coral as in 1985.  [Peter Ridd] explains that what's happening on the Great Barrier Reef with coral bleaching is a normal cycle.  He tells his story of being censured at James Cook university, but admits the state of free speech at universities in Australia is non-existent — even after his win.  They discuss how we might reform science with audits (universities are almost a lost cause).  We'll probably never know how many scientists think similar thoughts to Peter Ridd.  We know that they'll need a $250,000 legal fund if they say so.  [Video clip]

Oregon governor sends out state police to find GOP lawmakers skipping climate vote.  Republican lawmakers in Oregon are in hot water after they refused to partake in a historic vote Thursday to implement a cap-and-trade program to help rein in industrial carbon emissions.  Gov. Kate Brown authorized the state police to round up the 12 Republicans who walked out of the Capitol in protest of the bill and bring them back to the Senate floor for a vote.  If passed the measure will make Oregon the second state in the country after California to implement such a program.

This scientist proved climate change isn't causing extreme weather — so politicians attacked.  Roger Pielke Jr. is a scientist at University of Colorado in Boulder who, up until a few years ago, did world-leading research on climate change and extreme weather.  He found convincing evidence that climate change was not leading to higher rates of weather-related damages worldwide, once you correct for increasing population and wealth.  He also helped convene major academic panels to survey the evidence and communicate the near-unanimous scientific consensus on this topic to policymakers.  For his efforts, Pielke was subjected to a vicious, well-funded smear campaign backed by, among others, the Obama White House and leading Democratic congressmen, culminating in his decision in 2015 to quit the field.

Racism: Is There Anything It Can't Do?  This claim is so stupid that I can't even give it one of our coveted Green Weenie Awards:  ["]Racial Resentment May Be Fueling Climate Denial:  After Barack Obama took office, white Americans were less likely to see climate change as a serious problem, according to a recent paper published in the journal Environmental Politics.  The study further finds evidence of a link between racial resentment and climate change denial.  This is not to suggest that all climate deniers are racists, merely that racial resentment may, in part, be driving climate denial.["]

Conservatives Must Stand Up to Climate Change Bullying.  [Marc] Morano explains why so many Republican support climate alarmism:  "They just don't want to be seen as 'evil deniers' and they are prepared to give in wherever they can.  They want to have less toxicity in the media, in town halls, in social circles around the Washington establishment.  By supporting the climate scare, they're going to be better liked, less embarrassed by their positions and can say, 'you can't call us deniers anymore!'  That gives them a level of comfort at parties, campaign events, speeches and town halls."

The conduct of climate activists has been destructive, deceitful and violent.  Global warming alarmists have shouted down legitimate debate and committed deceitful and violent acts in support of their false cause.  The Climategate emails provide irrefutable evidence of scientific collusion and fraudulent misconduct.  In Canada, skeptic climatologist Dr. Tim Ball and other skeptics have received threats, and buildings related to the energy industry including the Calgary Petroleum Club were firebombed.  In the USA, skeptic scientists have had their homes invaded, and several highly competent skeptic scientists have been harassed and driven from their academic posts.

Climate Change Is Socialist Groupthink.  If you're someone who can think for himself, you have probably wondered why climate science is such a mess.  Why do they torture the temperature data to get it to look like a hockey stick in graphs?  Why do they ignore or slander critics instead of answering their concerns when they offer good evidence?

Climate Change and the Ten Warning Signs for Cults.  [#2] No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.  The conclusions of the Climate Change movement may not be challenged or questioned under any circumstances.  Those who dare scrutinize the conclusions, methodology, or prescriptions of "climate scientists" are categorically dismissed as a "Climate Denier", an excommunicated untouchable whose opinion is no longer valid on any subject.  Questions and critical inquiry aren't merely dismissed or refuted.  The unfortunate heretic immediately experiences a relentless ad hominem onslaught of scorn and hatred from the political and media left, and is often subjected to accusations of outright murder.  Simply question the effectiveness of a "carbon tax" and you may find yourself tied to a stake.  There is no tolerance for questioning the Climate Change movement, and thus it clearly meets the second warning sign for unsafe groups.

Climate skeptic scientist Peter Ridd wins big!  In May 2018, after an academic career of more than 30 years, Peter had his employment terminated as a professor of physics at James Cook University in Townsville, Australia.  Peter had spoken against the accepted orthodoxy that climate change was 'killing' the Great Barrier Reef. [...] Peter's court case has enormous implications for the international debate about climate change, and for the ongoing crisis surrounding freedom of speech.

Huge victory for genuine scientific inquiry on global warming.  The greatest "tell" for non-scientists evaluating the likelihood that the anthropogenic global warming theory is a fraud is that instead of critically examining the facts, warmists try to silence skeptics, with some of them even demanding jail for the thought-crime of questioning their unproven theory.  So thorough has been the pressure to keep the fraud going and keep the billions of dollars a year in research funds flowing to universities and other research institutions pushing the party line that skeptics are under threat of firing — and some have been fired.  That's why this news from Australia is so important.

Questioning Global Warming.  The question should be asked: are we looking at the wrong phenomenon and should be debating global cooling?  A number of climate scientists believe "another major cooling" is likely to happen in this century.  Despicably and treacherously GWCC [global warming/climate change] has overtaken all rational discussions about all forms of energy, electricity and the weather.  If you question GWCC you are a "climate denier," or worse you're viciously attacked without fully vetting the issue of whether or not man is causing anthropogenic GWCC.

Can We Talk?  The problem is that too many members of society today (more liberals than conservatives in my experience) are simply unwilling to listen to an opposing viewpoint, because they don't care about truth.  They only want to silence their intellectual counterparts.  For example, Bill Nye insanely suggested that skeptics of "climate change" should face criminal charges and prison sentences for daring to question the orthodoxy of climate change.

Climate Science, Red in Tooth and Claw.  We are reassured that the global warming scare is absolutely solid science, as everyone except climate deniers knows.  What everyone may not know is that climate science is an industry, and the product is the global warming scare.  If the global warming scare is discredited, the huge industry will collapse.  Climate scientists used to be unimportant academics in an unimportant academic field.  The global warming scare made them into celebrities jetting around the world.  They won't give up the glory without a fight.  Climate computer models, the basis of the doomsday predictions, disagree with each other and disagree with the climate of the Earth.  But according to the climate science mafia, anyone who brings up such embarrassing information is a tool of the fossil fuel industry.

Mass Immigration and Climate Change Doublethink.  When recipients of tens of millions of dollars in federal climate research grants ask the Department of Justice to arrest, prosecute, and imprison those who question their data quality, analysis, and conclusions, it's a fair bet they're up to something, but whatever it is, it's not science.  The peer review process has been a disaster for a long time.  It would not be improved by deep state prosecutors going after scientific peers who are more interested in homing in on the truth than in advancing a political agenda.  Climate change skepticism should also be informed by headlines proclaiming that a particular year was the Hottest in Recorded History.  That headline piqued my interest, but my willingness to believe was affected when I later learned that the "hottest year ever" part was based on a statistical analysis that was less robust than a coin toss.

Climate Alarmists Reduced to Recycling Discredited Attacks on Skeptics.  Last week, Esquire Associate Editor Jack Holmes penned a piece accusing The Republican Party (a.k.a. powerful "fossil-fuel interests") of warping discussions about "the consensus that climate change is happening, and human activity is causing it." [...] And this warmist is not entertaining any dissent:  ["]Anyone who continues to question whether [manmade global warming] is happening should be ostracized from the public debate.  They should not be invited on cable news or the Sunday Shows to spread misinformation and outright lies.  These voices have been granted legitimacy for far too long.["]  It would appear that Esquire's Holmes received the same memo as did NBC's Chuck Todd several weeks ago.

NBC Science Deniers Refuse Climate Debate.  Wake up, America!  We the People are being told we are not intelligent enough to understand both sides of an issue and come to our own conclusions.  The media have gone from doing their job, reporting the news without opinion or bias, to being pompous dictators, doling out only the information they want us to have.

It's Climate Alarmists Who Remain in Denial.  Chuck Todd opened last year's final Meet the Press show, which focused its entire hour on climate change, with a pompous, long-winded speech blaming human activity for a disastrously overheating Planet Earth.  The NBC News host made news himself by declaring that "climate deniers" aren't welcome to the discussion because "the science is settled."  It was an awful show, even by NBC standards — a Sunday news and discussion program that not only deliberately invited only one point of view to the table, but proudly proclaimed as much in its opening statement.  As promised, what followed was as one-sided and alarmist-biased a presentation on the subject as you're likely to see anywhere.

Stop the Personal Attacks and Answer the Climate Questions.  When you realize you are losing an argument, it is common to abandon the argument and attack the person.  It is one of many forms of arguments called ad hominem, or to the person.  A disagreement between two people makes an ad hominem argument easy to notice.  The loser and the winner are clear, and a shift in the tone and focus of the discussion is relatively apparent.  The structure and method chosen to create the myth of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) guaranteed an ad hominem situation.  The evidence against the hypothesis was overwhelming from the start.  The only question was left academic.  Can you have a collective ad hominem, that is a personal attack on a group, or does it only apply to an attack on an individual?  The answer is not about the number but the nature of the attack.  When it is an individual, the attack occurs because the debate on the issue is lost, and that is true when it is a group.

Another Year of Torrential Media Bias.  In a smug bow to this open dogmatism, NBC's Chuck Todd last Sunday [12/30/2018] prided himself on holding an hourlong episode of Meet the Press devoted to climate change without any conservative skeptics present.  Todd teed up the episode with a pompous disclaimer that sums up the presumption and propaganda of the media perfectly:  "Just as important as what we are going to do is what we're not going to do.  We're not going to debate climate change, the existence of it.  The earth is getting hotter and human activity is a major cause, period.  We're not going to give time to climate deniers.  The science is settled even if political opinion is not."  The self-appointed media arbiters of what is and what is not "settled" will apparently let us know if an issue is permissibly debatable anymore.

Chuck Todd Bans 'Climate Deniers' From Meet The Press.  On Sunday [12/30/2018] Chuck Todd, host of NBC's Meet The Press, used his bully pulpit to deny any opportunity for opponents of climate change activists to appear while he devoted his entire show to climate change, saying, "We're not going to give time to climate deniers."  Beginning by announcing his show would be devoted to the "climate crisis," Todd played snippets from various people, some of whom have suffered from natural disasters and some who simply opined that there was indeed a crisis, then pontificated:  "The evidence is everywhere."  "The science is settled."  "But the politics is not."

NBC News host says no air time for climate 'deniers' on "Meet the Press': 'Science is settled'.  NBC News has decided that climate change is no longer an issue that has two sides.  Sunday's [12/30/2018] episode of "Meet the Press" with Chuck Todd featured an hourlong panel with lawmakers and scientists about the consequences of climate change.  But at the start, Mr. Todd said his show is "not going to give time to climate deniers" and went on to inaccurately characterize the nature of the climate debate.  "Just as important as what we are going to do is what we're not going to do," he said.  "We're not going to debate climate change, the existence of it.  The earth is getting hotter, and human activity is a major cause.  Period."

The Editor says...
Not so fast, Mr. Todd.  [#1] The earth is warming at the rate of perhaps one degree per century.  In your lifetime, chances are the average global temperature will increase one degree or less.  That is an imperceptible change.  [#2] Human activity is a very minor cause of global warming.  Most of the warming in the 20th century occurred before 1940.  The widespread use of internal combustion engines didn't begin until after 1940.  The output power of the sun varies, and that causes the earth to warm or cool.  [#3] No legislation will stop climate change.  [#4] Nobody really knows from one decade to another if warming will continue, or if global cooling will take over.  [#5] The global warming hoax is all about expanding the government and collecting taxes.

Climate scientist hit with campus 'inquisition' over post opposing carbon tax.  University of Washington atmospheric scientist Cliff Mass has been called plenty of names, including climate "denier," but it wasn't until he came out against the state's proposed carbon tax last month that he was accused of being a racist.  Since then, Mr. Mass said he has been upbraided by the university's diversity dean and subjected to a faculty "inquisition," events that have stoked alarm about the threat posed by campus climate-change activism to academic freedom.

Green Energy is the Perfect Scam.  Anyone who criticizes the green energy scam is ruthlessly attacked.  Critics are often accused of being in the pay of fossil fuel companies.  Fossil fuel companies are too timid to risk the wrath of the green movement, so they hardly ever give money to the critics of the green movement.  A favorite line of attack is to accuse the critics of using tobacco company tactics to cover up the danger from using fossil fuels.  Critics are often depicted as being mental cases, as when Al Gore said that critics of his global warming promotions were like people who think the moon landing was filmed in a Hollywood studio or think that the Earth is flat.  James Hansen, often considered that father of the global warming movement, suggested that executives of fossil fuel companies should be sent to jail for crimes against humanity.  Green energy is the perfect scam because it is disguised as a do-good movement and the victims are dispersed, unorganized and disarmed by propaganda.

Sierra Club says you're RACIST if you don't agree with "climate change" mythology.  Climate change alarmists can't really fight against science, so they've stooped to some old-fashioned name-calling instead.  Now, if you don't believe the climate change mythology, it must mean you're racist, according to the Sierra Club.  Yes, you read that correctly.  The long-standing environmental group has been latching onto a study that claims there is a strong correlation between "reduced agreement with the scientific consensus on climate change" and "high levels of racial resentment."

Witch-Hunt and Pseudo-Science:  Sorry State of Climate Science.  Marine biologist Peter Ridd was sacked last month by James Cook University (JCU) in Australia for disagreeing on the state of the Great Barrier Reef.  Ridd, a skeptic of exaggerated impacts of climate change on coral reefs, was put on notice earlier this year after he expressed his opinion on a private news channel.  Despite Ridd's posing no threat to the university or to the health of research there, the university sacked him for disagreeing with some propaganda climate alarmists use to scare the general public — the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef due to man-made climate change. [...] Ridd is not the only victim of this climate witch-hunt.  Climate alarmists routinely attack scientists who pose a threat to the extremist narrative.

The Rapid 'Progress' of Progressivism.  Twenty years ago, there was honest debate over global warming.  Ten years ago, there was still honest debate over the effects of human-induced climate change.  Five years ago, there was still honest debate over the cost-benefit analysis of dealing with the problem.  Not now.  Anyone who doubts that there is an existential man-caused threat to the planet — requiring the radical and costly reconstruction of the global economy and society — is considered a "denier," deserving of professional ostracism or worse.

Play titled 'Kill Climate Deniers' launches theatrical run.  Global warming skeptics, beware:  A play with the alarming title "Kill Climate Deniers" may be coming to a theater near you.  Written by Australian playwright David Finnigan, "Kill Climate Deniers" kicked off Thursday the 2018 season of the Griffin Theatre in Sydney after a week of previews, with the final show scheduled for April 7.

The climate Gulag archipelago.  Climate alarmism, like all leftist propaganda, has turned virulent among its many followers.  It has been widely chronicled how the Gang Green — the radical environmental Nazis pushing climate change to establish an international order — has threatened nonbelievers or at least fantasized about horrible things being done to those who simply do not agree with their marginal and rather manipulated science.  We've had professors calling for the death penalty for climate change "denial," and we've had calls for Nuremberg-style trials for "deniers."  They have tried to call those who do not believe in global warming insane.  Even NASA scientist James Hansen called for trials of "deniers," a blood libel term designed to evoke visions of neo-Nazis.  Well, here's another one for you.  Over at Quadrant, Tony Thomas has unearthed a 2008 fantasy document from Forum for the Future, a hard-left Green infection posing as a non-profit group.  Their dream?  A gulag archipelago for climate change-deniers.

A Veneer of Certainty Stoking Climate Alarm.  While the nations of the world met in Bonn to discuss implementation of the Paris Climate Agreement, the Trump administration was working to dismantle President Obama's Clean Power Plan and to establish a climate "red team" to critically evaluate the scientific basis for dangerous human-caused climate change and the policy responses.  The mantra of "settled science" is belied by the inherent complexity of climate change as a scientific problem, the plethora of agents and processes that influence the global climate, and disagreements among scientists.  Manufacture and enforcement of a "consensus" on the topic of human-caused climate change acts to the detriment of the scientific process, our understanding of climate change, and the policy responses.  Indeed, it becomes a fundamentally anti-scientific process when debate, disagreement, and uncertainty are suppressed.

The Global Warming Thought Police Want Skeptics In 'Jail'.  Conform or else.  That's the message of the global warming alarmists.  Those who don't buy into the man-made climate change narrative should be prosecuted as criminals.  "Put officials who reject science in jail," someone named Brad Johnson who says he's executive director of something called Climate Hawks Vote tweeted last month.

Don't Call Climate Skeptics 'Deniers,' Call Us 'Correct'.  Arturo Casadevall and Ferric Fang, two academic microbiologists with no special knowledge of climate, recently used their article in the Hill to commit the repellent but now commonplace hate-crime of describing researchers skeptical of the sillier exaggerations of the climate-change establishment as "denialists."  This disfiguring hate-word, calculated to invite an invidious comparison between climate skeptics and those who say the Nazis did not murder six million Jews, is not fit to be uttered by any serious academic. [...] The two microbiologists have missed the point entirely.  They talk of "virtually unanimous consensus" that Earth is facing a period of anthropogenic climate change.  Yet the largest sample of academic papers on climate ever studied — an impressive 11,944 papers over the 21 years 1991–2011 — showed only 0.3 percent "consensus" explicitly supporting the proposition recent global warming was mostly manmade.  The question whether the small warming that is to be expected will prove dangerous was not even asked; the "consensus" on that question is even smaller.  Even if there were a "virtually unanimous consensus," science is not advanced by consensus but by informed dissent.  The instances the microbiologists themselves cite make it quite clear that where there is a "consensus," it is nearly always wrong, at least at the margins.

Oops! Climate Cultist Destroys [His] Own Position.  Astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson has been doing the leftist media interview circuit recently, pressing his peculiar thesis that professional (i.e., paid) scientists are a superior class of humans whose conclusions are intrinsically beyond reproach and must therefore be accepted blindly by unscientific lunks like you.  In each of these interviews, a non-climate scientist asks a series of predetermined questions designed to elicit rehearsed responses from the non-climate scientist Tyson, the upshot of which is that (a) people who question man-made global warming are anti-scientific fools driven by irrational agendas;  (b) scientific consensus is not the product of the social and political pressures of academic life working on the minds of the career-motivated, publication-obsessed majority of scholarly mediocrities, but rather consensus is the very definition of Objective Truth; and (c) anyone who questions a scientific consensus poses a threat to the survival of democracy.

Limousine Liberal Leo DeCaprio Joins Globalist John Kerry:  Climate Deniers Like Trump Shouldn't Hold Office.  Two hypocrite climate change freaks decided to pontificate to a packed house at Yale.  Both John Kerry and Leo DeCaprio love to hear themselves talk so this had to be a snoozefest.  The most ironic thing about the preaching on global warming coming from these two men is that they have HUGE carbon footprints.  Does Leo not understand that we know he travels by private jet and big yacht[?]  What a joke!  These two blow hard limousine liberals are why Trump won.

Punish the Thought:  Do Climate-change Skeptics Belong in Jail?  Hurricanes Harvey and Irma have left more in their wake than destruction of property and devastation of lives.  In the wreckage of the two storms, you can also see little pieces of the Constitution of the United States, torn up by global-warming hysterics, who now wish to criminalize what they call "climate-change denial."  In the aftermath of the two major hurricanes, the left-wing magazine The Nation published an article written by Mark Hertsgaard on September 7, linking climate-change skepticism with actual murder.  In his piece, entitled "Climate Denialism Is Literally Killing Us," Hertsgaard writes that "murder is murder" and "we should punish it as such."  Lest you think that Hertsgaard is simply one lone lunatic in a sea of rational journalists and scientists, there are dozens of others who are calling for the jailing of public officials who, in their words, "deny science" and work against the sweeping socialist reforms demanded by climate alarmists.

Climate Depot's Morano receives threatening email: 'You and your children should be burned in public'Marc Morano received the following barely literate email:  ["]Although it is my belief that you and your children should be burned in public.  Not be cause [sic] you are " a skeptic", I honestly believe that you know the science is true, but because you are to [sic] cowardly to engage in a real dialog. [..."]

Climate Kooks Escalate Calls for Criminalizing Dissent.  When Harvey struck, it ended a record run for the longest the USA has gone without a hurricane — just under 12 years.  It is in a three-way tie for only the 17th most powerful storm to hit us since the 1850s.  Unsurprisingly, people have been snickering at the predictable claim by liberals that finally getting a couple of hurricanes is proof of their discredited anthropogenic global warming theories.  True to type, the climate commies are falling back on the favorite tactic of progressives — coercion.

Former NASA GISS climate scientist tells new NASA head to stop funding "corrupt, carpet-baggers".  A new incendiary blog by Dr. Duane Thresher and Dr. Claudia Kubatzki unleashes on NASA Goddard Institute (one of the two main motherlodes of climate activism), calling for them to be defunded because they are "ignoble", with "herds of do-gooders", and "NASA GISS is a monument to bad science that truly should be torn down.  Take the money and buy a rocket."  They are a husband and wife team, both producing peer-reviewed climate papers.  He worked at NASA GISS for seven years.  Since they came out as skeptics in California, they've had to move house.

Stevie Wonder:  Climate Change Deniers 'Must Be Blind'.  At a time when fewer people than ever watch television live, how does a telethon have an impact?  By going viral.

Hurricane Irma Telethon Turns into Liberal Hate-Fest.  The stars turned out Tuesday night [9/12/2017] for a celebrity-studded telethon to help the victims of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma, but it didn't take long for the event to turn into a liberal rallying cry; with Stevie Wonder opening the event by saying anyone unsure about "climate change" was either "blind or unintelligent."  The event became political within minutes, with iconic singer Steve Wonder opening the event by saying, "When love goes into action, it preferences no color of skin, no ethnicity, no religious beliefs, no sexual preferences, and no political persuasions."

Hurricane Telethon Gets Political Right At The Start.  Singer Stevie Wonder kicked off Tuesday's star studded Hand In Hand telethon to raise money for hurricane recovery by getting political.  Wonder started the show by saying, "Anyone who believes that there's no such thing as global warming must be blind or unintelligent."

Oh Scientia!  Oh Mores!  This whole "don't believe in science" canard amounts to ackamarackus bordering on flimflam.  Even if you were a 100 percent "denier" of climate change, that wouldn't necessarily mean you don't "believe" in science.  Indeed, many of the hardcore rejectionists I know are really, really, really into the science of climate change (tell the guys at CEI they don't believe in science, I dare you).  They just tend to think the prevailing "consensus" is a politically and journalistically contrived sham.  But even if you are a "denier" without being a science dork, that doesn't necessarily mean you don't believe in "science."

Revisiting Wind Turbine Numbers.  Sustainability and renewable energy claims are too grounded in ideology, magic and politics.  Wind and solar energy forecasts ignore the need to find and mine vast new metal and mineral deposits — and open US lands that are now off limits, unless we want to import all our wind turbines, solar panels and batteries.  They assume land use impacts don't really exist if they are in other people's backyards.  Worse, too often anyone trying to raise these inconvenient truths is shouted down, silenced, ignored.  That has to stop.

Dirty Big Green Criminalizes Climate Science.  Big Green is escalating its crackdown on climate science.  If you are going to falsely claim that 99.99% of scientists agree with you, the best way to ensure that is by criminalizing scientific dissent.  Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has called for punishing and imprisoning dissenters.  Bill Nye endorsed such a call just last week.  And while it's easy to dismiss Kennedy and Nye as famous crackpots, Attorney General Loretta Lynch admitted that there had been discussions about prosecuting climate dissenters.  And that materials had been passed along to the FBI.

N.C. State researchers say solar lobby silencing them.  Ron Heiniger just wanted to be a farmer.  He encouraged research to avoid solar industry encroachment on North Carolina's prime farmlands.  But because of his academic study, the respected crop and soil scientist has become an unwilling poster child for anti-solar activists, vilified by the solar lobby, and chastened by his employer, N.C. State University.  "I've been called crazy.  I've been threatened.  My job's been threatened.  I really don't want to advertise my issue very much anymore," said Heiniger, who works at the Vernon G. James Research and Extension Center in Plymouth.

Battle of the graphs
The Church of Man-Made Climate Change on trial.  A little-known court case is taking place in the Supreme Court of British Columbia in Vancouver.  This case involves two scientists and two set of graphs.  One of the graphs is very famous, and the basis for every man-made climate change believer's faith, while the other... is not.  The foundation of the church of man-made climate change is on shaky ground, and an earthquake could be coming.  Michael Mann is a climatologist and geophysicist working at Penn State University.  In 1998, he was the leader of a group using statistical techniques that created a graph showing the earth's temperature over the last 1,000 years.  The graph would gain international fame and become known as the "hockey stick graph."

Lindzen: On the 'Death of Skepticism' Concerning Climate Hysteria.  [Scroll down]  These were hardly fringe scientists (as opposed to Nye who is no scientist at all).  On the contrary, they were leading figures whose deep interest in climate long pre-dated the Global Warming Hysteria and the subsequent explosion of support for those endorsing alarm.  So, Bill Nye is right.  The newcomers are younger, and with death of many of the previous generation, they have come to dominate the field — to the great detriment of the science, itself.  Those, among the older generation, who are still alive, are the subject of constant public abuse and libel, leading several of them like Bengtsson and Tennekes to withdraw from the field. [...] In addition, there are many outstanding scientists who have bothered to actually examine this issue, and have come to the obvious conclusion that there is much less to the story of gloom and doom than is popularly asserted.

Al Gore compares 'global warming' skeptics to Southern racists.  If you're skeptical about "global warming" and "climate change," you're as bad as the backwards as racist Southerners in the 1960s, according to Chief Alarmist Al Gore.  Gore, who recently was exposed for his mass consumption of energy at his Tennessee mansion, made the comparison on CNN this weekend.

The Left's War on the First Amendment.  [Scroll down]  This isn't just a media phenomenon.  It's what happened across the social spectrum when the people we used to call liberals became illiberal leftists.  It's why colleges censor controversial speakers and punish dissenting faculty.  It's why the environmental debate went from scientific discussions to calls to punish, fine and even jail those who question the left's Luddite alarmism on Global Warming.

Alleged 'science guy' Bill Nye:  Older people need to die before climate change science can advance.  In an interview published Wednesday at the Los Angeles Times, Bill Nye, the alleged "science guy," said that older people have to die off before so-called "climate change" science can advance.  The reason, he said, is that older people are more resistant to the environmentalist propaganda.  "It just sounds like people are scared.  It just sounds like people are afraid.  And the people who are afraid in general — with due respect, and I am now one of them — are older," he said.  "Climate change deniers, by way of example, are older.  It's generational.  So we're just going to have to wait for those people to 'age out,' as they say.  'Age out' is a euphemism for 'die.'  But it'll happen, I guarantee you — that'll happen."

Things Get Hot for Michael Mann.  Mann has been waging lawfare against people who have rightly called him out on his deceptive practices, practices paid for with tax dollars and subject to the Freedom of Information Act.  In point of fact, the Gang Green, the radical environmental lobby promoting the global warming hysteria, has poured massive amounts of money into the effort, far more than was spent by their opposition.  Couple that with the fact that national, state, and local governments have been supporting alarmism, as have charitable organizations and even businesses (when head of Exxon-Mobile Rex Tillerson moved the company to support climate change alarmism and it becomes obvious why Mann pursues a strategy of legal action; the intent is to win a war of attrition, to bankrupt "deniers" and critics so as to silence them.  Having lost the battle in the court of public opinion and in the realm of facts, they now seek to bully the opposition into silence.

Global Warming Skepticism is Part of the Final Phase of the American Revolution.  [Scroll down]  Marshall McLuhan's global village was realized through the electronic village of the Internet.  The power of the Internet and thereby its threat to the power elite who want total government control.  The mainstream media and their political masters were end run by the people ignoring them and seeking facts evidence and information from fellow citizens.  Internet success and power were confirmed when the power elite and media tried to participate by creating websites. [...] For the first time in history, the people had access to and control of information.

Campus police told students to stop touting the benefits of fossil fuels on campus: lawsuit.  A lawsuit has been filed against Macomb Community College after its campus police tried to stop a group of students from handing out information touting the benefits of fossil fuels.  Three students working to advance their arguments at the Michigan college in late April were threatened with trespassing by the officers because the students did not have official permission from administrators to engage in public expression on campus, alleges the lawsuit, filed last week.  The lawsuit claims the college's policy requiring a 48-hour pre-approval in person and in writing for expressive activity is a violation of students' First Amendment rights.  The suit also takes issue with the fact that even after such permission is obtained, the speech zone at the community college's Central Campus is only about .001 percent of the entire 230-acre campus.

Feds Fund Dissertation on 'Climate Change Denial'.  The National Science Foundation is funding a doctoral dissertation on "climate change denial."  The University of Kansas was awarded $12,000 for the research, which began on June 1.  The research seeks to find a "more complete and nuanced understanding" of individuals who are skeptical that human beings cause climate change.  The dissertation focuses on two parishes outside of New Orleans, along the Mississippi River, and claims that residents who work in the oil industry "exploit the local environment."  [...] The researchers seek to prove that people who do not believe in man-made global warming are driven in part by their emotions.

Former NASA Chief Scientist:  America is "Under Siege" from Climate Disinformers.  The science is NOT unequivocal that we face a climate emergency.  Using the IPCC's own climate figures, there is a real possibility anthropogenic CO2 is not a big deal.  Calling people who point this out purveyors of "fake news" is pure climate alarmism.  As for what happens after the year 2100, frankly that is their problem.  By the year 2100 humanity will know whether CO2 is causing climate problems — and will have the energy supply options and advanced engineering capabilities to deal with any eventuality.

Convert, Pay, or Die.  Convert, pay, or die is the set of choices Islam offers infidels.  Coincidentally, this is also what today's progressives and the Democratic Party offer nonbelievers, climate "deniers," white males, heterosexuals, patriots, blue-collar workers, farmers, miners, people without a college degree, the religiously devout, Republicans, and everybody else choosing not to buy into the party's version of what America is and what the nation owes both its citizens and the world.

It's the theory of Global Warming that's really dangerous.  It seems we have abdicated our ability to think rationally or to question whatever claims these pseudo scientists make about planet earth.  It is extremely unsettling that anyone questioning the flawed data given by these charlatans is deemed a denier and dangerous skeptic.  All scientific research requires debate and honest questioning rather than wholesale swallowing data from individuals who may have agendas based on funding from environmentalists hostile to our way of life.

Dilbert Disses Global Warming; Liberal Heads Explode.  Scott Adams has gone full-on climate denialist in his latest Dilbert strip, causing liberal heads to explode. [...] Anyone who questions this groupthink is labelled a "science denier."  But as Adams has grasped it has nothing to do with science.  Rather it's about the politically driven misapplication of models which have no real-world basis.

WRAL's Greg Fishel goes off on climate change deniers.  Popular local weatherman Greg Fishel had strong words for climate change deniers on his Facebook page on Sunday [5/22/2017].  Fishel, chief meteorologist at WRAL, went off on people who question the science behind climate change, telling them to "put up or shut up."  The post had earned more than 3,500 reactions by Monday afternoon.

How to Recognize 'Science Denial'.  There is a consensus of evidence that human activity is causing all of recent global warming.  Not some of it.  Not even most of it.  All of it. [...] How do we recognize science denial?  The various movements who have rejected a scientific consensus share the same five characteristics of science denial:  reliance on fake experts, using logical fallacies to arrive at false conclusions, demanding impossible expectations of scientific proof, cherry picking from the full body of evidence and conspiracy theories to explain the consensus.  Psychology tells us something important about the five characteristics of science denial.  While they may come across as nefarious tactics, they're not always deliberately deceptive.

No, I Am Not a Moron but Half the Country is Deranged.  What is so dangerous about the climate change issue is the frenzied attack on skeptics.  Several deranged GW advocates have urged prison sentences and even death threats against those who do not agree with their warnings.  Former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has said that climate change is as dangerous as, if not more, than the threats posed by the Islamic State and other extremist groups.  Obama and other Congressional Democrats concur with this fascist conclusion.  It took the Vatican 350 years to conclude that Galileo was right.  Let's hope it doesn't' take that long for the deranged to come to their senses and realize they are the real morons.

Heartland Institute Excluded by Local Organizers of 'Open Forum' on Climate Change.  On Saturday, May 6, North Central College in Naperville, Illinois will be hosting an event organized by Illinois Congressman Bill Foster (D-14) dubbed an "open forum on climate change."  [...] Although the event's website says "It's time for an honest discussion on the facts," only the alarmist side of the contentious climate change debate will be distributing literature or making presentations.  The Heartland Institute — identified by The Economist as "the world's most prominent think tank promoting skepticism about man-made climate change" — was not invited to participate in the "open forum."  Heartland contacted North Central College and asked if it could offer a dissenting view, and were told the event was organized and controlled by Foster's office, and we would not be allowed to participate.

Bill Nye's Fake Science.  Any alleged "scientist" who claims that his main goal is to "save the world" has forfeited his right to be called a scientist.  Same principle applies for journalists.  If your goal is to uncover anything but the unvarnished truth — no matter where the truth may take you or how brutally it may undermine your ideological leanings — then you are starting off with answers rather than questions and have corrupted the entire process.  Take, for example, the ideologically loaded but intellectually vacant term of "climate change denier."  Also flung against Holocaust and vaccine skeptics, the term "denier" itself is a grossly dishonest construction — it implies that the "denier" agrees with the accuser but is lying about it.  It starts from a premise of bad faith and eliminates the possibility that someone might simply disagree — or even have sincere questions.

Climate Bullies Take to the Streets for 'People's Climate March'.  After the March for Science this past Saturday [4/22/2017], shots were fired at the office of John Christy, a climate scientist at the University of Alabama, Hunstville, and a well-known climate-change skeptic.  Christy's colleague, Roy Spencer, reported the shooting on social media on Monday:  "When some people cannot argue facts, they resort to violence to get their way.  Maybe the 'March for Science' should have been called the 'March to Silence.'"  This is the kind of thuggery climate leaders promote so they can keep their agenda intact.  They play the victim by insisting that the Trump administration and Republicans are trying to oppress them, but they are the perpetrators, intimidating and coercing anyone who dares to defy them.

Do You Think Bill Nye Is A 'Science Guy' or a Propagandist?  Bill Nye has GOT to stop taking himself (and his B.S. in Mechanical Engineering) so seriously.  None of the rest of us do.  Well, MOST of the rest of us don't.  But he's famous and played a scientist on (Children's) tv.  And more importantly, has a science-y sounding name.  Therefore he is held up as an authority by the party that tends to rely too heavily on star power and arguments from authority in the first place.  He's taken a break from calling for the incarceration of 'climate change deniers'.

Bullets Shatter Windows Next To A Prominent Global Warming Skeptic's Office.  Shots were fired at the fourth floor of a science and technology center at the University of Alabama-Huntsville sometime over the weekend, hitting windows adjacent to climatologist John Christy's office.  No one was hurt, and university police have characterized the event as a "random shooting," UAH spokesman Ray Garner told WHNT News. [...] While police say the shooting looks to be random, Christy's colleague, Dr. Roy Spencer, said it's "more than coincidence" that shots were fired around Earth Day.

Climate Marches Aren't About Science — They're About Trump.  A science march website says this is "explicitly a political movement, aimed at holding leaders in science and politics accountable" for trying to "skew, ignore, misuse or interfere with science."  That pious language really means they intend to allow no deviation from climate cataclysm doctrines.  It means everyone must accept claims that fossil fuel emissions, not powerful natural forces, now govern Earth's climate; any future changes will be catastrophic; despite growing wealth and technological prowess, humanity will somehow be unable to adapt to future uctuations; and mankind can and must control the climate by regulating emissions of plant-fertilizing carbon dioxide, regardless of costs.

Bill Nye: 'We'll See' About Jailing Climate Change Skeptics.  Global warming skeptics should be jailed by the federal government because "this extreme doubt about climate change is affecting my quality of life as a public citizen," science activist Bill Nye said in a video published Wednesday on YouTube.

Democrats Ask Teachers To Destroy Books Written By 'Climate Deniers'.  Three senior House Democrats asked U.S. teachers Monday to destroy a book written by climate scientists challenging the environmentalist view of global warming.  The Democrats were responding to a campaign by the conservative Heartland Institute copies of the 2015 book, "Why Climate Scientists Disagree About Global Warming" to about 200,000 science teachers.  Democratic Reps.  Bobby Scott of the Committee on Education, Raúl M. Grijalva of the Committee on Natural Resources, and Eddie Bernice Johnson of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology all issued a statement telling teachers to trash the book.

Democrats Lose Argument, Try to Burn Books.  If you make scientific arguments against a fraudulent claim that benefits government, you are "anti-science."  And if you tell the truth about the Earth's climate, you are a "climate denier." [...] Why do you think our federal government has funded global warming alarmism to the tune of $40 billion?  It is all about power and money.

Tucker and Bill Nye Clash on Climate Change.  Bill Nye the Science Guy believes that climate change skeptics suffer from "cognitive dissonance," which prevents them from accepting how man-made global warming affects their lives.  On "Tucker Carlson Tonight," [2/27/2017] Nye argued that many people prefer to bury their heads in the sand instead of accepting evidence that conflicts with their preexisting worldviews.  [Video clip]

Bill Nye Loses The Plot.  Bill Nye the not-really-Science Guy was on Tucker Carlson tonight [2/27/2017].  Tucker tried time after time to get Nye to say how much of the change was due to humans ... and time after time, Nye refused to say what his opinion was.  So Tucker got him to agree that the climate has always been changing.  Then, in response to the question as to "what the climate would be like if humans weren't involved right now", Bill Nye said (according to my own transcription):  NYE:  "The climate would be like it was in 1750. [...]"

The Editor says...
The entire interview is worth watching, and as I recall, the quote is accurate.  So apparently Mr. Nye believes that human activity prior to 1750 had no effect on the climate.  (Interesting, inasmuch as the Chinese were burning coal at least 3000 years ago, and everybody burned firewood long before that.)  Mr. Nye apparently blames the Industrial Revolution for all the problems (he perceives) with the environment.  Mr. Nye went on to say that the global warming problem is so urgent that it must be dealt with in a matter of decades, not centuries.  Really?  How much global warming has taken place in the last two decades?  The answer is approximately zero.  Bill Nye may think of himself as a science guy, but he's really more of an alarmist who is in a panic over a problem that does not exist — at least to the extent that he believes.

Democrats' Real Global Warming Fraud Revealed.  The Democrats are devastated by their recent lost elections.  They will be even more devastated as we learn the details of their massive global warming fraud.  Dr. John Bates, a former high level NOAA scientist, set off a furor by revealing that a recent NOAA paper, which claimed global warming hadn't "paused" during the past 20 years, was fraudulent.  The paper was timed to undergird Obama's signing of the hugely expensive Paris climate agreement.  This is only a tiny fraction of the climate fraud.

When Is a Fact Not a Fact?  Science, like all empirical thinking, begins with facts.  It formulates a hypothesis and subjects it to experimental verification.  Or falsification, as the case may be.  As philosopher Karl Popper once argued, if you will not allow facts to refute your theory you are not doing science. [...] The alt-left has been hard at work trying to undermine our confidence in the facts.  They want us to ignore the facts, to refuse to let the facts or the results obtained by an experiment or by the market influence our judgment.  This is the first step toward mind control.

Mish Michaels isn't alone:  Many meteorologists question climate change science.  They observe changes in the atmosphere like astronomers study the stars, analyzing everything from air pressure to water vapor and poring over computer models to arrive at a forecast.  But for all their scrutiny of weather data, many meteorologists part ways with their colleagues — climate scientists who study longer atmospheric trends — in one crucial respect:  whether human activity is causing climate change.  Meteorologists are more skeptical than climate scientists, and that division was underscored by the recent departure of Mish Michaels from WGBH News.

The hypocrisy of climate change advocates.  For those of you who don't know what a climate denier is, it means you either challenge, question or flat-out reject the idea that the planet is warming due to human activity.  In the scientific world and in the world of international liberal groupthink (but I repeat myself), this is blasphemy.  Should you remotely doubt the dubious models, unrealized dire predictions, changing goal posts or flawed data related to climate science, you are not just stupid according to these folks, but you are on par with those who deny the Holocaust.

On eve of Trump, Obama's Energy Department announces new policy to protect scientists.  Speaking at the National Press Club Wednesday, outgoing Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz announced a new "scientific integrity" policy for an agency recently wracked by concerns about how an administration led by President-elect Donald Trump will treat employees who worked on climate change and other sensitive energy-related issues.  "It's part of establishing the environment that allows scientists to do their work, to stay with us, and to recruit new people," Moniz said in announcing the new policy.  Moniz, a physicist, gave an example of his own role in negotiating the Iran nuclear deal.  "Seven of our laboratories were providing near real-time support to our negotiating positions in a highly technical negotiation," Moniz said, "and I certainly needed correct answers, stated clearly, as opposed to anything that somebody may have thought was the answer I wanted.  That would not be helpful."

Enviros Want the Tillerson Hearings to be a Public Trial on Exxon's Climate History.  One of the groups involved in a year-long crusade against Exxon Mobil wants confirmation hearings for President-elect Donald Trump's secretary of state pick to be a public trial on the company's history of climate research.  Peter Frumhoff, the director of science and policy at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), told reporters Wednesday [12/28/2016] that Rex Tillerson's hearings should be devoted to holding Exxon responsible for hiding years of climate research.  He also said that Exxon's policies under Tillerson's leadership showed the company only supports policy ideas like carbon taxes when it's expedient for its bottom line.

The D.C. Court of Appeals Undermines the First Amendment.  Yesterday [12/22/2016], the D.C Court of Appeals issued its decision in Michael Mann's defamation case against us and the Competitive Enterprise Institute.  The court dismissed Mann's claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, and also dismissed his claims based on an open letter written by our editor-in-chief Rich Lowry taking Dr. Mann to task for threatening to file this bullying lawsuit in the first place.  At the same time, the court refused to dismiss the defamation claims against NR and CEI based on blog posts by Mark Steyn and Rand Simberg respectively criticizing Mann's infamous "hockey stick" graph, which is widely touted as providing lead-pipe cinch scientific proof of man-made global warming.

Congress: Obama Admin Fired Top Scientist to Advance Climate Change Plans.  A new congressional investigation has determined that the Obama administration fired a top scientist and intimidated staff at the Department of Energy in order to further its climate change agenda, according to a new report that alleges the administration ordered top officials to obstruct Congress in order to forward this agenda.  Rep. Lamar Smith (R., Texas), chair of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, released a wide-ranging report on Tuesday that shows how senior Obama administration officials retaliated against a leading scientist and plotted ways to block a congressional inquiry surrounding key research into the impact of radiation.

Congress: Obama Fired Scientist to Advance "Climate" Agenda.  The Obama administration fired a top scientist, intimidated other staff, censored important information from Congress for political reasons, and waged "a reckless and calculated attack on the legislative process itself," U.S. lawmakers concluded in a blistering new report about Obama's scandal-plagued Department of Energy.  All of it was done in order to advance Obama's controversial "climate-change" agenda, according to congressional investigators.  It is time for some serious changes in management at the U.S. Department of Energy, members of Congress declared.  But even that is not nearly enough to remedy the damage unleashed by Obama via the unconstitutional bureaucracy.

The DOE vs.  Ugly Reality.  Over at the Washington Post, Chris Mooney and the usual suspects are seriously alarmed by a memo sent out by the Transition Team at the Department of Energy.  They describe it in breathless terms in an article entitled "Trump transition team for Energy Department seeks names of employees involved in climate meetings". [...] Oh — you mean like say the Attorneys General of a bunch of states holding up their lists of known "denier" organizations and tacitly urging the public to go after them?  You mean like government officials of a variety of stripes ranting about how "deniers" should be brought to trial or otherwise penalized?

Chris Cuomo Sneers:  Climate Change Skepticism Like Opposing Interracial MarriageNew Day co-anchor Chris Cuomo on Thursday continued the media freak out over Donald Trump picking a climate change doubter to run the Environmental Protection Agency.  He even outrageously compared those with similar beliefs to past opposition of interracial marriage.  While discussing the appointment of Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt to run the EPA, Cuomo ranted to CNN co-anchor Alisyn Camerota, "People thought the world was flat."  He continued, "People thought blacks and whites shouldn't marry.  People thought blacks shouldn't be equal.  That doesn't mean you accept it as fact as a leader."

Fed judge rules AG Healey must appear in Texas for Exxon deposition.  A federal judge has rebuffed an attempt by Attorney General Maura Healey to avoid being questioned in Texas by attorneys for Exxon Mobil, setting the stage for an extraordinarily rare deposition of a sitting AG.  U.S. District Court Judge Ed Kinkeade for the Northern District of Texas issued a brief order yesterday simply stating he was denying Healey's request "after careful consideration."  He did not elaborate.  In April, Healey launched her probe into whether the $171-billion Texas-based Exxon Mobil Corp. has deceived consumers and investors about the potential environmental hazards of fossil fuel.  If Healey prevails, Exxon Mobil would be forced to disclose records dating back to 1976 on what it knew about global warming and climate change.

Court orders New York AG Schneiderman to turn over climate change secrecy pact.  A court has ordered New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to turn over documents related to a multistate confidentiality agreement on climate change investigations.  New York Acting Supreme Court Justice Henry F. Zwack ruled that Mr. Schneiderman has 30 days to comply with the Competitive Enterprise Institute's May 5 request under the state's Freedom of Information Law.  The Democratic prosecutor, who launched last year a probe into ExxonMobil, has fought the request for any pact made with other states or certain environmental activists, arguing that such documents are exempt from disclosure.

Five GOP Senators Demand AG Lynch Stop Investigating Climate Skeptics.  Showing a stunning disregard for the First Amendment last month U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch acknowledged the Justice Department has asked the FBI to look into whether the disbelieving of the unproven climate change hypothesis by climate skeptics merits prosecution for fraud.  In other words the Obama government was trying to scare skeptics into silence.  Thankfully some in our legislature have the guts to respond.

Dr. Rotunda's Testimony to House Science, Space & Technology Committee.  For decades, state and federal governments have assured us with the same certainty that [New York Attorney General Eric T.] Schneiderman has about global warming, that the prosecutors' scientific and forensic analyses are trustworthy.  Government prosecutors (like Mr. Schneiderman) routinely introduce this forensic evidence into court to convict people and take away their liberty, fortune, and life.  We know now that the science was too often wrong. [...] The New York attorney general has opposed congressional subpoenas trying to get to the truth as to whether he is part of a conspiracy to abuse government power and to silence those who question man's role in global warming.

16 Times Democrats Tried To Prosecute Their Opponents.  [#7] Climate Change Deniers:  Leftist TV actor Bill Nye "the science guy" said in April that those who are skeptical of so-called "climate change" should probably go to jail.  Nye isn't the only liberal who wanted to lock up those skeptical of climate change.  Robert Kennedy said he "wish[ed] there were a law you could punish them with."  California Attorney General Kamala Harris, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch have all expressed similar sentiments.

DiCaprio: Climate Deniers 'Should Not Be Allowed to Hold Public Office'.  Actor Leonardo DiCaprio sat on the White House lawn on Oct. 3, and proclaimed that anyone who doesn't not believe in climate change "should not be allowed to hold public office."  "The scientific consensus is in and the argument is now over, if you do not believe in climate change, you do not believe in facts or in science or empirical truths and therefore, in my humble opinion, should not be allowed to hold public office," DiCaprio stated at the livestreamed White House South By South Lawn (SXSL) event.  The invited crowd responded with cheers.

Testimony regarding the Climate Change Inquisition.  First, it is a violation of free speech, injurious to scientific method, and just plain wrong for the Government to threaten scientists and entities (whether corporation, foundations, or any other entity) with criminal prosecutions because they do not embrace a belief in human-caused global warming.  What the Government is doing now is chilling scientists who work in this area. [...] If this Committee's investigation shows that one or more State Attorneys General are chilling scientific investigations into global warming, the Committee should offer legislation to increase or redirect federal funds in order to counterbalance this harassment.

The Chevron Shakedown threatens to turn Canada's legal system into a disgrace.  On Monday [9/12/2016], a court in Canada will gavel into session and hear complaints from the group of Ecuadorian plaintiffs and their American environmentalist enablers who have been repeatedly been found to have engaged in massive fraud by American courts.  The Chevron Shakedown, which we've been covering here for years, has moved to the Great White North to see if the pickpockets who have been trying to fleece the energy giant for billions of dollars can fare any better there.  Not only is this a distasteful process for the concept of justice in general, but it holds particular dangers for the Canadians.

GOP Lawmaker Calls Obama's Climate Agreement A Work Of 'Science Fiction'.  Texas Republican Rep. Lamar Smith told reporters that President Barack Obama's decision to ratify the climate agreement Saturday [9/3/2016] in China was a strategic move to stifle public scrutiny.

Professors advise students to drop class if they question climate change.  The professors, who are team-teaching the fall online course Medical Humanities in the Digital Age, issued the memo after some students expressed concerns about the first online lecture on climate change, according to the College Fix, which obtained a copy of the email.  "The point of departure for this course is based on the scientific premise that human induced climate change is valid and occurring," the professors said.  "We will not, at any time, debate the science of climate change, nor will the 'other side' of the climate change debate be taught or discussed in this course."

Professors tell students:  Drop class if you dispute man-made climate change.  Three professors co-teaching an online course called "Medical Humanities in the Digital Age" at the University of Colorado-Colorado Springs recently told their students via email that man-made climate change is not open for debate, and those who think otherwise have no place in their course.  "The point of departure for this course is based on the scientific premise that human induced climate change is valid and occurring.  We will not, at any time, debate the science of climate change, nor will the 'other side' of the climate change debate be taught or discussed in this course," states the email, a copy of which was provided to The College Fix by a student in the course.

Conservative think tank sues AG Schneiderman over Exxon probe records.  The Competitive Enterprise Institute today [8/31/2016] filed a lawsuit against New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, seeking copies of any agreements his office signed that would protect internal communications stemming from his investigation of ExxonMobil's climate change record.  CEI's suit in New York state court comes after Schneiderman denied the conservative think tank's May 5 request under the state's freedom of information law for any common interest agreements that his office reached with other state AGs involved in his climate oversight efforts, as well as seven individuals and green groups also involved in Exxon probes.

New York AG's War Against 'Climate' Opponents Is Running Out Of Gas.  [Scroll down]  Just this week, Columbia Law Professor Merritt Fox wrote in the National Law Review to express his concerns, noting "It is really about the attorney general acting as a champion in the fight against global warming."  Regardless what instinct took over, these emails show Schneiderman quickly going from a "coalition" of 17 AGs one day to being almost completely alone.  Eric Schneiderman has misled the public into believing he led an investigation widely supported among his peers.  [...] In reality, and particularly after reflection, most of his recruits proved too wary of hitching their wagons to his star, seeing the "wild card" might prove to be a joker.

Green Activists, State AGs Collude Against Scientists, Nonprofit Groups.  E-mails uncovered by the Energy and Environment Legal Institute (EELI) show several state attorneys general (AGs) who have threatened prosecution of scientists and nonprofit organizations active in the climate change debate had collaborated with anti-fossil-fuel lobbyists to shape their legal and public relations strategies.  At a March 29 press conference hosted by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, with former U.S. Vice President Al Gore participating, a coalition of 16 Democratic attorneys general and Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude E. Walker, an independent, announced they were actively considering legal action against companies, organizations, and individuals who have challenged the Obama administration's claim humans are causing catastrophic climate change.

AG Schneiderman Changes Tactics With Exxon Investigation.  Faced with overwhelming opposition from legal experts, mainstream editorial boards across the country, and even the AGs his climate coalition, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman is completely changing his tune and attempting to reboot the reason behind his investigation into ExxonMobil.  After months of the #ExxonKnew campaign telling us that these investigations are happening because the company "knew" about climate change in the 1970s and 1980s and then "lied" about it (and as Schneiderman continues to refuse to comply with public records laws) Schneiderman is now telling the New York Times that Exxon's past statements are not the focus of his investigation at all.

Witch hunt:  Dem Attorney General [Knew] Global Warming Investigation Likely Illegal, Says Law Expert.  A legal expert in financial law said the Democrat-lead probe targeting ExxonMobil is likely illegal and a ruse to paint those investigating the company as champions "in the fight against global warming."  The Exxon subpoena into the company's knowledge about internal climate change reports is an abuse of extraordinary powers.  It allowed attorneys general (AGs) to subpoena private documents without either obtaining a court order or filing a complaint, Merritt Fox, a professor of law at Columbia Law School, wrote Monday at National Law Journal.

Physicist who foresees global cooling says other scientists tried to 'silence' her.  A physicist who foresees a 30-year period of global cooling says other climatologists have tried to "silence" her latest research on solar cycles.  Valentina Zharkova, a professor at Northumbria University at Newcastle in the United Kingdom, said the Royal Astronomical Society received requests to withdraw a press release on her team's latest research pointing to a significant drop in solar activity by mid-century.

Legal Group Claims Exxon Inquisition Is Meant To Protect Obama's Climate Rules.  The probes against Exxon Mobil and others by a slew of Democratic attorneys general were done to protect the Obama administration's climate rules, a conservative legal group said Tuesday [8/9/2016].  A letter from New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell to Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller shows that the group of attorneys general investigations were meant to defend federal environmental regulations, according to the Energy and Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal), a conservative legal group based in Washington, D.C.

Secret Deal Among AGs to Prosecute Climate Change 'Deniers' Challenged in Court.  By signing a "secrecy pact" with fellow Democrat attorneys general preparing to prosecute climate change skeptics, Rhode Island's top law enforcement officer jeopardized free speech rights and government transparency laws, according to two legal organizations that have taken him to court.  Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Kilmartin's tactics in supporting President Barack Obama's climate change policy violate state law guaranteeing access to public records, the two groups, Energy and Environment Legal Institute and Free Market Environmental Law Clinic, claim in their lawsuit.

State AGs Tried to Hide Climate Probe Geared to Punish Fossil Fuel Companies.  Eighteen liberal state attorneys general signed a pact in May to keep a joint investigation of Exxon Mobil Corp. and attempts to punish other fossil fuel companies over climate change issues secret, according to documents obtained by a free market think tank.  The Energy & Environment Legal Institute obtained a copy of the agreement through public-records litigation with the District of Columbia, which is a part of the pact along with 15 states.  The 18 attorneys general, led by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman (D.), are fighting climate change by pursuing "investigations of representations made by companies to investors, consumers, and the public regarding fossil fuels, renewable energy, and climate change."

Global Warming Skepticism is Not Fraud .  Professor Robert C. Post, dean of the Yale Law School, appeared recently in the Washington Post defending investigations by state attorneys general into ExxonMobil and the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), saying such investigations are standard operating procedure for addressing possible fraud.  He dismissed the protests of the targets of these investigations, saying, "It is grossly irresponsible to invoke the First Amendment in such contexts." [...] If belief in the "consensus" meme is in fact driving Prof.  Post and the attorneys general, then the whole premise of this litigation is false.  Because in fact, there is no consensus, but instead a lively academic debate taking place.

New York AG refuses to comply with U.S. House subpoena on Exxon probe.  The top state prosecutors in New York and Massachusetts said on Tuesday [7/26/2016] they will refuse to comply with a subpoena from U.S. congressmen for details on their investigations into whether Exxon Mobil misled investors on climate change risks.  The moves by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey are the latest in the political and legislative fight over Exxon Mobil and investigations on whether the oil company knowingly misled shareholders and the public on climate change.

We Thought We Were Free.  [Scroll down]  For instance, last week 17 of the nation's 18 Democratic attorneys general calling themselves "AGs United for Clean Power," announced that they will be targeting any and all companies that oppose the myth that is "climate change."  Speaking at a press conference on March 29, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman announced, "The bottom line is simple:  Climate change is real."  He went on to say that if companies are committing fraud by "lying" about the dangers of climate change, they will "pursue them to the fullest extent of the law."

2010-2016: The Era of Political Repression in America.  [Scroll down]  A typical example of designating the thought centers as targets for climate alarmism is an infamous "study" by Robert Brulle, which was analyzed recently in connection with the misconduct of the Leftist AGs.  The "study" was published in January 2013, indicating it was conceived in 2011.  The target list was created by applying the opinions of Greenpeace and the Center for Media and Democracy to a combination of old lists, some going back as far as 1997.  Most targets had no substantial link to the climate debates at all.  Even worse, the hit list included all the top conservative and libertarian think tanks, without a single exception:  the American Enterprise Institute, American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), Cato Institute, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation, Hoover Institution, Hudson Institute, Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, Mercatus Center, Pacific Research Institute, and Reason Foundation.  The frenzied Attorneys General seem to work off an even broader list.

When bullies get pushback.  AGs United for Clean Power, a coalition of 16 Democratic state attorneys general plus the Virgin Islands' Claude E. Walker, announced on March 29 that they would use government power to throttle climate change dissent.  Mr. Walker issued subpoenas to Exxon Mobil seeking communications with more than 100 scientists, universities and think tanks.  They took a cue from Sen.  Sheldon Whitehouse, Rhode Island Democrat, who suggested last year that civil racketeering law could be used against energy companies like Exxon Mobil that allegedly suppress data indicating that fossil fuels cause global warming.

AGs subpoenaed over prosecuting climate change skeptics.  The chairman of the House Science Committee issued subpoenas Wednesday [7/13/2016] to two Democratic attorneys general over their pursuit of climate change dissenters after the prosecutors had refused to respond to the panel's previous requests for information.  Chairman Lamar Smith, Texas Republican, announced that subpoenas have been sent to New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, as well as eight environmental groups, related to their "coordinated efforts to deprive companies, nonprofit organizations, scientists and scholars of their First Amendment rights."  "The attorneys general have appointed themselves to decide what is valid and what is invalid regarding climate change," Mr. Smith said at a press conference with other committee Republicans.  "The attorneys general are pursuing a political agenda at the expense of scientists' right to free speech."

Senator Whitehouse goes Full Conspiracy Theory on "Climate Denial".  Senator Whitehouse has unveiled his "web of denial", a vast conspiracy theory about why his side is losing the climate debate. [...] Whitehouse's conspiracy theory reminds me of some of the worst excesses of the anti-communist era, in which fantasies about shadowy conspiracies were used to ruin the lives of political opponents and innocent bystanders.  But Whitehouse appears to mean every word of it.

The Exxon Shakedown.  Liberal attorneys general from 17 states have put a big red bulls-eye on the chest of big oil.  Their bizarre claim is that, for years, energy companies fraudulently covered up their knowledge that greenhouse gases from fossil fuels cause catastrophic climate change.  The most recent chapter of this witch hunt is a remarkable subpoena filed by Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey, which would require Exxon Mobil Corp. to turn over 40 years of internal company documents.  It also demands that Exxon Mobil produce all its internal communication with conservative-leaning think tanks.  This is nothing more than an old-fashioned, political mob shakedown of a deep-pocketed industry for money.  The attorneys general are hoping for a repeat of the multibillion-dollar tobacco company settlement in the 1990s.  The big and obvious difference here is that tobacco companies sell a product that is dangerous to one's health.  The oil and gas companies sell energy that makes all modern industrial life possible.

22 Free Market Groups Call Dems 'Tyrants' For Targeting Them On Senate Floor.  Several free market and conservative groups called Democratic senators tyrants Tuesday for criticizing their opposition to global warming policies on the Senate floor.  The Heritage Foundation, Heartland Institute, American Legislative Exchange Council, and Americans For tax Reform, among others, lashed out Tuesday in a letter obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation at Democratic senators Harry Reid, Barbara Boxer, Al Franken, and Sheldon for calling them conspirators in a web of denial.  "We hear you," the letter read.  "Your threat is clear:  There is a heavy and inconvenient cost to disagreeing with you.  Calls for debate will be met with political retribution.  That's called tyranny.  And, we reject it."

Dems Plan To Ambush Global Warming Skeptics On Senate Floor, Email Shows.  Democratic senators were told to target and scorn conservative nonprofit groups Monday and Tuesday for opposing Democratic policies addressing man-made global warming, internal emails indicate.  Rhode Island Sen.  Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democrat, has directed 19 of his fellow Democratic senators to attack conservative and libertarian organizations such as Americans for Prosperity and the Cato Institute on the chamber floors for engaging in what the senators call a "web of denial."

Persecuting climate skeptics: The cover-up continues.  Seventeen attorneys general got more than they bargained for when they held a March 29, 2016 "publicity stunt" press conference to announce, with former Vice President Al Gore by their sides, a campaign to target opponents of the global warming agenda under racketeering laws.  It wasn't long before several batches of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) emails, obtained by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal) and Free Market Environmental Law Clinic (FME Law), revealed that the AGs were working behind closed doors with professional "climate" activists, from both pressure groups and law firms.  If that isn't bad enough, they also show a plan for the AGs to coordinate efforts to stonewall public records requests that threaten to expose their scheme.

Wikipedia and the Climate Non-Debate.  Wikipedia, known as the "people's encyclopedia," has proven to be anything but a reliable source in regards to the debate concerning the causes and possible consequences of climate change.  Wikipedia is written and edited "by the people who read it," and it receives more than 400 million unique visitors every month worldwide, according to GuideStar.  The massive website has about 80,000 volunteers, a substantial number of whom are devoted enough to earn the unpaid rank of "editor."  Editors are provided with a fat book of rules to follow and a code of civility to honor.  Wikipedia has emerged as an influential tool used by climate alarmists against climate change realists, who are unwilling to accept political proclamations that humans are causing catastrophic climate change.  Dogmatic climate doomsters ignore Wikipedia's rules and spend days plowing through reams of Wikipedia pages to track down and purge or alter any entry daring to challenge the view humans are responsible for global warming.

Justice Department Investigating Climate Skeptics.  U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch acknowledged the Department of Justice (DOJ) has asked the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to look into whether climate skeptics' denial of the theory humans are causing dangerous climate change merits prosecution for fraud.  Lynch's admission of the DOJ's investigation came in response to a question asked by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings that discussed DOJ's operations on March 9.  In 2015, Whitehouse, among other individuals and groups, called for the Obama administration to investigate companies in the oil and gas industry, trade organizations, nonprofits organizations, and scientists under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), a law written and passed to combat the mafia and similar criminal gangs.

Persecuting climate skeptics:  The cover-up continues.  Seventeen attorneys general got more than they bargained for when they held a March 29, 2016 "publicity stunt" press conference to announce, with former Vice President Al Gore by their sides, a campaign to target opponents of the global warming agenda under racketeering laws.  It wasn't long before several batches of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) emails, obtained by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal) and Free Market Environmental Law Clinic (FME Law), revealed that the AGs were working behind closed doors with professional "climate" activists, from both pressure groups and law firms.

Free Speech and Climate Fraud Prosecution Follies.  Over the weekend, the Democratic Party platform included a climate change plank that "respectfully request(s) the Department of Justice investigate allegations of corporate fraud on the part of fossil fuel companies accused of misleading shareholders and the public on the scientific reality of climate change." This is in line with a set of Democratic state attorneys-general (AGs United for Clean Power) who are pursuing climate change fraud investigation against oil giant ExxonMobil.  The allegedly motivating idea is that ExxonMobil possibly defrauded stockholders by not telling them about how projected climate change might damage its business prospects.  One member of the global warming legal cabal is the particularly ambitious (and quite clueless) attorney-general for the U.S. Virgin Islands Claude Walker.

Democrats force Hillary Clinton's hand on prosecution of climate skeptics.  The debate over prosecuting climate change "fraud" has landed squarely in the lap of Hillary Clinton, who must now decide whether the Democratic Party platform will include a resolution urging the Justice Department to pursue climate dissent.  So far it doesn't look good for climate skeptics.  The 15-member Democratic Platform Drafting Committee approved Friday [6/24/2016] a statement calling for a Justice Department investigation into "alleged corporate fraud on the part of fossil fuel companies who have reportedly misled shareholders and the public on the scientific reality of climate change."

Democrat Platform Super Enthused To Prosecute Climate Skeptics.  In other words, this is all politically motivated, pushed by people who won't give up their own use of fossil fuels, often refuse to give up the fossil fuels companies donations, and surely have fossil fuels in their own portfolios.  They're excited to use the power of Government to intimidate, harass, and prosecute people and companies for daring to have Wrongthink.  And that's what this is, because the investigations have been fishing expeditions based on nothing more than supposition.  There has to be some bit of proof that there was actual fraud, not a difference of opinion.

Dem Party Platform Calls For Prosecuting Global Warming Skeptics.  Democratic operatives responsible for creating their party's platform this year have unanimously adopted a provision calling for the Department of Justice to investigate companies who disagree with Democrats on global warming science.  A panel of Democrats voted Friday to approve a final draft of the party's platform to promote "Progressive Democratic Values," which apparently includes investigating energy companies who "misled" shareholders about global warming.

Why Exxon is not the problem.  Our highest court holds there can be no mandated, state-sanctioned opinions enforced in America under the U.S. Constitution.  Now, a handful of politically motivated prosecutors are working to strip us of this birthright security.  Beware the attorneys general of several states and territories who have launched a RICO (racketeering)-styled legal inquest to fine — and potentially even jail — Exxon-funded scientists and thought leaders whose work casts doubt on the prosecutors' state-sanctioned, politically correct views on climate change.  The planning of the inquest goes back to the year President Obama won re-election, and the first casualty of this war on free speech was Peabody Energy, the world's largest private coal company.

Global Warming Alarmists — You're Doing it Wrong.  Because climate scientists, like the macroeconomists, can't run experiments where they test one variable at a time, predictions of feedback effects involve a lot of theory and guesswork.  I do not denigrate theory and guesswork; they are a vital part of advancing the sum of human knowledge.  But when you're relying on theory and guesswork, you always want to leave plenty of room for the possibility that your model's output is (how shall I put this?) ... wrong.  Naturally, proponents of climate-change models have welcomed the lukewarmists' constructive input by carefully considering their points and by advancing counterarguments firmly couched in the scientific method.  No, of course I'm just kidding.  The reaction to these mild assertions is often to brand the lukewarmists "deniers" and treat them as if what they were saying was morally and logically equivalent to suggesting that the Holocaust never happened.

Green Activists and State AGs Collude Against Climate Dissenters.  E-mails uncovered by the Energy and Environment Legal Institute (EELI) show several state attorneys general (AGs) who have threatened possible prosecution of climate skeptics had collaborated in previous months with anti-fossil-fuel lobbyists to shape their legal and public relations strategies.  At a March 29 press conference hosted by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, with former U.S. Vice President Al Gore participating, a coalition of 16 Democratic attorneys general and Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude E. Walker, an independent, announced they were actively considering legal action against companies, organizations, and individuals who have challenged the claim humans have caused climate change.

Exxon's Inquisitors Feel the Heat.  The first thing to know about the crusade against Exxon by state attorneys general is that it isn't about the law.  The second thing to know is that it isn't even about Exxon.  What these liberal prosecutors really want is to shut down a universe of their most-hated ideological opponents.  That became startlingly clear this week, with Exxon's latest filing in federal court.

Virgin Islands AG Expanding Climate Witch Hunt.  The attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands is targeting dozens of think tanks, businesses and consumer groups, and individual researchers in his widening probe of organizations that have written skeptically about purported human-caused climate change and policies proposed and implemented to fight it.  His efforts are a witch hunt, an assault on the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech in an effort to silence political opponents.  A March 15 subpoena from U.S. Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker served on ExxonMobil demands copies of communications between the oil company and more than 90 organizations and researchers, including the Acton Institute for the Study of Religious Liberty, Africa Fighting Malaria, Arizona State University Office of Climatology, the Cato Institute, The Heartland Institute, The Heritage Foundation, the Hoover Institution, the Independent Commission on Environmental Education, the Institute for the Study of Earth and Man at Southern Methodist University, Lindenwood University in St. Louis, the National Black Chamber of Commerce, the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

House panel turns up heat after states clam up on climate dissent probes.  The 17 attorneys general pursuing climate change dissenters for accusations of "fraud" want House Republicans to mind their own business.  That's not going to happen.  Seventeen Republicans on the House Science, Space and Technology Committee reasserted their right in a Friday letter to conduct oversight on state investigations that represent a threat to the First Amendment and "the free flow of scientific research."  The letter to the 17 attorneys general — 16 Democrats and one independent — came after several refused to cooperate with a May 18 request by committee Republicans for information related to the coordinated campaign to pursue climate change dissenters, starting with ExxonMobil Corp.

Climate Realists Fight AGs' Fishing Expedition.  In the Climate Change Weekly released April 5, I discussed the press conference held by a group of state attorneys general (AG), led by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, threatening investigations and possible prosecutions of climate skeptics for speaking their mind.  Just days after I wrote that article, on April 7, a subpoena was served on the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) by Claude Walker, attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands.  The subpoena demands CEI produce emails, statements, drafts, and other documents regarding its work on climate change and energy policy, including private donor information, from 1997 through 2007. Walker gave CEI until April 30, 2016 to produce this decades' worth of material.  CEI responded swiftly and forcefully to the subpoena.  CEI General Counsel Sam Kazman issued a statement saying, "CEI will vigorously fight to quash this subpoena.  It is an affront to our First Amendment rights of free speech and association for Attorney General Walker to bring such intimidating demands against a nonprofit group.  If Walker and his allies succeed, the real victims will be all Americans, whose access to affordable energy will be hit by one costly regulation after another, while scientific and policy debates are wiped out one subpoena at a time."

Open Letter to Attorneys General about Climate Change.  All intelligent and learned people are ignorant about some things.  So, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch and members of Attorneys General United for Clean Power, take no offense when I tell you that your intent to investigate and potentially prosecute, civilly or criminally, corporations, think tanks, and individuals for fraud, under RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) or otherwise, because they question the causes, magnitude, risks, and benefits of global warming, and best responses to it, is a dead giveaway that you're ignorant about climate science and related climate and energy policy.

GOP AGs warn Dems that if climate skeptics can be prosecuted for 'fraud,' so can alarmists.  If Democratic attorneys general can pursue climate change skeptics for fraud, then also at risk of prosecution are climate alarmists whose predictions of global doom have failed to materialize.  The "cuts both ways" argument was among those raised by 13 Republican attorneys general in a letter urging their Democratic counterparts to stop using their law enforcement power against fossil fuel companies and others that challenge the climate change catastrophe narrative.  Consider carefully the legal precedent and threat to free speech, said the state prosecutors in their letter this week, headed by Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange.

Communism Disguised as Climate Change.  First, the name was changed to "Climate Change".  How convenient.  Progressives use language the way Clinton uses women, and this term can be molded to fit whatever is needed on any given day.  Then Hollywood, hotbed of communism-lovers that it is, got on board.  George Clooney, Leo DiCaprio, and Ed Begley, Jr. started to push the term "climate deniers," even calling those of us who can read and understand science "stupid."

Exclusive: Massachusetts AG Demands Docs From More Conservative Skeptic Groups.  Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey is now the latest state prosecutor to start investigating conservative groups with supposed ties to ExxonMobil, after she issued a subpoena for 40 years of internal company documents and communications with a handful of think tanks.  Healey's office subpoenaed Exxon as part of a multi-state effort among liberal attorneys general to investigate Exxon for allegedly trying to cover up global warming science.  Healey charges that the oil giant lied to shareholders and consumers about the risks of global warming in its communications and shareholder filings, according to a copy of the subpoena obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Exxon fights Massachusetts 'political' probe into climate change dissent.  Alex Epstein had a three-word response after learning Wednesday [6/15/2016] that Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey had included him in her investigation into climate change "fraud":  Buzz off, fascist.  Only he didn't say "buzz."  Mr. Epstein is a proud fossil fuel advocate, a believer that the benefits from cheap, reliable energy are more than offset by any still-under-debate problems from rising carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Dem Congressmen:  First Amendment Doesn't Protect Global Warming Skeptics.  California congressmen wrote a letter to state attorney general Kamala Harris claiming the freedom of speech "is not designed to protect fraud and deceit" of the likes being spread by oil company ExxonMobil about global warming.  Nineteen Democratic lawmakers told Harris her "investigation as to whether ExxonMobil lied about the truth of climate change and misled investors does not constitute an effort to silence speech or scientific research.  "The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, but it does not protect companies from defrauding the American people or improperly disclosing information to their shareholders," lawmakers, including California Reps.  Maxine Waters and Ted Lieu, wrote to Harris.

The End of the Free-Speech Consensus.  What happens when the consensus for free speech evaporates and those with political power become willing to use any means necessary to silence people who hold unpopular views?  We'll probably soon receive the answer in California, as the state's dominant Democrats set the stage for prosecutors to take action against climate-change "deniers."  "A landmark California bill... would make it illegal to engage in climate-change dissent clearing the way for lawsuits against fossil-fuel companies, think tanks and others that have 'deceived or misled the public on the risks of climate change,'" explains a Washington Times report.  The bill, S.B. 1161, passed through two committees but ultimately was shelved.  But like most "landmark" bills, this one will keep coming back until it passes.  The bill even comes with an Orwellian name, "The California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act."

How the Left Is Destroying Science.  The left has pushed us farther and farther away from science and toward scientism.  When our attorney general seriously ponders criminal prosecution against scientists who challenge the prevailing orthodoxy of man-made global warming, when universities drive out scientists who question global warming, when the state rewrites historic temperature data so that the revised data conforms to global warming, when the "proof" of global warming consists of what a certain percentages of scientists support, then scientism as supplanted science.  Why has this happened?

California Senate sidelines bill to prosecute climate change skeptics.  A landmark bill allowing for the prosecution of climate change dissent effectively died Thursday [6/2/2016] after the California Senate failed to take it up before the deadline.  Senate Bill 1161, or the California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016, would have authorized prosecutors to sue fossil fuel companies, think tanks and others that have "deceived or misled the public on the risks of climate change."  The measure, which cleared two Senate committees, provided a four-year window in the statute of limitations on violations of the state's Unfair Competition Law, allowing legal action to be brought until Jan. 1 on charges of climate change "fraud" extending back indefinitely.

The Assault on Science.  Recently, the attorneys general of a number of states have launched an effort to use the RICO anti-organized-crime statute to prosecute opponents of climate-change alarmism. [...] But this is nonsense:  Real science never fears contradiction.  Rather it relishes every joust with opponents as a chance to prove its worth on the field of intellectual battle, or honorably salute the victory of a stronger challenger in the never-ending contest to advance the cause of truth.  The demand by the climate alarmists that no one be allowed to enter the lists against them is proof not of strength, but of extreme weakness.

Climate spin doctor took charge after professors' 'mistake' called for prosecuting skeptics.  In the days after 20 professors fired off a letter urging President Obama to investigate climate skeptics for suspected federal racketeering charges, the climate change movement went into full damage-control mode.  Philip Newell, creative media manager of the public relations firm Climate Nexus, described the Sept. 1 letter as "a big mistake," advising activists and scientists to downplay the prosecution angle and spin the story away from individuals and toward fossil fuel companies, according to emails obtained Wednesday [6/1/2016] by The Washington Times.

Landmark California bill would allow prosecution of climate-change skeptics.  A landmark California bill gaining steam would make it illegal to engage in climate-change dissent, clearing the way for lawsuits against fossil-fuel companies, think-tanks and others that have "deceived or misled the public on the risks of climate change."  The first-of-its-kind legislation — Senate Bill 1161, or the California Climate Science Truth and Accountability Act of 2016 — is scheduled for floor action Thursday [6/2/2016] after clearing Senate committees in April and May.  The measure would allow state and local prosecutors to pursue claims against climate-change skepticism as a violation of the state's Unfair Competition Law [UCL], as well as extend the four-year statute of limitations for such claims retroactively to Jan. 1, 2021.

The Editor says...
If this legislation is not met with great resistance, the same legislators will come after the evolution skeptics, too, followed by the Common Core skeptics and the Islam skeptics and the Big Government skeptics, et cetera.

U.N. Chief's Message to Graduates:  Don't Vote for Climate-Change Deniers.  After receiving an honorary doctorate of laws from the university, Ban told the crowd that April marked the seventh straight month of the "hottest global temperatures on record," and he said students must help bring the Paris climate agreement to life:  "Don't vote for politicians who deny the problem," he said.  "Don't buy products that aren't sustainable.  And for heaven's sake, turn off the lights!"

Attorney General Withdraws Subpoena Against Climate Group.  Claude Walker, Attorney General of the U.S. Virgin Islands, has withdrawn a subpoena of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a think tank whose work has cast doubt on climate change.  The subpoena, filed in the District of Columbia, demanded over a decade's worth of documents related to the group's energy and climate change research.  Walker's subpoena was filed as part of an effort by a coalition of attorneys general in 17 states to "build upon the recent progress the United States has made in combating climate change" by prosecuting climate change skeptics for fraud.  New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said that the group, called AGs United for Clean Power, would investigate and pursue charges against organizations, scientists, and others who disagree with their agenda.

Portland public schools ban textbooks that cast doubt on climate change.  The Portland Public Schools board voted last week to ban any materials that cast doubt on climate change, the Portland Tribune reported.  According to the resolution passed May 17, the school district must remove any textbooks and other materials that suggest climate change is not occurring or that says human beings are not responsible for it.

Media Denial of Climate Change Thuggery.  Powerful government officials collude with proponents of one side of a vastly complex national debate.  They target the opposition.  They use their broad investigatory powers to intimidate, financially punish and ultimately silence them.  The legacy media respond to this egregious misuse of the public powers of office by collectively yawning and looking away.  We expect the media to inform the public, to safeguard free expression and to promote robust debate.  Yet time and again, the legacy media fail to deliver.  They avoid colorful stories that cast doubt on the Obama administration's climate change agenda.  They ignore the abuse of power perpetrated by four state attorneys general, at present count, on organizations that deviate from the party line on climate change.

Dissent is Forbidden:  Portland Crackpots Ban 'Climate Change-Denying' Material in Schools.  The science is settled, so we must eliminate anything that questions the junk science! [...] We're wondering if in this school's health class they're teaching about the undeniable science that boys are boys and girls are girls?

Portland school board bans climate change-denying materials.  In a move spearheaded by environmentalists, the Portland Public Schools board unanimously approved a resolution aimed at eliminating doubt of climate change and its causes in schools.  "It is unacceptable that we have textbooks in our schools that spread doubt about the human causes and urgency of the crisis," said Lincoln High School student Gaby Lemieux in board testimony.  "Climate education is not a niche or a specialization, it is the minimum requirement for my generation to be successful in our changing world."  The resolution passed Tuesday evening [5/17/2016] calls for the school district to get rid of textbooks or other materials that cast doubt on whether climate change is occurring and that the activity of human beings is responsible.  The resolution also directs the superintendent and staff to develop an implementation plan for "curriculum and educational opportunities that address climate change and climate justice in all Portland Public Schools."

Who Are the Real Deniers of Science?  Why do liberals hate science?  The Left has long claimed that it has something of a monopoly on scientific expertise.  For instance, long before Al Gore started making millions by claiming that anyone who disagreed with his apocalyptic prophecies was "anti-science," there were the "scientific socialists."  "Social engineer" is now rightly seen as a term of scorn and derision, but it was once a label that progressive eggheads eagerly accepted.  Masking opinions in a white smock is a brilliant, albeit infuriating and shabby, rhetorical tactic. [...] Science is the language of facts, and when people pretend to be speaking it, they're not only claiming that their preferences are more than mere opinions, they're also insinuating that anyone who disagrees is a fool or a zealot for objecting to "settled science."

House Republicans launch free-speech probe into prosecutors targeting climate skeptics.  House Republicans this week launched an investigation into the 17 attorneys general pursuing fraud allegations against climate change skeptics, citing concerns about the campaign's impact on free speech and scientific inquiry.  "Americans are entitled to express their views on matters of science and public policy even if certain groups disagree," said a statement from the House Science, Space and Technology Committee.  Thirteen Republicans on the committee sent letters Wednesday to the attorneys general requesting information on a series of meetings and communications with climate change groups and activists from 2012 until the March 29 press conference announcing AGs United for Clean Power.

Think Tank Seeks Damages Over 'Unlawful' Climate Subpoena.  A libertarian nonprofit group is seeking damages from the U.S. Virgin Islands' chief law enforcement officer, alleging a politically motivated legal campaign designed to stifle the group's policy advocacy activities.  Attorneys representing the Competitive Enterprise Institute filed a motion in a Washington, D.C. court on Monday alleging that Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker violated a D.C. law designed to prevent frivolous legal actions targeting policy groups' rights to free speech and government redress.  The motion is the latest chapter in a developing legal battle between conservative and industry groups that oppose Democratic attorneys general in 17 states who are pursuing racketeering charges against oil giant Exxon Mobil.

Professors pushing RICO for climate skeptics have own problems with FOIA.  It turns out that the George Mason University professors calling for a federal racketeering probe into climate skepticism engaged in a little colluding of their own.  A 190-page cache of emails released on a judge's order showed that two GMU professors hatched the attack on their political foes from their taxpayer-funded perches and then switched to private emails to avoid detection after being hit with a public records request.  The emails were unearthed following an eight-month court battle between the Virginia public university, which sought to protect the professors' communications, and the Competitive Enterprise Institute and senior fellow Chris Horner, who filed the Virginia Freedom of Information Act requests.

CEI Strikes Back At Unlawful Subpoena.  In a letter and set of objections served today [4/20/2016], the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) formally responded to an April 7 subpoena for a decade of the organization's materials and work on climate change policy.  CEI's attorneys called the subpoena "an effort to punish [CEI] for its public policy views, chill its associations, and silence its advocacy."  "Your demand on CEI is offensive, it is un-American, it is unlawful, and it will not stand," says the letter, addressed to U.S. Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker, who issued the subpoena.  "You can either withdraw it or expect to fight, because CEI strongly believes that this campaign to intimidate those who dissent from the official orthodoxy on climate change must be stopped."

