climate hoax

Bill Gates and His Climate Change About-Face

Tech billionaire Bill Gates has altered the discourse of climate politics by publishing a lengthy memo calling for a rethink on his pet issue, climate change. Gates refers to his latest actions as setting the stage for a “strategic pivot” in climate strategy.

This pivot is being described by the left as an about-face, reversal, or even a retraction. Many are confused and angry over his new revelation. In my mind, Gates’ memo is the closest we will come to hearing him confess there is no such thing as anthropogenic climate change. He actually did something slightly similar some years ago when he and his influencer buddies swapped the term “global warming” for the all-encompassing handle, “climate change.” Back then, liberal environmentalists were panicked by facts that were too obvious to ignore; namely, the earth’s atmospheric temperature was maintaining itself within historical norms as described in my bestseller, Climategate: A Veteran Meteorologist Exposes the Global Warming Scam (2010).

So, “climate change” became the title to scare the world’s idiots into submission.

Bill’s long-winded missive begins with a befuddling claim: “Although climate change will have serious consequences—particularly for people in the poorest countries—it will not lead to humanity’s demise. People will be able to live and thrive in most places on Earth for the foreseeable future.”

See what I mean? “Climate change…will not lead to humanity’s demise.” This is a far cry from the cataclysmic predictions Bill and friends made back in the day regarding global warming bringing an end to humanity. Clearly, the important books written by me and others—blasting holes into their pet theory of human-caused global warming/climate change—have proven to be more convincing than the left will ever admit.

So now, instead of spending gazillions to supposedly straighten an out-of-control atmosphere, Gates contends more money must be spent to improve living conditions for the world’s poorest. No doubt Gates is all for New York’s Mamdani who was elected Mayor of New York with a similar theme. As for we conservatives, we know the best way to help the down and out is by first exposing the very real dangers imposed by communism, socialism, democratic socialism and tyrannical governments.

In his new plan, Gates highlights what he refers to as three “Truths.” The first is, “Climate change is a serious problem, but it will not be the end of civilization.” Very likely, this was the statement causing President Trump to respond to Bill’s memo with a post on Truth Social exclaiming, “I (WE!) just won the War on the Climate Change Hoax. Bill Gates has finally admitted that he was completely WRONG on the issue.”

Indeed, given a myriad of past gloom and doom statements by Gates, including his 2021 book entitled, How to Avoid a Climate Disaster, this new “truth” seems to indicate even Billy silently concedes that just a few years ago he was full of hot air.

Gates’ second so-called truth states, “Temperature is not the best way to measure our progress on climate.” What a hilarious copout. Obviously, Mr. Microsoft has finally realized he can run but can’t hide from the fact that global temperature has not altered out of its age-old rhythm.

The third claims, “Health and prosperity are the best defense against climate change.” Certainly, health and prosperity are incredibly important issues, but the best defense against climate change?  That’s another nuanced allegation by a guy who refuses to just come out and admit he’s lost a major battle in his efforts to scare the masses into submission. Health and prosperity are the fruits of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness in a republic that is by, of and for its citizens.

No doubt Gates published his memo to coincide with the United Nations climate confab, “COP30,” held in Brazil with 50,000 hypocrites from over 190 countries flying in on fossil fueled jets, staying in air-conditioned luxury hotels, and drinking lots of booze (which requires fossil fuels for distillation) as they bloviated about their communist green agenda and other one-world machinations.

Thank you, President Trump, for wisely keeping the U.S. from participating with the blowhards in Brazil.

Hurricane Godfather Puts Record Hurricane Forecast Into Perspective

This article was originally posted at American Thinker.

The 2024 hurricane season is forecast to be a record-breaker and climate provocateurs are crowing that it’s all your fault. Your carbon-intense lifestyle is warming the global atmosphere and now the biggest storms on earth are about to intensify and wreak havoc.

A prime example was heard last week on National Public Radio’s Shortwave Podcast. An NPR “climate desk” correspondent stated, “…human-caused climate change is driving up temperatures around the world, not just on land—like so many of us are experiencing firsthand this week—but in the ocean, where the hurricanes form.”

Total junk-science.

The cover endorsement for my new book Climate Cult: Exposing and Defeating Their War on Life, Liberty, and Property is from the former director of the National Hurricane Center, Dr. Neil Frank.  At 93-years young he remains sharp as a tack and stays abreast of the latest atmospheric news. He is a meteorologist’s meteorologist.

I called Dr. Frank to get his take on the 2024 forecast which was issued by the hurricane forecasting unit at Colorado State University. CSU has been presenting these predictions for nearly 40-years, based on a formula created by Professor William “Bill” Gray.  Professor Gray (now deceased) was one of Neil’s best friends and was a regular guest on my San Francisco radio program. Bill was not a believer in anthropogenic climate change.

