September 19, 2026
The Climate Grift
Timothy Birdnow
Actually this guy is wrong in saying there was no scientific consensus about global cooling. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/347966094_The_1970s_Global_Cooling_Consensus_was_not_a_Myth]there was indeed a consensus and there were thousands of papers published on the subject at the time. But none made it into the digital age; who wants their failed predictions to be made immortal by translating them from paper to computer?
And it didn't start with the Seventies (although it got a big boost thanks to Paul Ehrlich and the Club of Rome study "Limits to Growth"). A commenter at the AT article gives a little bit of history:
100 years of climate hoaxes:
"Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coast cities uninhabitable.”
Washington Post, Nov. 2, 1922
"All glaciers in eastern Greenland are rapidly melting. Everything points to that fact that the climate in that region has been growing warmer in recent years. It may without exaggeration said that the glaciers – like those in Norway – fact the possibility of catastrophic collapse.”
Rochester Democrat, Dec. 17, 1939
"Polar Ice Thaw Increasing: The glaciers of Norway and Alaska are only half the size they were 50 years ago.”
The Cairns Post, Feb. 18, 1952
NOTE: There actually was an unprecedented heat wave in the 1930s-50s, but no one was swept away by rising oceans.
"Scientists agree: The world is getting colder.”
New York Times Jan. 30, 1961
"Scientists predict a new ice age by 21st century.”
The Boston Globe, April 16, 1970
"The time of famines is upon us and will be at its worst and most disastrous by 1975.”
The Salt Lake Tribune, Nov. 17, 1967
"We must realize that unless we are extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years.”
New York Times, Aug. 10, 1969
"The oceans will be as dead as Lake Erie in less than a decade.”
Redlands Daily Facts, Oct. 6. 1970
"The world could be as little as 50 or 60 years away from a new ice age, a leading atmospheric scientist predicts.”
The Washington Post, Times Herald, Jul 9, 1971
Worldwide and rapid trends towards a mini-Ice Age are emerging from the first long term analysis of satellite weather pictures.”
The Guardian, Jan. 29. 1974
"No end in sight to 30-year cooling trend in Northern Hemisphere.”
New York Times, Jan. 5, 1978
*But the cooling trend abruptly ended:*
"More droughts likely as 1988 is on the way to be the hottest ever as world temperatures are up sharply.” (Hat tip: Didn’t happen)
The Miami News, June 24, 1988
"If we do nothing to cut down on pumping caron dioxide into the atmosphere, temperatures in 2050 will be 6-7 degrees hotter than today. Washington DC would go from its current 35 days a year over 90 degrees to 85 days year. The level of the ocean will rise between one to six feet.” (Hat tip: The number of hot days in DC peaked in 1911 and have been declining ever since.)
Lansing State Journal, Dec. 12, 1988
"Maldives: A gradual rise in average sea level is threatening to completely cover this Indian Ocean nation of 1196 small islands within the next 30 years.” (Hat tip: Didn’t happen.)
The Canberra Times, Sept. 26, 1988
"A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if the warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.”
Associated Press, June 30, 1989
"The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water within 20-30 years.”
Salon.com Oct. 23, 2001
"Famine can only be avoided if the rich give up meat, fish and dairy.”
The Guardian, Dec. 23, 2002
"Britian will be ‘Siberian’ in less than 20 years.”
The Guardian, Feb. 21, 2004
There are more but they are later so less interesting.
The fact is there have been doomsday predictions involving the climate since the beginning of the twentieth century - a kind of Millenialism adopted from Christianity and placed in a secular context (and used to drive societal change towards internationalism and socialism).
Fear sells and disaster sells. Michael Crichton realized that when writing a novel about climate change disaster, and he reworked the novel into a story about POLITICAL disaster dressed as climate concern "State of Fear". He postulated that the ruling class was using climate alarmism to drive societal change in a direction they wished it to go, keeping the public in a constant state of fear to control them. Dr. Crichton was right about that. (Crichton had an MD. from Harvard Medical School.)
Anyone who knows how the more dishonest sales people work knows this is so. The medicine show barker, the confidence man, all use the same technique. Create a crisis, then offer a limited-time-only solution. Don't give the mark time to think. Stir the emotions but do not engage the frontal lobes.
Read this. It is an article on famous con men and the tricks they employed to swindle the public. Each and every one of these tactics has been employed by the Gang Green over the years.
Take Bernie Madoff's approach. FTA:
"If Charles Ponzi’s scheme was a populist "get rich quick” free-for-all, Bernie Madoff’s was the opposite: it was the most exclusive, members-only club in the world. Madoff’s multi-decade, $65 billion Ponzi scheme was the largest in history, and it worked by preying on the psychology of the ultra-wealthy."
You see this in the trolls who promote climate alarmism; they all see themselves as in an exclusive club, the bright ones who see more clearly than the hick rubes who oppose the theory because they are greedy for oil money or just plain ignorant flat-Earthers.
Or Frank Abagnale Jr.:
"Made famous by the film Catch Me If You Can, Frank Abagnale Jr.’s story is a case study in social engineering. As a teenager, he successfully impersonated an airline pilot, a doctor, and a lawyer, cashing millions in fake checks. How? He understood that confidence is a currency and a uniform is a cloak of authority."
So the alarmist scientists speak confidently, boldly, and say there is a consensus on the theory that the public will go along if they pretend to more knowledge than is theirs.
Or Charles Ponzi:
"Long before it was called a "Ponzi scheme,” it was simply "the best investment in Boston.” In 1920, Charles Ponzi promised investors an absurd 50% return in 45 days by (he claimed) arbitraging international postal reply coupons. The "how” was confusing, but the "what” was intoxicating.
Ponzi’s genius wasn’t just the promise; it was his exploitation of social proof."
Which is why every weather event is touted as proof our climate is warming and it poses an existential threat. They look around and find every and any natural disaster and say "see!" even if said disaster is counter-intuitive, like a freak late April snowstorm.
Then there is this:
"Elizabeth Holmes and her company, Theranos, are a chilling modern example of a con. She promised a revolution: a machine that could run hundreds of blood tests from a single drop. It was a lie. The technology never worked. So how did she raise $700 million and build a $9 billion company?
Holmes sold a story, not a product. This is the narrative fallacy: our brains are wired to accept compelling stories over complex (and boring) data. She sold the vision of a better world. She then used the Halo Effect to perfection. She adopted a "uniform” (the black turtleneck) to create a visual link to Steve Jobs. She used a fake, deep voice to project authority. She stacked her board with powerful, older men (like Henry Kissinger), using their reputations as a human shield. Investors and journalists weren’t vetting a product; they felt they were investing in the movie about a brilliant young woman changing the world. They wanted the story to be true so badly, they forgot to check if it was."
I could go on but you can read the post yourself and see how it is applicable to climate alarmism. Almost every trick used by confidence men are used by the Gang Green.
At any rate if you want to know if a thing is true one need but look at the way it is handled, who is handling it, and why anyone should do so. By all metrics the alarmist view of climate change is just a swindle, a con, a medicine show. And a fool and his money are soon parted. That's why it's Europe that is all on board with this and not Americans.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:43 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1441 words, total size 12 kb.
32kb generated in CPU 0.1238, elapsed 0.4467 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.4387 seconds, 186 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
35 queries taking 0.4387 seconds, 186 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
