On December 3-4, you can endure slow-talking Al Gore and his eighth annual 24 Hours of Reality: Protect Our Planet, Protect Ourselves, complete with certified has-beens, never-really-weres and on-the-way-outs like Sting & Shaggy, Moby, Jeff Goldblum & the Mildred Snitzer Orchestra, Bob Weir and Wolf Bros, the Goo Goo Dolls, David Crosby, Jaden Smith, Bill Nye, Téa Leoni, Claire Danes, Mandy Patinkin, and a bunch of sanctimonious bureaucrats lecturing on what YOU should do to “save the planet”… things they exempt themselves of.

or…

You can spend an hour and 15 minutes watching one of all-time best, unapologetic, widely-attacked, yet most informative video productions on the topic; complete with experts; not emotional, funding-dependent academics and activists.

The Great Global Warming Swindle is still one the most controversial documentaries on the topic. Check out as much as you wish of Al Gore’s talk-a-thon and see which position on “climate change” and the dangers of C02 makes more sense to you.

Oh, and while they claim this is all about a “discussion”, Al Gore’s live YouTube stream has “disabled” chats AND comments.

This is no surprise.

See how much concern (or lack thereof) Gore shows for the plight of poor African nations he happily denies the opportunity to develop while his privileged Western neophyte devotees stream his live production on their iPhones.

In listening to the hysterics of the climate change believers, it’s not an acceptance of even the remote possibility that there may be other explanations for the change in the climate. It’s more the arrogant denial that, heaven forbid, there is even the slightest possibility that they may have been suckered and are thus, very wrong.

Severe heat in the United States, torrential rains and flooding in the Far East, tornados in the midwest, and it’s all being blamed on man made “climate change” and for once, we agree. But it’s not solely because of the effect of industrialization but because arrogant climate scientists believe they alone can play God, tweak the weather, play havoc with our health and just look the other way after the literal fallout.

Some of the very climate catastrophes they predict now appear to be of THEIR making and they didn’t even have the common courtesy of asking the American people first before they interfered.

David Keith, who manages a multimillion dollar geoengineering research fund provided by Microsoft founder Bill Gates, previously commissioned a study by a US aerospace company that made the case for the feasibility of large-scale deployment of solar geoengineering technologies.
— The Guardian, 7/17/12

We’ve heard these scientists speak of their desire to lower the temperature but does anyone really know what the “normal” temperature for the planet should be or are we just talking about what’s comfortable for humans, which is suggestive as climates differ with location and people have adapted accordingly for centuries. That is, until agenda-driven, taxpayer-funded government-granted scientists decided they should put chemicals in the sky without even the courtesy of asking the American public first, because what’s deposited into the atmosphere doesn’t hover indefinitely; it eventually falls on all of us.

Of course, all involved ignore the health ramifications on the public because we were mandated to have health insurance that benefits who…? And how many times have we seen science fiction stories where arrogant, overambitious scientists created a bigger problem putting the public in the crosshairs, and then shake their heads in belated remorse after the cataclysmic damage was done.

To counteract global warming, humans may someday consider spraying sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere to form clouds — and artificially cool the Earth. However, suddenly stopping that spraying would have a “devastating” global impact on animals and plants, potentially even leading to extinction, according to the first study on the potential biological impacts of climate intervention.
— USA Today, 1/22/18

Great, they conveniently won’t turn off what they took it upon themselves to start. This should keep those all-important, multimillion dollar taxpayer-funded grants coming in regardless of the ramifications to the unconsulted public!

A White House road map for federally funded climate research has for the first time recommended research into geoengineering, the concept of intervening in nature to slow or reverse global warming.

The document, an update of a report that lays out a plan for climate-related research at 13 federal agencies until 2021, calls for studies related to the two most-discussed approaches to geoengineering: distributing chemicals in the atmosphere to reflect more heat-producing sunlight away from the earth, and removing carbon dioxide from the air so the atmosphere traps less heat.

Opponents of the idea, including many scientists, argue the risks are too great: Geoengineering might have unintended damaging effects on weather patterns, or it might be used unilaterally as a weapon by governments or even extremely wealthy individuals.
— New York Times, 1/10/17

Note how they’re calling for the “recommended research in geoengineering” they’ve been doing for many years now. How deceitful is that!