The 2024 forecast from CSU calls for 23 “named storms,” in the Atlantic Basin (Alberto, Beryl, Chris, Debby, etc.). Named storms include both tropical storms (winds of at least 39 mph) and hurricanes (winds of at least 74 mph). The seasonal average number of named storms is 14.

The CSU forecast also calls for 11 hurricanes in the Atlantic Basin, whereas the average is 7. Of those 11 hurricanes, 5 are anticipated to be “major,” meaning a storm with sustained winds of at least 111 mph. The average number of major hurricanes each year in that region is 3.

Indeed, while it really might be a big season for hurricanes and tropical storms, Dr. Frank put the CSU forecast into perspective.

“Hurricanes follow a multi-decadal cycle of about 60-years that cannot be linked to global warming. We are currently in a very active phase of a natural cycle. Not a surprise.”

As for the warmer ocean temperatures that the NPR reporter was attempting to link to climate change, Dr. Frank says such phenomena are not unusual. Keep in mind, hurricanes generally form near the equator and require a water temperature of at least 80 degrees Fahrenheit (26.5 Celsius) to get their engines going.  While it’s true that ocean temperatures are trending upward, according to Dr. Frank, “Ocean temperatures also follow a multi-decadal cycle of 30-years cold and 30-years warm. We’re currently in a warm cycle than has nothing to do with fossil fuels.”

Dr. Frank also pointed out another important factor that is missing from the climate change narrative. Technology has allowed meteorologists to almost instantly determine when a storm reaches the sustained wind threshold required to garner a name. “We are now naming storms we would have never named before. In the old days if we suspected the birth of a tropical storm we would have to wait for a ship or airplane to pass by and provide us with the data to confirm it. Many times, we were too late.

“And don’t forget this, Brian,” Dr. Frank reminded me. “Hurricanes are a necessary component of the atmosphere, transporting warm air from the equator towards the poles. And, of course, they can be deadly. The Galveston hurricane in 1900 claimed at least 6,000 lives.”

Can’t blame that on carbon dioxide emissions.

 Brian Sussman is a meteorologist, author, and host of the Brian Sussman Show Podcast

Biden’s SEC Chairman brings us a step closer to “the mark of the beast”

You have heard of “the mark of the beast.” Found in the Bible’s final book, Revelation, we read of an end times dictato the beast—who will cause,

the small and the great, and the rich and the poor, and the free men and the slaves, to be given a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, and he provides that no one will be able to buy or to sell, except the one who has the mark, either the name of the beast or the number of his name (Revelation 13:16;17 NASB).  

 Given that facial recognition ID has become the norm, and certain retail stores are now utilizing a simple wave of your palm to pay at their point of purchase, the above passage no longer reads like science fiction. However, there’s a new twist that’s just occurred  in Washington, D.C. and it has taken us a giant step closer to this end times scenario. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman, Gary Gensler (appointed by President Biden), held a vote on one of his most controversial proposals: a rule that would require corporate America to disclose material risks supposedly caused by climate change.

The rule passed. Not good.

I write about this concept in Climate Cult: Exposing and Defeating Their War on Life, Liberty, and Property. The SEC is now demanding that publicly traded companies provide their investors with environmental scores on their overall carbon dioxide footprint created from the fossil fuels used in manufacturing, delivery, administration, etc. This is part of something known in the corporate world as “ESG”—Environment, Social, Governance. “E” is not about being a good steward of the environment; it’s about “climate justice.”  Based on Biden’s assertions that “Climate change is the existential threat to humanity,” climate justice implies the goal of every organization is to be carbon neutral or “Net Zero.” But, as with all things in the climate movement, there is an agenda attached to this concept.  For example, according to UNICEF — the United Nations Children’s Fund — climate justice also means “combating social injustice, gender injustice, economic injustice, intergenerational injustice and environmental injustice.”

Though the SEC didn’t make a rule on the “S” and “G,” it’s only a matter of time. “S” provides scoring metrics for employee gender and diversity inclusion, relationships with labor unions, relations, and community relations.  “S” is a slap in the face to the for-profit corporate world.  Profit is no longer the bottom line, but being woke is.

“G,” is for governance and applies to the board of directors, their race and gender makeup, the company’s political contributions, lobbying record, hiring diversity, employee benefits, and community philanthropy.

ESG, then, is an imposed measurement of things that don’t relate to business performance and, because living up to such standards is costly, ESG principles tend to hinder new players from entering the market.  Startups who seek to go public find themselves pressured for disclosure on everything from their staff’s race and gender to every bit of carbon dioxide expelled from their supply chain.

When the climate disclosure rule was first proposed back in March 2022, Gensler said, “… investors need reliable information about climate risks to make informed investment decisions. Today’s proposal would help issuers more efficiently and effectively disclose these risks and meet investor demand, as many issuers already seek to do.”

Eventually this ESG scheme will trickle down to you, the average citizen. Don’t be surprised when a personal ESG-type score is a part of a job application—after all, the company will want to keep their overall ratings high for investors. And why would a bank or financial institution want to mar their ESG by having a carbon sinner like you as a client. Or, maybe that photo of you on social media wearing a MAGA hat triggered someone in HR and now your shown the door and fired for reasons that were never made clear to you?

