hoax

Why my books on climate are actually about Marxism

I’m writing a new book. It’s an updated version of Climategate and Eco-Tyranny.

I’m about to explain why, in large measure, my books about climate are actually about the agenda’s real goals: socialism, communism, and authoritarianism. It’s deeply personal.

At the urging of his parents , my grandfather escaped Lenin’s Soviet Russia as a teenager. His family stayed behind and eventually perished in the hands of tyranny.

Shortly after the Soviet Union finally collapsed in 1991, I had the life-changing experience of meeting with three, 30-something pastors from Russian; they were in the U.S. for a church conference. Between them they had spent had spent over the three decades in horrid prisons because of their Christian faith. Their testimonies stir my emotions to this day.

I have met many from Cuba whose assets were stolen by the communists during the takeover in the 1950s. These wonderful people fled for America and now cherish life, liberty, and personal property.

A relative was able to slip in to North Korea to accomplish Christian evangelism; she witnessed a parallel universe while in that communist hole.  Two weeks ago I was introduced to a woman who spent five years in a Chinese concentration camp for her anti-communist opinions. She escaped, living underground in her own country until she finally made it out to freedom.

The gentleman who is helping proof read my manuscript is a former combat Navy Seal who personally faced the military apparatus of communist regimes. He understands their underhanded determination to see America fail.

I met “Sammy” in Eastern Europe. He is Persian, originally from Iran, a nation led by authoritarians who loath American ideals and are cozy with China, North Korea and Russia. After converting to Christianity, he was put on an Iranian government hit list and escaped on foot to Bulgaria with nothing more than the clothes on his back. He’s never lived in America, but he believes the stability of the world is dependent upon the political future of the USA.

“The goal of socialism is communism.” I didn’t come up with that, Lenin did. All shades of Marxism are evil. And as for United Nations? It represents the thinktank responsible for spreading Marxist doctrine to the world. So, when I read about present day nations with socialist and communist governments like  Russia (where political dissidents are imprisoned), and China (where one million Uyghur Muslims and hundreds of thousands of Christians are in concentration camps), Iran (where Christians and women are horribly mistreated),  Cuba (where hundreds remain in prison for participating in the 2021 freedom protests), not to forget Pakistan (where western journalists are abducted) and all having a seat on the U.N. Human Rights Council, my head spins!

The climate agenda is not about the environment. It’s about turning American life, liberty and happiness (property ownership) upside down and introducing to the world a new order.

Faith in Climate Models is Foolish

One-point-five-degrees.

That’s the atmospheric warming threshold—the tipping point—that the public has been led to believe must be avoided at all costs. The climate catechism contends since the last Ice Age, some 12,000 years ago, the planet was naturally unthawing just fine until humans discovered the energy available through the use of fossil fuels and capitalists, exploiting labor, launched the Industrial Revolution.  Billions of humans later—with their countless polluting cars, trucks, buses, trains, planes—the temperature has risen 1.2o Celsius, and it’s soon to hit the danger mark of 1.5o if we don’t quickly conform to Net Zero.

If that doesn’t work, more drastic measures must be considered because all of the experts with their computer models say so. And trust me, drastic measures are being designed by both governments and billionaires.

But, taking a step back, let’s imagine a conversation with your average climate change believer.

You ask,“If we’ve already reached warming worth 1.2 o C, what’s another point-3-degrees going to look like? Will we even notice the difference in average temperature?”

The climate disciple will immediately go to Google and then respond, “The planet is currently experiencing some of the warmest weather on record.”

“And what about the recent record cold temperatures?”

Feeling it unnecessary to engage their phone, they quickly answer, “There are none.”

“Really? Last winter the summit of Mount Washington, New Hampshire reported a wind-chill of minus 78 Celsius (-108 Fahrenheit) — the coldest temperature ever recorded in the United States. California had its firth coldest March since 1885.”

“That’s not the world, that’s the United States.”

