There Is No Climate Crisis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to There Is No Climate Crisis

  1. Tomsa says:

    Another great video Tony sums up much of what you’ve been saying recently.

    Yesterday watched yours and Tim Ball’s presentations in Sydney three years ago. Glad you can have a sense of humour in your presentation when the whole subject is so serious as we’re deluded by the MSM, governments, etc. Tim’s too was excellent and being the first I’d heard of him I looked him up to note he’s from here, Manitoba, although I see he now lives in Victoria. I guess he’s prepared for the much warming on Vcr. Island, or perhaps that’s cooling, hang on which way IS the climate going anyway!

  2. TeaPartyGeezer says:

    Not to be a nag, but … you’re not going to post yesterday’s excellent video “4089 Days Until The End Of The Planet” on your website? (I just watched it again!)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=koxdc06wET4

  3. Snoopy says:

    “The Bureau of Meteorology has been accused of changing temperature records to fit a “global warming agenda” by a Queensland Liberal senator.

    Senator Gerard Rennick refused to back down from his attack on the weather’s bureau record-keeping practices during questioning of his past scepticism towards the federal agency on Sky News on Monday.”

    https://www.sbs.com.au/news/liberal-senator-doubles-down-on-accusing-bom-of-changing-records-to-fit-climate-agenda

  4. G W Smith says:

    Great one, Tony! Thanks!

  5. Archie says:

    At about 9 minutes in, Tony shows a graph where NASA changed the data to eliminate a “sea level rise hiatus.” However, earlier Tony showed tide gauge records indicating that sea level rise has been liner for 170 years. How could there have been a hiatus when rise has been linear? Honestly, it looks like NASA fixed an error in the original graph (black line) since the “corrected” red line looks more or less linear.

    • Jeff says:

      The hiatus was Hanson’s data on sea level rise worldwide. The Tidal Guage information was just for one location. Each graph he was showing was for a different location

    • -B- says:

      A short “hiatus” of 20 years won’t invalidate a linear fit over a 170 year time scale. The black line would still have a linear fit possible, it won’t be as good of a fit as the red line. If you look closely at the single location tide gauge a 6:41 for new york, you can see the “hiatus” in there. With many more data points in this plot the “hiatus” becomes even less of a factor in the linear fit. The variability month to month makes short term trends less damaging to the long term fit for lack of better words.

  6. Tyrannosaurus Rex says:

    Great news, Tony! This video has been positively commented by Terry Moore! For those of you who don’t know, Moore runs a pet supply shop in England. Before you say “big deal”, that’s just his PUBLIC business. His PRIVATE business is running the Cat Survival Trust for Endangered Species, his backyard turned wildlife sanctuary. Before you go visit, I should warn you that you need his permission to gain access. Anyway, it’s great that a real British environmentalist sees right through the XR.
    http://www.catsurvivaltrust.org/
    Cheers

  7. JPinBalt says:

    Thank you again for keeping at exposing this fraud. Great work.
    However, keep at the science, while repeating exposing prior media propaganda, pure science and data better than just saying old newspapers and mag forcasts got it wrong.
    Would not mind to see something on why top of atmosphere outgoing long wave radiation has been rising when by global warming theory the stuff reflected or radiated off earth is theoretically being more absorbed by tropospheric CO2 in 14 µm wavelength band and top of atmosphere OLW should be falling, smoking gun opposite.
    I do not understand why earth’s stratosphere cooling rapidly (RSS data) when more OLW, puzzle.
    https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/cgi-bin/data/timeseries/timeseries.pl?ntype=1&var=OLR&level=2000&lat1=90&lat2=-90&lon1=0&lon2=0&iseas=1&mon1=0&mon2=0&iarea=0&typeout=2&Submit=Create+Timeseries
    http://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html (hit TLS channel)

    • See https://www.climatesciencejournal.com/ , JPinBalt , to understand why the Greenhouse Gas theory is invalid science.

      • GCSquared says:

        I took a very quick look at the link, and I’m disappointed. The author conflates the energy >storedabsorbed< by H2O, CO2 and other "greenhouse gases".

        Greenhouse gases are any that can absorb infrared radiation (IR). This directly causes only these molecules to vibrate, but this energy is transferred indirectly to other atmospheric molecules by intermolecular collisions, so the whole atmosphere warms up.

        I'm not quite sure what to make of his discussion about the thermophysics of Rayleigh scattering.

        The principle of greenhouse warming IS competent science (at least in principle). Understandably, there's an inclination to trash the good along with the bad when so much has been corrupted, but sceptical examination is a healthier course than wholesale book-burning.

    • Vegieman says:

      I say keep up exposing the fraud of climate change with the old and very relevant news articles and the steady references to the reasonable and reliable datasets, while exposing the failed forecasts of their charlatans from manipulated data. This deception is not founded on science and its principles and will be further confounded by science so called. Hopefully reasonable people who seek truth are being empowered to expose and prevent the gain of power and control of those who lie and oppress.

  8. Norilsk says:

    The 142 year old record for Norfolk County, Ontario fell by a whopping 2.6 C to a new low of -10.6 C on Tuesday. Our minister of environment Catherine McKenna says we have a climate emergency. I guess so! What should she do about it? Dump soot on the Arctic?

  9. bob says:

    The term “fossil fuel” is outdated. Crude oil is now proven to be made from hydrocarbons deep in the earth and is a geological process. Don’t nreed no desad dinosaurs. I’m not sure about coal, i’m looking into that.
    http://viewzone.com/abioticoilx.html

    Love your site! hey, but isn’t acid rain a real thing? It decimated the fish in the Adirondacks near where I live.

    • Robert Gipson says:

      Bob, I agree re: the abiotic origin of petroleum. A lot of evidence supports it. Coal, on the other hand, is a horse of a different color. It’s dead plants.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.