Dem AG Targets 90 Conservative Groups in Climate Change Racketeering Suit.  The attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands is targeting dozens of conservative and libertarian organizations in a racketeering lawsuit against climate change skeptics that has been widely described as an effort to silence political opponents.  In a subpoena issued in March, the office of USVI attorney general Claude Walker demanded from Exxon Mobil copies of communications between the oil company and 90 different political and policy organizations "and any other organizations engaged in research or advocacy concerning Climate Change or policies."  The subpoena was part of a national, coordinated legal campaign by state attorneys general and left-wing advocacy groups to use the legal system against companies and organizations that disagree with and advocate against Democratic policies to address global climate change.

Liberal Activists Worked With AGs to Target Conservatives.  In Ray Bradbury's classic dystopian novel, "Fahrenheit 451," a future society criminalizes the possession of books and burns them in order to suppress any dissenting ideas, opinions, and views.  Today, we have state attorneys general trying to implement their own version of "Fahrenheit 451" to criminalize dissent over a disputed, unproven scientific theory:  man-induced climate change.  Recently, the attorney general of the Virgin Islands, Claude Walker, unleashed a subpoena on the Competitive Enterprise Institute seeking 10 years' worth of research and communications about climate change.  It turns out that same Grand Inquisitor, Claude Walker, has hit ExxonMobil with a similar subpoena that seeks all of that company's communications, conversations, and correspondence with 88 conservative and libertarian think tanks, foundations, and universities, and 54 individual researchers, scientists, and writers.

The return of pseudo-science.  What is going on is nothing more than modern-day Lysenkoism, named after Soviet biologist Trofim Lysenko, who had rejected Mendelian inheritance and the evolutionary theory of natural selection, and believed that acquired characteristics of a plant (like grafting of fruit trees) would be inherited by later generations.  Lysenko was unable to win his arguments by the empirical evidence or sound theory but, since Stalin liked his ideas, it was made illegal to have any other opinion. [...] Lysenkoism is now used in a metaphorical way "to describe the manipulation or distortion of the scientific process as a way to reach a predetermined conclusion as dictated by an ideological bias, often related to social or political objectives."  The problem for those who have been predicting climate catastrophe for the past 25 years is that their predictions have been very far from actual experience, and they are losing credibility with the public (if not the fawning media and political class). [...] The reason the climate Lysenkoists are so vitriolic in their denunciation of those of us who question is that most of them depend in one way or another on government grants or employment that would disappear if it was determined there was no crisis at hand.

Climate and Environmental Propaganda.  [Scroll down]  This collusion among activists, foundations and attorneys general seeks to silence, bankrupt and defund organizations that challenge their catechism of climate cataclysm.  These conspirators want to deprive us of our constitutional rights to speak out on the exaggerated and fabricated science, coordinated echo-chamber news stories, and pressure group-driven policies that impair our livelihoods, living standards, health, welfare and environmental quality.  But we will not be intimidated or silenced.

Climate Alarmism and the Muzzling of Independent Science.  Last week, the attorney general of a tax shelter — the US Virgin Islands — subpoenaed the Competitive Enterprise Institute.  This was part of a campaign to intimidate climate realists and to shake down, and possibly shut down, the energy industry.  The campaign was launched by a number of Democrat Attorneys General and Al Gore, colluding with trial lawyers and other special interests, under the guise of investigating ExxonMobil.  As bizarre as these moves are, they are just an escalation of 30 years of persecuting distinguished scientists who disagreed with Al Gore's climate change fantasies.

A Victory in the War For Free Speech.  One of the most sinister developments of our time is the Left's use of both criminal investigation and mob harassment to suppress dissent.  An outrageous instance of this trend is the effort by 20 Democratic state Attorneys General to investigate ExxonMobil and others for criminal "fraud," i.e., carrying out research that doesn't support the hysterical exaggerations of the Climatistas.  One of the leaders of this attempt to suppress scientific debate is California's Attorney General, Kamala Harris.  She has initiated a purported investigation into "whether Exxon Mobil Corp. repeatedly lied to the public and its shareholders about the risk to its business from climate change — and whether such actions could amount to securities fraud and violations of environmental laws.  Kamala Harris is running for the Senate.  As part of her campaign, she has sought press coverage of her attacks on "dark money," i.e., money the Democrats don't control.  Harris has demanded that conservative 501(c)(3) organizations file their federal IRS Form 990s, including Schedule B, which identifies donors, with her office.  Her obvious intent was either to publicize the names of donors, which are confidential under federal law, so that they could be threatened by liberals, or else to shut them up herself through bogus investigations.

Leaked email shows website Climate Feedback plans a propaganda push under guise of #StandWithScience.  I've received this from two independent sources, which is said to be from a mailing list being circulated, and I believe it to be genuine.  Climate Feedback is a website that rates news stories on climate on their "factuality", but it has one major flaw:  it is entirely one-sided, biased, and without checks or balances.  You have to apply, and they decide if you get into the club or not.  Of course, skeptical scientists need not apply based on their mission statement.

When Big Bad Brother Becomes the 'Heckler'.  Will Big Brother impose mandatory treatment for individuals with climate change denial disorder?  Are treatment programs for weight loss, addictions to alcohol, drugs, sex, pornography, and assorted phobias at risk of being banned by government?  No way, you say.  Think again. [...] The powers that be are aligned against those who question official climate change orthodoxy.  Speaking of hot house gases, watch Sen.  Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who is Jewish, lecture a Catholic priest for "disagreeing" with the Pope's tweets, which Boxer affirms as climate change catechism.  This follows Boxer telling a philosopher that his opinion is a toxic emission since he's not a "scientist" of the Pope's caliber.

Is Eric Schneiderman colluding with other AGs in an illicit war on Exxon?  New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and other state AGs are probing ExxonMobil — but maybe they're the ones who should be investigated.  E-mails obtained by a free-market think tank (the Energy & Environment Legal Institute) show Schneiderman & Co. colluded with two activists last month just before the AGs rolled out their anti-Exxon campaign.  A top Schneiderman aide even tried to keep the press in the dark about the role of one activist, Matt Pawa.  Pawa was also in the loop for a January meeting by various groups — Greenpeace, the Working Families Party, the Rockefeller Family Fund — to plan how to "delegitimize [Exxon] as a political actor," smear it publicly as "corrupt" and steer away investors.

Democrat A.G.'s Colluded With Eco-Nazis to Punish Political Opponents.  Emails obtained by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal) show that the offices of New York Democratic Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and those of other politically aligned AGs, secretly teamed up with anti-fossil fuel activists to launch investigations against groups whose political speech challenged the global warming policy agenda.  These emails, obtained under open records laws, shed light on what followed after a January meeting, reported by the Wall Street Journal on April 14, in which groups funded by anti-fossil fuel Rockefeller interests met to urge just this sort of investigation and litigation against political opponents.

AGs, activists accused of 'collusion' on Exxon probe amid new emails.  State Democratic officials are facing mounting accusations they secretly coordinated with climate activists to investigate whether ExxonMobil hid the truth about global warming, as new documents show the collaboration went deeper than previously thought.  Emails obtained and released by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute show a number of state attorneys general and their staff received advice and guidance from environmental activists at a March 29 meeting in New York, on the same day as a major press conference.

Email bombshell:  Attorneys General worked with Green groups to punish political opponents.  Emails obtained by the Energy & Environment Legal Institute (E&E Legal) show that the offices of New York Democratic Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and those of other politically aligned AGs, secretly teamed up with anti-fossil fuel activists to launch investigations against groups whose political speech challenged the global warming policy agenda.  These emails, obtained under open records laws, shed light on what followed after a January meeting, reported by the Wall Street Journal on April 14, in which groups funded by anti-fossil fuel Rockefeller interests met to urge just this sort of investigation and litigation against political opponents.

Gore's RICO-style Prosecution of Global Warming Skeptics.  [Scroll down]  The summary for this whole situation couldn't be more simple.  Al Gore has been at the beginning, middle and end of this so-called global warming crisis.  In the late 1980s, he was immediately faced with the inconvenient truth of science-based criticisms from skeptic climate scientists, and to this day, neither he nor scientists within the IPCC are open to engaging in scientific debate with skeptic climate scientists.  To distract the public from this problem from the start, it appears an accusation was invented that is the same one seen today — say skeptics are paid by 'Big Coal & Oil' to manufacture doubt about a settled discussion, and say this mimics what shill experts did for 'Big Tobacco.'  During this whole time, however, not one shred of evidence has been provided to the public proving skeptic climate scientists were paid to lie.

The Left Is Coming for You Next.  [Scroll down]  The attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands, Claude Earl Walker, has issued a subpoena to the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a libertarian-leaning think tank that has been critical of a great deal of global-warming scholarship.  This is part of a coordinated campaign by Democratic attorneys general, including those in New York and California, to prosecute persons and institutions with nonconforming views on global warming, with special attention being given to Exxon and to groups that it may have supported financially.  The subpoena against CEI is a pure fishing expedition, a search for anything that might be potentially embarrassing that can be used as part of the public-relations campaign rather than as part of a prosecution, the prosecution bit being tricky because there isn't much of an argument that any laws have been broken.

An Attack on Us All.  The Competitive Enterprise Institute, a libertarian-leaning think tank that has been a loud and trenchant critic of global-warming activism, is under subpoena by the attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands, who demands that the organization produce a decade's worth of communication on the subject of global warming.  Intending no slight to our friends and CEI and the fine work they do (some of which NRO has published), this isn't about libertarian exegesis of meteorological data, but rather an attempt to fry up a much, much bigger fish:  Exxon.  Exxon was, in the past, a substantial donor to CEI; presumably, communication with Exxon is no small part of what the subpoena hopes to uncover.

Dirty Big Green Criminalizes Climate Science.  Big Green is big business.  The global renewable energy market is estimated at over $600 billion.  Obama's stimulus boondoggle alone blew around $50 billion on green energy.  Annual spending is somewhere around $39 billion a year and that's just the tip of the Big Green iceberg.  California carbon auctions are climbing into the billions.  And the endgame is a national and a global carbon tax that will allow Big Green to take money out of the pockets of every single human being.  Environmentalism isn't a hippie with a cardboard sign.  It's multinational corporations and big banks.  It's environmental consultants padding the bill for every government project.  It's subsidies that get carved up ten different ways into highly profitable investments at taxpayer expense.  It's brand greenwashing and useless recycling programs.  It's a dime, a dollar or a hundred dollars added to every bill.

Democratic AGs, climate change groups colluded on prosecuting dissenters, emails show.  In the hours before they took the stage for their March 29 press conference, Democratic attorneys general received a secret briefing from two top environmentalists on pursuing climate change dissenters.  Peter Frumhoff of the Union of Concerned Scientists and the Climate Accountability Institute's Matt Pawa spent 45 minutes each providing talking points behind the scenes on "the imperative of taking action now" and "climate change litigation," according to a cache of emails released over the weekend by the free market Energy & Environmental Legal Institute.

Bill Nye:  Throw 'climate deniers' in jail.  Galileo was jailed for heresy when he spoke against the theory that the Earth was the center of the universe.  Thankfully, the Catholic Church no longer calls for imprisoning scientists or politicians who question popular opinion — only some Social Justice Warriors still demand jailing heretics.  The Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) posted a video to YouTube on Thursday with Bill Nye 'The Science Guy,' discussing whether "climate deniers" and energy CEOs should be jailed like war criminals.  [Video clip]

'Not a scientist': Palin slams Bill Nye over global warming stance.  The former Alaska governor, at a panel Thursday [4/14/2016] on Capitol Hill, ripped the TV star's credentials and accused him of intentionally using his stature to spread what she described as an alarmist agenda on global warming.  "Bill Nye is as much a scientist as I am," Palin said at a screening of "Climate Hustle" on Capitol Hill, according to an account in The Hill.  "He's a kids' show actor.  He's not a scientist."

Warmist Michael E. Kraft Wants To Punish Climate Deniers.  Who is Michael E. Kraft?  Does it really matter, because, he seems to be saying what most Warmists think, namely, yeah, there's a First Amendment and all, but, some things are more important, so, it's OK to violate their free speech rights.  For the record, he is professor emeritus of political science and public and environmental affairs at the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay.

The global warming assault on free speech.  Mark Twain, noticing that some things lie beyond the meddling of man, observed that "everybody talks about the weather but nobody does anything about it.  Now someone has.  The attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands thinks he has found the way to silence, once and for all, the debate over global warming, or climate change, or whatever the radicals-that-be are calling the scheme this week.  Global-warming jeremiahs are determined to intimidate, frighten and eventually fine or put in prison anyone who says the wrong thing about this best laid scheme of government.  They're determined to eliminate traditional sources of energy and replace them with politically correct but unreliable sources of energy, such as wind and solar power.  That's the beginning.

Bill Nye, the science guy, is open to criminal charges and jail time for climate change dissenters.  Bill Nye "the science guy" says in a video interview released Thursday [4/14/2016] that he is open to the idea of jailing those who deviate from the climate change consensus. [...] Mr. Nye's comments come with a coalition of liberal attorneys general pursuing companies that challenge the consensus of catastrophic climate change.  Critics fear the campaign could chill research and free speech.  Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude E. Walker raised concerns about a government crackdown on dissent when he issued a subpoena last week to the free market Competitive Enterprise Institute for its climate-related research and documents.  About about the potential for a "chilling effect," Mr. Nye said, "That there is a chilling effect on scientists who are in extreme doubt about climate change, I think that is good."

Sen. Barbara Boxer Attacks Catholic Priest For Questioning Global Warming.  California Democratic Sen.  Barbara Boxer went after a Catholic priest in a Wednesday [4/13/2016] hearing for supposedly questioning the pope's statements on the dangers of man-made global warming.  "So do you disagree with the pope when he says that climate change is one of the biggest issues," Boxer asked Father Robert Sirico of the conservative Acton Institute. [...] Boxer, who is Jewish, was trying to get Sirico to say he disagreed with the pope on global warming.  Last year, Pope Francis published an encyclical blaming humans for global warming and calling the Earth "an immense pile of filth."

Report reveals secret meeting by environmentalists to target Exxon, oil industry.  Environmentalists backing a Big Tobacco-style government probe of oil companies plotted their strategy for targeting companies like ExxonMobil at a closed-door meeting in Manhattan earlier this year, according to a Wall Street Journal report.  The report sheds new light on an evolving campaign against the fossil fuel industry that has drawn in several attorneys general who are now investigating ExxonMobil.

Lynch May Ignore First Amendment to Prosecute Climate Skeptics.  President Barack Obama's hostility to the free flow of information, open debate, and views contradicting his own appears to have no bounds.  The most recent evidence for this is Attorney General Loretta Lynch's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.  She said the Justice Department has discussed pursuing civil action against companies, organizations, and individual scientists who continue to debate the question of whether humans are causing catastrophic climate change.  The FBI has been tasked with investigating participants in an ongoing scientific debate.  This should shock civil libertarians and the general public alike.

5 Indicators The Left [Doesn't Care] About Freedom.  [#2] Government Crackdowns on Climate Change "Deniers.  Are you concerned that slashing and burning the Western economy in order to stop man-made global warming might be a mistake based on the level of uncertainty surrounding anthropogenic global warming?  The Obama administration wants you fined or imprisoned.  Seventeen state attorney generals as well as federal attorney general Loretta Lynch have expressed interest in prosecuting Exxon Mobil for fraud for giving money to pro-free market think tanks that have cast doubt on theories of global warming.

Wikipedia and the Climate Non-Debate.  Wikipedia, known as the "people's encyclopedia," has proven to be anything but a reliable source in regards to the debate concerning the causes and possible consequences of climate change. [...] Wikipedia has emerged as an influential tool used by climate alarmists against climate change realists, who are unwilling to accept political proclamations there is an indisputable consensus humans are causing catastrophic climate change.  Dogmatic climate doomsters ignore Wikipedia's rules and spend days plowing through reams of Wikipedia pages to track down and purge or alter any entry daring to challenge the view humans are responsible for global warming.

State AGs to Waste Tax Dollars on 'Climate Fraud' Investigations.  Displaying the hubris previously reserved for gods and heroes in Greek tragedies and failed tyrants throughout history, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, speaking on behalf of 16 Democratic attorneys general with the confidence of having received a revealed truth, pronounced, "[W]e know what is being done to the planet.  There is no dispute. ... The bottom line is simple:  Climate change is real; it is a threat to all the people we represent.  The occasion for Schneiderman's declaration was a press conference held by state attorneys general and failed presidential candidate Al Gore, announcing the states were jointly investigating various companies in the fossil fuel industry and groups they funded, including universities, think tanks, and other research institutes, to determine whether they had committed fraud when they published papers, delivered presentations, or made public comments daring to dispute AGW.

Intimidation through investigation.  Everyone loves a winner, especially the winner himself.  Reaching the top of the heap is a full-time job and once there, the successful feel entitled to stay there.  That's why political inquisitions are in full bloom across Barack Obama's Washington.  Fearing challenge over from climate change to religious advocacy, defenders of government authority are giving the third degree to groups that question the political orthodoxy.  That's not the American way, and fortunately an engaged citizenry is pushing back.  Environmentalism has evolved into a form of nature worship, and protecting "Spaceship Earth," the '60s-era notion of eco-friendly globalism, has become a favorite cause of the governing class.  U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch's admission of government interest in prosecuting global warming skeptics emerged last week when Claude Walker, the attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands, subpoenaed records of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) that concern the free-market think tank's talent for pointing out the contradictions in the "science" about the nature of forces controlling the planet's temperatures.

The Model Atmosphere and Global Warming.  Last month, Attorney General Loretta Lynch testified before the Senate that the Department of Justice that she is considering taking legal action against energy industries dubious of the dire role of carbon emissions to change the climate.  And Democratic attorneys general from numerous states are in hot pursuit of global warming heretics.

Liberal AG's Have Begun a War Against the First Amendment.  Last week, a line was crossed in the ongoing campaign of liberals to criminalize freedom of expression.  The attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands subpoenaed a decade of materials and work by a private advocacy group that had dared to question the orthodoxy of climate change.  The group is the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and the attorney general is Claude E. Walker, who had recently signed on to a campaign of over a dozen attorneys general to ferret out so-called climate change "deniers."  It is possible that CEI was being targeted by Walker precisely because one of its attorneys, Hans Bader, had criticized New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who was leading the campaign.

Here is an example of the rhetoric that is currently in circulation:
Climate-change deniers deserve punishment.  Dismissal of well-established climate science has parallels to decades of debate over tobacco use and its effects on health.  Tobacco companies long denied any causal relation between smoking and disease even when their own studies showed the opposite to be true.  Similarly, some fossil fuel companies for decades publicly rejected established climate science and the role of burning fossil fuels in anthropogenic climate change while their internal studies confirmed both.  The tobacco companies eventually paid a steep price for their actions. [...] Some ask whether such inquiries should be limited to fossil fuel companies.  What about extending the liability, they say, to certain think tanks and advocacy groups?  Some such groups have been heavily funded by the fossil fuel industry and have misrepresented climate change risks to the public.  That might be a tougher sell, given rights to free speech, but it could be given consideration.

Dear attorneys general, conspiring against free speech is a crime.  Federal law makes it a felony "for two or more persons to agree together to injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States, (or because of his/her having exercised the same)."  I wonder if U.S. Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude Walker, or California Attorney General Kamala Harris, or New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman have read this federal statute.  Because what they're doing looks like a concerted scheme to restrict the First Amendment free speech rights of people they don't agree with.  They should look up 18 U.S.C. Sec. 241, I am sure they each have it somewhere in their offices.

Virgin Islands AG Goes After Private Climate Skeptic Group.  As Sarah Noble at the Independent Sentinel notes "This is particularly shocking because they are going after a think tank, not an oil or gas company.  Think about that!"  But, should we be shocked?  This is the direction of the Cult of Climastrology, which is made up primarily of Progressives (nice fascists), and, despite their calls for tolerance, diversity, and multiculturalism, they are wholly intolerant of any belief, fact, and opinion that doesn't jibe 100% with theirs, and are willing to use abusive tactics, tactics they decry when others use them, to get their way.  They will use the power of government as one method.

More studies rebut climate change consensus amid government crackdown on dissent.  The latest government crackdown on climate dissent, exemplified by last week's subpoena of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, comes amid a surge of scientific research that pokes holes in the catastrophic climate change consensus.  Even as Virgin Islands Attorney General Claude E. Walker demanded the free market think tank's climate research and communications, a rising tide of evidence has challenged the narrative that increased carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere are driving floods, drought and other disasters.  As of March 27, researchers had published 133 "consensus-skeptical" papers this year, bringing to 660 the number of such studies appearing since January 2014, blogger Kenneth Richard wrote on the skeptics website NoTricksZone.

Yes, Let's Prosecute Climate-Change Fraud — and Start with the Scaremongers.  I've got three ideas:  [#1] United States v.  Al Gore.  Ten years ago, the former vice president of the United States launched an extraordinarily lucrative career by selling climate doomsday.  While promoting his Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, he made a shockingly false statement.  He said that unless the world took "drastic measures" to reduce greenhouse gases, it would reach a "point of no return" in ten years.  Ten years have passed.  Is there a scientific consensus that the world has reached a "point of no return?" No?  Gore's documentary grossed almost $50 million worldwide.  I'd suggest that number as a starting point for damages.

Subpoenaed Into Silence on Global Warming.  The Competitive Enterprise Institute is getting subpoenaed by the attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands to cough up its communications regarding climate change.  The scope of the subpoena is quite broad, covering the period from 1997 to 2007, and includes, according to CEI, "a decade's worth of communications, emails, statements, drafts, and other documents regarding CEI's work on climate change and energy policy, including private donor information."  My first reaction to this news was "Um, wut?"  CEI has long denied humans' role in global warming, and I have fairly substantial disagreements with CEI on the issue.  However, when last I checked, it was not a criminal matter to disagree with me.

The Climate Change Inquisition.  Speaking out against conventional wisdom is dangerous.  Throughout history, few crimes have been more severely punished than heresy.  We'd like to believe that, in this more enlightened age, we've left behind barbaric practices like the Inquisition.  We laugh at the ignorance of the small minds who punished Galileo and Socrates for pursuing unpopular truths.  But the Inquisition is alive live and well, having traded in its implements of torture for expensive suits and legal briefs.  The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), a free market think tank known for its willingness to challenge economic orthodoxy, has been served with a subpoena to release documents related to its research on climate change.  Like many organizations on the right side of the aisle, CEI has not bought into the idea of anthropogenic global warming, and has routinely challenged the so-called consensus position.  Apparently in 21st century America, dissent has become illegal.

The Left's Climate Inquisition New Target.  In a truly outrageous abuse of his authority and a misuse of the law, the attorney general of the U.S. Virgin Islands, Claude E. Walker, has served a subpoena on the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) demanding documents related to CEI's research on global "climate change."  Walker is part of a network of state "AGs United for Clean Power" who have formed a grand inquisition to go after those that they claim have lied about climate change — which is a contentious, and unproven scientific theory.

No, Bill Nye, Millennials Are Not All Climate Alarmists.  On a nightly show following the Wisconsin primary, science celebrity Bill Nye ("the science guy") argued that the Republican Party will need young people to win in November, and that the vast majority of millennials believe in climate alarmism.  As a conservative millennial, I deny his sweeping generalization, and the data back me up.  Nye lamented that the Republican candidates for president are all "deniers," and argued that the campaign has yet to pivot to real issues.  Then he made the ridiculous claim, saying the gap between alarmists and "deniers" is almost entirely generational.

16 Democrat AGs Begin Inquisition Against 'Climate Change Disbelievers'.  Beginning in 1478, the Spanish Inquisition systematically silenced any citizen who held views that did not align with the king's. [...] As an old adage says, those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.  So we now have a new inquisition underway in America in the 21st century — something that would have seemed unimaginable not too long ago.  Treating climate change as an absolute, unassailable fact, instead of what it is — an unproven, controversial scientific theory, a group of state attorneys general have announced that they will be targeting any companies that challenge the catastrophic climate change religion.  Speaking at a press conference on March 29, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said "The bottom line is simple:  Climate change is real."  He went on to say that if companies are committing fraud by "lying" about the dangers of climate change, they will "pursue them to the fullest extent of the law."

16 Democratic Attorney Generals are going after companies that do not agree with climate change.  This is a good thing!  Let's see them deal with who has actually been lying under oath about climate change.  The climate change lies stack up now in the thousands, no wonder the liberals are so determined to silence dissent!

The Green Witch Hunt.  Led by agenda-setting New York State and radical left-winger Al Gore the progressive persecution of climate change skeptics by the states is underway.  Top law enforcement officers in several states are joining with the Chicken Littles of green activism to weaponize the scientifically dubious argument that human activity is not only changing the earth's climate but that unprecedented world catastrophe awaits unless draconian, economy-killing carbon emission controls are imposed more or less immediately.  The litigation offensive has nothing to do with justice.  It is aimed at forcing those few remaining holdouts in the business community who stubbornly cling to science to confess their thought crimes and submit to the know-nothing Left's climate superstitions.  It is part of modern-day environmentalism's ongoing assault on knowledge, human progress, markets, and the rule of law.

A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Climate Inquisition.  The Climate alarmists are losing it.  As each year of the "hiatus" passes — now over a decade of no warming — climate change warriors become more unhinged. [...] In fact, global warming long ago ceased becoming just a cause.  It has morphed into a religion, and the faithful followers of this religious sect require all to believe.  I would liken the religion of climate change, not to Christianity or Judaism, but more akin to radical Islam.  There can be no global warming atheists or even agnostics.  All must believe — all must convert — or pay the price.

Kill the Deniers — a government-funded fantasy play where "guns" solve climate issues.  The government of the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) gave $18k to a theatre group to put on a play called "Kill the Deniers".  Now, lucky us, we can read the e-book.  Because the climate debate really needs more guns, hostages, brute force, and threats right?  Well, it does if you don't have any evidence.

17 State Attorneys General Form Coalition 'to Protect and Expand' Climate Change Agenda.  Seventeen attorney generals from around the United States have formed a coalition "to protect and expand progress the nation has made in combating climate change" in a first of its kind partnership of law enforcement officials.  Virginia Attorney General Mark Herring announced that he would be joining the coalition in a press release Tuesday [3/29/2016].

Democratic attorneys general to police climate change dissent.  A coalition of Democratic attorneys general in 16 states announced Tuesday an unprecedented campaign to pursue companies that challenge the catastrophic climate change narrative, raising concerns over free speech and the use of state authority to punish political foes.  Standing beside former Vice President Al Gore, New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said the state officials are committed to "working together on key climate-related initiatives," including queries into whether fossil fuel companies like ExxonMobil have committed fraud by deceiving the public and shareholders about the impact of man-made carbon dioxide emissions.

Skewed justice.  Scientists don't use the term "consensus," despite the regular use of the term by politicians who promote government-mandated action to stop alleged human-caused climate change.  The scientific method has little space for opinion, and no room at all for the democratic process.  Yet it's that "consensus" that has U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch investigating whether the Justice Department can and should sue scientists and others who question the human-caused climate change assumptions.  Last week, Ms. Lynch testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that she has discussed the potential for bringing civil action against those who question human-caused climate change science, who include esteemed scientists — Nobel laureates among them.

Barack Goes Ballistic.  In Iran there are mullahs who safeguard Islam's sacred law, in America there is a president who thinks he is a law unto himself.  Iran wants to nuke Israel and the U.S., and Obama is nuking the Constitution.  That's why the news that Attorney General Loretta Lynch reviewed the possibility of pursuing civil action against climate change skeptics ("deniers") was as disturbing as the report that Iran recently tested two ballistic missiles. [...] Then again, the president has already admonished those who contradict his beliefs concerning climate change by warning them if they don't agree with him "[They]'ll be pretty lonely."  What Obama didn't expound upon was whether or not a climate change skeptic ends up lonely inside or outside a courtroom.

The Left Is Embracing Orwellian Policies to Go After 'Climate Deniers'.  Just when we thought liberalism can't get any more authoritarian, the Obama administration reminds us that it can.  Attorney General Loretta Lynch recently confirmed that she had "referred" the "matter" of whether climate change "deniers" should be brought to court on racketeering charges to the FBI.  Yes, that's right.  If you happen to disagree with the administration's views of global warming, you could face a civil suit accusing you of fraud and corruption.  This represents a breathtaking corruption of the law.  Laws designed to catch mafia figures on corruption charges could be twisted to punish Americans whose only crime is to contest the Obama administration's view of climate change.

Attorney General Lynch Looks Into Prosecuting 'Climate Change Deniers'.  In news that should shock and anger Americans, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday [3/9/2016] that not only has she discussed internally the possibility of pursuing civil actions against so-called "climate change deniers," but she has "referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action."  Lynch was responding to a question from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., who urged Lynch to prosecute those who "pretend that the science of carbon emissions' dangers is unsettled," particularly those in the "fossil fuel industry" who supposedly have constructed a "climate denial apparatus."

The Obama Administration's Idea of a Crime. not, apparently, violating federal laws and regulations and State Department procedures in a manner that exposes thousands of classified documents to our enemies.  No, that isn't the sort of conduct that is likely to draw an indictment from Loretta Lynch's Department of Justice.  Obama's DOJ is more interested in trying to jail scientists who point out the rather obvious flaws in the government's desperate effort to convince Americans that global warming is our greatest threat.

Krauthammer: 'Impeachable' if Obama Actually Prosecutes Climate Skeptics.  President Obama has already demonstrated a willingness to "use the instruments of power" to target his political opponents, so Loretta Lynch's acknowledgment the Justice Department is exploring legal action against global warming skeptics isn't surprising, Charles Krauthammer said tonight [3/10/2016].  "We know that in principle it will do it and has done it," Krauthammer said on Thursday's [3/10/2016] Special Report.

AG Lynch: DOJ Has Discussed Whether to Pursue Legal Action Against Climate Change Deniers.  Attorney General Loretta Lynch acknowledged Wednesday [3/9/2016] that there have been discussions within the Department of Justice about possibly pursuing civil action against so-called climate change deniers.  "This matter has been discussed. We have received information about it and have referred it to the FBI to consider whether or not it meets the criteria for which we could take action on," Lynch said at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Justice Department operations.

The Current State of Climate Alarmism.  When their less committed followers, including Democrat congresspersons, Senators, editors of major media outlets, liberal billionaires etc., suspect foul play, the alarmist core throws a fit and demands that they stop thinking, acting, and most of all listening to the "deniers."  Amazingly, the followers obey, even though some of them are extremely smart and experienced.  Apparently, these people do not notice that the so-called "climate scientists" have no scientific achievements outside of the insular "climate science," and that whatever honors they received were given either by their non-distinguished peers or by politicized bodies (Heinz Awards, MacArthur Foundation Awards, etc.).  The "scientific consensus" is not an argument but passive-aggressive acknowledgement of a lack of arguments, and their allegations of a denial machine, secretly funded by "fossil fuels," are just conspiracy theories.  The alleged 97% agreement is closer to election results in the former Soviet Union than to the opinions of actual scientists.

Political Correctness Is A Mask For Leftists' Intellectual Insecurity.  2015 will undoubtedly go down as the year the Left's efforts to impose its absolutist ideology went well beyond targeting lecturers and graduation speakers invited to colleges.  In late spring, the University of California distributed a guide to forbidden classroom phrases, including "America is the land of opportunity" and "America is a melting pot," to faculty at each of its 10 campuses.  Later in the year, George Mason University professor Jagadish Shukla and 19 others went national with a letter to President Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch, demanding they criminally prosecute any company or organization that denies climate change.

Here are 5 of Bernie Sanders' Most Ridiculous Ideas.  [#3] Prosecuting so-called "climate deniers."  Sanders, who shares former Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore's passion for preaching brimstone and fire on climate change, has called for the prosecution of climate change skeptics.  The climate change issues section of his website reads, "Bring climate deniers to justice so we can aggressively tackle climate change.  It is an embarrassment that Republican politicians, with few exceptions, refuse to even recognize the reality of climate change, let alone are prepared to do anything about it.  The reality is that the fossil fuel industry is to blame for much of the climate change skepticism in America."

The Editor says...
On the contrary, I would say it is the facts that are "to blame" for global warming skepticism.  Please note that the "fossil fuel industry" has never contributed one dime to this web site.

A Retrospective on the Obama Years.  [Scroll down]  College professors who challenge the concept of manmade global warming put their careers at risk.  Recall the ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee who initiated an "investigation" of climate scientists and professors, and expressed contrarian views by sending letters of inquiry to their respective university presidents.  Likewise, politicians who question the (often subjective) science become the targets of hostile media types.  When inappropriate data manipulation by climate scientists is exposed, the story dies.  And the president of the United States is fond of ostracizing those who challenge the science or one of his regulatory remedies. [...] Suffice to say that climate politics is a perfect vehicle for the anti-growth, limited-horizon policies of the left.  After all, slower growth necessarily follows unilateral disarmament on fossil fuels.

Pseudo-scientists Demand Obama Prosecute Climate Realists.  Unable to convince Americans of the alleged dangers of man-made global warming using evidence or the scientific method — or even billions worth of tax-funded propaganda and manipulation — a group of self-styled climate scientists want a new weapon to make you believe their controversial theory:  government coercion and even prosecution of climate heretics.  In a letter to Obama and his attorney general, a team of 20 professors, echoing the recent factually challenged ramblings of Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), urged the administration to start prosecuting climate realists under the anti-mafia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO).  In other words the debate is not really over after all, if the threat of prosecution must be employed in an attempt to end the allegedly non-existent debate.

Judge Deals Blow To Warmists On Trial For Blocking Oil Train.  [Scroll down]  Instead of claiming "climate change', they should have done it for the danger these trains pose to explode.  They might have found some sympathy from non-climate change believing people, and the judge may have allowed it at the end.  The law is the law, though, and if one is going to break it to "protest", one must be ready for the consequences, which could include a few years in jail.

Historic Climate Trial Starts Monday In Lynwood, WA.  Five community members who blocked the path of an explosive oil train in Everett last year will finally go to trial in Snohomish County on Monday [1/11/2016].  In a surprise ruling Judge Anthony E. Howard has allowed the defendants to argue that their actions were justified by the threat of climate change.  This is the first time a U.S. court has heard a 'necessity defense' in a case relating to climate action.

Obama and the Insanity of the Liberal Mind.  The fight against anthropological global warming, manmade climate change, or what normal people simply refer to as "weather", has been a cause celebre of the left since Al Gore jumped onboard the gravy train a decade ago.  Much like other liberal causes, this war has become a religion for its proponents.  However, environmentalists have become religious fanatics who pronounce the science "settled" and consider any views to the contrary blasphemy.  They urge the prosecution of skeptics including one Democratic senator suggesting that "climate denial" should be made a "crime against humanity."

Sean Penn: Climate Deniers Were Invented By Fox News.  Top international global warming expert Sean Penn has given his verdict on the COP21 Paris climate conference:  everything's going to be OK because both his kids drive Priuses and because climate change "deniers" don't actually exist.

Ted Cruz Is Exactly Right on Climate Change.  [Scroll down]  The term "climate denier" was deliberately chosen by the alarmist establishment as an insult to make skeptics look as weird and marginalized as Holocaust deniers.

'I was tossed out of the tribe': climate scientist Judith Curry interviewed.  It is safe to predict that when 20,000 world leaders, officials, green activists and hangers-on convene in Paris next week for the 21st United Nations climate conference, one person you will not see much quotedis Professor Judith Curry.  This is a pity.  Her record of peer-reviewed publication in the best climate-science journals is second to none, and in America she has become a public intellectual.  But on this side of the Atlantic, apparently, she is too 'challenging'.  What is troubling about her pariah status is that her trenchant critique of the supposed consensus on global warming is not derived from warped ideology, let alone funding by fossil-fuel firms, but from solid data and analysis.  Some consider her a heretic.

Similarities to Jim Jones and the Cult of Climate Change.  A group of 20 university professors want to get the federal government to prosecute climate change doubters.  The group posted a letter to the White House in September and matched those who are doubtful concerning man-made global warming to the tobacco industry.  The group's idea are similar to those used against the tobacco industry from 1999 until 2006.  That RICO investigation played a role in preventing the tobacco industry from maintaining the deception of Americans about the hazards of smoking.  If corporations in the fossil fuel industry and their supporters are guilty of the misdeeds that are becoming apparent as in the Exxon case, it is important that the misdeeds be stopped so that America can get on with the important business of finding the truth about climate change.

Schneiderman's Climate Inquisition.  Few citizens would include "climate change" among New York State's top law-enforcement priorities.  Few, that is, except the one citizen who happens to be New York's attorney general:  Eric Schneiderman. [...] The use of government prosecutorial power to silence those who deviate from climate-change orthodoxy is an emerging goal of the green lobby.  In recent months, more than 40 environmental groups as well as all the Democratic presidential candidates have called on U.S. attorney general Loretta Lynch to conduct a federal probe of Exxon — though the politicians and pressure groups cannot specify any crimes that the firm committed.

The Climate Change Inquisition Begins.  According to The New York Times, its sources "said the inquiry would include a period of at least a decade during which Exxon Mobil funded outside groups that sought to undermine climate science."  See what they did there?  To have a different view of climate science is to "undermine" it because there is no scientific study of the climate except that which they agree with.

New York AG Tries to Criminalize Scientific Dissent on Climate Change in Soviet-Style Investigation.  Everyone reading this should do the attorney general of New York, Eric T. Schneiderman, a big favor:  buy a copy of the U.S. Constitution, highlight the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights with a bright yellow or orange Sharpie, and mail him a copy.  Schneiderman obviously needs a remedial lesson in the fact that the government is banned from censoring or restricting speech, and certainly has no business "investigating" Americans, including corporations, for their views on — of all things — a contentious scientific theory.  The New York Times is reporting that Schneiderman has subpoenaed extensive financial records, emails and other documents of Exxon Mobil to investigate whether the company "lied to the public about the risks of climate change or to investors about how such risk might hurt the oil business."  In addition to ignoring the First Amendment, Schneiderman is apparently unaware that the claim that the world is endangered by a warming climate is a scientific theory, not a proven fact.

Levin slams the Left's political witch hunt on Exxon Mobil.  New York has launched a political witch hunt into Exxon Mobil for not promoting the Left's climate change policies.  NY Attorney General, Eric T. Schneiderman, has begun a sweeping investigation of Exxon Mobil to determine whether the company lied to the public about the risks of climate change or to investors about how those risks might hurt the oil business, the New York Times reports.  This is what happens when you don't worship the same idols that the Federal Government does.  They criminalize your dissent.

Big Oil Is Not Big Tobacco: Why The Witch Hunt Against Exxon Is Absurd.  Back in the 1970s the more pressing concern was the coming of a great global cooling, a new "little ice age" that would cause crops to fail and spread famine worldwide.  In 1961 the New York Times reported that "an assembly of specialists from several continents seems to have reached unanimous agreement on only one point:  it is getting colder."  According to this Newsweek report from April, 1975, scientists proposed to deal with the danger of Global Cooling by melting the arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot.  And this 1975 story from the AP has the priceless line:  "The panel reported that without doubt, colder climate will come."

The war against Exxon Mobil.  If you care about free speech, you should pay attention to the campaign now being waged against Exxon Mobil.  More than 50 environmental and civil rights groups have written Attorney General Loretta Lynch urging her to open a "federal probe" of the giant energy firm.  Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton have also joined the chorus.  The charge is that Exxon Mobil "systematically misled the public" on climate change, even as its executives recognized the dangers.  New York's attorney general has already launched an investigation.

The Exxon Inquisition.  Having failed in their shakedown of Chevron, New York Democrats are turning their attention to Exxon, with the office of state attorney general Eric Schneiderman attempting to prosecute Exxon for holding naughty views on the subject of global warming.  Earlier this week, Exxon was served with a subpoena demanding at least a decade's worth of financial records relating to Exxon's own climate research and its relationship with outside activist groups that have opposed U.S. entry into the Kyoto protocols and criticized arguments for certain regulations aimed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions.  This is a flat-out campaign aimed at punishing a corporation for having a policy disagreement with Democrats.

NY Attorney General Launches Political Witch Hunt Against Exxon Mobil.  Have you ever declined to promote the Democrat agenda while engaging in commerce?  You might be under criminal investigation.  There's a lot of talk in Washington these days about over-criminalization and the need for criminal justice "reform."  However, while Congress pursues an agenda of emptying the prisons of violent criminals, they are overlooking the true threat of over-criminalization — political witch hunts on the part of liberal government officials against companies and individuals who don't obey their religion of global warming.

Obama Calls Senate Environment Chairman 'Cray' for Doubting Climate Change.  [Scroll down]  "And the planet is warming; 99 percent of scientists have said it's warming.  And we've got the Republican chairman of the Senate Energy and Environment Committee carrying a snowball into the Senate chambers to show that there is still snow and that climate change isn't happening.  I am not making that up.  That's what happened.  That's what happened.  That's crazy," Obama said.

The Editor says...
Yes, 99 out of 100 hand-picked Democrat scientists who live on federal funding would agree that global warming is very dangerous and needs lots of research.