“You’re correct. How ‘bout this? In 2021, the average temperature at the South Pole between their winter months of April and September, was minus-78 degrees Fahrenheit (minus-61 Celsius), the coldest on record;  The extreme cold pushed sea ice levels surrounding the Antarctica to their one of their highest levels on record.”

“Fake news.”

“No. It’s real info from the United States Antarctic Program administered by the National Science Foundation, and the National Snow and Ice Data Center.”

“Meh,” the person shrugs, flipping to their TokTok feed.

And as for those climate models?  There’s a big problem.

Clouds associated with thunderstorms play a major role in the climate cycle, as they reflect the sun’s energy back into space and also trap the heat that rises from the surface; but climate models cannot accurately account for thunderstorms, nor clouds, or even water vapor. Additionally, the models are unable to replicate the actions produced powerful ocean currents which are essentially massive weather conveyor belts.  Weather patterns are driven by these currents, which are created by a combination of surface winds, water temperature and salinity gradients, Earth’s rotation, and the gravitational effects of the sun and moon which create the tides.  These magnificent ocean currents transport warm water and precipitation from the equator toward the poles and cold water from the poles back to the tropics, regulating the global climate and counteracting the uneven distribution of solar radiation reaching Earth’s surface.

The models can’t handle these features.

So, what do the climate modelers do when they just don’t know?

They approximate.

And what they can’t approximate they omit.

Perhaps this is why the models have a dismal track record. Apart from failing to predict a pause in global warming in the early 2000s, the models are known even by modelers to consistently run hot.

Could it be human bias and political agenda weighs in to the estimations made by certain modelers?

California’s Latest Maniacal Green Mandate

California is now seeking to meet federal ozone standards by banning natural gas furnaces and water heaters in homes by 2030.

“We need to take every action we can to deliver on our commitments to protect public health from the adverse impacts of air pollution, and this strategy identifies how we can do just that,” said California Air Resources Board Chair Liane Randolph.

Ever abundant natural gas is now the bad guy.  This is insane.

All of these foolish proposals to ban the use of natural gas will be harmful to the public as people are forced to purchase new, pricey, products and then run them with electricity, which is consistently two to three times higher  in price than natural gas.

For starters this means Californians will have to familiarize themselves with hot water heat pumps: very expensive all-electric heating appliances that replace a traditional gas water heater. I have an on-demand heat pump running my water heater and it works great, but it runs off of economical natural gas.

And imagine ditching your furnace and replacing it with the equivalent of multiple portable space heaters? Talk about uneconomical.

How will such arm and a leg purchases be made by those on a fixed income? What about income properties that a forced to make the changes? Those incredible costs will be passed on to renters in the form of increased monthly rent.

And no doubt the electrical grid will be further strained in California by this mandate. I just don’t see where California will get its energy from. Currently 47 percent of the electrical grid is powered by natural gas. Going all solar won’t do it, it’s only available in the day when it’s sunny. Wind? It only works when there’s a moderate breeze. And what the decision makers will not tell you is that all industrial solar and wind generation plants require a natural gas backup.

Actually, this isn’t insane. It’s maniacal.

The state has also mandated that no gas or diesel vehicles be sold beginning in 2035. The grid in California is already shaky; electric vehicle owners are constantly being told to avoid charging between 4 and 9pm.  As of the end of 2021, less than three percent of California’s entire vehicle fleet has been replaced with electric cars and there is already a major grid issue.

Where will California get the required electricity to ban fossil fuels?

But back to greenhouse gases: America’s natural gas utilities invest millions and millions of dollars each year to advance low and zero-carbon energy technologies and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  By the way, this technology has led to a 69 percent decline in emissions since 1990.  By all accounts (except in the collective minds of the green activists), natural gas is very clean.

America does the best job of any country when it comes to cleaning up its environment. The world’s biggest air pollution problems are in China, India and Russia for starters—not the U.S.A.

And one more thing: since when did the government get into the business of telling us what we are to purchase?