Think I’m joking? As I discuss in Climate Cult, a chilling sign that everyone should consider occurred in 2021, when Deutsche Bank AG and Signature Bank announced that they would no longer provide financial services to former President Donald Trump or his business, the Trump Organization, purely for ideological reasons.

Save the Climate, Plant trees! Wait—No—Erect solar panels!

For quite a few years now, many environmental organizations have been telling their supporters to make donations so that trees can be planted to offset global warming and climate change caused by carbon dioxide emissions. The idea is, since plants require carbon dioxide and absorb  it for the process of photosynthesis, planting trees would make for excellent places to naturally deposit excess carbon dioxide.  In fact, there are for-profit “carbon exchanges” where members of the climate cult can atone for their personal dirty carbon footprints by purchasing offsets, which usually include planting trees in the name of the buyer. This quote from the CarbonFund’s website verifies my point: “Planting trees is an excellent way to offset the carbon emissions you have generated through your energy consumption.”

I navigated their website and found that for $4000 I could offset a years-worth of carbon dioxide pollution! If I were to pull the trigger on this purchase, they say they can use that money to plant 4000 trees in my name!

Hmm. Is the guilt-ridden carbon sinner getting scammed, or what?

But wait! Next, I headed over to the Climate Portal at MIT to see what the brainiacs at the Writer’s Team has to say about this. They present a dire warning: we’re past the tipping point and planting trees is just not enough. “Humanity’s emissions have tipped that natural cycle out of balance,” they report, “And the enormous complexity of this system makes it perhaps impossible to say for sure how many new trees would be required to bring it back into balance.”

Darn. Planting a tree seemed so easy. So now what does the climate transgressor do?

Well, according to a just published article at Science Daily, “There is another way of dealing with the climate crisis, which, unlike the forests, is neither natural nor green, at least not in the literal sense of the word. This artificial solution consists of erecting fields of dark-colored solar panels. Obviously, the production of electricity from solar power has a positive impact on climate balance, since it replaces power stations that use fossil fuels such as coal and gas, thereby reducing harmful emissions of greenhouse gases that accumulate at increasing concentrations in the atmosphere.”

Of course, there was nothing in the article about the carbon dioxide emitted from the heavy machinery required to mine the rare earth minerals required for the solar panels, not to mention emissions associated with transportation, construction, and installation of the panels. Really, this is just another opportunity for highly favored renewable energy investors to make loads of cash while claiming to be green.

I’ll reveal a lot more of these schemes in my upcoming book, Climate Cult: Exposing Their Agenda, Defeating Their Schemes, Saving Liberty.

United Nations Climate Charade Opens in Dubai: “No Meat For YOU!”

Dubai is an opulent city in the United Arab Emerates. The country was made wealthy from the sale and consumption of oil. Take that resource away from the Arab world and they would be pounding sand, so to speak.

So now, Dubai is host to the world’s elite, flying in on private planes, dining on luxurious spreads, sleeping and partying in air-conditioned suites, and telling us how to live a more frugal, carbon-free life. And so the United Nations latest Climate Change spoof begins.

High on the agenda? A plan to provoke us into becoming vegetarians. Why? Because the meat from animals, particularly cattle, is causing global warming. The chain of thought goes like this: when cattle fart they produce methane, a greenhouse gas. The more beef we eat, the more cattle required, the more methane released, and the more the atmosphere warms, creating climate change. So, the U.N. is calling on Western countries, especially the U.S., to drastically reduce meat consumption to save the world.

Never mind that the U.S. agriculture industry only accounts for 1.4 percent of greenhouse emissions and 10 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions. Never mind that China produces more greenhouse gas and REAL pollutants than any other country in history.

The UN and other agencies have long called for ditching red meat and swapping to vegetarian or vegan diets to prevent climate change. I talk about this in my latest podcast.

Stop the press. First of all, we need greenhouse gases. Without them we have a climate more similar to that of the moon. The primary greenhouse gas is water vapor; the one the climate agenda hates is generally carbon dioxide, with only accounts for .04% of all the gas in the atmosphere. Of that, humans are responsible for a mere 4%! Carbon is the backbone of life, Carbon Dioxide is a required atmospheric compound necessary for life. Methane is a another tiny fraction of the global atmosphere, but an important one as well. And forget about cow farts as the big methane contributor, the biggest living emitter of methane are termites!

I eat a lot of veggies and I even like tofu when prepared properly. But I also like good, organic, grass fed and finished beef. My wife and I have freezer full of beef from a steer we raised and buthered last year. It’s fantastic.

Meantime, have you ever tried one of these fake burgers? The most poplar is the Impossible Burger? They call it an Impossible because it’s impossible anyone will ever confuse it for a real beef burger.