Latest Chapter in Climate McCarthyism.  The climatistas are entering their desperado phase, with calls to suppress all deviations from green orthodoxy.  We saw recently the ludicrous call for a RICO investigation of climate skeptics, and the more recent charge that Exxon "suppressed" early findings about global warming (nicely debunked today by SeekingAlpha).  Now comes Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse calling for the speech of climate skeptics to be suppressed because it is "fraudulent," that is, it disagrees with him, so the government has the right and authority to shut it down.  Seriously, that's his argument.

The RICO Case Against Exxon Is Toothless.  Allegations that Exxon committed fraud regarding climate change communications are groundless.  There isn't any evidence that the company misrepresented the science, whether willingly or not.  While the stock might be struck temporarily by a headline or rumor, a prosecution and its associated financial cost are extremely unlikely.

Sheldon Whitehouse Continues To Push To Prosecute Climate Skeptics.  Back in the spring, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) brought out the idea to use the RICO statues to prosecute those who have climate wrongthink.  Especially fossil fuels companies.  Despite Whitehouse himself refusing to give up his own use of fossil fuels.

NIPCC's reply to Physics Today (that they won't even acknowledge).  I've been made privy to an email exchange with the editor of Physics Today regarding a rebuttal letter to a badly botched article by Spencer Weart that ignored a good portion of climate history.  So far, editor Marty Hanna seems to be ignoring his own policy on right of reply for properly formatted and sourced letters.

Climate Change and Leftist Hypocrisy.  Scientific research has value when there are "schools of thought" in science.  If some scientists doubt climate change and others believe that climate change is global cooling and others think that any climate change is natural and not man-made — and if there are others who believe in man-made global warming — then there is a purpose and a value to research.  What climate change research really means is the heavy-handed use of taxpayer-funded leftist totalitarianism in the institutional bureaucracies of academia, whose sole purpose is to propagandize the gullible with specious reasoning, with the heavy stamp of "Official Science."

Top French Meteorologist Persecuted for Debunking Climate Hysteria.  Just months before the massive United Nations "Climate Change" summit hosted by the French government is set to take place in Paris, France's top meteorologist is blowing the whistle on the hysteria surrounding alleged man-made global-warming theories.  Blasting the UN's controversial climate agenda and the corruption of science to serve radical political goals, chief weatherman Philippe Verdier with state-funded broadcasting giant France Televisions said the world had been taken "hostage" by misleading data peddled by politicians and climatologists.  He also touted the benefits of climate change, especially to France, and blasted "renewable energy."

Almost three weeks later, the Associated Press discovers this story.
French weatherman fired after slamming climate conference.  A weather forecaster for French state television has been fired after releasing and promoting a book criticizing politicians, scientists and others for what he calls an exaggerated view of climate change.

France's Top Weatherman Hired By Kremlin After Being Fired For Questioning Global Warming.  France's top weatherman has found a new gig after being fired in November for questioning global warming in his new book:  he's working for Russian state-owned media.  French news outlet Le Figaro reports Philippe Verdier is covering the United Nations climate summit in Paris for Russia Today France.  Verdier has a daily news segment dedicated to covering what goes on during the U.N. climate talks.

John Kerry: Bar Global Warming Skeptics From Elected Office.  As is often said at children's parks all over the country, two can play this game.  So we propose here that no climate change alarmist or uncritical believer in the man-made global warming story should hold high, medium or even low public office.  It makes sense.  Almost all of those who meet these descriptions are either:  1) political opportunists who are simply saying the right things to a voting bloc or some other group whose support they're courting, or 2) the sort of folks who haven't given the issue enough thought, in most cases because they don't want to.  Spare us the nonsense about "6,000-plus peer reviewed studies" and the new perennial favorite "97% of scientists say man is warming the planet."  The first is either a poorly done study or con job, and the second is ... either a poorly done study or con job.

Kerry: Climate Change Greater, Easier to Solve Than 'Mind-Bending False Assumptions About Islam'.  [Scroll down]  During the Q&A portion of the forum, Kerry said he was "absolutely astounded" to hear senators and presidential candidates not cast a verdict on climate change with the explanation that he or she is not a scientist.

The Editor says...
When a global-warmist is challenged by a skeptic, the first thing the warmist does is investigate the skeptic's academic and scientific credentials, and then discount the skeptic's opinion when the credentials don't meet the warmist's standards.  Politicians are then hesitant to offer an opinion on global warming / extreme weather / climate change, because the ridicule will follow immediately.  And now we see Secretary Kerry ridiculing politicians for their reluctance to offer an opinion.

Shutting down the debate about climate change.  Are you skeptical of human-caused global warming or climate change like many respected scientists and climate experts?  Then you should be prosecuted like a Mafia mob boss, according to 20 academics at ivory towers such as Columbia, Rutgers and the University of Washington.  Apparently, these professors either don't believe in the First Amendment or are profoundly ignorant of the basic rights it protects.  They recently wrote an open letter to President Barack Obama and Attorney General Loretta Lynch asking for anyone who questions the climate-change dogma to be criminally prosecuted under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, because they have "knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change."

In UK, Judges Propose Making It Illegal to Utter Any Statement Denying Global Warming.  I'm old enough to remember when courts of uninformed, politicized judges deciding what was and what was not heresy was a bad thing.

Warmists: Climate Justice More Vital Than Democracy.  Is anyone surprised in the least by this?  Exactly what form of governmental structure would they like to enact to replace democracy?  They don't say.  It's right there:  progressive.  Fascism.

Cult Of Climastrology Attemtps To Take Scalp Of French Weatherman For Dissent.  Remember when dissent was patriotic?  Dissent against the State approved doctrine of Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC)?  Well, if they can't get you on RICO charges (or throw you in jail, hang you, stab you with an icicle, etc), they'll just attempt to get you fired.

France's top weatherman sparks storm over book questioning climate change.  Every night, France's chief weatherman has told the nation how much wind, sun or rain they can expect the following day.  Now Philippe Verdier, a household name for his nightly forecasts on France 2, has been taken off air after a more controversial announcement — criticising the world's top climate change experts.  Mr Verdier claims in the book Climat Investigation (Climate Investigation) that leading climatologists and political leaders have "taken the world hostage" with misleading data.

Judges plan to outlaw climate change 'denial'.  [Scroll down]  "The most important thing the courts could do," he said, was to hold a top-level "finding of fact", to settle these "scientific disputes" once and for all:  so that it could then be made illegal for any government, corporation (or presumably individual scientist) ever to question the agreed "science" again.  Furthermore, he went on, once "the scientific evidence" thus has the force of binding international law, it could be used to compel all governments to make "the emissions reductions that are needed", including the phasing out of fossil fuels, to halt global warming in its tracks.  The fact that it could be seriously proposed in the highest courtroom in the land that the law should now be used to suppress any further debate on what has become one of the most contentious issues in the history of science (greeted with applause from the distinguished legal audience) speaks volumes about the curious psychological state to which the great global warming scare has reduced so many of the prominent figures who today exercise power and influence over the life of our Western societies.

Cult Of Climastrology Wouldn't Look To Actually Ban "Climate Denial", Would They?  [Scroll down]  Warmists demand that the only science to be taught in schools is one sided, being more akin to indoctrination than scientific inquiry.  They refuse to follow the Scientific Model.  They band together and assail any scientist who refuses to bow to the CoC.  They yammer on about getting the US Department of Justice to file RICO (Rackateer [sic] Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, originally designed to prosecute the Mafia) charges against non-believers.  They call for jail and death for Skeptics.  Simply outlawing Skepticism is fully and wholly believable, and something that Warmists very much want to do.

Scientist who urged government to sue climate skeptics gets millions from taxpayers.  A key signatory of a petition calling for government to sue companies that question climate change has pulled the letter from his institute's website amid revelations his family reaped $500,000 in salary and benefits last year from the government-funded organization.  The controversy started after George Mason University climatologist Jagadish Shukla and 19 other scientists signed a letter on Sept. 1 urging lawsuits against companies like Exxon for, the petitioners claim, intentionally misleading about climate change.

Some scientists want to prosecute global warming skeptics under the RICO Act.  Twenty individuals from academia and research labs who refer to themselves as "scientists" have penned a letter to President Obama asking him to prosecute global warming skeptics under the same law that the government uses to convict mafia dons and drug kingpins.  The racketeering statute RICO is generally used against organized crime, but it has been used in the past to prosecute pro-life groups.  (Supreme Court finally ruled that the government couldn't do this.)  In the letter, the "scientists" tell the president that people who disagree with them are criminals and should go to jail.

An Instance of Warmist Corruption.  We have often written about the fact that the world's governments pour billions of dollars annually into the global warming project, the object of which is to increase the powers of government.  And yet governments, the main parties that stand to benefit from the warmists' campaign, pretend that their money is somehow innocent, while any private entity that supports climate research is suspect.  Alarmist scientists have gone so far as to urge the Obama administration to prosecute criminally scientists who disagree with them.

These 20 Scientists Want to Make it a Crime to Disagree with Them.  I think it is important to publicize these names far and wide:  [List]  These 20 people, who nominally call themselves "scientists", have written a letter to President Obama urging him to use the RICO statute to prosecute people who disagree with them on climate science, essentially putting scientific agreement in the same status as organized crime.  If they can't win the scientific debate with persurasion, they will win it with guns.

A new low in science: Criminalizing climate change skeptics.  Scientists have many important roles to play in preparations for the upcoming UN Conference on Climate Change in Paris.  Some are working hard to clarify uncertainties in the science, others on developing and evaluating alternative climate policies.  One group of climate scientists is trying a different approach.  Dismayed by what they see as a lack of progress on the implementation of climate policies that they support, these 20 scientists sent a letter to the White House calling for their political opponents to be investigated by the government.

Those scientists who want to use RICO to prosecute AGW 'deniers' have a big problem.  Legions of pro-global warming people, including Pope Francis, President Obama, and nearly all of the mainstream media essentially beg us to trust them about the settled science, despite the existence of highly detailed climate assessments compiled by skeptic climate scientists.  The egregious tragedy of this situation is that so many pro-global warming people have been blatantly misled about immoral "corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change" when no such evidence proving it exists, and when evidence is so easily found on how the accusation stems from one highly questionable source.

Oh-oh! Global warming RICO letter writers may have opened Pandora's Box.  Finally, we may be getting some cosmic justice for the gang of warmists who have spread hysteria over their shaky theory of global warming.  Owing to an outrageous act of witch-hunting dissenters, a congressional investigation has begun, and who knows what it will uncover?  It was an outrage when a group of 20 scientists published a letter to President Obama and AG Lynch demanding RICO prosecution of those who question the theory of global warming, based as it is on models that have failed to accurately predict the Earth's climate for the last 19 years.  Not only is criminalizing scientific investigation a bad idea, but the underlying contention that skeptics are funded by greedy polluters is false, a myth deliberately spread by the gang that profits from hysteria[.]

The 'RICO 20 letter' to Obama asking for prosecution of climate skeptics disappears from Shukla's IGES website amid financial concerns.  The big story at Climate Audit this week (see Shukla's Gold) is about the twenty authors of the letter demanding that climate skeptics be put on trial, and in particular the man pushing the letter, Jagadish Shukla, seems to be getting quite prosperous with all that [...] public money he gets sent his way.

Professors: Denying global warming should be a crime — literally!  Are you a flat earther?  You know, someone who doubts the reality of man-made global warming.  If you are, you might find yourself in need of a lawyer — at least that could be the case if the recommendations of a group of professors ever become reality.  A group of 20 university professors are hoping the federal government will prosecute global warming skeptics.  They expressed this idea in a letter to the Obama [administration] earlier this month where they compared those who doubt man-made global warming to the tobacco industry: [...]

AP Stylebook boots term 'climate change deniers'.  The Associated Press (AP) today announced a change to its famous stylebook, discouraging the use of the terms "climate change deniers" and "climate change skeptics" in favor of an alternative:  "climate change doubters."  The switch in terminology, noted the wire service in an online posting, solves a number of problems encountered by journalists writing on this divisive topic.  "Scientists who consider themselves real skeptics — who debunk mysticism, ESP and other pseudoscience, such as those who are part of the Center for Skeptical Inquiry — complain that non-scientists who reject mainstream climate science have usurped the phrase skeptic," notes the AP posting under the byline of Vice President and Director of Media Relations Paul Colford.  And that's only the beginning of the clash that motivated this AP change.

Scientist Demands Criminal Investigation of Climate Change Skeptics.  A scientist calling on the federal government to prosecute those who question his position on global climate change has paid himself and his wife millions of dollars in federal grant money, public records show.  George Mason University meteorologist Jagadish Shukla was the lead signatory to a letter sent this month to the president and the attorney general asking them to use federal racketeering laws to prosecute "corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change."

Steyn puts Warmists in the Dock.  [Scroll down]  Another swath of Steyn's evidence concerns the University of East Anglia Climate Research emails that were hacked into and published in 2009, resulting in the "Climategate" scandal.  These communications give credence to the claim that there is or was a "Big Climate" mafia headed by Michael Mann — a group as eager to protect its fame and grant-producing turf as Michael Corleone was to defend his crime syndicate.  Fortunately, Mann and company "only" employ stigma, blackballing, and control of peer-reviews to achieve their objectives.  Two cases in point:  In 2014 Dr. Judith Curry, former Chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology observed that her "challenge to the [climate change] consensus has precluded any further professional recognition."  She also mentioned that she worries about younger scientists without tenure protection.  That same year the 79-year-old distinguished professor Lennart Bengtsson was forced by "enormous group pressure" to resign "for the sake of [his] health and safety" from the advisory board of a think tank that promoted rational skepticism about global warming.

Scientists Ask Obama To Prosecute Global Warming Skeptics.  Scientists from several universities and research centers even asked Obama to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to prosecute groups that "have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America's response to climate change."  RICO was a law designed to take down organized crime syndicates, but scientists now want it to be used against scientists, activists and organizations that voice their disagreement with the so-called "consensus" on global warming.  The scientists repeated claims made by environmentalists that groups, especially those with ties to fossil fuels, have engaged in a misinformation campaign to confuse the public on global warming.

Moonbeam Science — And Then There's Dr. Ben Carson's Real Science.  California Gov. Jerry Brown calls Dr. Ben Carson a science denier for not buying into his global warming agenda.  Would that be the same Dr. Carson with a degree in neurosurgery and a science school named after him?  Horning in uninvited on Carson's presidential campaign, Brown sent Carson a letter questioning the latter's skeptical stance on global warming.  The letter, complete with a thumb drive of a United Nations report, questioned Carson's motives and condescendingly concluded:  "Please use your considerable intelligence to review this material.  Climate change is much bigger than partisan politics."  Then Brown called Carson a "climate-science denier" in a retweeted tweet from his press office.

NY Times: Climate Deniers Have "an intellectual stance that is uncomfortably close to Hitler's".  And there you have it:  if you follow the Scientific Method, if you want scientists to be honest, if you want them to follow long established scientific principles, if you have a problem with falsified/adjusted data, if you want to see the raw data, well, hey, you are almost Hitler!  Even though Hitler shared most of the same views and political ideology as today's Progressives. [...] So, if you refuse to join the CoC [Cult of Climastrology], you're the ghost of Hitler.  This is all about shutting down debate, demonizing one's opponents in the most horrific manner.  Someone else did that back in the 1930's and 1940's.  I wonder who?

Brown to Carson: Here's climate change evidence.  Ben Carson says there's no convincing research to prove that man plays a role in climate change.  So California Gov. Jerry Brown has sent the retired neurosurgeon a U.N. report so he can brush up on the subject.

The Editor says...
The IPCC report is a political document published by the United Nations, which has the ultimate goal of world domination (just like the Muslims and the Communists).  One report from the U.N. is neither a substitute for, nor a rebuttal of, objective scientific evidence.

Obama in Alaska: Climate-change deniers 'are on their own shrinking island'.  "The time to heed the critics and the cynics and the deniers is past," [President Obama] told delegates to an international conference on climate change in the Arctic [8/31/2015].  "The time to plead ignorance is surely past.  Those who want to ignore the science, they are increasingly alone, they are on their own shrinking island."  He used the backdrop of America's only Arctic state to emphasize the need for this country and others to move, and move fast, to reduce carbon emissions, to pursue cleaner energy sources and to stop relying on "unstable parts of the world" for oil.

The Editor says...
If he wants to "to stop relying on 'unstable parts of the world' for oil, why is he opposed to drilling in ANWR, offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, the Keystone XL pipeline, and fracking?

Obama blasts 'lazy' critics of carbon rules.  President Obama's controversial move to limit carbon emissions from power plants sparked a backlash on Capitol Hill and across the country within hours of its release Monday [8/3/2015], with lawsuits challenging the rules already filed and Republicans vowing to block the plan by any means necessary.  A coalition of 15 states — including Democrat-led Kentucky — say they'll sue the Environmental Protection Agency over the regulations, known as the Clean Power Plan and intended to cut carbon emissions from power plants by at least 32 percent by 2030.

Hillary Clinton Calls Out GOP Climate Change Deniers in New 'Stand With Reality' Video.  Hillary Clinton today attacked the Republican presidential contenders who deny "the settled science of climate change" and laid out two renewable power goals in a new video that outlines part of her plan to tackle global warming. [...] "You don't have to be scientist to take on this urgent challenge that threatens us all.  You just have to be willing to act," she continues.

The Editor says...
Global warming at the rate of one degree per century is not an urgent problem, nor does it threaten us all.  In fact, it doesn't threaten anybody, especially since it has now stopped, all by itself.

You Don't Have To Be Venal and Creepy To Work In Climate Science. But It Certainly Helps.  It's almost as if the mere fact of being a prominent climate change believer is such a powerful get-out-of-jail-free as to render you immune to all criticism, let alone appropriate punishment for your bad behaviour. [...] Almost everyone is on the make or the take, in one way or another; the science is so dodgy that manipulation and fabrication have become the norm; the financial stakes are so high and the positions taken so entrenched that nobody has any option but to close ranks and try to shut down valid criticism by whatever means necessary.

Three scientists investigating melting Arctic ice may have been assassinated, professor claims.  Professor Peter Wadhams said he feared being labelled a "looney" over his suspicion that the deaths of the scientists were more than just an 'extraordinary' coincidence.  But he insisted the trio could have been murdered and hinted that the oil industry or else sinister government forces might be implicated.  The three scientists he identified — Seymour Laxon and Katherine Giles, both climate change scientists at University College London, and Tim Boyd of the Scottish Association for marine Science — all died within the space of a few months in early 2013.

De Blasio Flies to Vatican to Deliver Environmentalism Speech.  Pope Francis has been pushing hard on the issue of climate change, having issued a recent 184-page papal encyclical largely blaming climate change on fossil fuels and human activity.  He also said that developed, industrialized countries bore the most responsibility for the problem.  De Blasio referenced the encyclical, asserting that it "burns with urgency," while lauding the Pope, saying he had "awakened people across the globe to the dangers we face as a planet."  De Blasio loftily stated, "The encyclical is not a call to arms.  It is a call to sanity."

The Editor says...
Really?  Can you comprehend what's on this page and still imply that it's insane to doubt global warming?

Nobel laureate's 'Emperor's New Clothes' speech about global warming.  At the July 3 Nobel laureates conference on Mainau Island, 30 of the 65 attendees signed a media-reported letter urging action against global warming.  Not reported by the media:  the attendees listened to Norway's 1973 Nobel physics laureate, Ivar Giaever, give a truth-telling "Emperor's New Clothes" speech. [...] Giaever was saying that the fraction-of-a-degree differences in temperature upon which global warming theory is based are as invisible as the Emperor's new clothes.

Gina McCarthy and Obama's Totalitarians.  The Soviet system had a long and cruel record of perverting psychiatry to abuse political dissidents.  Labelling many thought-criminals "insane," the communist regime institutionalized them under horrifying conditions in mental hospitals and force-fed them dangerous and mind-shattering drugs. [...] And now enter the leftist totalitarians of the Obama stripe.  While anti-Soviet ideas caused dissidents to be confined to psychiatric institutions in the Soviet Union, the soil is now being fertilized for the same process in the American leftist land of Alinskyite hope and change.

EPA Head Gina McCarthy is Simply Not Normal!  Yesterday [6/23/2015] the White House held the "White House Public Health and Climate Change Summit" to explain why man made climate change puts public health at risk and that more needs to be done to mitigate that threat.  Of course first they have to prove their hypothesis that there is man made climate change.  According to EPA chief Gina McCarthy anybody who disagrees or is skeptical of the climate change hypothesis is not a normal human being.

Dem Senator Whitehouse: Justice Dept Should Sue Global Warming Skeptics.  Democratic Rhode Island Senator Sheldon Whitehouse said during an interview that he believed the Justice Department should sue the "vast" global warming "denial apparatus" for lying to the American people.

Soviet Union 2.0 — The Environmental Protection Agency.  Former President Richard Nixon is an ancestral RINO — Republican In Name Only. The wobbly GOP wing that insists on delivering us Diet Democrat policies.  So it was in 1970 when President Nixon signed an executive order creating the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

EPA Chief: 'Climate Deniers' Aren't Normal Human Beings.  EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy told an audience Tuesday gathered at a White House conference "normal people," not "climate deniers" will win the debate on global warming.  McCarthy's remarks came as she was talking about the reasons why the EPA put out a report on the negative health impacts global warming will have on public health.  She said the agency puts out such reports to educate the public, not answer critiques from global warming skeptics.

How climate-change doubters lost a papal fight.  Pope Francis was about to take a major step backing the science behind human-driven global warming, and Philippe de Larminat was determined to change his mind. [...] After securing a high-level meeting at the Vatican, he was told that, space permitting, he could join.  He bought a plane ticket from Paris to Rome.  But five days before the April 28 summit, de Larminat said, he received an e-mail saying there was no space left.  It came after other scientists — as well as the powerful Vatican bureaucrat in charge of the academy — insisted he had no business being there.  "They did not want to hear an off note," de Larminat said.

Pope Francis blasts global warming deniers in leaked draft of encyclical.  A draft of a major environmental document by Pope Francis says "the bulk of global warming" is caused by human activity and calls on people — especially the world's rich — to take steps to mitigate the damage by reducing consumption and reliance on fossil fuels.  In words likely to anger some of his conservative critics, the pope backs the science of climate change, saying "plenty of scientific studies point out that the last decades of global warming have been mostly caused by the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxide and others) especially generated by human action."  "The poor and the Earth are shouting," reads the draft of the encyclical, the first of its kind dedicated to the environment.

To This Senator, Global Warming Skeptics Are Like John Gotti.  A U.S. senator wants to use federal organized crime laws against skeptics of man-made global warming.  Nothing says desperation quite like a politician hoping to criminalize a difference of opinion.

Obama: Climate deniers endangering national security.  President Obama in a speech on Wednesday [5/20/2015] cast climate change as a growing national security threat, accusing Republican skeptics of harming military readiness by denying its effects.

Pope's top adviser blasts US climate skeptics.  Pope Francis' closest adviser castigated conservative climate change skeptics in the United States Tuesday [5/12/2015], blaming capitalism for their views.  Speaking with journalists, Cardinal Oscar Rodr$#237;guez Maradiaga criticized certain "movements" in the United States that have preemptively come out in opposition to Francis's planned encyclical on climate change.

The Editor says...
Would a TV station hire a weatherman just because he used to be an advisor to the Pope?  How then is he so well qualified to forecast the weather 100 years from now, and to squelch any dissent?

The Pope's Confused Climate Communique.  On April 28, Pope Francis hosted a one-day conference, "Protect the Earth, Dignify Humanity: The Moral Dimensions of Climate Change and Sustainable Development."  Unfortunately, the conference was less a discussion and more a lecture to the world on the evils of capitalism and the "fact" fossil fuel use causes increasing poverty and inequality and is destroying the planet. [...] The game was rigged from the outset.  Only climate alarmists were on the pope's guest list.  For the pope and his invitees, the debate was over.

Saul Alinsky, Climate Scientist.  If Alinsky were alive today, he would likely fit right in with the current activist climate scientists. [...] "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon," apparently a favorite tactic of climate activists.  It's far easier to submit a barrage of ridicule or to sling labels like "denier" at people than to engage in thoughtful scientific debate — especially if the facts are not in your favor.

Vatican and U.N. team up on climate change against skeptics.  The Vatican and the United Nations teamed up to warn the world of the effects of climate change on Tuesday [4/28/2015], coming down firmly against skeptics who deny human activities help change global weather patterns.

Obama Takes Cheap Shot at Florida Gov. Rick Scott During Sparsely Attended Everglades Speech.  The thinly veiled insult came during the president's speech at the Florida Everglades, which only a small handful of Floridians attended.  The speech was televised by Al Jazeera America but none of the major cable news networks, according to Mediaite.  As the president made his case for taking action on climate change, he scoffed at one denier in particular who supposedly refuses to even allow the words "climate change" to be said in his state.  A key component of the left's strategy to impose their policies on the populace is to mock and ridicule those who don't go along with the program.  The idea is to force everyone into accepting their hard-left agenda through peer pressure.

Differences between Real Science and Man Made Global Warming Science.  There are at least a dozen differences between man-made global warming (AGW) and real science.  While science follows a defined scientific method, AGW uses political campaign tools like polls, demonizing opposition, scare tactics, deception, and propaganda.

'Because I Said So'.  What should be done to those who question the belief that human activity is causing catastrophic global climate change?  Environmental activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (nephew of the late president) recently said some of such people are "treasonous" and should be in jail with other criminals.  Similarly, climatologist James Hansen, who was NASA's top climate expert for over a decade, said questioners of the hypothesis should face criminal trial for "high crimes against humanity."  For Richard Parncutt, a professor at the University of Graz in Austria, however, prison is not punishment enough.  In 2012, he said:  "I propose that the death penalty is appropriate for influential GW [Global Warming] deniers."

Punishing 'climate change deniers'.  Failing to convince the public that global warming is an urgent cause for concern, hysterical fear-mongers are turning to the armory of tyrants, and demanding punishment for those they call "deniers," consciously inking Holocaust denial.  The recent rebranding of their cause as "climate change" creates a certain awkwardness, as nobody denies that climate has and always will change.  Glaciers, after all, covered a good part of the northern tier of the United States, carving out the Great Lakes, for example.  Nonetheless, the hysterics demand that "climate change deniers" be punished, even killed, and the call extends from the spittle-flecked fanatics to the usually sober New York Times.  Christopher Monckton, the Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, has compiled a valuable list of those calling for the abrogation of free speech and punishment of dissidents.

Environmentalism and Envy.  Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., whose uncle was president of the United States, has led a difficult life including heroin addiction, sex addiction, and a wife who committed suicide.  A dedicated environmental activist, Kennedy wants climate change deniers and skeptics put in jail as the equivalent of war criminals.  Kennedy's life illustrates how people seek refuge from their difficulties and frustrations by adopting fanatical environmental beliefs.  When the Danish economist Bjorn Lomborg published a book skeptical of environmental dogma, environmental activists, including John Holdren, now Obama's science advisor, spared no effort to destroy Lomborg's reputation and career by publishing an 11-page collective rant denouncing Lomborg in Scientific American magazine.

Another call to arrest climate "deniers".  Adam Weinstein, of the Gawker, has added his voice to the growing list of greens, who demand a brutal authoritarian response to the vexing problem of people who have a different opinion.

Science Museums Urged to Cut Ties With Kochs.  Dozens of climate scientists and environmental groups are calling for museums of science and natural history to "cut all ties" with fossil fuel companies and philanthropists like the Koch brothers.  A letter released on Tuesday [3/24/2015] asserts that such money is tainted by these donors' efforts to deny the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change.

FEMA becomes the thought police.  Among the myriad things the Federal Emergency Management Agency does, like screw up disaster response, take long lunches, and provide work for the otherwise unemployable, is providing money the states for disaster mitigation. [...] Now FEMA has decided you have to think the right thoughts.

FEMA to States: No Climate Planning, No Money.  The Federal Emergency Management Agency is making it tougher for governors to deny man-made climate change.  Starting next year, the agency will approve disaster preparedness funds only for states whose governors approve hazard mitigation plans that address climate change.  This may put several Republican governors who maintain the earth isn't warming due to human activities, or prefer to do nothing about it, into a political bind.  Their position may block their states' access to hundreds of millions of dollars in FEMA funds.

FEMA targets climate change skeptic governors, could withhold funding.  The Obama administration has issued new guidelines that could make it harder for governors who deny climate change to obtain federal disaster-preparedness funds.  The Federal Emergency Management Agency's new rules could put some Republican governors in a bind.  The rules say that states' risk assessments must include "consideration of changing environmental or climate conditions that may affect and influence the long-term vulnerability from hazards in the state."

FEMA to deny funds to warming deniers.  The Federal Emergency Management Agency is making it tougher for governors to deny man-made climate change.  Starting next year, the agency will approve disaster-preparedness funds only for states whose governors approve hazard-mitigation plans that address climate change.  This may put several Republican governors who maintain that the Earth isn't warming due to human activities, or prefer to take no action, in a political bind.  Their position may block their states' access to hundreds of millions of dollars in FEMA funds.  In the last five years, the agency has awarded an average $1 billion a year in grants to states and territories for taking steps to mitigate the effects of disasters.  "If a state has a climate denier governor that doesn't want to accept a plan, that would risk mitigation work not getting done because of politics," said Becky Hammer, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council's water program.  "The governor would be increasing the risk to citizens in that state" because of his climate beliefs.

Will Warmists Please Stop Whining?  Climate alarmists are so frustrated by their losing the debate — both in public opinion of the importance of "climate change" as an issue and in climate data itself — that their response to even the most docile of questioning is to belittle the questioner and, after saying "Trust me, I'm a scientist," bombard readers with misuse of statistics and misleading implications.  The most recent example comes from Mark Buchanan, "a physicist and science writer," who penned an obnoxious little screed for Bloomberg View attacking hedge-fund manager Cliff Asness of AQR Capital for having the temerity to write a paper questioning alarmist claims of impending climate doom.

Gore says climate-change deniers should pay political price.  Former Vice President Al Gore on Friday [3/13/2015] called on SXSW attendees to punish climate-change deniers, saying politicians should pay a price for rejecting "accepted science."  Gore said smart investors are moving away from companies tied to fossil fuels and toward companies investing in alternative energy.

Dems steadfast in 'witch hunt' of doomsday-denying climate scientists.  Democrats may be flustered after a week of being accused of engineering an anti-science "witch hunt," but they aren't backing down from their investigations into the financial backing of climate change researchers who challenge the movement's doomsday scenarios.  Rep. Raul Grijalva of Arizona, the ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, told National Journal this week that he may have been guilty of overreach even as he defended his probe into the funding sources of seven professors, now known as the "Grijalva Seven."

Kerry: Climate Change an 'Elementary Truth' — Like the Laws of Gravity.  That climate change is happening and that humans are largely responsible should be as universally accepted as the law of gravity, Secretary of State John Kerry suggested Thursday [3/12/2015].

Meteorologists warn of 'chilling effect' from Democrat's probe of climate research.  The American Meteorological Society is warning a top House Democrat that singling out funding provided to certain climate scientists "sends a chilling message to all academic researchers."  The meteorological society said it is committed to transparency, but took issue with letters sent by Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) this week asking universities to provide documents on the funding that was provided to seven professors for climate research.

The Liberal Circus.  We no longer live in an age of debate over global warming.  It has now transmogrified well beyond Al Gore's hysterics, periodic disclosures about warmists' use of faked data, embarrassing email vendettas, vindictive lawsuits, crony green capitalism, and flawed computer models.  Now Congressman Raul Grijalva (D-AZ), the ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, has taken the psychodrama to the level of farce in a two-bit McCarthyesque effort to demand from universities information about scientists who do not embrace his notions of manmade global warming.  Where are the ACLU and fellow Democratic congressional supporters of free speech and academic freedom to censure such an Orwellian move?

The Warmish Inquisition.  [Scroll down]  Christopher Monckton is a famous scourge of the Clime Syndicate, and they expend a lot of energy attempting to marginalize him as a kook and a weirdo, including strange claims that his hereditary viscountcy, conferred on his grandfather by HM The Queen on February 12th 1957 (if you'll forgive a little peer review), is not a real peerage.  Willie Soon, on the other hand, is inside the system:  He has a part-time gig at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.  If Soon were to get away with publishing papers with Monckton in peer-reviewed journals, there's no telling what other scientists might follow.  Let Soon pull that off, and, before you know it, the settled science could get all unsettled.  So it was necessary to make an example of him.

Climate scientist being investigated by Congress for not believing in global warming enough.  Roger Pielke, a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, and six others are under investigation by Congress regarding testimony they've given on the subject of climate change.  Pielke, a believer in man-caused global warming, can't quite figure out why he's the object of a witch hunt.

A Shameful Climate Witch Hunt.  Let the climate inquisition begin.  The ranking Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, Raúl Grijalva of Arizona, has written to seven universities about seven researchers who harbor impure thoughts about climate change.  One of the targets is Steven Hayward, a blogger, author and academic now at Pepperdine University (as well as an occasional contributor to National Review).  As Hayward puts it, the spirit of the inquiry is, "Are you now or have you ever been a climate skeptic?"

Global Warming McCarthyites Are Even Targeting Believers.  Here's what happens when a climate researcher doesn't fully conform to the global warming narrative:  He becomes the target of a congressional inquisition.  Roger Pielke Jr., a professor at Colorado University's Center for Science and Technology Policy Research, announced on his blog Wednesday that he is "one of seven U.S. academics being investigated by U.S. Rep. Raul Grijalva," an Arizona Democrat who is the ranking member of the House Committee on Environment and Natural Resources.

Dem. Congressman on Witch Hunt Against Climate Scientists.  On his blog this morning, Roger Pielke Jr. at the University of Colorado, a respected climate scientist, reveals that he was one of seven academics being being investigated by Rep. Raul Grijalva, the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Natural Resources.  Grijalva wants to know all university financial disclosure policies that are applicable to Pielke, detailed information about any sources of external funding and grants he may have received, as well as any communications related to external funding.  He also wants copies of any speeches and testimony before lawmakers Pielke has delivered, as well as salary and travel expense information.

I am Under "Investigation".  So far, I have been contacted by only 2 reporters at relatively small media outlets.  I'd say that the lack of interest in a politician coming after academics is surprising, but to be honest, pretty much nothing surprises me in the climate debate anymore.  Even so, there is simply no excuse for any reporter to repeat incorrect claims made about me, given how easy I am to find and just ask.

Experts Smeared by Media and Greenpeace for Debunking Global Warming.  A not so funny, but somewhat predictable, event occurred after Dr. Matt Briggs co-authored a major peer-reviewed climate physics paper that exposed significant errors in the billion-dollar computer models used by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).  Briggs and his colleagues were smeared by the New York Times, the Guardian, the Washington Post and the Boston Globe because the revealed errors suggest that there is no climate crisis after all.

Study: Reporters told to stop covering 'irrelevant' climate change critics.  A new study of how environmental reporters cover global warming and climate change reveals that they see the issue as one America has endorsed and, as a result, no longer include critics in their reports because they are "generally irrelevant."  And the orders are coming from editors.  What's more, the study from George Mason University found that climate change reporters are weaving their coverage into stories on broader issues to get around editors who don't want a lot of reports on global warming.

Bill Nye Hits 'Unglued' Viewers Who Object to Blaming Blizzard on Climate Change.  A severe winter storm about to strike the northeast is caused by global warming?  That's the unsurprising suggestion by climate change enthusiast Bill Nye on MSNBC, Monday [1/26/2015].  The TV personality appeared on The Cycle to discuss the New England Patriots and Deflategate.  Changing the subject, he condescendingly asserted, "I just want to introduce the idea that this storm is connected to climate change.  I want to introduce that idea.  I know there will be certain viewers who will become unglued."

Meet Bill Nye, The Anti-Science Guy.  The unique achievement of science has been its ability to correct itself.  Every conclusion is subject to testing and independent confirmation — and it is open to being overthrown by any cantankerous skeptic who can put together the data to disprove it.  But this only happens when respected, famous figures — or some guy who's been on TV a lot — don't try to set themselves up as unquestionable authorities.  It only happens to the extent that "skeptics" are not rebranded as "deniers" and then thrown out of the discussion.  That's what Bill Nye is trying to do, and that makes him an anti-science guy.

What's at Stake in Mann v. National Review.  [Scroll down]  [Michael] Mann is indulging here in a dangerous game — in a petty and quixotic attempt to recruit the nation's courts to his side and to forestall any criticism of himself and his work.  If the First Amendment is to be worth the paper it is written on, those courts should refuse to be co-opted.  Rather, they should dismiss the case as soon as is possible, reminding us as they do that, in America, robust public debate is not actionable, but worthy of celebration instead.

Steyn vs. Mann and the 'Toilet' D.C. Justice System.  More than two years have passed since Penn State University professor Michael Mann filed a defamation lawsuit against Steyn and other conservatives for criticizing his global warming research.  At a hearing in the D.C. Court of Appeals on Tuesday, Steyn was just a spectator.  He decided not to join his co-defendants National Review, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, and Rand Simberg in filing an appeal to get the lawsuit thrown out.  Steyn wants a trial.  "I took a decision not to appeal," Steyn told the Washington Free Beacon following the hearing.  "The reason is I've been in this toilet of D.C. justice long enough and I would like to get onto the trial.  If he wants a trial, I take him at his word."

What the mainstream media won't tell you about global warming.  Between the recent "deal" with China, reports of Obama taking climate action via executive fiat, and the debate over keystone, global warming has been over the mainstream media recently.  But instead of debating whether or not the global warming hypotheses is a valid threat to the Earth, the media starts with the premise that the theory is real and anybody who contests global warming is the equivalent of people who don't believe the holocaust actually happened, they are called deniers.  The "LA Times" refuses to print letters that disagree with global warming, CNN openly mocks them on air, the NY Times ran a cartoon suggesting climate change skeptics should be stabbed to death, and MSNBC and CBS only interview climate change believers on their programs.

Criminalizing Weather-related Fatalities.  Deaths from natural disasters are traditionally considered "acts of God," or "acts of nature," beyond human control.  This view is being challenged in a French trial where prosecutors have charged a small-town mayor with manslaughter for deaths caused by storm flooding.  The precedent of criminalizing weather-related deaths would delight climate-change activists who increasingly call for criminal trials of anyone skeptical of their agenda.

Democrat Religious Fanatics.  In order to galvanize those concerned about the environment, the Democrat priests invented first global cooling, then global warming, then climate change, and — most recently — climate disruption.  By ensuring that grants and other funding vehicles go only to those who toe the government line, dissenting voices are mocked, suppressed, censored, and tarred as "deniers".

Green Graphic Novel Celebrates Eco-Terrorism Shopping Mall Killing Spree.  When is it acceptable for a terrorist to go berserk in a shopping mall and machine gun innocent victims to death?  When it's all being done for the noble cause of environmentalism, of course!

Google's Climate Name-Calling.  Eric Schmidt always seemed a decent guy but we never had reason to ask if he was especially brave.  Then came his long interview on a Washington radio show late last month, the closing minutes of which featured a caller's inquiry whether Google was still "supporting ALEC, which is that fund lobbyist in D.C. that are funding climate change deniers."

POTUS Official Twitter Account Instructs Fans to 'Stick It To' Climate Change Deniers.  Have to call them out for confrontational political language.  Remember, these are the people who blame every act of violence in America on "right wing rhetoric".

Little Bobby, Now in Full Backtracking Mode.  Robert F. "Little Bobby" Kennedy Jr is trying to backtrack from his latest foam-flecked calls for jailing climate skeptics.

EPA chief: Climate skeptics 'sad'.  Environmental Protection Agency chief Gina McCarthy on Thursday [9/25/2014] made a forceful case for action on climate change, arguing moves should be made not "despite the economy" but "because of it."  McCarthy ripped climate skeptics for bashing the administration's signature rule on carbon pollution from power plants, saying it's "sad" they would "hide behind the word 'economy' to protect their own special interests." [...] If President Obama doesn't take action, McCarthy argued, then the U.S. will be pushing global temperatures up with the rest of the world, damaging the economy in the process.

PBS's Rose Baffled Anyone Could Oppose Liberal Policies on Climate Change.  An adamant Charlie Rose, on Thursday night [9/25/2014], was astounded that there could be any opposition to the fight against climate change as he blurted:  "Where is the resistance?!  What stands in the way of something that clearly threatens the planet?"  During a discussion with the foreign minister of France, on his PBS show, Rose asked Laurent Fabius what "progress is being made" at Climate Week at the United Nations General Assembly.  In his response Fabius unveiled a new and improved politically correct term to be used by the environmental left as he told Rose:  "I don't speak about climate change.  I speak about climate disruption."  This made sense to Rose as he offered:  "[climate] change is too soft a word."

EPA Proposed Regulation Would Significantly Hurt Access to Electricity.  When talking about energy and environmental policy, it is a bit troublesome to watch just how recklessly big-government environmentalists unfairly and erroneously accuse individuals and organizations of the pro-free market persuasion of being "climate deniers."  Instead of engaging in thoughtful, substantive discussion, many of these environmental activists oftentimes resort to this tactic of public shaming in order to eliminate debate and to bully individuals and groups into supporting an ever-expansive federal regulatory scheme.

