Global Warming Fraud Exposed In Pictures
My Gift To Climate Alarmists
Tony Heller does an amazing job of showing how the fraud takes place in his video entitled My Gift To Climate Alarmists.
The video is only 12.51 minutes long.
Cherry Picking
- Heatwaves increasing since 1960
- Arctic ice declining since 1979
- Wildfires increasing since 1983
- Sea levels rising since 1920
When you want to mislead people with statistics picking the start date is very important.
Alarmist Heat Wave Chart Shown vs Underlying Data
US Wildfires as Presented by Alarmists vs Actual Data
Please compare the right hand portion of the above chart with the lower half of the heat wave chart to see the actual correlation.
Arctic Sea Ice Extent
US Sea Level Since 1920
US Sea Level Since 1850
Sea Level Rising for 20,000 Years
Waverly Ohio
Climate Fraud Tool
Tony Heller devised software to automatically pick the perfect start date for climate alarmists to use to portray what they want.
“Most scientists are keeping their mouths shut because they they have to. They would lose their career and income if they didn’t.”
“Adults won’t take climate change seriously. So we, the youth, are forced to strike.”
“The Green New Deal reads like the communist manifesto”.
Redistribute the World’s Wealth by Climate Policy
The climate change activists will of course claim that such statements are out of context.
I agree they likely are. But the brainwashing of kids isn’t.
Flashback 1989
Entire nations could be wiped off the earth by 2000.
Visit Real Climate Science for more information.
Heller shows some of the tricks alarmists use, but what about the actual long-term data?
Global Warming Swindle
William Land describes the actual underlying data for thousands of years in the “Great Global Warming Swindle“.
The video is long. However, the data aspect is fully covered in the first 35 minutes. The rest covers the politics of what’s happening. Here are some clips that I made.
Facts don’t Fit the Theory
Global Warming Fraud Basics
Co2 and Temp vs Solar Activity and Temp
Carbon dioxide does not fit the global warming cycle at all. Solar activity does.
Al Gores’s Ice Core examples
Al Gore’s ice core tests show Gore is wrong. Carbon dioxide lags temperature by 800 years.
Temperature leads CO2 not the other way around.
Cosmic Rays Inverted vs Temperature
- When cosmic rays went up, temperatures went down. When cosmic rays went down, temperature went up.
- Climate is controlled by the clouds. The clouds are controlled by cosmic rays. The cosmic rays are controlled by the sun.
- Vastly different records come together beautifully.
- It all comes down to the sun, not CO2.
Patrick Moore Greenpeace Co-Founder
Deniers and Heretics
Scientists who speak out face “climate denier” drumbeats.
Anyone who keeps it up long enough is labeled a heretic or worse.
“The environmental movement is really a political activist movement,” says the Greenpeace co-founder.
Worse yet, what should be a scientific debate, is now an unwinnable religious debate with indoctrinated kids used as tools.
Read more at moneymaven.io
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Please DONATE TODAY To Help Our Non-Profit Mission To Defend The Scientific Method.
Trackback from your site.
Andy Rowlands
| #
Great article. The Great Global Warming Swindle has almost become the bible for skepticism, I recorded it off the tv when it was first shown in 2007.
Reply
Joseph Olson
| #
“The way to control the opposition, is to lead it ourselves6 ~ Lenin
In order to keep this fraud going for two decades, the elites fashioned a fake debate between the Alarmist BIG Warmist and the Luke LITTLE Warmists. Barred from debate are the scientifically correct NO Warmists. I have been lectured to in person by dozens of Lukewarmist FAKE skeptics and exposed their have truths.
“Spencer Sorcery on Magic Gas” > FauxScienceSlayer(.)com
Reply
D. J. C..
| #
Postma is just as wrong as Spencer, John. Postma has an M.Sc. in an irrelevant branch of physics. I have a B.Sc majoring in physics, plus extensive private post-graduate study in the very relevant field of thermodynamics and I have published three papers on The Second Law of Thermodynamics as it relates to climate science. Postma displays a serious lack of understanding of the fact that (in addition to reflecting about 30% of the solar radiation) the atmosphere also absorbs about 20% of solar radiation and so the solar radiation reaching the surface of Earth could not make its global mean surface temperature hotter than that for the Moon, that being well below zero C.
So, John O’Sullivan, you’d better wake up to yourself because you are ruining the reputation of PSI by continually publishing the junk science of Joseph Postma, Andy Rowlands, Herb Rose and others who make out that it is radiation reaching the surfaces of planets like Earth and Venus that is supposedly explaining the global mean surface temperature. It is not. It has to do with what Josef Loschmidt said in 1876 about how gravity acting on individual molecules sets up the non-zero temperature gradient in the troposphere of all planets, this being why it is hotter than Earth’s mean surface temperature at the base of the 350Km high nominal troposphere of Uranus – a fact which supports my 2013 hypothesis which nobody, least of all Postma, has ever proved wrong. Over 2,000 have downloaded my papers at https://ssrn.com/author=2627605 and many physicists now know why neither “radiative forcing” nor direct solar radiation supports observed surface temperatures. I have given you the CORRECT explanation for such temperatures and yet you then tried to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. The “500 scientists” have not presented the correct alternative. I have. http://climate-change-theory.com.
FOOTNOTE: This is the fifth posting of this comment which Journalist John O’Sullivan keeps deleting because my correct physics and compelling evidence throughout the Solar System PROVES Postma wrong. How could he possibly explain the Venus surface temperature with his fictious claims that solar radiation impinging on the Venus surface that is about one-eighth of that reaching Earth’s surface is somehow raising its temperature by five degrees from 732K to 737K on the sunlit side? There’s nothing wrong with considering averages, because the total solar energy is fixed. In fact, because of the T^4 in Stefan-Boltzmann calculations, the fact that the solar radiation reaching Earth’s surface is variable means that the mean surface temperature it could achieve is LESS than what would be achieved by a constant flux equal to the average, that being about 168W/m^2 and being what could only achieve about 233K (-40C) as the global mean surface temperature for Earth. So, the variable flux could not even achieve that cold temperature. That is why POSTMA IS HORRIBLY WRONG and John O’Sullivan cannot come to grips with this fact, even though Dr Hans Jelbring told him years ago that Postma was wrong and always has been in his claim that all it takes is direct solar radiation to the surface to explain the global mean surface temperature.
Reply
Kevin Doyle
| #
The solar panels on my boat have achieved on their best days in summer, at midday, just under 200 watts/sq-m. If the solar input is 168 W/sq-m, then my solar panels must be 120% efficient. Amazing!
Reply
jerry krause
| #
Hi Kevin,
I suspect on the best days the atmospheric condition could have been described as having scattered white puffy cumulus or maybe a ‘thin’ overcast layer of high cirrus.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply