The Definitive Data On The Global Warming/Climate Change Scam

There is only one piece of US climate data which correlates with CO2 –  the amount of data tampering NCDC is applying to US temperature.

ScreenHunter_3233 Oct. 01 22.59

All of the other relevant metrics show either no correlation, or negative correlation vs. CO2.  The whole thing is a 100% scam – from top to bottom.

Hot days show no correlation vs. CO2

ScreenHunter_3341 Oct. 05 06.14

Severe tornadoes have declined as CO2 has increased

ScreenHunter_3337 Oct. 05 05.58

US temperatures show no correlation with CO2

ScreenHunter_3332 Oct. 05 05.19

US hurricane strikes have declined as CO2 has increased

ScreenHunter_3328 Oct. 05 04.41

US heavy rainfall events show no correlation with CO2

ScreenHunter_3315 Oct. 04 14.20

East Coast sea level rise shows no correlation with CO2

ScreenHunter_3311 Oct. 04 11.20

25 Responses to The Definitive Data On The Global Warming/Climate Change Scam

  1. Rick says:

    So, besides allowing plants to breath more freely, producing more food and oxygen, CO2 also decreases tornadoes and hurricanes. You’re welcome earth.

  2. What are the sources of this data?

  3. zant7 says:

    Nice post , thank you

  4. Fred says:

    Is there any correlation the amount of sunshine hitting the surface of the earth and the clearing of the skies due to pollution control measures that have been instituted since the creation of the EPA?

  5. Fred says:

    I am referring to the removal of particulates from the smokestacks that could have been seeds for cloud formation which would buildup and make rain. Less clouds, less rain, more sun hitting the surface of the earth, the warmer the temperatures. Not sure if CO2 has much to do with it. Also, no one talks about stopping population growth since the more people we have the more CO2 there will be. Just thoughts to ponder.

  6. This Nye comes after an important Bill says:

    I hope this is satire! If not… got any sources for us budding deforesting, habitat-destroying people of the enlightened truth? We do love a bit of extra reading and empirical evidence to read with our warm milk before the next oil spill.

    • Neil Mahony says:

      If I were an oil company I would make sure you never got another drop of gasoline, fuel oil or natural gas. You people bad mouthing the oil industry make me puke. Let’s take away all of these products and go back to burning wood and tippy toeing through the horse manure in the streets!

      • Snowleopard says:

        I suspect that’s what the “you people” have in mind. Depending on the location and the horse’s workload, it takes 1.5 to 5 acres to support (oats, hay, pasture) a horse. A large percentage of that land would be re-purposed from growing food for people (or food for animals that people eat). Therefore less people. Unfortunately you are not an oil company. and several of the larger ones are supporting this PSYOP/scam.

    • JCH says:

      Perhaps you would be happier in Liberia, or North Korea.

      Not a lot of energy usage there.

  7. Politics has totally obscured real science for climate studies. The climate is always changing, and probably humans have little influence on it. CO2 remains a trace gas and the solar constant is not constant. Ignore the models – they are seriously flawed. Back off the carbon tax bullshit, put up the proper satellites and collect real data. Let’s see what is really happening and what adaptations humans need to make over the next millenium, if any.

    Climate forcings may come in stepped perturbations (like volcanoes or sunspot cycles), but they put the climate into a trajectory that takes hundreds of years to reach equilibrium, up or down. You don’t hear much about the real issues or the existence of trajectories, and almost nothing about real energy solutions, like liquid thorium reactors. Instead we get inundated with CO2 propaganda and carbon tax proposals, none of which are scientifically justifiable.

    Don’t punish the fossil fuel industry that heats your home and runs your car. Just find a better alternative. No one had to tax buggy whip manufacturers out of business.

  8. John says:

    Three aims are sufficient- less pollution, more efficient energy and clean water for all.
    Any global warming effects are secondary to these priorities.

  9. Steven White says:

    Or we could trying to blame man for an entire solar system wide climate event:

    During the claimed period of “man made” global warming the winds of Venus increased 33%.

    Mars underwent warming.

    Jupiter lost an entire weather band.

    And gains a spot.

    Saturn erupts with a violent heat prompted storm.



    So I guess if one ignores 99% of the solar system – one can certainly blame mankind for global warming – excuse me “climate change.”

  10. John Herman says:

    But…………Al Gore’s ocean front Malibu home.

    Didn’t he know about “climate change” when he bought on the beach?

    Soulld we help him?

    • Mark Talmont says:

      I don’t see how the Gores, Clintons and rest of their crowd could possibly believe this stuff given their habit of flying around in private jets. Is there anything more gratuitous when if they really believed it’s an “existential crisis” like the Empress-in-waiting says, they could set a good example by flying in the same aircraft with everybody else? I mean you can get some pretty good First Class accommodations and there’s plenty of room for you gun-toting private security/secret service. But then you do have to breath the same air as the peons. An increasingly risky thing what with the uncontrolled immigration and all.
      Plus 20% of the greenhouse gas is from animal agriculture (see the analysis of this in “Cowspiracy”). Notice none of the prominent advocates of The Doctrine even say anything about this? Probably doesn’t “focus group” too well.