Budget Chief: Denying Climate Change 'Makes You a Member of the Flat Earth Society'.  Shawn Donovan, director of the Office of Management and Budget, said on Friday [9/19/2014] that if you don't believe in climate change and support federal spending to fight it, you believe the earth is flat.  "The failure to invest in climate solutions and climate preparedness doesn't get you membership in a fiscal conservatives caucus," Donovan said at the Center for American Progress in Washington, D.C.  "It makes you a member of the Flat Earth Society."

Robert Kennedy Jr., Aspiring Tyrant.  Blissfully unaware of how hot the irony burned, Robert Kennedy Jr. yesterday [9/21/2014] took to a public protest to rail avidly in favor of censorship.  The United States government, Kennedy lamented in an interview with Climate Depot, is not permitted by law to "punish" or to imprison those who disagree with him — and this, he proposed, is a problem of existential proportions. [...] Those who contend that global warming "does not exist," Kennedy claimed, are guilty of "a criminal offense — and they ought to be serving time for it."

The real sea change should occur on campus.  Recently, several liberal professors visited Gov. Rick Scott to brief him on the "closed" science of global warming.  Never mind that many scientists will tell you that science is never closed or settled.  These professors — like many in the media, academia and in Hollywood — will continue to scream the sky is falling until they force more polluters out of business and cause the loss of more American jobs.  Should you be one of those scientists who dares to question global warming, you stand the chance — like Galileo and Copernicus when they went against the settled science of the Church and were branded heretics — of paying a price that could range from ridicule and censorship to the loss of your career.

Liberal Billionaire: 99.5% of Americans Are Not 'Super Sophisticated'.  Billionaire hedge-fund manager Tom Steyer attempted to explain why there is still a sizable portion of Americans that do not buy in to global warming alarmism by, basically, generalizing virtually all of America as not "super sophisticated." [...] Steyer's sweeping generalization is not a new excuse made for why liberal ideas are not shared by a large swath of the electorate.  Coming from a side of the political isle that prides itself on ending "hate" and precluding judgment on those that are not like them, many wealthy liberal activists have been quick to make harsh conclusions about any group of people with whom they disagree.

Groups rally around think tank, publication being sued for global warming views.  News outlets, advocacy groups and fellow think tanks are jumping to the defense of a conservative-leaning D.C. policy center and publication being sued for libel by a scientist who didn't like what they had to say about his work on global warming. [...] Critics say the suit threatens to violate constitutionally protected rights to opinion and fair comment, particularly in an area of scientific debate.

In heated war of words, my money is on Mark Steyn.  [Mark] Steyn's apparent offense is that he dared to challenge the scientific orthodoxy on climate change, and he did it most colorfully.  This is somewhat ironic since [Gene] Lyons is himself noted for his acerbic barbs, aimed mostly at poor country bumpkins and rich Republicans.

Mann v Steyn: If This Trial Ever Goes Ahead Global Warming Is Toast.  Mark Steyn has published his latest brief in his protracted court case with discredited climate scientist Michael Mann (who is suing him for libel) and it's a corker.  Here's a sample: [...]

ACLU, news organizations back National Review, think tank in climate libel case.  A who's who of news organizations, as well as the American Civil Liberties Union, have sided with the conservative National Review and the free market Competitive Enterprise Institute in a libel lawsuit brought against them by climate scientist Michael Mann.  Mann contends that the magazine and the think tank both libeled him by publishing articles alleging that he has intentionally manipulated climate data.  Both defendants are seeking to have the case dismissed under a statute that prevents nuisance lawsuits intended to silence critics.  The matter is currently before the D.C. Superior Court.

World's top PR companies rule out working with climate deniers.  Some of the world's top PR companies have for the first time publicly ruled out working with climate change deniers, marking a fundamental shift in the multi-billion dollar industry that has grown up around the issue of global warming.  Public relations firms have played a critical role over the years in framing the debate on climate change and its solutions — as well as the extensive disinformation campaigns launched to block those initiatives.  Now a number of the top 25 global PR firms have told the Guardian they will not represent clients who deny man-made climate change, or take campaigns seeking to block regulations limiting carbon pollution.

In Praise of Hate Speech.  Someone has petitioned the UK Government's Home Office demanding that the term "denier" be classified as "hate speech."  ["]We the undersigned request that the offensive terms, 'climate denier', 'denier', 'denialist' and other variants being used to harass sceptical scientists or other people who do not ascribe to the hypothesis of man made climate change or man made global warming be classified as hate speech in accordance with the Public Order Act 1986.  Scientists and others should not be subjected to hateful, offensive names in order to diminish their standing or to make them accept a consensus view.["]

Evidence of an Ominous American Climate Change.  A new "nationally representative survey" has concluded that the number of Americans who still have free minds is now low enough to warrant intensifying the psychological warfare in order to finish them off for good.  In fact, if this study from the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication and the George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication can be trusted — and with unbiased names like those, what's not to trust? — life will be getting hotter for those frustrating American holdouts who insist on thinking for themselves when there are so many qualified experts ready to provide them with all the pre-packaged thoughts they need.

"Sometimes one must look to sources outside the United States to get a better perspective on what is happening."
No denying climate change deniers.  People who refuse to drink the Kool-Aid known as global warming — climate change are not just "deniers"; we are guilty of a "nihilistic refusal" to address the issue.  So says a Washington Post editorial commenting favorably on Monday's Supreme Court ruling that allows the Environmental Protection Agency, under certain limits, to proceed under the Clean Air Act to regulate major sources of greenhouse-gas emissions.  The actual nihilists are those who refuse to accept any scientific information that undermines their claim that the globe is warming and humans are responsible for it.  Cults are like that.  Regardless of evidence contradicting their beliefs, cultists persist in blind faith.

The moment I became a climate skeptic.  [Scroll down]  One item got my attention. It said: "Projections based on the Special Report on Emissions Scenarios suggest warming over the 21st Century at a more rapid rate than that experienced for at least the last 10,000 years."  I called the professor, one of the authors of the report, for a clarification (he remains nameless because we were off the record).  "If global warming is caused by man-made emissions," I asked, "what accounts for the world warming to this same level 10,000 years ago?"  There was a long silence.  Then the professor said, "Are you serious?"  I admitted that I was.  The professor loudly informed me that my question was stupid.  The panel's conclusion was indisputable science, arrived at after years of research by a conclave of the world's leading climate scholars.  Who was I to dispute it?

Obama Mocks Climate Change Skeptics: It's Not Some 'Liberal Plot'.  President Obama spoke to the League of Conservation Voters Wednesday night [6/25/2014] about climate change, and he took a few minutes to mock Republican climate change skeptics who state very openly they "don't believe anything scientists say" and actually believe it's a "hoax" or a "liberal plot."

Global Warming Witch Hunt Continues With Caleb Rossiter.  The latest victim of climate McCarthyism is Caleb Rossiter, who, until his op-ed challenging the "consensus" on climate change was published in the Wall Street Journal, was a Democratic academic who briefly forayed into politics but was content to crusade against U.S. support for dictators and against the use of anti-personnel land mines.  In that op-ed, Rossiter called himself an "Africanist."  He not only questioned the science behind climate change warnings but the impact of abandoning fossil fuels on human progress on a continent that's lowest in production of carbon emissions and the neediest in terms of economic development.  For his questioning of climate orthodoxy, Rossiter, an adjunct professor at American University, was sacked via email from his position with the Institute for Policy Studies.

At Commencement, Obama Mocks Lawmakers Who Deny Climate Change.  President Obama, appearing emboldened after his recent move to cut carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants, on Saturday [6/14/2014] ridiculed members of Congress who deny climate change or plead scientific ignorance as an alibi for avoiding an uncomfortable truth.

Obama Used Commencement Speech To Attack Americans Who Disagree With Him.  President Obama delivered the commencement speech at UC Irvine over the weekend and used the occasion to go on the attack against Americans who don't agree with his climate change policies.  Not only did he call those skeptical of global warming theory the derogatory term "deniers" he also told the graduates that we are a threat to their existence. [...] If anyone is a threat to our future it's Obama, not people who don't buy into global warming theory.

More about Obama's speech at UC Irvine.

PC police, Big Green environmentalists are turning America into a First Amendment-free zone.  America is rapidly becoming a First Amendment-free zone, thanks to the growing power of the PC police in the media and on campus and among Big Green environmentalists in the nonprofit community.  American University adjunct professor and veteran self-described "progressive activist" Caleb Rossiter is the latest victim, thanks to an article he wrote for the Wall Street Journal opinion pages questioning global warming.  Rossiter's sin was describing global warming as an "unproved science" and advocating that developing African nations be allowed to adopt the same "all-of-the-above" energy policies as the U.S. follows.

Obama pushes global warming agenda in commencement speech.  Obama told those in attendance that they must respond now to protect children and future generations — a theme he has repeated after announcing in recent weeks new rules for reducing carbon emission for plants that burn fossil fuel.  "We also have to realize, as hundreds of scientists declared last month, that climate change is no longer a distant threat but 'has moved firmly into the present,'" said Obama in the ongoing effort by him and his supporters to win the debate on global warming and its possible causes.  "The overwhelming majority of scientists who work on climate change, including some who once disputed the data, have put the debate to rest."

Obama Flunks his Climate Science 101 at University of California, Irvine.  Denying climate change is like saying the moon is made of cheese, President Obama has said in his latest attempt to persuade an unconvinced world that "global warming" is the most urgent crisis of our time. [...] "I'm not a scientist."  Possibly the only factually accurate words in the president's entire speech.

Denying climate change is like saying the moon is made of cheese, argues Obama.  Obama issued the call to the tens of thousands gathered at Angel Stadium even though he said Congress 'is full of folks who stubbornly and automatically reject the scientific evidence' and say climate change is a hoax or fad.

Climate McCarthyism claims yet another victim.  Climate McCarthyism has claimed another victim. Dr Caleb Rossiter — an adjunct professor at American University, Washington DC — has been fired by a progressive think tank after publicly expressing doubt about man-made global warming.

Obama 'Absolutely' Wants to 'Just Go Off' on Climate Deniers in Congress.  In the clip that aired on CBS Sunday morning [6/8/2014], Obama stressed the national security implications of catastrophic climate change.  "We're obviously concerned about drought in California or hurricanes and floods along our coastlines and the possibility of more powerful storms or more severe droughts.  All of those things are bread-and-butter issues that touch on American families," Obama said.  "But when you start seeing how these shifts can displace people — entire countries can be finding themselves unable to feed themselves and the potential incidence of conflict that arises out of that — that gets your attention."

The Editor says...
Even if Mr. Obama's assertions were plausible, and they are not, nobody is displaced by the weather.  (If that were true, who would have returned to New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina?)  No country will face famine after a one-degree temperature change.  No wars will be fought over changes in the weather.  Barack H. Obama knows that he can make rash pronouncements of this sort and nobody will challenge him.

Canada Cracks Down on Scientists Who Talk About Climate Change.  Meteorologists are paid to talk expansively about the weather.  But in Canada, they have to choose their words a little more carefully.  The government has made it clear that none of the meteorologists on its payroll should be talking about climate change, according to a new report.  It's unclear how long this rule has been in effect, but Environment Canada, the government entity that shares weather and meteorological information publicly, explained its position in a statement to us.  "Our Weather Preparedness Meteorologists are experts in their field of severe weather and speak to this subject.  Questions about climate change or long-term trends would be directed to a climatologist or other applicable authority," said Danny Kingsberry, a spokesman for Environment Canada.

Taxpayers Paid $5.6 Million for Climate Change Games.  Taxpayers paid more than $5 million to create climate change games, including voicemails from the future warning that "neo-luddites" will kill global warming enthusiasts by 2035.  Columbia University's Climate Center has received $5.7 million from the National Science Foundation for the university's "PoLAR Climate Change Education Partnership," to "engage adult learners and inform public understanding and response to climate change."  Based on the theory that games "motivate exploration and learning of complex material," the school created "Future Coast," a website that features hundreds of made up voicemails painting a dire picture of the future as a result of climate change.

Meterologist [sic] Says Climate Alarmists Used 'McCarthy' Tactics Against Him.  Meteorologist Lennart Bengtsson claims that after he joined a non-profit which expressed doubt in the global warming alarmist movement, he suffered a persistent campaign of hate and vitriol from alarmist scientists.  He resigned from the group on May 14, citing fears for his health and safety. Broadcast news networks ignored Bengtsson and his claims while continuing to report on climate change.

The Climate Change Fundamentalists.  Any dissent from the fundamentalists' doomsday prophesies if their radical prescriptions to save humanity and Mother Earth are not followed is regarded as heresy.  Charge the well-funded climate change "deniers" with committing "criminal negligence" for "their willful disregard for human life, "says Lawrence Torcello, a philosophy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology.  After all, heretics must be punished.

John Kerry slams climate change critics in graduation speech: 'We are risking nothing less than the future of the entire planet'.  Secretary of State John Kerry warned graduates of Boston College on Monday [5/19/2014] that they have doom and destruction to look forward to if they don't take climate change more seriously than previous generations.  'And I know its hard to feel the urgency as we sit here on an absolutely beautiful morning in Boston,' Kerry said, 'you might not see climate change as an immediate threat to your job, your communities or your families.  'But let me tell you, it is.'

Trick or truth! Can you even tell the difference?  Speaking of settled science, it is easy to convince people it is settled when you control what gets published and what doesn't.  On Friday, it was revealed that an academic journal called Environmental Research Letters rejected a paper that questioned how sensitive the climate is to greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.  The rejection said the report was "harmful as it opens the door for oversimplified claims of 'errors' and worse from the climate skeptics media side."  In other words, the report questioned climate change orthodoxy and therefore could not be published.  This would worry people who had an open mind, but most people will never even hear about it just like they won't hear about the record-setting Antarctic ice sheet.

Climategate II And The Rise Of Climate McCarthyism.  A noted researcher who questioned the climate's sensitivity to greenhouse gases says his paper is not being published for ideological reasons and because it might fuel doubt in the climate change story.

Climate McCarthyism: The Scandal Grows.  Professor Lennart Bengtsson — the scientist at the heart of the "Climate McCarthyism" row — has hit back at his critics by accusing them of suppressing one of his studies for political reasons.  The paper, which Prof Bengtsson wrote with four co-authors, suggested that climate is probably less sensitive to greenhouse gases than is admitted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and that more research needs to be done to "reduce the underlying uncertainty".  However, when submitted for publication in the leading journal Environmental Research Letters, the paper failed the peer-review process and was rejected.

Science as McCarthysim.  One of the most telling features of climate science is just how few climate scientists changed their minds as the evidence changed.  The pause in global temperature in the last 15 years or so has been unexpected.  Now we know why:  Yesterday, Bengtsson dropped a bombshell.  He was resigning from the think tank.  In his resignation letter, Bengtsson wrote: ["]I have been put under such an enormous group pressure in recent days from all over the world that has become virtually unbearable to me.  If this is going to continue I will be unable to conduct my normal work and will even start to worry about my health and safety...["]

Climate McCarthyism: The Scandal Grows.  Professor Lennart Bengtsson — the scientist at the heart of the "Climate McCarthyism" row — has hit back at his critics by accusing them of suppressing one of his studies for political reasons.  The paper, which Prof Bengtsson wrote with four co-authors, suggested that climate is probably less sensitive to greenhouse gases than is admitted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and that more research needs to be done to "reduce the underlying uncertainty".  However, when submitted for publication in the leading journal Environmental Research Letters, the paper failed the peer-review process and was rejected.

Climate Science Defector Forced to Resign by Alarmist 'Fatwa'.  Professor Lennart Bengtsson — the leading scientist who three weeks ago signalled his defection to the climate sceptic camp by joining the board of the Global Warming Policy Foundation — has now dramatically been forced to resign from his position.  His views on the weakness of the "consensus" haven't changed.  But as he admits in his resignation letter, he has been so badly bullied by his alarmist former colleagues that he is worried his health and career will suffer.

Settled and unsettled science.  The NY Times calls this report "totally alarming."  The only thing alarming is that an American college professor wants anyone who disagrees with the premise of manmade global warming to be thrown in jail.  This report was prepared by the US Global Change Research Program.  Funded with a huge annual budget of $2.5 billion, not much less than the budget of the state of Delaware, their vision is, "A Nation, globally engaged and guided by science, meeting the challenges of climate and global change."  Interesting statement.  They are guided by science, where very little is actually settled, yet they too assume that climate change is a settled fact.

Climate change scientist claims he has been forced from new job in 'McCarthy'-style witch-hunt.  A globally-renowned climate scientist has been forced to step down from a think-tank after he was subjected to 'Mc-Carthy'-style pressure from scientists around the world.  Professor Lennart Bengtsson, 79, a leading academic from the University of Reading, left the high-profile Global Warming Policy Foundation as a result of the threats, which he described as 'virtually unbearable'.  The group was set up by former Tory Chancellor Lord Lawson and are sceptical about radical policy changes aimed at combating global warming.

A Wicked Orthodoxy.  There is something odd about the global-warming debate — or the climate-change debate, as we are now expected to call it, since global warming has for the time being come to a halt.  I have never shied away from controversy, nor — for example, as chancellor of the exchequer — worried about being unpopular if I believed that what I was saying and doing was in the public interest.  But I have never in my life experienced the extremes of personal hostility, vituperation, and vilification that I — along with other dissenters, of course — have received for my views on global warming and global-warming policies.

David Bellamy OBE — Global Warming Victim.  It's funny that those who stress the scientific credentials of the anthropogenic global warming theory (AGWT) use very unscientific and indeed political ways and means to silence all contradictory — or even skeptical — views about it.  For example, AGWT activists, scientists and even some MPs have written to the BBC begging it not to give "airtime" to AGWT skeptics or critics. [...] Indeed individuals in America have even argued that AGWT skeptics should be prosecuted or criminalized — quite literally!  Will there now be a Gulag built for those who dare to question the complete and total truth of the AGWT?

The Climate Inquisitor.  In a free and open society, the correct way to respond to the accusation that one's work is "intellectually bogus and wrong" is to attempt a rebuttal, not to file a lawsuit.

Obama shuts down debate.  Increasingly, however, it seems that the "shut up and move on" trope has become the go-to response of liberals on a number of serious topics they'd rather not have to discuss in open debate.  Climate change?  We're told there's 100 percent agreement among scientists that the climate is changing, human activity is the cause and America should upend its economy to stop it from happening.

Media ignores sold-out global warming 'skeptic' conference.  Climate scientists skeptical of claims that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are warming the planet gathered in Germany this month for a major, now sold-out climate conference, which the media has opted not to cover.  In early April, the European Institute for Climate and Energy (EIKE) hosted its seventh Climate Conference in Mannheim, Germany.  The two-day conference featured prominent climate scientists including Dr. Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, physicist Nir Shaviv of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and physicist Henrik Svensmark of the Danish National Space Institute.

Warmist Fiona Stanley Says Skepticism Is Like "Child Abuse".  The issue became politicized when Leftists started using the "science" to push their far left political agenda.  Interesting that she has no problem denigrating people who do not agree with the science and the scientists, most of whom do not even have degrees in climate science, or even meteorology, to use a Warmist talking point.  And, it is meant to tell skeptics to shut up.

Torquemada Invades America.  This nation of free and open inquiry has been seized by totalitarians who refuse to entertain other points of view.  The debate about global warming is over[,] say adherents of this position.  When, if ever, has the debate about any scientific issue been over?

Kerry: Big Bucks in Climate Change.  What we usually hear about when the subject is climate change is stuff meant to scare you out of your socks.  Rising oceans, violent storms, draughts, famines, plagues of locusts, and so forth.  The implied alternative is austerity so severe — no cars, rationed electricity, smaller houses, once-a-week cold showers, etc. — that people are inclined to think, "Well, that will never happen," and tune out.  Secretary of State John Kerry is a believer and a scold of those who are called "deniers" to smear them as akin to those who believe the Holocaust never happened.

Thought police on patrol.  Two months ago, a petition bearing more than 110,000 signatures was delivered to The [Washington] Post, demanding a ban on any article questioning global warming.  The petition arrived the day before publication of my column, which consisted of precisely that heresy.  The column ran as usual.  But I was gratified by the show of intolerance because it perfectly illustrated my argument that the left is entering a new phase of ideological agitation — no longer trying to win the debate but stopping debate altogether, banishing from public discourse any and all opposition.

NYT's Thomas Friedman Calls Global Warming Skeptics Trotsky Radicals.  [Scroll down]  Friedman claimed that skeptics are in the bottom 3% of people who believe there are questions about the global warming science but that is not fact at all.  The figure came from one survey that had been doctored.

Green 'smear campaign' against professor who dared to disown 'sexed up' UN climate dossier.  The professor who refused to sign last week's high-profile UN climate report because it was too 'alarmist', has told The Mail on Sunday he has become the victim of a smear campaign.  Richard Tol claims he is fighting a sustained attack on his reputation by a key figure from a leading institution that researches the impact of global warming.  Prof Tol said:  'This has all the characteristics of a smear campaign.  It's all about taking away my credibility as an expert.'

The Liberal Gulag.  Adam Weinstein, whose downwardly mobile credibility has taken him from ABC to Gawker, called for literally imprisoning people with the wrong views about global warming, writing, "Those malcontents must be punished and stopped"; [...] Mr. Weinstein specifically called for political activists, ranging from commentators to think-tank researchers, to be locked in cages as punishment for their political beliefs.  "Those denialists should face jail," he wrote. [...] At the risk of being repetitious, let's dwell on that for a minute:  The Left is calling on people to be prosecuted for speaking their minds regarding their beliefs on an important public-policy question that is, as a political matter, the subject of hot dispute.  That is the stuff of Soviet repression.

The freedom not to question climate change.  The goal of eliminating fossil fuels would inevitably reduce civilization to a thin veneer of culture over a primitive hunting-gathering society.  So with such huge consequences, it would seem a reasonable request to have a debate about the validity of the science which demands such earth-shattering changes from society.  But free debate is the last thing that climate-change proponents want.  Instead, they want everyone to accept "settled science" and move on to the "solution." [...] The earth's climate is changing now, in 2014, just like it has always been changing.  Climate is a dynamic, not a static system.  Ergo, climate change in itself does not prove anything.

Smearing Climate Skeptics.  As even die-hard enthusiasts for the global warming scare campaign begin to admit that they are losing the battle to keep the public alarmed, it is time to examine how this doomsday movement has been sustained for two decades. [...] Despite widespread cries from enviro-activists and reporters that skeptics are given unwarranted attention, when is the last time you saw a global warming news report where skeptic climate assessments were thoroughly spelled out?  And how many times have you seen that done in the twenty-year history of this issue?

Climate scientists refuse to debate global warming 'skeptics' in the media.  Dan Weiss, the director of climate strategy at the liberal Center for American Progress, refused to appear on Fox Business to debate climate skeptic Marc Morano last week.  Morano runs the blog Climate Depot, where he reports on environment and climate news.  Weiss was set to debate Morano on the show "The Independents" but "refused to debate directly with Morano, and chided [the show] for airing his views," according to the Fox Business show.

Climate Change 'as Certain as Auschwitz,' Claims Guardian.  Global warming 'deniers' are as bad as 'Holocaust deniers' because climate change is as "as certain as Auschwitz", a Guardian columnist, Nick Cohen, has claimed.  Anyone who disagrees with this is a "bed-wetting kidult", he says.  Oh, and also, climate change deniers are a bit like people who believe in aliens.

6 Arguments Only A Liberal Could Believe.  [#2]  We're all going to die because man is causing global warming!  Proof?  It's science! Granted, no one can explain the science that proves global warming.  But, science isn't about science, it's about repeating the word "science" over and over again like a magic incantation. [...] Why do you hate science so much?  Why do you want polar bears to die?

US Philosophy Professor: Jail 'Denialist' Climate Scientists for Criminal Negligence.  Scientists who don't believe in catastrophic man-made global warming should be put in prison, a US philosophy professor argues on a website funded by the UK government.  Lawrence Torcello, assistant professor of philosophy at Rochester Institute of Technology, NY, writes in an essay at The Conversation that climate scientists who fail to communicate the correct message about "global warming" should face trial for "criminal negligence".

Bob Beckel Battles Climate Denier on Hannity: You Know Better Than That!'  "There is no scientific proof that we're causing climate change," [Patrick] Moore declared, stressing that he does believe the planet is getting warmer, just not that humans are primarily responsible.  [Bob] Beckel called out Moore for abandoning his environmentalist roots, saying he "sold out" to profit off of large companies that exacerbate climate change with their carbon output.  When Moore protested, saying CO2 goes into "the trees and the food that we eat" rather than the atmosphere, Beckel shouted, "Come on Patrick, you know better than that.  That's what you tell your clients."

Tim Cook's Climate Change Faith Costs Apple, Shareholders.  Apple CEO Tim Cook has told global warming skeptics to "get out of this stock."  But in essence, he did more than that.  He told every Apple shareholder to take a hike and waved potential investors away.  When Cook met with shareholders Friday [2/28/2014], he lost his usual business cool when a group proposed that the company be more open about its environmental activism as well as transparent about costs it incurs as it increases its dependence on renewable energy.  "If you want me to do things only for ROI (return on in vestment) reasons, you should get out of this stock," Cook snapped back.

Personal Score-Settling Is the New Climate Agenda.  Surely, some kind of ending is upon us. Last week climate protesters demanded the silencing of Charles Krauthammer for a Washington Post column that notices uncertainties in the global warming hypothesis. [...] These are indications of a political movement turned to defending its self-image as its cause goes down the drain.  That's how thoroughly defunct, dead, expired is the idea that humanity might take charge of earth's atmosphere through some supreme triumph of the global regulatory state over democracy, sovereignty, nationalism and political self-interest, the very facts of political human nature.

The Original Sin of Global Warming.  [Scroll down]  This is the original sin of the global warming theory: that it was founded in a presumption of guilt against industrial civilization.  All of the billions of dollars in government research funding and the entire cultural establishment that has been built up around global warming were founded on the presumption that we already knew the conclusion — we're "ravaging the planet" — and we're only interested in evidence that supports that conclusion.  That brings us to where we are today.  The establishment's approach to the scientific debate over global warming is to declare that no such debate exists — and to ruthlessly stamp it out if anyone tries to start one.

Climate change advocates try to silence Krauthammer.  Charles Krauthammer says it right up front in his Washington Post column:  "I'm not a global warming believer.  I'm not a global warming denier."  He does, however, challenge the notion that the science on climate change is settled and says those who insist otherwise are engaged in "a crude attempt to silence critics and delegitimize debate."  How ironic, then, that some environmental activists launched a petition urging the Post not to publish Krauthammer's column on Friday.  Their response to opinions they disagree with is to suppress the speech.

Obama's science czar: Opposing climate views outside the 'mainstream scientific opinion'.  White House science czar Dr. John Holdren wasn't in the mood to be contradicted on whether global warming was causing "extreme weather."  Holdren described climate scientists whose work contradicts the White House's global warming claims as outside the "scientific mainstream."

NY Times Cartoon Suggests 'Climate-Change Deniers' Should Be Stabbed to Death.  As far as cartoonists at the New York Times are concerned, if you are skeptical about climate change, you should die.  Preferably in a violent manner. [...] Yes — even killing a climate-change knuckle-dragger is illegal, at least for now.  But give the oh so tolerant true believers more time.  All crimes are justified when one is saving the world.

NY Times publishes cartoon about killing global warming 'deniers'.  When apocalyptic cults turn murderous, they become a danger to the public.  The warmist cult, frustrated by the failure of nature to back-up their prophecies of doom, apparently is turning to homicidal fantasies, and venting them in the pages of the New York Times.

NYT suggests 'deniers' should be stabbed through the heart — like vampires.  So, as WUWT readers well know, I have a different opinion about global warming.  Do you think the New York Times should endorse stabbing me (and others with similar opinions) through the heart like a vampire because I hold that opinion?

Climate Parasites: The Answer to 'Climate Change Deniers'.  It is a basic principle of psychological warfare that the side that controls the language of the argument controls the argument.  Barack Obama's own website is using this PsyWar technique by calling opponents of his cap and trade agenda "climate change deniers."  He has also used the financial resources of the federal government, such as, to marginalize everybody who doesn't agree with him as a climate change denier.  Democrats Sheldon Whitehouse, Harry Reid, and Peter DeFazio also have followed Joseph Goebbels's advice to the effect that if you tell a big lie vigorously and often enough, people will believe it.  All have used the phrase "climate change deniers," on websites paid for by the federal government, to spread the message that anybody who opposes the cap and trade scam is a knuckle-dragging troglodyte.

Why Kerry Is Flat Wrong on Climate Change.  In a Feb. 16 speech in Indonesia, Secretary of State John Kerry assailed climate-change skeptics as members of the "Flat Earth Society" for doubting the reality of catastrophic climate change. [...] But who are the Flat Earthers, and who is ignoring the scientific facts?  In ancient times, the notion of a flat Earth was the scientific consensus, and it was only a minority who dared question this belief.  We are among today's scientists who are skeptical about the so-called consensus on climate change.  Does that make us modern-day Flat Earthers, as Mr. Kerry suggests, or are we among those who defy the prevailing wisdom to declare that the world is round?

Secretary of State Kerry lashes out at climate change skeptics.  U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday called climate change perhaps the world's "most fearsome" destructive weapon and mocked those who deny its existence or question its causes, comparing them to people who insist the Earth is flat.

Climate-Change Skeptics Have a Right to Free Speech, Too.  I find myself tugged in two directions by the latest ruling in the defamation suit filed by climatologist Michael Mann.  A professor of meteorology at Pennsylvania State University, Mann has long been an object of ire among climate-change skeptics.  Now it seems they have let their ire get out of hand.

Prince Charles slams climate-change deniers.  Prince Charles has called people who deny human-made climate change a "headless chicken brigade" who are ignoring overwhelming scientific evidence.

GOP lawmakers accuse EPA of muzzling scientists on climate regulations.  Republican leaders on the House Science Committee are accusing the Environmental Protection Agency of disregarding science in its push to impose carbon dioxide limits on power plants.  Committee Chairman Lamar Smith, R-Texas, and 20 other Republican lawmakers sent a letter to EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy on Thursday, claiming the agency has "muzzled" members of its independent science advisory board.

Acclaimed Climatologist Bette Midler Explains Why Global Warming Is Real Or Something.  Bette Midler has connected the dots to prove — definitively — that global warming is real, America.  Even more impressive, she was able to do so in a single tweet — just 13 words.

Global warming advocates should take out their earplugs.  Having a rational conversation about public policy issues is becoming increasingly difficult because so many advocates will brook no disagreement, even if their positions are contradicted by facts or logic.  Instead of engaging the argument, they demonize those who disagree with them as corrupt, ignorant, racist or worst [sic].  They use these ad hominem attacks, in turn, to justify their refusal to compromise.  The result is that urgent problems grow steadily worse.  Environmental issues often provide vivid examples of this process, especially if the issue is global warming.

EPA Appoints Radical Activist as Head of 'Scientific Integrity'.  Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy yesterday [11/25/2013] appointed a top staffer with the environmental activist group Union of Concerned Scientists to serve as the agency's top objective referee on scientific integrity issues.  McCarthy's selection of Francesca Grifo raises troubling concerns about EPA rushing headlong into anti-science environmental activism.  Grifo led so-called scientific integrity efforts at the Union of Concerned Scientists.  While Grifo led such efforts, the UCS attempted to suppress scientific democracy and dissent, expressing outrage that a Congressman who is skeptical of the UCS' asserted global warming crisis was allowed to be a member of the House Science Committee.

Science, Belief and Policy.  The number of people who understand the issues and who are, to varying degrees, sceptical of what they see as an unnecessarily alarmist view based on incomplete evidence is not really known, but it is substantial; probably much smaller than the mainstream, but then science is about assessing evidence rather than taking a democratic vote.  It is difficult to be objective, of course, but I see a large number of sceptics who are really what Matt Ridley has termed 'lukewarmists'.  They know that higher levels of carbon dioxide will have some effect on temperature but see no evidence either that this is the dominant effect or that current costly political prescriptions are likely to have any worthwhile impact.  For this, they are criticised by many and vilified as 'deniers' by their more zealous opponents.

What The Know-Nothings Know.  They know that the world has been warming due to humanity's awfulness, even as it has cooled for the last 15 years or more, and their only answers involve hiding evidence.  They know global warming and cooling have never naturally happened before, because they left that data out of their computer runs.  They know that solar activity has nothing to do with global temperatures.  They know that anyone who points these matters out is "anti-science."  They know that only science paid for by liberals is "settled," and that to question evidently cooked "science" makes one equivalent to a Holocaust "denier."

One religion is enough.  We are all aware of the climate enthusiasts, who advocate quite substantial, and costly, responses to what they see as irrefutable evidence that the world's climate faces catastrophe.  By employing a sanctimonious tone against people who do not share their view, they show their true colours:  to them the cause has become a substitute religion.  Increasingly offensive language is used.  The most egregious example has been the term "denier".  We are all aware of the particular meaning that word has acquired in contemporary parlance.  It has been employed in this debate with some malice aforethought.  An overriding feature of the debate is the constant attempt to intimidate policy makers, in some cases successfully, with the mantras of "follow the science" and "the science is truly settled".

Who are the true denialists?  People have the nasty habit of giving their opponents names.  Those who are convinced that humans are wrecking the world by burning fossil fuels call those who don't believe them "denialists."  It implies that they are close to the Holocaust deniers, and so are clearly beyond the pale.  I have come to the conclusion that they are wrong.  The true denialists are those who believe in global warming, and who will go to any lengths to deny the evidence against that position.

LA Times: We Don't Publish Letters to Editor Claiming Man Isn't Causing Climate Change.  It's one thing for a news outlet to advance the as yet unproven theory of anthropogenic global warming; it's quite another to admit that you won't publish views that oppose it.  As amazing as it may same, that's exactly what the Los Angeles Times did Saturday [10/5/2013] in an article by editorial writer Jon Healey.

LA Times to No Longer Print Letters that Disagree with Global Warming.  The Warmist myth is collapsing.  The latest data have thoroughly undermined it.  But that just means the Party has to circle its wagons even tighter.

The Press Endures Obama's Unrequited Love.  A recent, glaring example of how some of today's journalists have debased their profession was the decision by Paul Thornton, editor of The Los Angeles Times letter's section, to openly refuse to publish any letters from skeptics about the global warming hoax that blames "climate change" on human activity, not the Sun, oceans, and other natural factors.

It's a Cooked Book.  The AP itself uses the term "climate skeptics," which is less pointed than "denialists" but is still problematic.  The purported opposition between "skeptics" and adherents to "the scientific consensus" is nonsensical, for skepticism is at the very heart of the scientific method.  When the data call a theory into question, a scientist revisits the theory.  Instead, the panel is employing the antiscientific method:  It "is expected to affirm" the theory "with greater certainty than ever."  And look how the AP sums up that theory:  "that humans are cooking the planet by burning fossil fuels and cutting down CO2-absorbing forests."  That's science fiction, not science.

Al Gore: 'There needs to be a political price' for climate 'denial'.  Former vice president Al Gore on Monday [9/23/2013] called for making climate change "denial" a taboo in society.  "Within the market system we have to put a price on carbon, and within the political system, we have to put a price on denial," Gore said at the Social Good Summit New York City.

The Editor says...
Next year, perhaps it will be called the Double-Plus Good Summit.

UN climate panel: Hmm, how can we selectively edit these inconvenient truths?  [A]nyone who doesn't immediately and vigorously seize upon the eco-radicals' predetermined conclusions about the imminent catastrophes climate change — as well as their recommendations that we must quickly and forcefully self-depress our economies from the top down, spending money we don't have and making people poorer — is forever destined to be lumped into the oh-so-heinous category of a stubbornly flat-earth-society, knuckle-dragging climate "denier."

Uncivil scientists thwart Cliff Mass' climate-change debate.  [Cliff] Mass is an atmospheric sciences professor at the University of Washington.  He has been troubled for years by the way the subject of global warming can turn typically even-headed scientists into politicized, tribal warriors.  As he sees it, there are the vast majority of scientists, including himself, who think human-caused global warming is a reality.  But some in this group, frustrated at political inaction, have begun hyping the effects of climate change beyond what the science supports.  "It has taken on some of the traits of orthodoxy, in that it can't be questioned," Mass says.

Man Made Climate Change Arguments Don't Survive Scrutiny.  Proponents of man-made climate change are being challenged more and more by scientists who don't buy into the climate catastrophe scare.  The arguments used to dismiss the challengers range from calling the non-believers names such as president Obama's "flat earthers" and his use of the term "denier" which is meant to equate non-believers with holocaust deniers, very un-presidential.

Who are the real deniers?  Global warmers are forever calling those of us who disagree with them 'deniers.'  This thinly veiled reference to the Holocaust and the murder of six million people is far from appropriate.  Do skeptics deny the Holocaust and the science?  Of course not, but it brings up an interesting question: [...]

Time for the BBC to ban the 'D' word?.  Personally I don't believe in banning words — but I do believe in intellectual and moral consistency.  You'd never hear an organisation as eggshell-treadingly right-on as the BBC use pejorative terms for Jews or black people or homosexuals or sufferers of cerebral palsy.  So why, pray, does it feel it can persist in using the deliberately offensive term "denier" to write off anyone who is sceptical about Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming?

Al Gore compares global warming skeptics with racists, apartheid supporters, and homophobes.  A skeptic is more likely to receive cheers than boos by challenging orthodoxy.  And Gore fails to mention in the interview that US emissions of CO2 have dropped to levels not seen since 1996 — without any of his carbon get rich quick schemes or silly government pronouncements about CO2 being poisonous.

Krauthammer: The Idea That Climate Change Is A Closed Issue Is "Arrogant And Anti-Scientific".  ["]Freeman Dyson, who is one of the great physicists of our time, he's a climate skeptic, he has more IQ in his pinky than the entire political echelon of the EPA put together, and they are saying this man is a scientific illiterate?  The entire idea of science is that you are open to contrary evidence, it is the definition of a scientific theory.["]

All Barack and No Populist Bite.  On Tuesday [8/13/2013], I visited the offices of two local congressmen:  Cincinnati's Steve Chabot and Northern Kentucky's Thomas Massie.  My self-appointed mission was to observe appearances by protesting members of Organizing for Action, the now supposedly "independent" entity which until late last year ran President Barack Obama's presidential campaigns.  All of OFA's protest visits "just so happen" to target 135 Republicans characterized as "climate deniers."  As a result, on Wednesday, Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe, one of the very few real heroes in what used to be the world's greatest deliberative body, announced an investigation into whether OFA has violated the Hatch Act's prohibition against engaging in political campaign activities.

For 'Action August" Little Obamanists harangue "Climate Deniers".  The cadre serving under the banner of Organizing for America have declared this month "Action August," and the marching orders were issued for the Little Obamanists to stage rallies and blizzard their neighborhoods with flyers and postcards about Global Warming. [...] Key to Action August is the effort to shame members of Congress who oppose the president's environmental agenda, but also to stick them with the label:  "Climate Denier."

More about the OFA.

Interior Secretary: I don't want any climate-change deniers in my department.  What would happen to somebody at the department [of the Interior] who raised some skepticism regarding [Sally] Jewell's take on climate change?  Would they be in danger of losing their job?

Climate Change 'Deniers' Not Welcome at Interior — Secy. Jewell.  DOI Secretary Sally Jewell told employees today that combatting climate change is a "privilege" and "moral imperative," adding:  "I hope there are no climate change deniers in the Department of Interior," E&E News PM reports.  Such moralizing would be funny were it not for the chilling effect it is bound to have in an agency already mired in group think.

Obama's Climate Change Speech Ignores Science & EU Experience.  President Obama was playing to his most extreme "green" constituency in his climate and energy speech at Georgetown University today, blasting global warming skeptics as "flat-earth society" ostriches with their heads in the sand.  President Obama said he does not have "patience for anyone who denies that this problem is real."

Is Climate Change Our No. 1 Crisis, Mr. President?  Global temperatures have been flat for 16 years — a curious time to unveil a grand, hugely costly, socially disruptive anti-warming program.  Now, this inconvenient finding is not dispositive.  It doesn't mean there is no global warming.  But it is something that the very complex global warming models that Obama naïvely claims represent settled science have trouble explaining.  It therefore highlights the president's presumption in dismissing skeptics as flat-earth know-nothings.  On the contrary.  It's flat-earthers like Obama who refuse to acknowledge the problematic nature of contradictory data.

The Global Warming Fraud.  Newspapers, magazines, television programs, classrooms, and conversations all over America are awash in fraud which is being covered by the mantle of "science."  The birth of the Global Warming Fraud can be traced to a conference organized by anthropologist Margaret Mead, in 1975. [...] Anyone who dares to challenge this sacred majesterium of "science" is a heretic and an ignoramus, according to advocates of The Global Warming Fraud.  Nobody wants to be called stupid, much less really be stupid.