So when you see that fine haze in what should have been a crisp, blue sky (deposited without our knowledge or consent), know that it will eventually come down on all of us; either in the form of erratic weather events and/or toxic chemical “side effects” no American citizen gave them authorization to dump on us in the first place.

John Holdren, former Assistant to the President for Science and Technology under Obama, has successfully ping-ponged from the faculty lounge/nonprofit world to a presidential administration and back to the faculty lounge so he’s going to remain well fed. His concern for the future of his colleagues’ paychecks is steeped in the promotion of conclusions based on manipulated climate data used to suppress opposing scientific discussion.

One renowned scientist shared with us his candid opinion of Dr. Holdren and his brand of “science”.

This man is the personification of evil from his early days with Ehrlich and the promotion of eugenics, through his vicious attacks on Willie Soon, but especially Sally Baliunas when he was at Harvard to his use of. The White House authority to push false science like the incorrectly named Polar vortex, like it was something new. He is pure socialism from head to toe.
— Timothy Ball, Environmentalist

Bob freelanced as a video cameraman for a few gatherings at the National Science Foundation in Washington, D.C. where nonprofits and colleges made their respective cases to acquire federal funding. The majority of their PowerPoint presentations were pleas to fund projects that saw no clear conclusions to their research, thus the funding required appeared to be open-ended.

We’re not implying that all of the taxpayer funding Holdren is in panic of the scientific community losing isn’t legitimate, but science is supposed to the quest for knowledge, not the suppressing of research that doesn’t reach a political conclusion, and in fact may expose science that’s been used to support the lavish lifestyles of progressive, self-appointed gurus.

A group of executives who want to fight global warming has published a new report calling for countries to spend up to $600 billion a year over the next two decades to boost green energy deployment and energy efficiency equipment. The Energy Transitions Commission’s (ETC) report claims “additional investments of around $300-$600 billion per annum do not pose a major macroeconomic challenge,” which they say will help the world meet the goals laid out in the Paris agreement.

ETC is made up of energy executives, activist leaders and investment bankers, including former Vice President Al Gore, who would no doubt get a piece of the trillions of dollars they are calling for.
— Daily Caller, 4/25/17

We’re not sure if Gore’s involvement with carbon-credit-trader partners Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers is not the money maker it once was (seriously, what liberal really wants to pay for their own carbon footprint), but here we have yet ANOTHER nonprofit with no goal that will ever be met.

Legitimate science will always be funded through the traditional methods, philanthropy, academia, etc.

Scams require emotional fundraising techniques mastered by liberal career mill nonprofits, the entrenched and comfortable within the federal government now see their livelihood threatened because President Trump dares challenge the “settled science” of global cooling-turned-global warming-turned-climate change-turned-carbon crisis which will inevitably morph into something else once CO2 is again proved to be something natural that can’t be demonized for profit.

Be prepared for more hysterics as this is NOT about “science”.

It never really was.

Again, just because Obama says so, doesn’t make it so, and “There’s no debate” is his presidential way of saying, “Shut the fuck up”.

However, we all know how ballistic liberals get when you present them with facts and numbers.

The “97%” Lie

The 97 percent claim was taken from a study paper by Australian John Cook, Climate Communications Fellow for the Global Change Institute at the University of Queensland, and his colleagues, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters in May, 2013. The paper says nothing about the would-be dangers of climate change and it counts the number of publications, rather than the number of scientists, in support of human-made climate change.

Cook and Co. analysed somewhere between 11,944 and 12,876 papers – they can’t get their story straight on the sample size – but only 64 of these explicitly state that humans are the primary cause of recent global warming. A reexamination of their data brought that number down to 41. That is half a per cent or less of the total, rather than 97 percent.
— Richard Tol, professor of economics, University of Sussex

Even a second-grader could understand the difference between a “publication” and a “scientist”, but when you can rely on stoopids to repeat and defend something that’s easily provable as wrong, you get the Obama transformation of the word “consensus”.