  11. Javapoppa says:

    I’m sick to death of hearing every windbag politician, brain dead media type, pompous academic with an agenda, self serving corporate exec, et al blathering on about human caused climate change caused by “carbon” pollution. I’m still waiting for the definitive explanation of how CO2, a mere .04% of the GHG, causes all of the the extreme weather events that are attributed to it. You have to wonder what the other 99.96% of the GHG have been up to while all this has been happening. Then there is that large, variable heat source up there, that sun thingy…

    • chris says:

      well, you could check out an atmospheric science textbook from the 1970s, and sit down and study it. the basics are all there. the details, not so much

  12. Sue Dodd says:

    I love this website!

  13. Allan says:

    😉 ———That Science is the highest value.

    The meta-principle that there is no contradiction in contradictory principles, is invoked with a high frequency in all organized religions; and, as a religion, Science is nothing if not organized, perhaps the most highly organized in the history of organized religion. One can well imagine, for example, that the author of this essay, sick unto dying from the gangrene of functional employment, would derive quite a lot of satisfaction and a good income by joining the ranks of Walter Sullivan, James Gleick, Gina Kolata, Isaac Asimov and so on, by writing a science column for some magazine or daily newspaper.

    This is indeed true, the trouble being that he is unable to pay homage to the drivel demanded by the Religion of Science, a spiritually emaciated cult worship of such universal acceptance that “science writing,” “science proselytizing,” and “science worship,” are inseparable in the public consciousness.

    The Article of Faith which requires us to believe that “Science,” as a metaphysic and mass opiate, is the highest and most enduring value, has prevailed over the past two centuries so that it has turned almost all of our schools and colleges, and certainly all of our big universities, into either technical schools or research institutes. Things have changed very little since twelfth-century Sorbonne, when Theology was lord of all, and all other intellectual endeavors had to go begging. It is only the name of the game which is different.

    In today’s schools, Philosophy has been reduced to an inane obsession with sententious doubt. Letters apologizes for its very existence. There’s no money in an English degree, and the teaching of Languages for any profession outside the diplomatic corps has fallen to such a low level that even the pampered scientists of our day are in danger of losing their grasp on the scientific treasures of the past five hundred years, almost all of which were written in Latin and Greek—indeed, scientists in today’s America can’t even speak a good French, German or Russian, something unimaginable seventy years ago.

    Culture is ridiculed with a sorry yawn; mathematicians, physicists, biologists, or even chemists who imagine themselves on the slashing edge of knowledge will make comments about modern art, music or poetry that a poor lonesome cowboy, far from the centers of learning and art, would be ashamed to utter.

    Such is the power of faith. ——–

  14. Mark Talmont says:

    I have adopted the habit of asking fanatical “warmers” why the glaciers started melting thousands of years before anybody was burning any coal (assuming they even understand that). Then there is the apparent causation of warming first, raised CO2 next in the ice core data. Sadly this is not new, the still-referenced as authoritative Club of Rome flatly state we would be out of oil by 2015 (in 1977). For a fun web search try “predictions made on the first earth day” the insufferably bombastic Paul Ehrlich will show up prominently.

  15. Floyd says:

    Yes It’s all Humbug, which should be obvious to Canadians as this hoax is primarily meant to bring about the takeover of (English)Canada previous to Nov 2016. It may well happen as the Railways are all owned by huge money Democrats, plus Canada’s oil and they want our water as well, there will not only be oil pipelines as there will be water pipeline(s) to California, Arizona and more. If anyone wants the real nitty gritty on this, I only need an email address!

    • Bs. We don’t need your oil or water, what kind of horse shit are you spreading? There is to much gas in the market now so why do we need yours? Railways owned by Dems?? What are you smokin? We rejected your pipeline, I think your full of crap.

  16. Marc says:

    There is over 7.4 BILLION people one this planet all generally come in at roughly 98.6 degrees F has any one taken into account this in the rise in temp. ok I know don’t give them crybabies any more ammunition. the climate is governed by something called a cycle temps go up temps go down both in the short term we call it seasonal weather summer,fall, winter, spring, and it repeats. Are we humans having some effect on global warming odds are yes how much can’t say for sure but in stead of asking for more restrictions , why not work on finding a solution that adds value to anything and cleans while maybe making a bit of money for some people good jobs are needed. Henry Ford did not just say that people have so much trouble getting long distances in a short time he did something about it and made automotive transportation affordable for most. then the garbage issue spawned the recycling industry. and so on!

  17. Has to be something to it. If 99% of the experts are wrong now what. Is the author of this article a climate scientist? I don’t think the only problem is CO2. And I don’t think anyone is saying it’s all from man, it seems more like man is a contributing factor which makes sense at least to some degree. And besides, I thought the debate over this was pretty much settled.

  18. Leo T says:

    72 million years ago, long before humans walked on this planet, there was 13 times as much CO2 in the air as compared to the present age, (reference: Australian Museum 1 William Street, Sydney) there was another spike of excessive CO2 52 million years ago. (reference; National Geographic magazine). the planet reduced the CO2 by growing more trees and it is the CO2 in the decaying plant mater that produced the coal and oil fields that we rely on today.
    If the experts can’t predict the day to day weather correctly WHY should we believe them as to what the weather will be like in 50 to 100 years time.
    Climate Change has always been with us it is as changeable as the winds that generate it

Leave a Reply

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