Howard Dean on climate realists: "Run 'em over".  The former Governor noted it was the 10th anniversary of his campaign speech and talked about the progress he's seen in that time — such as the ability to fight back against people who say "crazy" things.  "I heard a great program on CurrentTV yesterday about people who deny climate change, and I'm in favor of what their solution was," Dean said.  "We don't have to talk to them anymore about stuff that's not true and this propaganda that's a lie.  We're just going to run 'em over.  And that's exactly what we're going to do."

Team Obama calls global warming doubters 'crazy'.  The president's recently formed grass-roots campaign operation revealed Thursday that it plans to attack Republicans who question radical global warming hype, dubbing them "crazy" purveyors of "far-fetched conspiracy theories."  In a fundraising memo from President Obama's re-election campaign manager, Organizing for Action slammed "climate deniers" and their doubts, which Jim Messina compared to the nutty things a crazy uncle would say at Thanksgiving dinner.

Academic warmists celebrate book burning at San Jose State University.  At the San Jose State University Meteorology Department, they'd rather burn books than read them, if their faith in the gospel of man-made global warming would be challenged by the contents.

Climate Change Conversation Aborted.  An editorial essay by American Chemical Society (ACS) officers Bassam Shakhashiri and Jerry Bell (Science 5 April 2013) extends a gracious invitation for a "respectful conversation" about Climate Change.  Yet when I tried to respond, the editors of Science refused to print it.  So much for "conversation."

Eco taxes are nonsense if the earth isn't warming.  Mysteriously, anything can be produced as evidence of global warming — hot weather, cold weather, wet weather and dry.  Climate change has become a religion and any diversion from the orthodox view is pounced on as evidence of heretical wickedness.  Those who beg to differ about the global warming creed are held up as wicked rather than merely sceptical.

Global Warming: One NASA Scientist Vs. More Than 20.  The most famous NASA scientist is James Hansen, the political activist and expert on the Venusian atmosphere who sounded the man-made global warming alarm at a 1988 congressional hearing.  He's just one man, but the media and the political left have made him out to be an infallible voice on climate change.  We live in a society where dissent from the left-wing narrative is not tolerated.  So it's no surprise that more than 20 retired NASA scientists and engineers are not getting the same media treatment that a single doomsayer whose quarter-of-a-century-old prediction has not come to pass.

Global warming takes a vacation.  Those who dare assert the Earth's temperature isn't on a perilous rise are derided as "deniers."  For liberals, the climate debate has ended, and it is an unquestionable article of faith that mankind's carbon-dioxide emanations have set the stage for rising oceans, devastating hurricanes and disasters on a scale never before seen.  To say otherwise is unthinkable, and that has created a dilemma.  It's not actually getting warmer.

Government Scientist Gets Fired for Telling the Truth.  Something's amiss at the Department of Interior.  Eight government scientists were recently fired or reassigned after voicing concerns to their superiors about faulty environmental science used for policy decisions.  Which begs the question, "Are some government agencies manipulating science to advance political agendas?"

How to Destroy Science: Cast Self-Interest as Public Interest.  [Bruce] Alberts is obviously a scientist with broad interests — or, depending on your point of view, a know-it-all who is spread very thin.  According to his website, he has managed to collect 16 honorary degrees and currently serves on 25 non-profit boards.  Yet this busy man still finds the time to lecture our political leaders.  He wants them to stop denying the science of climate change.  Apparently, Alberts thinks that the politicians should shut up and listen to brilliant scientists, like himself, who really understand these things.

Professor Calls for Death Penalty for Climate Change 'Deniers'.  It is as inevitable as the rising of the sun; the Left, when thwarted in their quest for power, suggests the use of lethal force to compel those who disagree.  There is a nauseating litany of murders done by our betters in their pursuit of the Benthamite vision of "the greatest good for the most people" — which in their minds equates to collectivization and socialism.  You have Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Margaret Sanger, Mao Tse Tung, Pol Pot.  Now we can add one more name to the list:  Professor Richard Parncutt, Musicologist at Graz University in Austria.

Progressive Professor Demands Death Penalty for Global Warming Skeptics and the Pope.  Richard Parncutt is an Austrian professor of Music, which makes him an expert on global warming, who originally hails from Australia, but in true progressive style is ashamed of Australia. [...] Parncutt also hates Israel and Mormons, and wants a global wealth tax.  And even though he is opposed to the death penalty in the case of mass murderers, he's willing to consider an exception for people he really disagrees with.

University Of Graz "Death To Deniers!" Professor Richard Parncutt Calls For The Execution Of Pope Benedict.  It's nice to see that academia in Austria is getting more and more tolerant with every passing day.  In fact we haven't seen this level of tolerance in about 70 years.

Professor Richard Parncutt Calls for Death Penalty for Global Warming Hoax Deniers.  Hardcore global warming ideologues are not just kooks, but evil kooks.  If that sounds like hyperbole, check out the final solution Australian expat Richard Parncutt, a professor at the University of Graz in Austria, advocates for those who won't drink the Kool-Aid voluntarily:  ["]I propose that the death penalty is appropriate for influential GW deniers.["]

Richard Parncutt: Musicology Prof. Changes His Tune For Christmas.  After exposure of his death-penalty dissertation on several sceptical blogs yesterday, Prof. Richard Parncutt took down and rewrote the page on the University of Graz website.  I have reproduced his reconsidered Christmas message to the climate debate below.  He makes much of his membership of human rights organisation Amnesty International.

Earth First! Moonbats Call for "Eco-Assassinations".  If Professor Richard Parncutt's demand that global warming deniers be executed didn't convince you that enviromoonbats are not just flaky but evil, maybe Earth First!'s call for "eco-assassins" will work.  Enthralled by the terrorist activities of their hero and role model Ted Kaczynski, EF! is forming a splinter group explicitly devoted to not eschewing violence.  A list of targets is provided, complete with addresses and phone numbers, mainly featuring CEOs of companies that provide society with the energy it requires to function.

Earth First Calling for Creepy Mock "Assasinations" hideout.  So, they collect information on where their targets live and work, and invite their moronic cadre of tree huggers to target them.  Of course, the first thing this does is send the message of "we know where you live."  But, I think the more sinister note is that the left has a history of carrying out assassinations at an appointed time.

British peer ejected from UN climate talks for denouncing protocol.  Lord Monckton of Brenchley was thrown out of the United Nations climate change talks in Doha last night. [...] After a short speech, in which he was booed, he was escorted out of the meeting by UN guards.  He is understood to have claimed there is no global warming in the last sixteen years, and therefore the science needs to be reviewed.  Claiming to represent Asian coastal nations, he is understood to have said:  "In the 16 years we have been coming to these events there has been no global warming at all." [...] He has been banned for life from UN climate talks.

Lord Monckton Evicted from UN Climate Summit After Challenging Global Warming.  Apparently criticizing Islam is not the only thing the UN considers blasphemous. [...] "In the 16 years we have been coming to these conferences, there has been no global warming," Monckton said as confused murmurs filled the hall and then turned into a chorus of boos.

Report finds Labor Department's green jobs program failing.  The news media loves the Democrats and they are constantly making fun of Republicans for doubting evolution and global warming.  I submit to you that believe in green jobs programs is the scientific equivalent of flat-Earthism.  And I have the numbers to prove it.  They have the blind faith and the insults.  We have the evidence.

Freedom of speech is deader in Australia.  It goes without saying — as it did with the Bolt affair — that the apparatus of the state must be used to crush all such voices of dissent.

The Anti-Free-Speech Brigade.  Last week 18,000 people signed a petition demanding that a publicly-funded television station 'never again' report on a particular point-of-view. [...] Here's what that petition said:  ["]Immediately investigate the NewsHour segment featuring climate change denier and conspiracy theorist Anthony Watts for violations of PBS standards on accuracy, integrity, and transparency, and recommend corrective action to ensure that such reporting never again occurs on PBS.["]  If I were serving as ombudsman I doubt I would take seriously anyone who couldn't make their point in a professional and polite manner.  Was it really necessary to insult Watts, who runs the most-read climate change blog in the world?  What purpose was served by labeling him a climate change denier and a conspiracy theorist?  And shouldn't people who hurl such accusations be required to supply some sort of proof?

The Skeptics Are Thrashing The Alarmists In The Global Warming Debate.  Rarely will global warming alarmists step into the ring for a live debate that people can watch.  There are good reasons for this.  When you remove alarmists from the protection of a fawning liberal press and subject them to a debate on equal terms without media filters, embarrassing things tend to happen.

NZ Justice shows courts are useless in a science debate.  [Scroll down]  What's unnerving about this is that if "authority" is determined not by behavior, logic or quality of reasoning, but simply by government decree, then the court becomes a de facto arm of the government — because only people who are funded by the government (all "climate scientists" are funded by government) can give evidence that the court recognizes.  Who can criticize and hold government or statutory authorities to proper standards?  Not the citizens, for they are not "qualified".

Be Skeptical of Skeptic's Skepticism of Skeptics.  Anyone who starts out by using the hate-speech term "Climate Deniers" — laden with political overtones of Holocaust denial — cannot expect to be taken seriously as an objective scientist.  Despite this promise of "Climate Scientists' Answers", only four peer-reviewed papers by climate scientists are cited among the 41 references at the end of the article.  And the implicit notion that "Climate Deniers" are non-scientists while true-believers are "Climate Scientists" is also unreasonable.  Many eminent climate scientists are skeptical of the more extremist claims made by the UN's climate panel, the IPCC.  We shall cite some of their work in this response to the Professor's unscientific article.

Kerry: Climate Change 'As Dangerous' as Iran's Nukes and Possibility of War.  The situation facing the planet because of climate change is "as dangerous" as the possibility of war over Iran's nuclear activities, Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) told the U.S. Senate on Wednesday [8/1/2012].  Delivering what his office described as "a major address and current assessment of the global climate change challenge," Kerry acknowledged and bemoaned the success of those who question the notion of human-induced global warming.  He compared skeptics to flat-earthers and decried what he called a "concerted assault on reason."

Letter from R.C.E. Wyndham To the Bishop of Exeter.  [Scroll down to page 17]  The ethical considerations arise from the activities of propagandists when
  •   they seek to howl down any form of questioning or dissent,
  •   they use threatening vilification as a propagandist tool,
  •   they damage the careers of those who have the temerity to question their dogma,
  •   they wilfully and knowingly misrepresent data,
  •   they wilfully and knowingly suppress contra-indicative data,
  •   they claim data to be authentic and rigorous when, in reality, it is cherry picked from partisan environmentalist propaganda material,
  •   they undermine scientific method by refusing to disclose and share data/methodology [...]

Professor fired after expressing climate change skepticism.  Oregon State University chemistry professor Nicholas Drapela was fired without warning three weeks ago and has still been given no reason for the university's decision to "not renew his contract."  Drapela, an outspoken critic of man-made climate change, worked at the university for 10 years.

The '96-to-present smear of skeptic scientists.  We all need to ask why the MSM didn't find the red flags I describe in these pieces — 45 all together.  The smear — in its successful form — goes back to 1996, but we need to find out more about its '91-'95 time period.

Lord of the Skeptics.  [Scroll down]  Whenever inconvenient facts don't fit the desired narrative, out come the nasty names.  Skeptics are called things like "birthers, baggers and blowhards," "love letter truthers," racists, extremists, "transcripters," "planet wreckers," flat-earthers, deniers, crack-smokers, and crackpots — in order to mock, ridicule, and shut them up, Alinsky-style.

Climate-Catastrophe Skeptics — If You Can't Beat 'Em, Shrink 'Em!  For nearly three decades, certain U.S., U.K., and U.N. activists, like NASA's James Hanson, have tried to sell governments on draconian centralized economic policies supposedly to save the planet.  Anyone disagreeing — regardless of credentials and reasoning — becomes the target of rhetorical terrorism.  But the skeptical resistance is so strong and growing so rapidly — not just in the public, but also among scientists — that the alarmists increasingly show signs of both despair and loss of self-control.

Environmentalists compared their opponents to mass murderers long before the Heartland Institute.  [Scroll down]  Consider the leading British green who said climate-change deniers should be held responsible for the "coming" "Holocaust" and thus might have to be banged up for their complicity in mass murder.  "I wonder what sentences judges might hand down at future international criminal tribunals on those who will be partially but directly responsible for millions of deaths from starvation, famine and disease in decades ahead", he mused.  The popular eco-magazine Grist has called for "some sort of climate Nuremberg" to try the "bastards" who deny climate change.  When they aren't being likened to Hitler, climate-change sceptics are being lumped in with those who appeased him.

Eco Crowd Growing Desperate — and Dangerous lose steam, tempers.  Writing for, [Steve] Zwick has called on so-called "climate deniers" to be treated like virtual war criminals:  "We know who the active denialists are — not the people who buy the lies, mind you, but the people who create the lies," he writes.  "Let's start keeping track of them now, and when the famines come, let's make them pay.  Let's let their houses burn until the innocent are rescued.  Let's swap their safe land for submerged islands.  Let's force them to bear the cost of rising food prices.  They broke the climate.  Why should the rest of us have to pay for it?"  Those who disagree with him are not merely mistaken, they are malevolent, unworthy even of persuasion through honest debate.  Instead, "denialists" deserve only to have their homes razed.  This is becoming a more and more common feature of environmentalist rhetoric.

The Editor says...
Imagine the narcissism of a person who believes that he (or anyone else) could break the climate.

Climate deniers should be tracked and made to pay 'when the famine comes', says inflammatory climate columnist.  A liberal environmental analyst sparked a firestorm after he used an outlandish example that suggested those who deny the existence of man-made global warming should have their houses burnt down.  Steve Zwick used the example of the fire department in a small Tennessee town allowed several houses to burn to the ground because their owners had not paid the mandatory $75 fee for the service.

Climate Alarmist Calls For Burning Down Skeptics' Homes.  Writing for Forbes Magazine, climate change alarmist Steve Zwick calls for skeptics of man-made global warming to be tracked, hunted down and have their homes burned to the ground, yet another shocking illustration of how eco-fascism is rife within the environmentalist lobby.

Global Warming's Reckless Rhetoric.  An acclaimed environmental studies professor contends that those who do not believe that humans are causing global warming are mentally ill and need to be "treated," according to a recent story at American Thinker.  Keri Norgaard teaches at the University of Oregon and is the author of Living in Denial: Climate Change, Emotions and Everyday Life.  In her book she compares global warming skepticism to racism, arguing that there is a "cultural resistance" that keeps some people from acknowledging that humans are responsible for global warming.  This condition, she claims, "... must be recognized and treated" as an aberrant sociological behavior.

The Religion of Global Warming.  [Scroll down]  Global warming is harsh toward skeptics, heretics, and other "deniers."  One of the most dangerous features of the global warming religion is its level of intimidation of the heretics, the non-believers.  For example, former Vice President Al Gore called skeptics "global warming deniers."  Many climatologists have been intimidated into silence, or have had calls to punish them go out.

The Science of Half-Baked Ideas.  The more we learn about climate science, the more we learn what a shabby, back-of-the-envelope business it is.  Dr. Michael Mann, the climate science poster boy who simplified the global climate of the last millennium into a hockey stick, just came out with a book to remind us how anyone who disagrees with him is a shill for dark forces.

'Fakegate': Climate Change Fanatics Wage War on Dissenters.  The rise of environmentalism, however, has generated a war on science, first by distorting it, and then by propagandizing the 'findings', studies' and resulting claims based on them."  The Heartland Institute, as a leading voice, led the effort to debunk the hoax through its sponsorship of six international conferences featuring scientists and others who presented papers demonstrating "that 0.038 percent of CO2 in the atmosphere had little or no "greenhouse" effect on the Earth's climate or weather events."  Heartland's six International Conferences on Climate Change (ICCC) attracted scientists worldwide, who employed science rather than pseudo-science in their presentations.

Statement by The Heartland Institute on Gleick Confession.  Earlier this evening [2/20/2012], Peter Gleick, a prominent figure in the global warming movement, confessed to stealing electronic documents from The Heartland Institute in an attempt to discredit and embarrass a group that disagrees with his views.  Gleick's crime was a serious one.  The documents he admits stealing contained personal information about Heartland staff members, donors, and allies, the release of which has violated their privacy and endangered their personal safety.

Global warming's desperate caper.  For believers in a science that supposedly is "settled," global-warming advocates are awfully concerned about the need to silence dissent.  Last week, the ethics chairman for the American Geophysical Union resigned in disgrace over his role in a black-bag job meant to intimidate the Heartland Institute, one of the most effective voices questioning the anti-carbon-dioxide orthodoxy.

The Not-So-Vast Conspiracy.  When did it become received media wisdom that global warming skepticism was all the work of shadowy right-wing groups lavishly funded by oil companies?  As best we can tell, it started with a 1995 Harper's magazine article claiming to expose this "high-powered engine of disinformation."  Today anyone who raises a doubt about the causes of global warming is accused of fronting for, say, Exxon, whatever the facts.

Global warming activists seek to purge 'deniers' among local weathermen.  Concerned that too many "deniers" are in the meteorology business, global warming activists this month launched a campaign to recruit local weathermen to hop aboard the alarmism bandwagon and expose those who are not fully convinced that the world is facing man-made doom.

Scientists want climate change in young minds.  [Scroll down]  The NCSE and other groups instead will launch a public relations effort.  If it is successful, climate change skeptics could become a small minority and might be derided for their beliefs.  Some already have faced persecution.  Last week, Reuters news service reported that actor and conservative economist Ben Stein filed a $300,000 lawsuit against Japanese manufacturer Kyocera after, he said, the company booted him from an advertising campaign when it learned he doesn't subscribe to the theory that humans are responsible for climate change.

Dissent on global warming has been shut down from the start.  The odd thing about the great debate on global warming is that there never really was a debate.  As soon as the global warming scare exploded on the world in 1988, to its promoters there could be no argument about it.  The scientists who that year set up the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) were already convinced beyond doubt that 'human-induced climate change' was a reality.  Al Gore was soon already pronouncing 'the science is settled'.

UK police seize computers of skeptic blogger in England.  The first blogger to break the Climategate2 story has had a visit from the police and has had his computers seized.  Tallbloke's Talkshop first reported on CG2 due to the timing of the release being overnight in the USA.  Today he was raided by six UK police (Norfolk Constabulary and Metropolitan police) and several of his computers were seized as evidence.

Global Warming: the Guilty Men.  [Scroll down]  How did they get away with this stuff?  It's a question I find myself asking time and again of all those establishment figures using every manner of dirty trick to promote the Man Made Global Warming scam.  As we saw with Appeasement and we saw again with the Euro, foremost among these dirty tricks is a relentless campaign to discredit those who disagree with them by implying that they are mad, extreme, out-of-touch, unrepresentative, ill-informed.

The New Deniers.  The recent publication of a report by the National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academy of Sciences prompted a number of editorial pieces that repeated this "consensus of scientists" argument.  Typically, the pieces presented or summarized no data in support of the catastrophic predictions, nor did they even acknowledge alternative explanations for whatever warming the earth may be experiencing.

The Warmists Strike Back.  Science is supposed to be about truth, not what the party says is truth.  The modern science establishment is increasingly resembling George Orwell's Ministry of Love; two plus two equals five, if we say so!  After all, ignorance is strength!  Now stop that dissent.

Gore's plan to demonize catastrophic climate change skeptics.  Al Gore invented the internet.  He and Tipper were the basis for Erich Segal's book, Love Story.  He grew up and worked in tobacco fields, he was pro-life before he was pro choice, and his mother sang him to sleep as an infant with "Look for the Union Label."  Now, he is creating more lies, the big lie, the evil formula:  Call people indefensible names so they shut up.

'Climate scepticism is the new racism' says Gore.  Just as "racist" has been honed over the decades by liberal-lefties for casual use as a deadly weapon against anyone who disagrees them, so "climate denier" has become the new leftist shorthand for "evil, wrong, uncaring, right-wing — and almost certainly funded by Big Oil."  In both cases, the intent is the same:  to close down the argument by implying that your opponent is so morally compromised that his case isn't even worth consideration.

Gore: Global warming skeptics are this generation's racists.  One day climate change skeptics will be seen in the same negative light as racists, or so says former Vice President Al Gore.  In an interview with former advertising executive and Climate Reality Project collaborator Alex Bogusky broadcast on UStream on Friday, Gore explained that in order for climate change alarmists to succeed, they must "win the conversation" against those who deny there is a crisis.

Perry and Global Warming.  Last week Rick Perry questioned the prevailing orthodoxy on global warming.  There was, as is easy to imagine, no shortage of warmists waiting to pounce.

'BBC's biased climate science reporting isn't biased enough' claims report.  As Biased BBC notes, it has been five years since the BBC officially abandoned all pretence that it was adopting a neutral position on "Climate Change".  In a 2007 BBC Trust policy report, it wrote:  ["]The BBC has held a high level seminar with some of the best scientific experts (on whose and what measurement) and has come to the view that the weight of evidence no longer justifies equal space being given to the opponents of consensus.["]  This anti-heretic policy it has been pursuing with Torquemada-like fervour ever since.

Climategate U Loses Bid to Stifle Critic.  James Delingpole, a take-no-prisoner blogger with the Daily Telegraph, has been a relentless critic of the university and the professor at the heart of the scandal, Phil Jones.  In an attempt to curb Delingpole's blog posts, the university lodged a complaint with the UK Press Complaints Commission, an independent body.  The Commission's decision, just out, is a crushing repudiation of the university's attempt to manage dissent that could strike a blow for free speech everywhere.

Britain's Prince Charles Blasts Climate-Change Skeptics.  Prince Charles lashed out Wednesday [2/9/2011] at climate change skeptics, saying they are playing "a reckless game of roulette" with the planet's future.

Pop Went the Climate Bubble.  The New York Times' editorial writers have apparently spent the last 11 months in a Rip Van Winkle-like state of unconsciousness when it comes to climate change.  Monday's [10/18/2010] lead editorial, "In Climate Denial Again," railed about the 19 of 20 or so Republican Senate candidates who do not "accept the scientific consensus that humans are largely responsible for global warming."

Daily Kos Editor Says Skeptics Should Commit Suicide.  A Daily Kos contributing editor has suggested that "Steve Milloy and his buddies" commit suicide or be euthanized apparently for the crime of opposing global warming alarmism.

Smearing Global Warming Skeptics.  Meteorologist blogger Anthony Watts normally talks about the crumbling science of man-caused global warming, but recently described an uninvited office guest demanding to know about his alleged "big oil funding."  The charge that only the lure of big money causes people to question warmist gospel is old, but, turns out, of highly questionable origin.

Objective:  Silence the global-warming skeptics.  A noted skeptic of "man-made climate change" says attempts are being made to ban individuals like himself from testifying before political committees.  Marc Morano of has testified numerous times on Capitol Hill in regards to alleged "climate change," and was even the communications director for Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) on the minority staff for the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.  But he says he drew the ire of one individual when he was asked to testify in the state of Louisiana.  According to Morano, Commissioner Foster Campbell of the Louisiana Public Service Commission was none too happy after engaging in a debate with Morano over climate change.

Silencing Dissent on Global Warming.  [In 2007], the Weather Channel's Dr. Heidi Cullen called for the decertification of weathermen who were skeptical of manmade global warming.  Grist Magazine's staff writer David Roberts said that his solution for the "bastards" who were members of what he termed the global warming "denial industry" is, "When we've finally gotten serious about global warming, when the impacts are really hitting us and we're in a full worldwide scramble to minimize the damage, we should have war crimes trials for these bastards — some sort of climate Nuremberg."

Global Warming:  Silencing The Critics.  A recent poll of 530 climatologists in 27 countries showed 34.7 percent of interviewees endorsed the notion that a substantial part of the current global warming trend — which might see temperatures rise by a degree or two, on average, by century's end — is caused by man's industrial activities:  driving cars and the like.  More than a fifth — 20.5 percent — rejected this "anthropogenic hypothesis."  Half were undecided.

Global Warming Censored:  How the Major Networks Silence the Debate on Climate Change.  So much for that job requirement of balance and objectivity.  When it came to global warming the media clearly left out dissent in favor of hype, cute penguins and disastrous predictions.

A Major Contributor To Climate Science Effectively Sidelined By Climate Deceivers.  I was saddened to hear that Ernst Georg Beck died after a battle with cancer.  I was flattered when he asked me to review one of his early papers on the historic pattern of atmospheric CO2 and its relationship to global warming.  I was struck by the precision, detail and perceptiveness of his work and urged its publication.  I also warned him about the personal attacks and unscientific challenges he could expect.  On 6 November 2009 he wrote to me, "In Germany the situation is comparable to the times of medieval inquisition."

State Climatologist Invited, then Uninvited to Rally.  On Wednesday, August 25, I was invited by Environment America to speak at its September 8 press conference on "Extreme Weather in Delaware", to promote the release of their new report on the subject at Legislative Hall.  Ms. Hannah Leone was pleased to have me speak because my "knowledge on climate change and weather would be a great asset to the event."  On Friday, August 27, I was uninvited from the event by Ms. Leone, who noted that "I believe it is in the best interest of the success of our report that you do not participation [sic] in this event"...

Blowing Up the Climate Skeptics.  This is where communism and socialism ultimately lead — even of the eco-variety.  You don't get with the program; you get exterminated.

Climate Change Group Apologizes for Violent Video.  Emaciated polar bears clutching to melting icebergs.  Smokestacks fading to reveal wind turbines and clear air.  These are the kinds of images you typically see in a TV spot for climate change awareness or clean energy use.  But exploding children?  That's precisely what's depicted in a new ad released Friday [10/1/2010] by British clean energy group 10:10, ironically titled "No Pressure."

"One of the two ancient principles of natural justice long recognized in British law is audiatur et altera pars.  Hear the other side too.  It's certainly cheaper, and it's probably right."

17,000 People Who Don't Exist.  Apostles of the Global Warming religion claim their "science" is "settled" and that there is no disagreement in the scientific community on man-made global warming.  Well, there are over 17,000 verified signatures by PhD scientists who don't believe in anthropogenic global warming.  It's call the Oregon Petition.

Filmmaker James Cameron Backs Out of Global Warming Debate HE Organized.  Multi-millionaire filmmaker James Cameron on Sunday backed out of a global warming debate that he asked for and organized.  For those that haven't been following the recent goings on concerning Nobel Laureate Al Gore's favorite money-making myth, an environmental summit was held this weekend in Aspen, Colorado, called AREDAY, which is short for American Renewable Energy Day.

Emails Refute James Cameron's Reason for Cancelling Global Warming Debate.  E-mail messages obtained by NewsBusters refute claims that multi-millionaire filmmaker James Cameron cancelled a debate with prominent global warming skeptics because they weren't as famous as he is.

Politicizing the climate science debate has boosted alarmism.  [Scroll down]  Those of us who do not support the idea that human greenhouse gas emissions are dangerously warming the planet are usually condemned by main stream media as being ultra-conservative, ill-informed, anti-environmentalists, when the press acknowledges us at all.

Climate Depot's Marc Morano Takes on ABC News' Dan Harris.  We've all sort of known the media have been in the tank for the global warming alarmist movement.  For evidence, look no further than a March 2008 segment that aired on ABC "World News" attacking leading climate skeptic, University of Virginia environmental scientist Professor Emeritus Fred Singer.

Global warming's unscientific method.  The prophets of global warming continue to lament as their carefully crafted yarn unravels before their eyes.  Ross McKitrick, an intrepid economics professor from the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, has tugged apart the thin mathematical threads that once held together the story of climate change.  Recent attempts to silence Mr. McKitrick illuminate the extent to which the alarmists have abandoned proper scientific method in their pursuit of political goals.

Warming Is Just Latest Misuse Of Science.  On climate issues, as on many other issues, the biggest argument of the left has been that there is no argument.  The word "science" has been used as a magic mantra to shut up critics, even when those critics have been scientists with international reputations as specialists in climate science.

Hit Job:  ABC News Attempts to Align Climate Change Skeptics with White Supremacists.  At first, Michael Mann, a Penn State professor and a central figure in the Climategate scandal, but best known for his discredited "hockey stick graph" didn't like being mocked in a YouTube video.  Now Mann is alleging he's a victim of hate groups.

Global Warming Farce Crashes Down.  It has been a standard ploy of the Warmers to revile the skeptics as whores of the energy industry, swaddled in munificent grants and with large personal stakes in discrediting AGW.  Actually, the precise opposite is true.  Billions in funding and research grants sluice into the big climate-modeling enterprises and a vast archipelago of research departments and "institutes of climate change" across academia.  It's where the money is.  Skepticism, particularly for a young climatologist or atmospheric physicist, can be a career breaker.

Take a letter, Maria...  As predicted, the bishops of the Church of Man-Made Climate Change have directed their flock to begin attacking The Great Satan — newspapers that have the hardihood to report and/or editorialize on the hardy har har that is "global warming."  Whence it originated is yet to be divined.  But this correspondent received four different versions of what's basically an e-mail form letter — astroturf, as it's known in this cyber age.

Climate scientists plot to fight back at skeptics.  Undaunted by a rash of scandals over the science underpinning climate change, top climate researchers are plotting to respond with what one scientist involved said needs to be "an outlandishly aggressively partisan approach" to gut the credibility of skeptics.  In private e-mails obtained by The Washington Times, climate scientists at the National Academy of Sciences say they are tired of "being treated like political pawns" and need to fight back in kind.

Theories, Facts, and 'Denialism':  [Scroll down slowly]  The climate is constantly changing.  That is a fact.  The notion that climate change is caused by human activities is a theory that seeks to explain the fact.  By calling the theory a "fact," climate change scientists have effectively foreclosed the possibility of further discussion.  After all, only a fool argues about facts, right?  This seemingly obvious ruse has been surprisingly effective, and the whole business hinges on the words used.

Time to Turn Up the Heat on the Warmists.  At one time some would call them "deniers."  The more generous called them "skeptics."  But now, increasingly, it appears that they can be called something else:  sane.  Yes, the climate has certainly changed.  Even in the mainstream media, the less liberal organs are waking up.

Obama slams climate sceptics.  US President Barack Obama on Friday [2/19/2010] rebuked climate change sceptics who argue that piles of snow dumped on the US during a frigid winter cast doubt on global warming science.

Vindication — Dutch global warming denier "was right after all".  De Telegraaf, the Netherlands' largest daily newspaper, has totally vindicated the country's most prominent global warming denier in a prominent article entitled "Henk Tennekes — He was right after all."

EPA Scientist Silenced in Coverup.  Monday's declaration by the Environmental Protection Administration that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health is apparently a regulatory fraud.  It was made after EPA regulators refused to consider a report from a leading EPA scientist rejecting the theory that emission of greenhouse gases causes global warming.

'Warming' meltdown.  Climate alarmists conjured a world where nothing was certain but death, taxes and catastrophic global warming.  They used this presumed scientific certainty as a bludgeon against the skeptics they deemed "deniers" — a word meant to have the noxious whiff of Holocaust denial.  All in the cause of hustling the world into a grand carbon-rationing scheme.

Phil Jones Finally Proves Al Gore Right — The Debate Is Over.  Now that Climategate ringleader Phil Jones has admitted that there has been no global warming (man-made or otherwise) since at least 1995, and that the world was warmer in medieval times than now, I only have one question.  Where do the so-called global warming skeptics go to get their reputations back?

The Climate Change Propaganda Machine.  In the last several weeks we have learned several new facts about climate change research.  First, climate scientists' motives are biased.  Second, scientists actively discussed how to achieve political ends through their research.  Third, and more disturbingly, the public has learned of discarded data, attempts to keep opposing views silent, and total political adherence to an ideology.

Climatology expert threatened for climate change views.  Recently I interviewed professor Tim Ball on my TV show.  Ball is a highly qualified and experienced academic with an expertise in historical climatology who rejects most of the current hysteria around climate change and global warming.  He is a modest, gentle man who, in spite of his enormous work in the field and the chairing of inquiries and commissions into environmental causes, is now libelled, slandered, abused and threatened for his opinions.

Liberals and the Scientific Method:  True to their mission as the organs of the liberal establishment, Time magazine and the New York Times ran stories in the midst of the great snowmageddon warning us against drawing any politically incorrect conclusions. ... Note how the Times contrasts "skeptics of global warming" with "climate scientists."  Bill Nye the Science Guy, appearing on MSNBC, used the same tactic, accusing skeptics about manmade global warming of "denying science."

Bill Nye 'The Science Guy':  Denying Climate Change 'Unpatriotic,' 'Inappropriate'.  Challenging someone's patriotism is a pretty hefty charge to level in the political arena, based on the response when Barack Obama's patriotism was challenged during the 2008 election cycle.  However, there seems to be a different set of rules when it comes to questioning the authenticity of the manmade global warming argument in the wake of record-setting snowfall in the Mid-Atlantic.

Climategate:  Failure of a Blind and Biased Mainstream Media.  It's beyond belief that the mainstream media can't see the devastating importance of the emails leaked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) known as Climategate.  The blindness cancels the claim they're society's watchdog. ... The mainstream media willfully ignore the massive deception just as they have the political exploitation of climate science.  In fact, most led or joined attacks on scientists who dared to point out the problems.

Climategate:  You should be steamed.  The [Climategate] e-mails document that the attack on the skeptics was twofold.  First, the believers gained control of the main climate-profession journals.  This allowed them to block publication of papers written by the skeptics and prohibit unfriendly peer review of their own papers.  Second, the skeptics were demonized through false labeling and false accusations.

Chestnuts Roasting on a Copenhagen Fire.  Despite Rep. Ron Paul's call for members of Congress to consider the joint opinion of more than 32,000 U.S. scientists — including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s — who believe humans likely have little or no part in the creation of "global warming," White House press secretary Robert Gibbs justified the White House's position and waved away opposition by tritely retorting that most people believe in global warming.  A recent survey, however, found Americans' belief in global warming has declined and is at a 12-year low.

Who are 'flat-earthers' on global warming?  British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has taken the route of many who would rather call names than have a serious debate about "climate change."  He characterizes those who question "settled science" members of the "flat-earth" society.  When people resort to name-calling it is a sign they have lost an argument.

Climategate in the Classroom?  The mainstream media has for too long dominated the information being disseminated about global warming.  Some people have long-term loyalty to television news programs, newspapers, or magazines.  Any opinion that varies from their source is unacceptable.  Some people have been so completely indoctrinated with the climate catastrophe story, they can't stand to hear anything else.  For them my story of global warming will be met with closed doors and deaf ears.

Trouble afoot for high priests.  The global warming scam is in trouble because neither the globe nor the thermometer will cooperate. ... The church [of global warming] is rattled by the embarrassing disclosure of certain e-mail messages between prominent global-warming scientists, revealing what was suspected but not proved before, that skeptics of the theory are systematically ignored and shunned.

Global Warmists Caught Red-Handed.  [Scroll down slowly]  Our friends in the editorial sanctum sanctorum of the Wall Street Journal pored over all the damning emails.  They found dissenting scientists (Global Warming skeptics, as they are called) being blacklisted and suppressed.  For instance, Michael Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Pennsylvania State University, emailed likeminded Global Warmists advising them to isolate and ignore scientists and scientific journals that publish the views of the skeptics.

Global-warming theology.  Belief in global warming had long had a tinge of theology about it, a form of cultism that adherents and defenders elevated to a holy crusade.  Any who questioned the orthodoxy were branded as heretics.  Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said that climatechange skepticism is "treason" and exhorted that "we need to start treating [skeptics] as traitors."  In 2007, the Weather Channel's Heidi Cullen said that meteorologists who were skeptical of man-made global warming should be decertified.  The e-mails from the University of East Anglia's Climate Research Unit reveal systematic attempts by high priests of this religion to silence scientists who disputed their rigged findings.

Did someone mention ClimateGate?

UN Security Stops Journalist's Questions About ClimateGate.  A Stanford Professor has used United Nation security officers to silence a journalist asking him "inconvenient questions" during a press briefing at the climate change conference in Copenhagen.  Professor Stephen Schneider's assistant requested armed UN security officers who held film maker Phelim McAleer, ordered him to stop filming and prevented further questioning after the press conference where the Stanford academic was launching a book.

When You're Out of Arguments, Call in the Heat.  Global warming alarmist Stephen Schneider gave a press briefing in Copenhagen today [12/11/2009].  No one was impolite enough to remind Schneider of the days when he claimed the world was about to be destroyed by global cooling...

The Supporting Cast — Thought Police Anyone?  The most insidious activity included controlling climate information through Wikipedia.  When I ask students how many use Wikipedia for their research all hands go up.  I know most media rely on it.  Most have no idea how the material is entered or edited.  William Connolley knew and exploited the opportunity. ... His activities are shocking.  He established himself as an editor at Wikipedia and with a cadre (I use the term deliberately) of supporters he controlled all entries relating to climate, climate change and the people involved.  This included putting up false material about skeptics.

Wikipedia Meets Its Own Climategate.  Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, had an article in yesterday's Wall Street Journal drawing attention to the rise of "online hostility" and the "degeneration of online civility."  He (and coauthor Andrea Weckerle) suggested ways in which we can "prevent the worst among us from silencing the best among us."  I agree with just about everything that they say.  But there is one problem that Mr. Wales does not go near.

Democrats Censor Climate Skeptics in Congress.  The Democratically-controlled Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming held a hearing yesterday [12/2/2009] to examine the science behind global warming.  Two climate experts from the Obama administration testified, but when Republicans asked to have a global-warming skeptic at the hearing, Chairman Ed Markey (D-Mass.) refused to allow it.

The Disgusting Use of "Denialist" by Warming Advocates Trivializes the Holocaust.  Nothing in the climate debate which I've been paying sporadic attention to is more repulsive than the global warming advocates' attempt to smear skeptics of their theories and models and predictions as "denialists."  As if they were some analog of holocaust deniers.

EPA Lawyers:  Cap-And-Trade 'Fatally Flawed'.  After stifling a report questioning the science behind climate change, the EPA is censoring two of its lawyers for saying the proposed solutions are also problematical.  The debate isn't over.  It's being suppressed.  In the proud tradition of EPA whistle-blower Alan Carlin, whose leaked study blew the lid off the EPA's hyped and flawed science behind climate change, two EPA lawyers, Laurie Williams and Allan Zabel, have produced a Web video titled "A Huge Mistake."  In it they say cap-and-trade in general and the Waxman-Markey bill in particular are the wrong answers anyway.

Wiki for Me but Not for Thee.  Some of you may have followed Wikipedia's contribution to the global warming campaign at ClimateAudit and elsewhere, about which I wrote extensively in the draft manuscript of Red Hot Lies. ... Now I see in an e-mail from a colleague at the Common Sense Alliance that "Wikipedia is about to delete the 'global warming hysteria' page I set up."

Energy Secretary Chu's War On Business.  Part of the climate-change mantra is that the debate is over and the science is settled.  Just to make sure, environmental groups have sought to pressure businesses to go green or at least keep silent.  Now it would appear the whole weight of the federal government is being thrown behind this campaign to coerce and silence real and potential opposition.

The EPA Silences a Climate Skeptic.  [Scroll down]  One of President Barack Obama's first acts was a memo to agencies demanding new transparency in government, and science.  The nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Lisa Jackson, joined in, exclaiming, "As administrator, I will ensure EPA's efforts to address the environmental crises of today are rooted in three fundamental values:  science-based policies and program, adherence to the rule of law, and overwhelming transparency."  In case anyone missed the point, Mr. Obama took another shot at his predecessors in April, vowing that "the days of science taking a backseat to ideology are over."  Except, that is, when it comes to Mr. [Alan] Carlin, a senior analyst in the EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics and a 35-year veteran of the agency.

The Decline of Thinking.  The political establishment's response to the global warming doubts raised by EPA researcher, Alan Carlin, is remarkable.  The mantra chanted by one EPA official — and dutifully echoed across the media — is that Mr. Carlin "is not a scientist."  This fact, of course, has not kept Al Gore from becoming the patron saint of the environmental religion.  (Gore received his PhD in which of the recognized sciences?)  An assertion of this sort is evidence of the anti-intellectualism that has metastasized across academia and spread to other venues of expression.

Cap-and-suppress.  [Scroll down]  Moreover, the report said, "Given the downward trend in temperatures since 1998 (which some think will continue until 2030) there is no particular reason to rush into decisions based on a scientific hypothesis that does not appear to explain most of the available data."  Which is why President Obama and the Democrats are rushing their blatantly socialistic and massively expensive cap-and-trade bill through Congress.  They want it to become law before the global-warming theory unravels completely.  So if Americans don't speak up now, they will be saddled with this multitrillion-dollar monstrosity that purports to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

Green Jackets, Brown Shirts.  [Al] Gore didn't come right out and call global warming skeptics Nazis while addressing an audience at Oxford University in England.  But then, he didn't have to.  By simply violating Godwin's Law — which essentially says that an argument dies the moment someone makes a comparison to Nazis — in the way he did, Gore labeled anyone who opposes his agenda a fascist.  While the former vice president was delivering his sermon, the British were busy creating a para-police squad that will enforce government-imposed carbon dioxide emissions limits.

Albert — the Not-So Great — Gore.  Think what you want about George W. Bush, but he did do this:  he saved us from a Gore Presidency. ... The Stormtroopers of the Global Warming Party do not want to "discuss" whether the planet is warming or cooling or whether the process is natural or man made.  Their "science" is just as immutable and absolute as, say, the Aryan Science of the Nazis or the weird genetic theories of Lysenko in Stalinist Russia.  That is to say, the science of global warming is driven exclusively by political ideology — intolerant political ideology.

The Mind-boggling Extremism of Obama "Science Czar" John P. Holdren.  As part of his series of profiles on President Barack Obama's many policy "czars," last night FOX News host Sean Hannity looked at the new "Science Czar", John P. Holdren. ... The longtime Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, Holdren is no stranger to controversy.  As Hannity pointed out in his segment, Holdren has been quoted as calling the United States the "meanest of wealthy countries."  He has also, according to Hannity, "left the door open" to prosecuting "global warming deniers."

Obama's EPA Ignores Inconvenient Truths.  John Hinderaker of Poweline has alerted everyone to the release of the suppressed EPA Carlin/Davidson report along with incriminating emails by the Competitive Enterprise Institute.  President Obama and his administration have again been appropriately exposed.  Obama's intent can no longer be in question, and his deceptive activities are instructive as to the role the United Nations will play in his plan to address the use of American wealth.

Sen. Inhofe Calls for Inquiry Into 'Suppressed' Climate Change Report.  Republicans are raising questions about why the EPA apparently dismissed an analyst's report questioning the science behind global warming.

Suppressed EPA scientist breaks silence, speaks on Fox News.  Alan Carlin, the senior EPA research analyst who authored a study critical of global warming that was suppressed by agency officials, has broken his silence and spoken on Fox News about his situation.  Carlin told "Fox & Friends" Steve Ducy and Gretchen Carlson that his most important conclusion in the study was that the U.S. should not rely upon recommendations of the UN in making policy decisions regarding global warming.

Faith-Based Science, Indeed.  Dr. Carlin's paper is substantial and deserves to be read in its entirety.  But his takeaway is clear:  the best explanations for global temperature fluctuations are changes in the amount of energy emitted by the sun, and, especially, oscillations in the temperatures of the oceans.  The explanatory power of CO2 levels is much weaker, and, over the past decade, almost non-existent.  So why, when the House has just passed a "global warming" bill, is this report only available via a leak from CEI?

More information about the EPA (none of it favorable) can be found here.

The Censorious Left's Global Warming Denier Deniers.  While President Obama says that global warming "science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear" and Krugman says the "warming deniers" have "contempt for hard science," the record reveals a different story.  If anyone has contempt for hard science, it is the [Paul] Krugman leftists, who, either because of their political agenda or ideological predispositions, refuse to acknowledge — let alone consider — opposing opinions, even when they come from "hard scientists."

Hey Paul Krugman, Here are 2.4 Billion More Traitors.  Two days after the [cap and trade] vote, Paul Krugman, a columnist for the New York Times excoriated the 212 members of the House who voted against the legislation, saying that they were "deniers" about the dangers of climate change and that they were committing a "form of treason — treason against the planet."  Of course, everyone — and columnists in particular — is entitled to their own measure of hyperbole.  But Krugman neglected to inform the Chinese and the Indians — all 2.4 billion of them — that they were committing treason against the planet, too.
This is an original compilation, Copyright © 2024 by Andrew K. Dart

Consensus or censorship?  The Environmental Protection Agency has submitted a "finding" to the White House Office of Management and Budget that will force the Obama administration to decide whether to limit greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.  If adopted, new laws and regulations will likely follow that have the potential to change our lifestyles and limit our freedoms.  None of these laws and regulations will be preceded by debate.  They will be imposed on us by fundamentalist politicians and scientists who have swallowed the Kool-Aid and declared global warming as fact — end of discussion.

Polar bear expert barred by global warmists.  Over the coming days a curiously revealing event will be taking place in Copenhagen.  Top of the agenda at a meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group ... will be the need to produce a suitably scary report on how polar bears are being threatened with extinction by man-made global warming. ... But one of the world's leading experts on polar bears has been told to stay away from this week's meeting, specifically because his views on global warming do not accord with those of the rest of the group.

Did someone mention polar bears?

EPA's Game of Global Warming Hide-and-Seek.  In March, Alan Carlin, a senior research analyst at the Environmental Protection Agency, asked agency officials to distribute his analysis on the health effects of greenhouse gases. ... But Carlin's study didn't fit the blame-human-activity narrative, so it didn't make the cut. ... The EPA now justifies the suppression of the study because economist Carlin (a 35-year veteran of the agency who also holds a B.S. in physics) "is an individual who is not a scientist."  Neither is Al Gore.  Nor is energy czar Carol Browner.  Nor is cap-and-trade shepherd Nancy Pelosi.

'O'ministration conceals environmental report.  A report has surfaced that the Environmental Protection Agency is suppressing an internal study that undermines the administration's position on global warming.  As the EPA wraps up its proposed rule-making process that seeks to label carbon dioxide as a pollutant harmful to human life, Sam Kazman of the Competitive Enterprise Institute says the federal agency has suppressed a critical internal report.

The EPA's internal nightmare over global warming:  Part 1.  A source inside the Environmental Protection Agency confirmed many of the claims made by analyst Alan Carlin, the economist/physicist who yesterday went public with accusations that science was being ignored in evaluating the danger of CO2.  The source, who chooses not to be identified for fear of retaliation, said that Carlin was rebuffed in his attempt to introduce scientific evidence that does not accord with the EPA's view of global warming, which largely relies on IPCC reports.  The source also saw Carlin's report and said that it was 'based on 8 points of peer-reviewed, recent and relevant scientific publications' that cast doubt on the wisdom of regulating CO2 as a pollutant.

CEI Releases Global Warming Study Censored by EPA.  The Competitive Enterprise Institute is today making public an internal study on climate science which was suppressed by the Environmental Protection Agency.  Internal EPA email messages, released by CEI earlier in the week, indicate that the report was kept under wraps and its author silenced because of pressure to support the Administration's agenda of regulating carbon dioxide.

The Climate Change Climate Change.  As the U.S. House of Representatives prepares to pass a climate-change bill, the Australian Parliament is preparing to kill its own country's carbon-emissions scheme.  Why?  A growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens once again doubt the science of human-caused global warming. ... It turns out Al Gore and the United Nations (with an assist from the media), did a little too vociferous a job smearing anyone who disagreed with them as "deniers."  The backlash has brought the scientific debate roaring back to life in Australia, Europe, Japan and even, if less reported, the U.S. ... New Zealand last year elected a new government, which immediately suspended the country's weeks-old cap-and-trade program.

The Planet Cools While Romm Burns.  According to blogger Joe Romm of Climate Progress, websites and writers daring to question greenhouse gas orthodoxy are guilty of endangering the "health and well-being of countless billions of people."  And in a surprisingly erratic response to recent criticism, the dangerous "deniers" this modern day prophet of doom singles out for suppression are American Thinker and its new environment editor.

The Politics of Global Warming.  [The global warming alarmists have used this] strategy to execute an orchestrated agenda over the last two decades:
   •  Announce a disaster
   •  Cherry pick some results
   •  Back it up with computer modeling
   •  Proclaim a consensus
   •  Stifle the opposition
   •  Take over the process and control the funding
   •  Roll the policy makers

Global Warming Skeptic Takes Center Stage.  As we saw last week when Democrats squashed the efforts to have Lord Monckton side-by-side with Al Gore before Congress and the American media, global warming advocates are reluctant to provide any venue for their "science" to be subject to scrutiny or debate.  With such deliberate obstruction, it is hard to see how their "science" is little more than propaganda.

Obamamotive.  The Obama administration has recently announced new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and automobile emissions standards.  These new standards are intended to save us from man-made "climate change" or "global warming."  The leftists in power like to declare that the science of global warming is indisputable and there is a "scientific consensus" as to the reality of global warming.  What they are really saying is that they don't want it disputed.

Politicians shun facts, blow hot air on climate change.  Former Vice President Al Gore's appearance on Capitol Hill on Friday [4/24/2009] capped four days of testimony that elevated climate alarmism over sound science.  Unfortunately, compliant news media allow Gore's bloviating to obscure the "inconvenient truths" that would greatly unsettle his eco-political agenda.  Federal legislators are now poised to move forward with punitive anti-emissions schemes such as cap-and-trade that ignore important and highly relevant new studies.

Science a slave to expediency.  The notion that human activity has an alarming influence on climate is based on Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports and spurious claims about a scientific consensus.  Independent scientists who question these claims are accused of being in the pay of the energy industry and of believing that the notion of man-made climate change is a conspiracy.

Climate change "morality".  The climate "crisis" is a "moral issue that requires serious debate," Al Gore proclaimed in an April27 blog post.  His conversion to the Anglo-American tradition of robust debate came a mere three days after the ex-VP refused to participate in a congressional hearing with Lord Christopher Monckton, former science advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Republicans had invited Monckton to counter Gore's testimony before the House Energy and Commerce Committee.  But Gore froze like a terrified deer in headlights, and Chairman Henry Waxman told the UK climate expert he was uninvited.

House Democrats don't want Gore humiliated.
Democrats Refuse to Allow Skeptic to Testify Alongside Gore At Congressional Hearing.  UK's Lord Christopher Monckton, a former science advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, claimed House Democrats have refused to allow him to appear alongside former Vice President Al Gore at high profile global warming hearing on Friday April 24, 2009 at 10am in Washington.  Monckton told Climate Depot that the Democrats rescinded his scheduled joint appearance at the House Energy and Commerce hearing on Friday.  Monckton said he was informed that he would not be allowed to testify alongside Gore when his plane landed from England Thursday afternoon.  "The House Democrats don't want Gore humiliated, so they slammed the door of the Capitol in my face," Monckton told Climate Depot in an exclusive interview.  "They are cowards."

"Silencing" the skeptics — literally.
Capital punishment for "global warming deniers".  I have compared global warming alarmism as a kind of religion, complete with its own versions of sin, repentance, atonement, ritual (kids go through recycling drills) and indulgence (purchase carbon offsets to compensate for your private jet travel).  Now it turns out that there's another element:  a desire to kill heretics.

Beware of blood lust on the Left.  It seems there are more than a few global warming fanatics these days whose patience is wearing thin with those of us who refuse to endorse repeal of what the true believers view as three of the 20th century's greatest evils — privately owned cars that empower people to go where they please, suburbs that let them permanently escape city life, and free market capitalism that produces a wider prosperity than seen anywhere else in human history.  So we increasingly hear such folks muttering darkly about things that remind of Robespierre's cure for counterrevolutionary thinking.

Are Greens Tipping the Debate Away from what Really Matters?  In 2006 a retired software executive insisted to me that we had only 10 years to do something dramatic about climate change (because that's what James Hansen had told him).  When I gently suggested that 10 years was not a scientific number but rather an arbitrarily political one, the executive accused me of being anti-science.

How the world was bullied into silence:  One of the most disturbing aspects of the global warming scam is the number of prominent people and entire segments of society bullied into silence.  Consider the case of Dr. Joanne Simpson ... .

The Children, and the Alarmists' Strange Qualifications Game.  Alarmists constantly whine that eminent physicist Freeman Dyson and thousands of other scientists are simply unqualified (usually adding much worse things than that) to express their skepticism on climate alarmism, and yet frightened children who have been goaded into expressing their opinion are voices that the alarmists insist must be heard on this topic.

Exploiting the Prevailing Insanity.  Even as the science mounts, almost daily, against man-caused global warming, this valid, credible science is totally ignored by the government and the full range of the worldwide news media.  Articles supporting the fraud appear frequently in newspapers and on radio and TV reports, but hardly a peep is heard about the science debunking it.

NYT Writer Deceitfully Claims Climate Conference Disharmony.  You'd expect a gathering of over 700 reputable scientists, economists, and policy makers tackling an issue as topical and media-hyped as global warming to be big news.  And you know it would be, had the goal of their discussions and presentations been to parrot and propagate the conclusions of the alarmist mainstream.  But instead, attendees of the International Conference on Climate Change arrived on Sunday prepared to put anthropogenic warming claims to the test, and for their sins the publicity they received ranged from none to insulting.

Global Warming Skepticism:  It is worth noting that anyone even remotely skeptical of the standard model of global warming faces an almost insurmountably quixotic task. The view that human industrial and other economic activity is filling the air with carbon dioxide and causing the planet's temperature to rise is taught to nearly all the nation's children and has been for years. It continues to be taught all the way through high school and into college. It is endlessly reported in the newspapers and on the evening news broadcasts. It is repeated on the Weather Channel and is the subject of frequent cable television specials and documentaries.

You've Got to Have Heartland.  Environmentalists just respond to the arguments of these careful, logical, soft-spoken scientists with ridicule and derision, claiming quite wrongly that the scientific debate is over, and these "deniers" should just shut up, or be shut out.  Quite to the contrary, what the scientists at the Heartland conference have demonstrated beyond dispute is that at a minimum the scientific debate is just warming up, so to speak.  I think they have demonstrated quite clearly already that the alarmist warm-mongers are just wrong.  No wonder the environmentalists don't want to debate.  These are brown shirt tactics effectively just shouting down any opponents and preempting debate.

How to Think Sensibly, or Ridiculously, About Global Warming.  Unfortunately, the green warriors substitute propaganda for persuasion, insist that there is no debate about the science of climate change, and demonize any scientist who dares dissent from their views.  They advocate putting the U.S. and the world on an energy starvation diet, to the exclusion of a wider and more moderate range of precautions that might be taken against global warming.  Underlying this effort is a sense of panic over two things:  the collapse of the Kyoto Protocol, and frequent polls showing that Americans aren't buying into global-warming alarmism.

Global Warming Rope-a-Dope.  Americans have been rope-a-doped into believing that global warming is going to destroy our planet.  Scientists who have been skeptical about manmade global warming have been called traitors or handmaidens of big oil.  The Washington Post asserted on May 28, 2006 that there were only "a handful of skeptics" of manmade climate fears.

The Farce of Global Warming.  Wholesale acceptance of human-caused global warming does not, in fact, exist.  Indeed, many scientists believe that the highly politicized global warming scare is one of the greatest scams inflicted on the planet.  They hold it responsible for enforced political restrictions on legitimate scientific inquiry and dissent and feel that a deliberate attempt has been made to silence prominent atmospheric and climate scientists who offer legitimate criticism.

Global warming is not our fault ... it's nature.  Dr Jim Buckee says he feels like a heretic, persecuted for his views and treated like an outcast.  His crime?  Being a climate change sceptic.  Next week the former chief executive of the oil and gas firm Talisman, who has a PhD in astrophysics from the University of Oxford, will try to convince others that climate change has nothing to do with human activity.  During a lecture at the University of Aberdeen he will argue that, far from warming, the Earth is set to enter a 20-year cooling period.

The Anthropogenic Global Warming Doctrine:  I have been collecting some of the insults levelled at AGW sceptics: cash-amplified flat-earth pseudo-scientists; the carbon cartel; villains; refuseniks lobby; polluters; a powerful and devious enemy; deniers; profligates; crank scientists.  The list is endless.  I remember the reaction of a Canadian scientist who dared to ask critical questions at a meeting on global warming.  He was totally taken aback by the virulent reaction, "it was as if I was back in the Middle Ages and had denied the Virgin Birth".  A common slur is also that all sceptics are in the pockets of the oil industry.

'Santa' Klaus Takes on Global Warming.  [Scroll down]  Enter the Barack Obama administration.  Between new "Climate Czar" Carole Browner and Science Advisor John Holdren, the True Believers are now taking over Federal policy on energy and the weather.  (The weather?  Yes!  We are now blessed with an official bureaucracy tasked to change the weather.  It includes NASA Goddard Space Center's James Hanson, who believes that CEOs of energy companies "should be tried for high crimes against humanity and nature" if they spread foul skepticism about global warming.)

The U.N.'s Global Warming Muzzle.  When the United Nations insists that man-made global warming is now proved beyond doubt, it's practicing one of the few things it has proved itself good at:  censorship of dissenting viewpoints.

Our New Established Religion:  What is interesting about the debate — what sets is apart from almost every other scientific investigation in the last two centuries — is that within no more than a few years, several people announced that the issue was no longer a debate at all.  Despite the fact that climate scientists were still analysing data, revising models and indeed revising modelling methods, it was proclaimed publicly that there was no longer any doubt; the issue was resolved; it had been proved beyond a doubt that the world was getting warmer, humans were to blame, and the world was facing a major catastrophe as a result.

Truth is Conveniently Missing from Global Warming Debate.  Whenever anyone refuses to debate an issue and repeatedly asserts the "debate is over," red flags should go up.  Al Gore, who brought his man-made global warming message to Austin on October 1st [2007], claims the debate is over.  But as MIT Professor Richard Lindzen says, this is "a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition."

When the Warmest in History Isn't.  Here's another reason why people don't trust newspapers. ... When it comes to global warming, newspapers play up stories that reinforce the prevalent the-sky-is-falling belief that global warming is human-caused and catastrophic.  But if a study or scientist does not portend the end of the world as we know it, it rarely rates as news.

BBC Shunned Me For Denying Climate Change.  For years David Bellamy was one of the best known faces on TV.  A respected botanist and the author of 35 books, he had presented around 400 programmes over the years and was appreciated by audiences for his boundless enthusiasm.  Yet for more than 10 years he has been out of the limelight, shunned by bosses at the BBC where he made his name, as well as fellow scientists and environmentalists.  His crime?  Bellamy says he doesn't believe in man-made global warming.

Next Up for Nationalization:  the Internet.  Network neutrality, or net neutrality, is the beneficent-sounding name for sweeping new government regulatory power that would prohibit Internet service providers from innovating in their own networks. ... Yet the greatest danger of network neutrality may be the outright censorship of speech that it promises.  Here's an example:  University of Sunderland professor Alex Lockwood says nationalization of the Internet is one way to get a handle on the problem, in his view, of scientists skeptical of global warming who use the Internet to disseminate their research.  His reasoning shows how easily the rationale for regulation can creep from network structure to content control.

Greens are the enemies of liberty.  Imagine a society where simply speaking out of turn or saying the "wrong thing" was openly discussed as a crime against humanity, and where sceptics or deniers of the truth were publicly labelled "criminals", hauled before the press and accused of endangering humanity with their grotesque untruths.

Global Warming Alarmists Sabotage Wikipedia Entries.  "Wikipedia is in the hands of zealots," says Lawrence Solomon, a respected journalist with Canada's National Post and an avowed environmentalist who is disturbed about deliberate misinformation wherever he finds it.  Solomon reports, in an entry on his blog page, that the biographies of global warming skeptics on the Wikipedia Web site are being "dive-bombed" by a cadre of global warming alarmists who trawl the site.

The price of dissent on global warming.  When I first stuck my head above the parapet to say I didn't believe what we were being told about global warming, I had no idea what the consequences would be.  I am a scientist and I have to follow the directions of science, but when I see that the truth is being covered up I have to voice my opinions.

Global Warming Censored.  Global warming crusader Al Gore repeatedly claims the climate change "debate's over."  It isn't, but the news media clearly agree with him.  Global warming skeptics rarely get any say on the networks, and when their opinions are mentioned it is often with barbs like "cynics" or "deniers" thrown in to undermine them.  Consistently viewers are being sent only one message from ABC, CBS and NBC:  global warming is an environmental catastrophe and it's mankind's fault.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn feeds the darkest temptation.  [Scroll down slowly]  Why is [Clive] Hamilton so strongly drawn to the global warming crusade?  Why is it so many former Marxists and almost everyone of the Left is so attracted to the cult of man-made warming, with its call to force us into eco-virtuous lives?  Why is it, say, that the former editor of the Communist Party of Australia's newspaper, NSW University's Associate Professor David McKnight, not only now preaches global warming, but demonises sceptical scientists as enemies of the revolution, likening them this week to Holocaust deniers and tobacco lobby shills, and suggesting they were so corrupt they'd been bought off by Big Oil?

Skeptics, unite!  In early September, I began noticing a string of news stories about scientists rejecting the orthodoxy on global warming.  Actually, it was more like a string of guest columns and long letters to the editor since it is hard for skeptical scientists to get published in the cabal of climate journals now controlled by the Great Sanhedrin of the environmental movement.  Still, the number of climate change skeptics is growing rapidly.  Because a funny thing is happening to global temperatures — they're going down, not up.

Lonely voice of dissent declared valid.  There is something odd about the ferocious amount of energy expended suppressing any dissent from orthodoxy on climate change.  After all, the climate cataclysmists have won the war of public opinion — for now, at least — with polls, business, media and Government enthusiastically on board.  So, if their case is so good, why try so fervently to extinguish other points of view?  There is a disturbingly religious zeal in the attempts to silence critics and portray them as the moral equivalent of holocaust deniers.

Global warming hysteria:  how the pendulum has swung.  It has become commonplace knowledge, and is unchallenged, that global average temperature has not increased since 1998.  This corresponds to a 9-year period during which the level of atmospheric carbon dioxide, in contrast, did increase, and that by almost 5%.  The greenhouse hypothesis — which asserts that carbon dioxide increases of human origin will cause dangerous global warming — is clearly invalidated by these data.  As if that were not enough, a leading computer modelling team has recently published a paper in Nature which acknowledges what climate rationalists (the so-called "sceptics") have always asserted.  Which is that, contrary to IPCC assessments, any human influence on global temperature is so small that it cannot yet be differentiated from natural cycles of climate change.

Confessions of a Global Warming Skeptic:  To me the global warming debate merits caution because (1) The debate feels more fanatical than other debates, say, about health care or the war in Iraq.  I sense some unconscious emotional forces at work, including an in-group mentality.  (2) There are likely hidden agendas.  What was once a scientific debate has migrated into the political realm, where stakes are high in research funding, corporate profits, political careers, and possibly even geopolitical strategy.

Skeptics Shed Needed Light on Truth.  When global warming alarmists condemn skeptics as "deniers," that is an unscientific and socially dangerous characterization.  Skeptics are not the enemy.  On the contrary, they are crucial to science because they help us search for truth.  Scientific theories exist to be verified or proven false.

Yes, global warming "is just propaganda".  Most readers don't want endless scare stories about climatic doom, accompanied by authoritarian lectures about their carbon footprints.  They're hungry for a variety of opinions.  Unfortunately only 1% of the huge number of articles on climate change in the posh London newspapers deviate from the official line of the Intergovernmental Panel.  That's not my reckoning.  It comes from researchers at Oxford University who complain about the more balanced reporting in the not-so-posh papers, with a deviancy rate of 23%.  They say it has 'skewed public understanding of human contributions to climate change'.  In other words, kindly abandon the journalistic principle that different points of views should be heard on controversial matters, or else a lot of dreadful people out there (you or me) may not truly believe that climate change is their fault.

Global warming has paused.  Unfortunately, many scientists appear to forget that weather and climate also are controlled by nature, as we witness weather changes every day and climate changes in longer terms.  During the last several years, I have suggested that it is important to identify the natural effects and subtract them from the temperature changes.  Only then can we be sure of the man-made contributions.  This suggestion brought me the dubious honor of being designated "Alaska's most famous climate change skeptic."

People Who Don't Buy Into Global Warming Alarmism Are "Traitors?"  "Get rid of all these rotten politicians that we have in Washington, who are nothing more than corporate toadies," said Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the environmentalist author, president of Waterkeeper Alliance and Robert F. Kennedy's son, who grew hoarse from shouting.  "This is treason.  And we need to start treating them as traitors."  The reality is that despite all the hype, favorable press, celebs that rant about global warming, etc., the global warming alarmists are losing the public relations war.

Robert Kennedy Jr:  Treat Global Warming Infidels As Traitors.  The penalty for treason is death.  Robert Kennedy Jr. is thus, in calling for treating them as traitors, advocating death for his policy opponents.  Will we see any media outrage?  Doubtful, as the author of this particular fluff piece found the comment unworthy of further consideration.

No smoking hot spot.  I devoted six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office.  I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector. … But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming.  As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind.  What do you do, sir?"

Hansen Says GW Skeptics Should Be Tried.  NASA astronomer James Hansen, one of the most visible and vocal proponents of alarmist global warming theory, has called for criminal trials against scientists, corporate executives, and public policy advocates who disagree with him.

Climate mafia has us fooled.  Vested interests have hijacked the climate debate, and taken Australia's future hostage.  The ransom they demand?  Simple agreement or, at the very least, compliance.  Voices of dissent face derision.  Legitimate questions are met with ridicule.  But with many of the squabbling forces of power in this country now apparently united in their enthusiasm for an emissions trading scheme, it is more important than ever that we go back and examine the basis of their campaigns.

Some of the Many Experts  who contest Kyoto's scientific foundation.

Climate Skeptics Say Debate Stifled.  The head of the U.N. panel on climate change compared him to Hitler.  Another leading scientist called him a parasite.  A third described his latest book as a "stealth attack" on mankind.  The list of allegations against Bjoern Lomborg, one of the world's leading climate change skeptics, almost reads like an indictment for war crimes.

Global warming sceptics in an unholy row.  If you really want to know what it's like to be a 16th-century heretic, try saying you're a bit sceptical about man-made global warming.  Temperatures do seem to have gone up a little, even though environmentalists acknowledge that we might be in for a cool spell now. … Still, no one has convincingly proved that all this is definitely man's fault.  Try saying that in polite circles and it's like saying you're partial to roasted babies.

Science by intimidation:  Not all the world shares Dr. Hansen's vision of imminent ecological Armageddon.  Serious minds, seriously disinterested in the subject, throw up caveats all the time.  They question the models of climatological speculation; they question the peculiar mix of man-made and other likely sources of climate dynamics; they question some of the data gathering and some of its interpretation; and they question the very maturity of the highly complex, and experimentally deficient science of global warming itself.  They seriously question, too, the massive policy prescriptions that are being insisted upon as necessary in response to the scientific determinations of man-made global warming.

The Union of Concerned Scientists:  Its Jihad against Climate Skeptics.  Among the activist groups seeking to stifle dissent in the global warming debate, none has been more vocal — or more effective at attracting media attention — than the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).  But UCS is a master of political tactics, not an advocate for the scientific community.

The Union of Concerned Propagandists.  I know quite a few climatologists and meteorologists and the ones I know have been courageously refuting the global warming fraud for years, even decades. Beyond them, thousands of comparable scientists have signed petitions and statements to the effect that global warming was and is a hoax.

Globe may be cooling on Global Warming.  Dr. Phil Chapman wrote in The Australian on April 23.  "All those urging action to curb global warming need to take off the blinkers and give some thought to what we should do if we are facing global cooling instead."  Chapman neither can be caricatured as a greedy oil-company lobbyist nor dismissed as a flat-Earther.  He was a Massachusetts Institute of Technology staff physicist, NASA's first Australian-born astronaut, and Apollo 14's Mission Scientist.

Global warming 'consensus' a fiction.  Former Vice President Al Gore claimed there's no legitimate objection to the catastrophes he and the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change predict.  All this received much media coverage and support from politicians and government bureaucrats, who stand to gain control if we heed their warnings.  The problem is, there's no scientific consensus for doomsday claims, let alone that drastic remedies are needed.  Growing numbers of global warming science skeptics are making their opposition known.  They include experts in climatology, oceanography, geology, biology, environmental sciences and physics, among others.

Yellow Science:  Over the past several decades an increasing number of scientists have shed the restraints imposed by the scientific method and begun to proclaim the truth of man-made global warming. This is a hypothesis that remains untested, makes no predictions that can be tested in the near future, and cannot offer a numerical explanation for the limited evidence to which it clings. No equations have been shown to explain the relationship between fossil-fuel emission and global temperature. The only predictions that have been made are apocalyptic, so the hypothesis has to be accepted before it can be tested.

This article is much more interesting than the synopsis might lead you to believe.
The American Physical Society and Global Warming.  [The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley writes,] "The editors of Physics and Society, a newsletter of the American Physical Society, invited me to submit a paper for their July 2008 edition explaining why I considered that the warming that might be expected from anthropogenic enrichment of the atmosphere with carbon dioxide might be significantly less than the IPCC imagines."

Taking Out the Junk (Science):  When Al Gore and his global warming alarmists take over, one of the first citizens they'll slap in a prison and charge with crimes against the (green) state will be Steven J. Milloy, founder and publisher of the popular Web site  For 12 years, has worked to debunk the bad science that has been used to advance the harmful or merely silly political and social agendas of environmentalists that have led to things such as bans on DDT and incandescent light bulbs.

'Algoreism' For the Masses.  Algoreism is based first and foremost of the principle of the Big Lie.  That is, if you tell a lie often enough, it transmogrifies into truth.  The bigger the lie, the better.  And to push the lie forward, you make every attempt to cut off reasonable debate.

TV's One-Sided Global Warming Nonsense:  Study says ABC, CBS and NBC never mentioned that thousands of scientists disagree with the doomsayers.

Global warming not settled; skeptical view should be heard.  This Earth has been warming up or cooling off through its entire history.  The idea that we can stop these cycles is ludicrous.  The global warming we have recently experienced is well within the norms we have experienced in recorded history.

Global warming on hiatus.  Since there has actually been no global warming since 1998, that means there would be an almost two-decade span where concentrations of GHG emissions, most notably carbon dioxide, continued to intensify in the atmosphere, without global temperatures following suit.  These researchers aren't climate "deniers."  They say their findings — based on cutting-edge computer modelling techniques still in their infancy — are a refinement of existing climate models. … Prior to this study, anyone impertinent enough to point out, contrary to the Al Gore Nation, there hasn't been any global warming for a decade was apt to have their head shot off by climate hysterics.

Blessed are the sceptics.  In 1633 Galileo Galilei was hauled before the religious authorities of his day, the Inquisition, for daring to concur with Copernicus that the Earth was not the centre of the universe and also that it orbited the sun rather than the other way around.  For his pains, he was placed under house arrest and forced to recant. … Today we are faced with a newer religion known as environmental activism which has insinuated itself into some aspects of science.  It shares some of the intolerance to new or challenging ideas with the old.  Immolation at the stake is no longer fashionable but it has been replaced by pillory in the media.

The slick trick behind global frauding:  In Al Gore's America, any "global warming denier" is guilty until proven innocent.  He or she must have been bought off by Big Oil.  Skeptics, no matter how well-qualified, must prove the negative about really silly alarmist hogwash.  And whenever some prediction is falsified, the warm mongers have an explanation:  it's just a temporary glitch in the data.  Oh, yes, we were wrong about 1998, but just wait till 2050!  The excuses are endless.

Good science isn't about consensus.  If you listen hard to the global warming debate you will hear people at every level tell us that they don't want to hear any more talk, they want action.  I feel that the actions I have seen proposed, such as carbon caps and carbon trading, are likely to be unnecessary, expensive and futile unless there is much stronger evidence that we are facing a global environmental crisis, whether or not we have brought it about ourselves.

Academic cool on warming.  Professor Aitkin told The Australian yesterday he had been told he was "out of his mind" by some in the media after writing that the science of global warming "doesn't seem to stack up". … He says critics who question the impact of global warming are commonly ignored or attacked because "scientist activists" from a quasi-religious movement have spread a flawed message that "the science is settled" and "the debate is over".

Global Warming Doubters Strike Back.  Every few years, some group of scientists, egged on by the media, is persuaded to warn mankind of some new danger facing the human race.  This triggers the anxiety that always floats just below the conscious level in most people, and serves the purposes of the media by generating several months of gratifying headlines.  It also serves the purposes of the scientists, by giving them months of flattering publicity, not to mention the financial rewards that accompany scientific papers on the subject.  The excitement dies down in due course, but there is always some new peril being discovered.  Remember the ozone hole?  And whatever happened to acid rain?

NY Climate Conference:  Journey to the Center of Warming Sanity.  If you rely solely on the mainstream media to keep informed, you may not have heard that the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change concluded in New York City on Tuesday [3/4/2008].  And if you have heard anything — this being primarily a forum of skeptics — it was likely of a last gasp effort by "flat-Earthers" sponsored by right-wingers in the pockets of big-oil to breathe life into their dying warming denial agenda.  Well, having just returned from the 3 day event, I'm happy to report that the struggle against the ravages of warming alarmism is not only alive, but healthier than ever.

Opening Remarks at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change.  The alarmists think it's a "paradox" that the more people learn about climate change, the less likely they are to consider it a serious problem. … And incidentally, 70 percent of the public oppose raising gasoline prices by $1 to fight global warming, and 80 percent oppose a $2 per gallon tax increase, according to a 2007 poll by The New York Times and CBS News.  I've got news for them:  Reducing emissions by 60 to 80 percent, which is what the alarmists claim is necessary to "stop global warming," would cost a lot more than $1 a gallon.

Partial list of skeptical scientists  who are questioning the global warming hysteria.

The media snowjob on global warming:  [Scroll down] The bias is that whatever the IPCC and its defenders claim, the Washington Post and most other outlets report without scrutiny.  Meanwhile, the motives and sources of all sceptics are instantly suspected and derided.

Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate.  The IPCC is pre-programmed to produce reports to support the hypotheses of anthropogenic warming and the control of greenhouse gases, as envisioned in the Global Climate Treaty.  The 1990 IPCC Summary completely ignored satellite data, since they showed no warming.  The 1995 IPCC report was notorious for the significant alterations made to the text after it was approved by the scientists — in order to convey the impression of a human influence.  The 2001 IPCC report claimed the twentieth century showed 'unusual warming' based on the now-discredited hockey-stick graph.  The latest IPCC report, published in 2007, completely devaluates the climate contributions from changes in solar activity, which are likely to dominate any human influence.

Global climate change has natural causes.  Over the past two decades the concepts of man-made global warming and man-made climate change have come to be accepted as reality.  It is repeated every day, in the papers, on TV, in schools and universities.  Many governments, and the United Nations, have declared their faith that Man is causing global climate change.  But is it true, or is it just another extraordinary popular delusion?

The Sloppy Science of Global Warming:  Contrary to what you have been led to believe, there is no solid published evidence that has ruled out a natural cause for most of our recent warmth — not one peer-reviewed paper.  The reason:  our measurements of global weather on decadal time scales are insufficient to reject such a possibility.  For instance, the last 30 years of the strongest warming could have been caused by a very slight change in cloudiness.  What might have caused such a change?  Well, one possibility is the sudden shift to more frequent El Niño events (and fewer La Niña events) since the 1970s. That shift also coincided with a change in another climate index, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation.

Not Worth The Paper It's Scribbled On.  The irony here is that global-warming alarmists are fond of using assertions about expertise and consensus as clubs to beat their critics over the head.  Unless you are an atmospheric scientist, you aren't supposed to express even an opinion about the assertions of, say, Al Gore or the filmmakers behind The Day After Tomorrow.  And when scientists do, indeed, step forward to question the supposed consensus about an impending global catastrophe, the alarmists attempt to assassinate their character or compare them to Flat-Earthers.  Only the minority of scientists who subscribe to the entire alarmist agenda are said to be credible.  They say this is science.  It is precisely the opposite of science.

Uncertain science dogs climate debate.  In an often bitter debate, sceptics argue the science on climate change is not settled.  Instead, they say international government climate change policies will cost billions to solve a problem that in all probability does not exist.

Environmental extremism must be put in its place in the climate debate.  Many people are starting to realize that much of what they've been told about climate change by governments, the United Nations and crusading celebrities is simply wrong.  Not surprisingly, the assertion that "the science is settled" in a field the public is coming to understand is both immature and quickly evolving, is triggering growing public skepticism.  Alarmists respond by upping the ante, making even more extreme and nonsensical forecasts, which in turn further fuels healthy public disbelief.

Scientific Consensus on Global Warming:  This booklet summarizes the results of international surveys of climate scientists conducted in 1996 and 2003 by two German environmental scientists, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch. … More than 530 climate scientists from 27 different countries provided numerical answers each time the survey was conducted.  All responses were anonymous.

Saying "No" When Everyone Else Is Saying "Yes":  There is no dramatic warming of the earth.  There is no indication of a near-future warming.  Carbon dioxide (CO2) plays such a minimal role in the atmosphere that an increase would have no effect beyond the very beneficial boost in the growth of forests, crops, and everything else that is truly green.  Indeed, climatologists will tell you that CO2 increases follow, not precede, warming cycles.  They are not a trigger.  They are a response.

Physicist, global warming skeptic Frederick Seitz dies at 96.  Frederick Seitz, a former president of both the National Academy of Sciences and Rockefeller University and an outspoken skeptic on global warming, has died.  He was 96.

Global Warming Suit Infringes Free Speech.  A global warming lawsuit by Eskimos seeks to impose conspiracy liability on oil and power companies for giving money to groups that question the degree of humanity's role in global warming.

Meet The Global-Warming McCarthyites.  Newsweek magazine, which tells us in a recent edition about a "well-funded," global-warming "denial machine," is itself something of a trashing machine, a journalistic pretender that mistakes smear for substance. … The article not only fails to make so sweeping a case, but skips over a fact that the rawest newsroom rookie should have picked up — namely, that the Chicken Littles have outspent the cited think tanks and other groups in trying to inflict everyone with the willies, scientific exactitude be hanged.

GM Exec Stands by Calling Global Warming a 'Crock'.  General Motors Corp Vice Chairman Bob Lutz has defended remarks he made dismissing global warming as a "total crock of s---," saying his views had no bearing on GM's commitment to build environmentally friendly vehicles.  Lutz, GM's outspoken product development chief, has been under fire from Internet bloggers since last month when he was quoted as making the remark to reporters in Texas.

A Total Crock of Doo-Doo!  News coverage of Mr. Lutz's politically incorrect "crock-of-doo-doo" declaration caused me to wonder just how many American business executives harbor the same opinion about global warming, but are too cowardly to utter the words in public?  How many parrot the environmental slogans du jour and spout platitudes about corporate social responsibility because they would rather appease the activists than fight to protect their companies and shareholders from the scourge of eco-socialism?  I will be keen to watch these corporate Neville Chamberlains squirm when manmade global warming takes its place in the Guinness Book of World Records under the category "Biggest Fraud Perpetrated on Mankind."

The Dangerous Rise of Carbon Fundamentalism:  The sheer volume of articles, the vicious language and the retranslation of so many social and cultural trends — divorce, obesity, gender conflict and much else — into terms of carbon footprint suggests that something more fundamental is going on.  Most obviously, the extreme language — comparing academics who disagree about interpretation of data to Hitler or to Holocaust deniers — is indicative of a profound if subtle reframing of climate change.  One does not debate Hitler:  the use of such language indicates a shift from helping the public and policymakers understand a complex issue, to demonizing disagreement, especially regarding policies favored by the scientific community.

I was on the global warming gravy train.  I devoted six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian government to estimate carbon emissions from land use change and forestry.  When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty conclusive, but since then new evidence has weakened that case.  I am now skeptical.

Over 31,000 U.S. Scientists Deny Man-Made Global Warming.  In 1998, Dr. Arthur Robinson, Director of the Oregon Institute for Science and Medicine, posted his first Global Warming skeptic petition, on the Institute's website. … Robinson's petition states a truth:  "There is no convincing evidence that human release of CO2, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing or will cause, in the foreseeable future, catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."  What do these approx 32,000 scientists believe has caused the earth's warming since 1850 if it isn't CO2?  He points to the sun.  Robinson notes that over the past 150 years the sunspot index has predicted the Earth's temperature changes — with 79 percent accuracy — about ten years before they happen.  The sunspots actually predicted the 2007 global temperature decline; the index turned down in 2000.  The computer models didn't foresee it.

Chilling Effect:  You'd think this would be a rich time for debate on the issue of climate change.  But it's precisely as sweeping change on climate policy is becoming likely that many people have decided the time for debate is over.  One writer puts climate change skeptics "in a similar moral category to Holocaust denial," another envisions "war crimes trials" for the deniers.  And during the tour for his film "An Inconvenient Truth," Al Gore himself belittled "global warming deniers" as unworthy of any attention.

The Forces of Climate Sanity:  Unfortunately for the "debate is over" crowd, as more data arrives it continues to contradict everything they predict, and therefore the anti-free market policy proposals that they and their econo-moron political masters believe.  We should not forget that the global warming alarmist movement is in no small part simply another attack on first world economies brought to you by some of the same politicians and unions who tried and failed to destroy free trade in the past decade.

All those scientists may still be wrong.  To shut down debate is unscientific.  Science progresses by observation and deduction, by setting up hypotheses and testing them.  Allowing one view to be pushed forward with no dissent sets a precedent that will stifle innovative thinking.  Whatever Al Gore may believe, there is an even more inconvenient truth:  he could be wrong.

The Global-Warming Debate Isn't Over.  If you must declare a debate over, then maybe it's not.  And if you have to gussy up your agenda as "our greatest opportunity to lift global consciousness to a higher level," then it deserves some skeptical examination.

Skeptics Help Us Search for Truth.  When global warming alarmists condemn skeptics as deniers, it is an unscientific and socially dangerous characterization.  Skeptics are not the enemy.  On the contrary, they are crucial to science because they help us search for truth.  Scientific theories exist to be verified or proven false.  Thomas Huxley, a famous nineteenth-century English biologist, explained, "Skepticism is the highest of duties; blind faith the one unpardonable sin."

Plenty of scientific doubt about climate catastrophe.  I am a denier, a pejorative term applied to those of us who reject the now discredited report that 99 percent of climatologists agree that we are in a period of accelerated global warming, and that the debate is over.  I am in good company.  The deniers include those scientists who are directly involved in actual measurements of global temperatures, or those who base their positions on solid science, as opposed to those who base their opinion on computer modeling.

Science Organizations' 'Consensus' Statements Do Not Reflect Members' Views.  The American Geophysical Union, world's largest organization representing earth and space scientists, has issued a new statement on the causes and consequences of recent climate change and possible responses.  Similarly, in the past few years Royal Society, National Academy of Sciences (NAS), and American Meteorological Society (AMS) have issued statements endorsing a so-called consensus view that human activities are driving global warming.  What you don't hear is that these societies never allowed member scientists vote on these climate statements.  Essentially, in each case only two dozen or members on ad hoc committees and governing boards of these institutions produced the "consensus" statements.

U.N. Blackballs International Scientists from Climate Change Conference.  The United Nations has rejected all attempts by a group of dissenting scientists seeking to present information at the climate change conference taking place in Bali, Indonesia. … The scientists, citing pivotal evidence on climate change published in peer-reviewed journals, have expressed their opposition to the UN's alarmist theory of anthropogenic global warming.

Professor Spreads False Warming Stories.  University of Montana forestry professor Steven Running has interjected himself into the global warming debate by actively lobbying for expensive greenhouse gas restrictions and criticizing those who oppose his view.  In the October 25 Missoula Independent, Running labeled "ridiculous" those who have publicly corrected his many false and misleading statements about global warming.

Not So Hot.  If a scientific paper appeared in a major journal saying that the planet has warmed twice as much as previously thought, that would be front-page news in every major paper around the planet.  But what would happen if a paper was published demonstrating that the planet may have warmed up only half as much as previously thought?  Nothing.

Skeptics Voted The Clear Winners Against Global Warming Believers in Heated NYC Debate.  Just days before former Vice President Al Gore's scheduled visit to testify about global warming before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, a high profile climate debate between prominent scientists [in March 2007] ended with global warming skeptics being voted the clear winner by a tough New York City before an audience of hundreds of people.

EPA Chief Vows to Probe E-mail Threatening to 'Destroy' Career of Climate Skeptic.  During today's hearing, Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), Ranking Member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, confronted Stephen Johnson, Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), with a threatening e-mail from a group of which EPA is currently a member.  The e-mail threatens to "destroy" the career of a climate skeptic.

Scientists Send Letter to UN:  Give Up Futile Climate Change Battle.  If a former vice president with absolutely no formal scientific training in climatology or meteorology makes a statement about the world coming to an end due to rising temperatures, media will fawn over him like teenyboppers in the presence of Elvis Presley.  Yet, if more than 100 scientists from around the world send a letter to the Secretary General of the United Nations urging him and his organization to stop wasting time, resources, and money fighting a futile climate change battle, crickets will be heard in newsrooms around the country.

Media bias proves to be a Gray area.  It's not that [Dr. William] Gray is a media pariah.  His annual forecast on the number of hurricanes is dutifully reported and prominently displayed.  But when Gray talks about global warming — he's on the record as a strong skeptic of man-made global warming — the media barely notice.

When Political Correctness Becomes Conventional Wisdom:  Bill Gray has testified on global warming before Congress.  He has given speeches, written articles and done all he can think of to get his message out.  Yet, he has been ostracized by his colleagues, cut off from government funding and invested more than $100,000 of his own money to keep his research going — all because he contends that global warming is a fraud.  "I am of the opinion that this is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people," he says.  "I've been in meteorology over 50 years.  I've worked [very] hard, and I've been around.  My feeling is some of us older guys who've been around have not been asked about this.  It's sort of a baby boomer, yuppie thing."

The climate models are worthless:  An interview with Dr. Vincent Gray.  Dr. Gray is an expert reviewer for the IPCC and has submitted more than 1,800 comments on IPCC reports.  I contacted Dr. Gray to get his view on global warming and here's the exclusive interview.

Eye Of The Hurricane:  Colorado State University says it'll no longer promote the work of Dr. William Gray.  Is it really a cost-cutting move or are CSU and eco-fascists trying to silence the godfather of hurricane forecasting?  The university says its decision is based solely on the burdens of keeping up with media requests and inquiries about Gray's work that overwhelm a lone media staffer.  It says the decision has nothing to do with the fact that Gray, professor emeritus of CSU's atmospheric department, has been an effective voice offering inconvenient truths debunking Al Gore's climate disaster theories.

Colorado hurricane forecaster says global warming 'grossly exaggerated'.  The studies continue to mount:  Global warming is likely to blame for producing more powerful hurricanes and endangering the earth's ecosystems.  Nonsense, William Gray said Tuesday.  "There's been so much hype," the Colorado State University storm prognosticator said.  "But I don't think there's a real problem.  I think global warming has been grossly exaggerated."

Skeptical Scientists:  These are names of scientists who are question the global warming hysteria.

Meteorologist Documents Warming Bias in U.S. Temperature Stations.  New research suggests the temperature stations used to calculate statistics on temperatures in the United States are wrong and show more warming than has actually occurred. … Unfortunately, the scientists who compute the nation's average annual temperature seem to have little interest in obtaining accurate information.

Fall in weather deaths dents climate warnings.  Green scientists have been accused of overstating the dangers of climate change by researchers who found that the number of people killed each year by weather-related disasters is falling.  Their report suggests that a central plank in the global warming argument — that it will result in a big increase in deaths from weather-related disasters — is undermined by the facts.  It shows deaths in such disasters peaked in the 1920s and have been declining ever since.

Baby, it's so cold outside.  Devastating man-made global warming is here, they insist, and causing terrible, terrible suffering.  They sound so very sure of it that you'd think they could pick, ooh, dozens of examples of this present cataclysm that are so obvious, so incontrovertible, that sceptics like me will slink back into our irresponsibly airconditioned homes, flushed from shame and an eerily hot sun.

Associate State Climatologist Fired for Exposing Warming Myths.  University of Washington climate scientist Mark Albright was dismissed on March 12 from his position as associate state climatologist, just weeks after exposing false claims of shrinking glaciers in the Cascade Mountains.

News and commentary about NASA's James Hansen

ABC Attacks NASA Skeptic with 'Incensed' Scientists.  Offer any skepticism of global warming and the media quickly line up experts to discredit you.  That's exactly what happened on "World News with Charles Gibson" on May 31.  Correspondent Bill Blakemore's report was about a "controversy" over recent skeptical remarks made on NPR by NASA administrator Dr. Michael Griffin.

NASA Global Warming Soap Opera Takes Dramatic New Twist.  NASA scientist and global warming alarmist James Hansen … who has received a quarter of a million dollars in grant money from Teresa Heinz Kerry's left-wing Heinz Foundation, and thereafter publicly endorsed Heinz's husband John Kerry for president in 2004, has given more than 1,400 on-the-job interviews presenting a global warming alarmist point of view.

Alarmism Undermines Sound Policy.  The fact that the press has appointed Jim Hansen, whose opinion is anything but objective, the savior of civilization shows just how unscientific the global warming debate has become.

James Hansen:  Abusing the Public Trust.  Monday [6/23/2008], James Hansen, Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS), addressed Congress and brought a new twist to his tired global warming song and dance routine.  Hansen now seems to be calling for the chief executives of Big Oil to be tried for high crimes against humanity.  Their crime?  Spreading doubt about global warming.  Actually, it is Hansen who is guilty.  Guilty of abusing the public trust.

NASA warming scientist:  'This is the last chance'.  Exactly 20 years after warning America about global warming, a top NASA scientist said the situation has gotten so bad that the world's only hope is drastic action. … Hansen, echoing work by other scientists, said that in five to 10 years, the Arctic will be free of sea ice in the summer.

The Editor says...
What a relief!  This means that in ten years, we can completely ignore every prediction Mr. Hansen makes, or has already made, because there will still be plenty of ice at the North Pole.

A Desperate Man.  In another example of junk science run amok, NASA scientist James Hansen wants oil executives put on trial for giving "misinformation" about his global warming theory.  Is this where society is headed?  If so, we are headed for a dangerous place.  Only in totalitarian systems is dissent a criminal offense. … Hansen's comment is revealing.  It's the sort of declaration made by a desperate man trying to hang on to his declining relevance.

The Editor says...
Put me on trial, Mr. Hansen.  Where will this trial take place... in a NASA courtroom?  While I'm defending my skepticism, I think I can prove that NASA itself is a complete waste of money and should be scrapped.

Twisting Science to Fit the Global Warming Template:  The global warming crowd does not take kindly to being contradicted, either by critics or data.  Of course, critics can be defamed and data can be skewed.  But unless the critics can be silenced, they can fight back and expose phony data.  When it begins to look like predictions of doom are not turning out sufficiently catastrophic, a full Orwell is called for.  The media mobilize their templates to completely re-cast the information.

Climate hysteria now invading our homes and businesses.  In a public and government relations coup of unprecedented proportions, governments world-wide have been frightened into bowing before "so-called" romantic environmentalists, a well-funded but misguided movement that has thoroughly distorted the public policy debate.  Anyone who questions their dogma is to be silenced, shunned and disgraced.

Global warming:  the bogus religion of our age.  Genuine science is about gathering evidence and testing the veracity of theories, not cheerleading for a particular ideology.  That is what is so disturbing about the current debate on global warming.  Healthy scepticism, which should be at the heart of all scientific inquiry, is treated with contempt. … [Environmentalism] is intolerant of dissent; those who question the message of doom are regarded as heretics, or 'climate change deniers', to use green parlance.

A Denier's Confession:  Global warming is more alarmist than alarming.  I confess:  I am prepared to acknowledge that the world has been and will be getting warmer thanks in some part to an increase in man-made atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases.  I acknowledge this in the same way I'm confident that the equatorial radius of Saturn is about 60,000 kilometers:  not because I've measured it myself, but out of a deep reserve of faith in the methods of the scientific community, above all its reputation for transparency and open-mindedness.

They call this a consensus?  More than six months ago, I began writing this series, The Deniers.  When I began, I accepted the prevailing view that scientists overwhelmingly believe that climate change threatens the planet.  I doubted only claims that the dissenters were either kooks on the margins of science or sell-outs in the pockets of the oil companies. … My series set out to profile the dissenters — those who deny that the science is settled on climate change — and to have their views heard.  To demonstrate that dissent is credible, I chose high-ranking scientists at the world's premier scientific establishments.

BusinessWeek Credits 'Savvier Media' With Silencing Warming Opposition.  The media is actively silencing critics it disagrees with.

Attacking the Messenger:  The Left Unhinged by The Fox News Channel.  The most recent tactic used against the number one cable news channel, Fox News, has been a campaign by activist and filmmaker Robert Greenwald.  Through the website,, Greenwald is going after advertisers, like Home Depot to get them to pull their ad dollars from The Fox News Channel because they dare to present an opposing view regarding the role of humans in global warming. … Their testiness is especially evident after the "Live Earth" debacle.  They are scrambling to regain some sense of decorum on the discussion of Global Warming.

Global warming zealots are stifling scientific debate.  Tonight's airing of The Great Global Warming Swindle and the associated discussion on [Australian] TV should be a hoot. … Three scientists with a more rational view to the doomsday hype were invited to appear on the panel and have now been uninvited as they do not dance to the drumbeat of disaster.  There is a VIP section of the audience with loopy-left greens and social commentators.

Up against the warming zealots.  When I agreed to make The Great Global Warming Swindle, I was warned a middle-class fatwa would be placed on my head.  So I wasn't shocked that the film was attacked on the same night it was broadcast on [Australian] ABC television last week, although I was impressed at the vehemence of the attack.  I was more surprised, and delighted, by the response of the Australian public.  The ABC studio assault, led by Tony Jones, was so vitriolic it appears to have backfired.

Climate film hits back at Gore.  From the moment it hit the airwaves on a British television station on March 8, The Great Global Warming Swindle has generated both praise and outrage because of its theory that scientists, politicians and the media have conspired to scare people into believing that humans are causing climate change.

Censoring Global Warming Skeptics.  Bob Ward, John Houghton, Myles Allen and the others who advocate censoring scientific opinion should reconsider the meaning of the statement Allen made in this piece:  "Science is about the arguments."  Precisely.  And you can't have arguments if one side can keep the other from speaking.

Chilling Intolerance for Free Speech on Global Warming.  The debate is now over, according to the world's top science experts, Al Gore and Britain's environmental minister.  Those who question if that's a fact are no longer simply nay-sayers or skeptics.  They are flat-earthers, "known liars," and war criminals.  Worse than the name-calling, environmentalists, the media, and even scientists are attempting to stifle other scientists with differing opinions on climate change.

Turning up the Heat on Gore.  Global warming is what William James called a "moral equivalent of war" that gives political officials the power to do things they could never do without a crisis. … This explains Gore's relentless talk of "consensus," his ugly moral bullying of "deniers" and, most of all, his insistence that because there's no time left to argue, everyone should do what he says.  Isn't it interesting how the same people who think "dissent is the highest form of patriotism" when it comes to the war think that dissent when it comes to global warming is evil and troglodytic?

Inside the Church of Global Warming:  When ex-vice president Al Gore started saying, in a time of war, that global warming was a more important issue for us all to focus upon than international terrorism, I placed even more focus on the issue.  With the help of the scientific community, those who have reservations on the magnitude of reported man made global warming, I wrote two compelling articles meant to spark further debate on where we should prioritize this issue when the nation is at war.  I was literally assailed by the fanatics of the global warming community.

The Great Global Warming Swindle:  A juicy new documentary called "The Great Global Warming Swindle" has just been broadcast [3/8/2007] on the UK's Channel 4.  Based on the thesis presented in the book The Chilling Star by Danish scientist Henrik Svensmark, the documentary claims that humans have absolutely no control over Global Warming and that all the hype about it is simply propoganda inspired by the huge amounts of money given to what's become a popular cause.

The Left-Wing Echo Chamber.  Death threats.  Harassing phone calls.  Threatening e-mails.  Such was a day in the life of Drew Johnson a few weeks ago.  His crime?  Johnson is president of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, a free-market think tank that broke one of the juiciest stories of 2007. … Unfortunately for Johnson, it meant enduring days of attacks from liberals — even though the facts of the story came directly from public records.

Just the facts.  The chorus of cheers that on Feb. 2 greeted the release of a summary of findings by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is only the latest example of a hardening political consensus around a subject on which there is still scientific debate.  What has happened is that climate change and the human role therein have now become a kind of orthodoxy that you question at your peril if you are a scientist or a politician.

A Cool Look at Global Warming:  The more one examines the current global warming orthodoxy, the more it resembles a Da Vinci Code of environmentalism.  It is a great story, and a phenomenal best seller.  It contains a grain of truth — and a mountain of nonsense.  And that nonsense could be very damaging indeed.  We appear to have entered a new age of unreason, which threatens to be as economically harmful as it is profoundly disquieting.  It is from this, above all, that we really do need to save the planet.

Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming — Now Skeptics.  Following the U.S. Senate's vote today on a global warming measure, it is an opportune time to examine the recent and quite remarkable momentum shift taking place in climate science.  Many former believers in catastrophic man-made global warming have recently reversed themselves and are now climate skeptics.  The names included [in this article] are just a sampling of the prominent scientists who have spoken out recently to oppose former Vice President Al Gore, the United Nations, and the media driven "consensus" on man-made global warming.

Gore fans abuse, threaten Gore foes.  Gore's defenders also spewed venomous e-mails.  They sent the [Tennessee Center for Policy Research] nearly 3,000 Gore-related messages that exhibited the very bigotry the Left routinely denounces.  These offensive, often-vulgar, and occasionally unschooled comments reveal the vitriol behind much of today's "progressive" rhetoric. … Such anti-intellectual intimidation reflects the high-octane hate that fuels so much Leftist discourse. … Remember this whenever liberals crow about diversity, tolerance, and open-mindedness.

'Dissent' Authors Oppose Dissent.  The Boykoff brothers urge that it's unethical to allow experts skeptical of global warming into news stories.  But when you turn to Jules Boykoff's college biography page, you discover that much of his writing is devoted to protesting the "suppression of dissent" in America, including by ... the mass media.

Now it's really getting ugly.
Scientists threatened for 'climate denial'.  Scientists who questioned mankind's impact on climate change have received death threats and claim to have been shunned by the scientific community.  They say the debate on global warming has been "hijacked" by a powerful alliance of politicians, scientists and environmentalists who have stifled all questioning about the true environmental impact of carbon dioxide emissions.  Timothy Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, has received five death threats by email since raising concerns about the degree to which man was affecting climate change.

In age of reason, the brouhaha over global warming can leave you cold.  History shows that scientists are not always right.  Sometimes they get caught up in the non-scientific enthusiasms of their time.  History also shows that one of those enthusiasms, which crops up constantly, is a desire to believe in the approach of some kind of apocalypse.  Of course, I have no way of knowing if the carbon crusade is a case in point.  But it shares some of the characteristics of previous apocalyptic movements, which provides grounds for cool scepticism.

True Lies, The Sequel:  Five Western governors have joined forces to fight global warming by limiting carbon dioxide emissions.  But all they'll be limiting will be the economies of their states and the free speech of skeptics. … The silencing of skeptics of global warming's imminent danger, the extent of human causation, and the cost-effectiveness of things like Kyoto, is apparently part of the initiative.

Taking a closer look at Al Gore's truth:  When you compound the probabilities, the claims of environmentalists such as Gore begin to look less and less certain.  In fact, in their unwillingness to brook dissent or countervailing theories, they seem less like scientists and more like the fundamentalists they otherwise scorn.

Gore under the spotlight.  Gore and his friends oddly insist the debate is over and consensus has been reached on the subject.  The striking fact we find in exploring the subject is, however, the extent of disagreement among scientists on the question of human agency in climate change.  Gore might wrap himself in the mantle of science, but he is not a scientist.  He belongs to a class of people — politicians — least trusted by the public.

Gore on the Rocks.  A backlash in the scientific community has begun. Last week, New York Times veteran science reporter William Broad filed a devastating article about scientists who are "alarmed" at Gore's alarmism; Gore's account of global warming goes far beyond the evidence.  The dissents from Gore's extremism, Broad explained, "come not only from conservative groups and prominent skeptics of catastrophic warming, but also from rank-and-file scientists" who have "no political ax to grind."

Is there global warming 'truth'?  There is little disagreement in the media that Al Gore is greatly responsible for bringing the subject of man-made global warming into the public glare. ... Science and politics have co-existed in an uneasy relationship for a very long time.  The reason is simple.  In science "truth" is meant to be independent of human preferences and its discovery occurs through the scientific method of conjectures and refutations.

Climate change, Gore and Hitler.  Scientists are part of the consensus if they find that human-induced global warming is just as bad as others say it is, or if it is a bigger problem than others say it is.  But if they find that is not such a serious problem, they're no longer part of the consensus.  They're denialists.  Millionaire businessman Richard Branson is allowed to offer $25 million for research on carbon emissions but if the American Enterprise Institute pays scientists $10,000 to examine a recent UN report, that's bribery and corruption.

Liberals:  A very modest proposal.  As Michael Crichton pointed out, when folks start talking about consensus among scientists, they're talking politics, not science.  Nobody goes around claiming there's a consensus of experts when it comes to the laws of thermodynamics or asks the U.N. to decide if there's any validity to DNA.  Only with global warming are we supposed to put it to a vote, and then abide by the results of a fixed election.

On Comparing Global Warming Denial to Holocaust Denial:  In her last column, Boston Globe columnist Ellen Goodman wrote:  "Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers ..." This is worthy of some analysis. ... The Ellen Goodman quote is only the beginning of what is already becoming one of the largest campaigns of vilification of decent people in history — the global condemnation of a) anyone who questions global warming; or b) anyone who agrees that there is global warming but who argues that human behavior is not its primary cause; or c) anyone who agrees that there is global warming, and even agrees that human behavior is its primary cause, but does not believe that the consequences will be nearly as catastrophic as Al Gore does.

What Explains the Increasing Fury of Global Warming Alarmists?  What's behind the shameless demagoguery and character assassination being heaped on climate change "deniers"?  What's behind the chilling calls for "Nuremberg trials" for dissenting scientists?  Why has the Green rhetoric escalated to lynch-mob proportions?

Global warmers getting desperate.  The perpetration of a hoax follows a fairly well-established pattern.  First, the initial propaganda stage.  As skepticism increases to the point the hoax may be foiled, desperation sets in.  The second stage begins by attacking the skeptics.  America is entering the second stage, and it's not very pretty.

Prominent French Scientist Reverses Belief in Global Warming — Now a Skeptic.  His dream, he says, is to see "ecology become the engine of economic development and not an artificial obstacle that creates fear."

Global Warming Skeptics Shunned.  The political climate isn't good for scientists with dissenting views on global warming, leaving some researchers to fear that honest research could be blackballed in favor of promoting a "consensus" view.  A dispute erupted this week in Oregon, where Gov. Ted Kulongoski is considering firing the state's climatologist George Taylor, who has said human activity isn't the chief cause of global climate change.

Senator Sees Momentum Shifting Toward Global Warming Skepticism.  Politicians who build campaigns around "alarmist" global warming claims are themselves becoming quite alarmed because of growing skepticism, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said. … "Politicians who are using this to run for office are panicking because the scientists have totally reversed themselves on this issue," he asserted.

Global Warming Consensus:  Folks Who Believe There is One Can't Tell You What It Is.  If "the consensus" truly is an established fact, why is it referred to as "a consensus"? … The supposed consensus itself is a mass of contradictory opinions, a fact which says clearly to anyone with open ears that the science isn't settled on global warming.

Consensus is Nonsensus in Scientific Matters.  The concept of consensus means little more than a majority of opinions on a given matter.  In politics this is the best we can do in making decisions to proceed with political actions.  In the scientific world consensus is meaningless, and often unscientific, and worse, often wrong.  Even the act of seeking such a consensus as a form of proof is not science.

Global-warming skeptics cite being 'treated like a pariah'.  Scientists skeptical of climate-change theories say they are increasingly coming under attack — treatment that may make other analysts less likely to present contrarian views about global warming.  "In general, if you do not agree with the consensus that we are headed toward disaster, you are treated like a pariah," said William O'Keefe, chief executive officer of the Marshall Institute, which assesses scientific issues that shape public policy.

Exposing the real climate 'deniers'.  Today, let's attack the real global warming "deniers."  The affluent, First World, Kyoto crackheads, who condemn anyone who questions their hysterical "apocalypse now" rhetoric as being no better than a Holocaust denier.  Their rhetoric is morally repugnant and disgusting.  Plus, they're fools.  They carry on as if coal, oil and natural gas are evil, instead of being a product of the natural world that has enabled civilization to flourish and saved more lives than any of them ever will.

Global Warming:  The Cold, Hard Facts?  Why is it that when scientists who have studied the Global Warming phenomenon for years say that humans are not the cause nobody listens?  Why does no one acknowledge that the Emperor has no clothes on?  Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2).  This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science.  We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification.

Global Hot Air:  The political Left's favorite argument is that there is no argument.  Their current crusade is to turn "global warming" into one of those things that supposedly no honest and decent person can disagree about, as they have already done with "diversity" and "open space."  The name of "science" is invoked by the Left today, as it has been for more than two centuries.  After all, Karl Marx's ideology was called "scientific socialism" in the 19th century.  In the 18th century, Condorcet analogized his blueprint for a better society to engineering, and social engineering has been the agenda ever since.

The Emperor's New Climate:  Is Global Warming Real?  Everyone knows that the planet Earth is heating up disastrously.  Everyone.  If you listen to the news at all, you know that the 1990s was the hottest decade in 1,000 years.

"We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?"

— Phil Jones in a reply to climate skeptic Warwick Hughes *    

The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus:  [There is] a societal instability that can cascade the most questionable suggestions of danger into major political responses with massive economic and social consequences.  ...Some of the reasons for this instability are:  the existence of large cadres of professional planners looking for work, the existence of advocacy groups looking for profitable causes, the existence of agendas in search of saleable rationales, and the ability of many industries to profit from regulation, coupled with an effective neutralization of opposition.  It goes almost without saying that the dangers and costs of those economic and social consequences may be far greater than the original environmental danger.

Global warming pipedream:  A few years ago, then-Interior Secretary Bruce Babbit said those skeptical of the global-warming doomsdayers are "un-American" and part of a "conspiracy."  Yesterday [1/15/2004], former Vice President Al Gore, speaking in New York amid record-low temperatures, blasted President Bush as a "moral coward" for not taking a more active stand against the imaginary global-warming scenario.

MIT's inconvenient scientist.  Al Gore delivered the kickoff lecture, and, 10 years later, he reiterated [Stephen] Schneider's directive.  There is no science on the other side, Gore inveighed, more than once.  Again, the same message:  If you hear tales of doubt, ignore them.  They are simply untrue.  I ask you:  Are these convincing arguments?

Fact sheet on Global Warming:  There is less consensus about climate change within the scientific community than reported.  Some scientists believe temperatures are warming and human action is the dominant cause.  Others will accept data that seems to indicate warming but attribute this to solar phenomena or natural cycles.  Still others challenge the tools and methods of data gathering that are the foundation for claims of warming.  Indeed, even the basic measurement of today's temperature can vary widely when measured from the ground and from satellite.

Global warming:  a few skeptics still ask why it's happening.  Amid mounting evidence that temperatures are rising on planet Earth, the "skeptics" and "agnostics" are a smaller band than they used to be.  Yet those who do still harbor doubts about a looming global-warming crisis are quietly continuing to test alternative ideas about how climate works and what, if not the burning of fossil fuels, might be causing the temperature creep.

Climate of Fear:  Global-warming alarmists intimidate dissenting scientists into silence.  Everything from the heat wave in Paris to heavy snows in Buffalo has been blamed on people burning gasoline to fuel their cars, and coal and natural gas to heat, cool and electrify their homes.  Yet how can a barely discernible, one-degree increase in the recorded global mean temperature since the late 19th century possibly gain public acceptance as the source of recent weather catastrophes?  And how can it translate into unlikely claims about future catastrophes?

Global warming skeptic is simply man of reason.  Unfortunately, life is more about circles and cycles than straight lines.  Global warming is taking on the aspect of a religious belief rather than science.  No matter what happens — hot or cold, wet or dry — it's blamed on global warming.  And, like the Darwinians, the global-warming folks treat dissenters as if they were evil heretics.

Global Warming is More Scare than Science.  On June 13 [2005], USA Today declared that "The debate's over:  Globe is Warming."  That's another headline you can ignore.  The world has been warming ever since the last Ice Age, but it is not rapidly warming in ways that threaten our existence, nor warming in a way that requires the industrialized nations to drastically cut back on their use of energy to avoid the many scenarios of catastrophe the Greens have been peddling since the 1980's.

"Warming" is still up for debate.  So, "the debate is over."  Time magazine says so.  Last week's cover story exhorted readers to "Be Worried.  Be Very Worried," and ABC News concurred in several stories.  So did Montana's governor, speaking on ABC.  And there was polling about global warming, gathered by Time and ABC in collaboration.

"I don't like the word 'Balance'" — Says ABC News Global Warming Reporter.  ABC News Reporter Bill Blakemore declared "I don't like the word 'balance' much at all" in global warming coverage at a journalism conference in Vermont over the weekend.  Blakemore, who reported on August 30, 2006, "After extensive searches, ABC News has found no such [scientific] debate" on global warming, said he rejects 'balance' in order to justify excluding any skeptics of manmade catastrophic global warming from his reporting.  He made his remarks at Friday's panel discussion at the Society of Environmental Journalists annual conference in Burlington.

Global-warming theory and the eugenics precedent.  "Global Warming" had a precursor in capturing the hearts and minds of the world.  Michael Crichton, in his novel "State of Fear," brilliantly juxtaposes the world's current political embrace of "global warming" with the popular embrace of the "science" of eugenics a century ago.  For nearly 50 years, from the late 1800s through the first half of the 20th century, there grew a common political acceptance by the world's thinkers, political leaders and media elite that the "science" of eugenics was settled science.  There were a few lonely voices trying to be heard in the wilderness in opposition to this bogus science, but they were ridiculed or ignored.

Book review
Hot Talk, Cold Science:  Global Warming's Unfinished Debate.  S. Fred Singer is a distinguished astrophysicist who has taken a hard, scientific look at the evidence. … Singer's masterful analysis decisively shows that the pessimistic, and often alarming, global warming scenarios depicted in the media have no scientific basis.  In fact, he finds that many aspects of any global warming, such as a longer growing season for food and a reduced need to use fossil fuels for heating, would actually have a positive impact on the human race.  Further, Singer notes how many proposed "solutions" to the global warming "crisis" (like "carbon" taxes) would have severe consequences for economically disadvantaged groups and nations.

Geoff Metcalf interviews renowned atmospheric scientist, Dr. S. Fred Singer.  Dr. S. Fred Singer, former director of the National Weather Satellite Center and renowned atmospheric scientist from George Mason University, says concerns about "global warming" — most prominently emanating from presidential hopeful Al Gore — may be a lot of hot air.

Global hot air, Part II:  Propaganda campaigns often acquire a life of their own.  Politicians who have hitched their wagons to the star of "global warming" cannot admit any doubts on their part, or permit any doubts by others from becoming part of a public debate.  Neither can environmental crusaders, whose whole sense of themselves as saviors of the planet is at stake, as they try to stamp out any views to the contrary.

Global hot air, Part III:  If you take the mainstream media seriously, you might think that every important scientist believes that "global warming" poses a great threat, and that we need to make drastic changes in the way we live, in order to avoid catastrophes to the environment, to various species, and to ourselves.  The media play a key role in perpetuating such beliefs.  Often they seize upon every heat wave to hype global warming, but see no implications in record-setting cold weather, such as many places have been experiencing lately.

True believers preach global warming with alarming zeal.  The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Summary for Policy-makers has stated there is 90 percent certainty that there is an anthropogenic component.  Sounds good, but that is nowhere near certain in scientific terms.

"Studies prove...".  Climate expert Richard S. Lindzen of M.I.T. has indicated that the vast amount of government research money available for studies of "global warming" can discourage skeptics from being vocal about their skepticism.  This is not peculiar to studies of "global warming."  Many people who complain about the corrupting influence of money never seem to apply that to government money.

Global Warming Gag Order.  Washington has no shortage of bullies, but even we can't quite believe an October 27 letter that Senators Jay Rockefeller and Olympia Snowe sent to ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson.  Its message:  Start toeing the Senators' line on climate change, or else. … Its essential point is that the two Senators believe global warming is a fact, and therefore all debate about the issue must stop and ExxonMobil should "end its dangerous support of the [global warming] 'deniers.'"

Activists Trying to Shut Down Climate Debate, Skeptics Say.  Climate change skeptics — and journalists who report on them — have become the target of a campaign aimed at stifling legitimate debate at a time when Congress is planning an aggressive new environmental push.  This is the assessment of environmental scientists and free market advocates who see a concerted effort to silence and de-fund think tanks that publish material challenging "prevailing global warming orthodoxy."

The Global Warming Inquisition and the Suppression of 'Skeptic' Heresy.  Imagine living in a world where no one is allowed to think independent thoughts or take independent actions.  Only pre-approved human response would be acceptable.  To break the rule and engage in forbidden thought would result in terrible retribution, perhaps leading literally to ones destruction.  That's the kind of world apparently desired by the global warming Chicken Littles.  It seems they are prepared to do anything to achieve it.  Case in point is an outrageous letter to ExxonMobil Chairman Rex Tillerson on October 27, 2006.  The letter was sent by two United States Senators, Olympia Snowe (R-ME), and Jay Rockefeller (D-WV).

The evolution of warming.  You remember evolution, right?  That's one of those great unchallengeable orthodoxies of our era — an orthodoxy that is about to run head-first into another supposedly unchallengeable orthodoxy, climate change.  Because, I would assume, to believe that millions of types of fish, butterflies, rodents, polar bears and a myriad of other species will be completely and utterly wiped off the face of the Earth by global warming is to also believe that these animals are creatures entirely without the ability to adapt or evolve.

A Skeptic's Guide To Debunking Global Warming Alarmism:  Something that the media almost never addresses are the holes in the theory that C02 has been the driving force in global warming.  Alarmists fail to adequately explain why temperatures began warming at the end of the Little Ice Age in about 1850, long before man-made CO2 emissions could have impacted the climate.  Then about 1940, just as man-made CO2 emissions rose sharply, the temperatures began a decline that lasted until the 1970's, prompting the media and many scientists to fear a coming ice age.

"An Inconvenient Truth" is a bit hysterical.  Consider the first paragraph of the first section on the movie's website:
Humanity is sitting on a ticking time bomb.  If the vast majority of the world's scientists are right, we have just ten years to avert a major catastrophe that could send our entire planet into a tail-spin of epic destruction involving extreme weather, floods, droughts, epidemics and killer heat waves beyond anything we have ever experienced.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that even most believers in the global warming theory would call this misleading at best.  "The vast majority of the world's scientists" don't even work on climate.  Among those scientists who do, "the vast majority" DO NOT claim "we have just ten years to avert a major catastrophe."

The item above was borrowed from my page of Environmental Propaganda Movie Reviews.

What's so hot about fickle science?  Alas, the science isn't so solid.  In the '70s, it was predicting a new ice age.  Then it switched to global warming.  Now it prefers "climate change."  If it's hot, that's a sign of "climate change."  If it's cold, that's a sign of "climate change."  If it's 53 with sunny periods and light showers, you need to grab an overnight bag and get outta there right now because "climate change" is accelerating out of control.

Chill out over global warming.  You'll often hear the left lecture about the importance of dissent in a free society.  Why not give it a whirl?  Start by challenging global warming hysteria next time you're at a LoDo cocktail party and see what happens.

Ignore scientists that cast doubt on global warming: Broadcaster David Suzuki.  A media darling — especially to the publicly funded Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) who pays his salary — Suzuki's advice to journalists is specific:  They should ignore scientists that cast doubt on global warming, since they don't represent a consensus within the scientific community.

[If you intentionally ignore evidence and opposing viewpoints, then you are engaged in something other than science.]

Climate of Fear:  How can a barely discernible, one-degree increase in the recorded global mean temperature since the late 19th century possibly gain public acceptance as the source of recent weather catastrophes?  And how can it translate into unlikely claims about future catastrophes?  The answer has much to do with misunderstanding the science of climate, plus a willingness to debase climate science into a triangle of alarmism.  Ambiguous scientific statements about climate are hyped by those with a vested interest in alarm, thus raising the political stakes for policy makers who provide funds for more science research to feed more alarm to increase the political stakes.  After all, who puts money into science — whether for AIDS, or space, or climate — where there is nothing really alarming?

Storm Hits Weather Community Over Climate Expert's Global Warming Claims.  The Weather Channel is standing by a climatologist who is taking some heat after blogging that TV weather forecasters skeptical about man-made global warming theories should lose their professional certification.  Climate expert Heidi Cullen defended herself last week in The Weather Channel's One Degree Climate Change blog after questioning the fitness of meteorologists who disagree with her conclusions.

More Hot Air on Global Warming.  Voltaire once said, "I may not agree with what you say, but to your death I will defend your right to say it."  Apparently the Weather Channel's Heidi Cullen believes "If you don't agree with me, you should be silenced, censured, and ostracized."  The central point to all this brouhaha is the debate over global warming.  And there in is the essence of the problem.  It remains a debate.

Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics.  The Weather Channel's most prominent climatologist is advocating that broadcast meteorologists be stripped of their scientific certification if they express skepticism about predictions of manmade catastrophic global warming.

Weather Channel Host Shows Climate Alarmists' Ugly Side.  Heidi Cullen, a Weather Channel meteorologist who hosts the station's alarmist weekly program The Climate Code, created a media stir on January 18 by calling on the American Meteorological Society (AMS) to decertify meteorologists who disagree with her alarmist global warming views.

Let the great debate on climate continue.  It is profoundly unscientific to say the debate is over and that sceptics are not only wrong on the facts but morally unhinged — as demonstrated by the unsubtle and offensive epithet "denier".  It was scepticism that led Copernicus to challenge contemporary orthodoxy and assert that the Earth is not the centre of the universe.  Today's scepticism could well prove that man-made carbon emissions are not the sole, or even primary, driver of climate change — a conclusion radically unsettling to those who believe that humanity is a destroyer rather than an improver of the Earth.

Science, Politics and Death:  The enemies of humanity ... want to move technology another step downward and energy production another step backward by diminishing even the use of hydrocarbon energy.  To accomplish this, they have contrived three lies.  These are the lies of hydrocarbon shortages, human-caused global cooling, and human-caused global warming.  Their allies in the press, government, foundations and business have heavily promoted these lies over the past several decades.

Global Warming:  Fact, Fiction and Political Endgame.  Did human industrial output somehow increase 55 percent during those two years, and then decline by that amount in 2004?  Of course not.  For the record, NOAA concluded that the fluctuation was caused by the natural processes that contribute and remove CO2 from the atmosphere.  Al Gore would be hard-pressed to explain NOAA's findings within the context of his apocalyptic thesis, and he would be hard-pressed to convince any serious scientists that his Orwellian solutions could correct such fluctuations.  This is because his thesis is based largely on convenient half-truths.

Global warming dissenters few at U.S. weather meeting.  Joe D'Aleo was a rare voice of dissent this week at the American Meteorological Society's annual meeting in San Antonio.  D'Aleo, executive director of the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project, a group of scientists, doesn't think greenhouse gas emissions are the major cause of global warming and climate change.  Researchers who hold such contrary views do not appreciate being lumped together with flat-Earthers.  They are legitimate scientists who question the mainstream, but they are a distinct minority.

Convenient Fiction?  Documentary Plans to Challenge Gore.  A critic of "global warming alarmism" began filming a documentary Thursday [12/14/2006] that seeks to rebut some of the claims former Vice President Al Gore made in his popular movie, "An Inconvenient Truth."

A genuine threat or a political bandwagon?  Nigel Farage, leader of the UK Independence Party, said:  "We are being led to believe that there is a scientific consensus that global warming exists when, in fact, the science used to support the theory stresses uncertainty at best.  "In the 1970s, there was a serious debate about whether we were entering a new Ice Age and the cause back then was based on emissions.  Now, those same emissions are allegedly the cause of global warming.

Please, Don't Let the Facts Get in the Way.  I find myself continually annoyed at the absolute certitude cultural elites have toward global warming and man's causation.  In almost every media presentation dealing with the issue all questions are banished, and to question the "consensus" is tantamount to heresy.  Why just the other day on NPR I heard a reporter/prosecutor sound amazed that the Bush administration ever had the temerity to question the science behind global warming.

Why liberals fear global warming far more than conservatives do.  The usual liberal responses — to label a conservative position racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic or the like — obviously don't apply here.  So, liberals would have to fall back on the one remaining all-purpose liberal explanation:  "big business."

Climate change sceptics bet $10,000 on cooler world.  Two climate change sceptics, who believe the dangers of global warming are overstated, have put their money where their mouth is and bet $10,000 that the planet will cool over the next decade.  The Russian solar physicists Galina Mashnich and Vladimir Bashkirtsev have agreed the wager with a British climate expert, James Annan.

Global Warming Models Labeled 'Fairy Tale' By Team of Scientists.  A team of international scientists [in May 2002] said climate models showing global warming are based on a "fairy tale" of computer projections.  The scientists met on Capitol Hill to expose what they see as a dearth of scientific evidence about global warming.

Global warming is still a fear, not a fact.  Every flood, drought or cyclone is seen through the prism of the continuing debate about global warming.  And there are those prepared to play on people's fears with exaggerated and simplistic claims that demean the debate and the depth of scientific inquiry that is being conducted on the issue.  Tim Flannery's article in Tuesday's Age provided a good example of this.  To take just one point, it is nonsense to suggest, as Flannery did, that the present drought is the worst in 1000 years.  Whenever someone claims that a weather event is the worst since records began, it is important to remember that reliable climate records only go back for a century at best.

The Latest Global Warming Claims Are Flawed and Inflated.  The release of five gloom-and-doom articles on global warming and climate change, timed just as the Democratic Party was settling on a nominee, was no accident.  Nor was it surprising that those articles should contain major flaws, inflated claims, and sweeping generalizations.  But what remains unanswered is how this stuff continues to make it through the scientific review process and editorial boards of major newspapers and magazines.

The Sky Is Falling! Or Is It?  Modern-day Chicken Littles would like you to believe that the sky is falling — or, more precisely, that the atmosphere is dangerously overheating.  But they are wrong.

Back to the The Global Warming Page
Jump to the Kyoto Protocol
Jump to the Environmental Issues Page
Back to the Home page

Document location
Updated June 12, 2024.

 Entire contents Copyright 2024 by Andrew K. Dart