‘Climate Hustle’ will rock alarmists to their core

climate hustle screengrabHave you ever been deceived by a “confidence” artist, plying their trade? No? Think again. We’ve all been victimized, whether we know it or not. It’s called the “Climate Hustle” and scientists, politicians, educators, entertainers, business people, and even the president are willing perpetrators in the greatest con job in our lifetime.

On Monday, May 2, 2016, during a one-night nationwide theatrical engagement, see for yourself the unmasking of this fraud in a powerful documentary, “Climate Hustle” that demolishes the climate change agenda.

This could be the most important movie of the year. Here’s why:

President Obama claimed at the 2015 State of the Union Address that: “No challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change.”

This set into motion a powerful cartel, culminating at the United Nations just a few days ago, on Friday, April 22, 2016. Secretary of State John Kerry, on behalf of the Obama administration, signed the Paris Climate Agreement.

The administration considers this treaty an executive agreement between President Obama and other nations. Bypassing the ratification of the U.S. Senate, as required by the Constitution, the president defends his action by acknowledging that he cannot bind the country with an executive agreement; he can only bind his administration for the duration of his remaining months in office.

Nonetheless, the Paris Climate Agreement now further obligates the United States to slash its fossil fuel use, carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth.

More tellingly, the Paris Climate Agreement states the goal of creating a $100 billion per-year fund as commitments by wealthy countries and the private sector, to offset the cost of changing technology and climate damage to poor countries.

Read rest…

Trackback from your site.

Leave a comment (newest first):

Comments (3)

  • Avatar

    DAVID ROWE

    |

    I decided 5 years ago to try to find the truth of AGW for myself, because I was suspicious of all the ambiguous statements concerning climate change. After 5years research I cannot find any scientific evidence of AGW. So now I ask a simple question which has yet to be answered accurately. How can the miniscule amount of man made CO2 influence & control our climate?

    Reply

  • Avatar

    David Lewis

    |

    [quote name=”DAVID ROWE”]I decided 5 years ago to try to find the truth of AGW for myself, because I was suspicious of all the ambiguous statements concerning climate change. After 5years research I cannot find any scientific evidence of AGW. So now I ask a simple question which has yet to be answered accurately. How can the miniscule amount of man made CO2 influence & control our climate?[/quote]

    This is a valid question and of course the answer is that it can not. However, when most people ask this question they think in terms of the current concentration of 400 parts per million. The claim is that the pre-industrial revolution concentration was around 270. So the questions isn’t how could 400 ppm impact the climate, but how could an increase of 130 make such drastic changes to the climate.

    It gets better. Just as the alarmists have adjusted the historical temperature data to support the anthropological climate change movement, they have also adjusted the historical carbon dioxide levels. In both cases, they have made past values lower than they actually were.

    Check out: https://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/FoS%20Pre-industrial%20CO2.pdf

    The true pre-industrial level was about 335 ppm. So now the question is how could an increase of 65 ppm, or 0.0065 per cent, be impacting our climate. The answer is obviously it could not.

    The cited article also said that one of the problems with climate computer models is that they are using an incorrect value for the pre-industrial level of carbon dioxide.

    Reply

  • Avatar

    GR82DRV

    |

    …And on top of that ridiculous and fraudulent premise of CO2 involvement, the rest of the campaign is intentionally built upon a modeling system that is so incredibly complex it makes Rube Goldberg look like a rank simpleton.

    It’s impossible to flow chart these models because they overflow all margins while often contradicting themselves within their own machinations. Each model has hundreds of Achilles heels, any one of which if found to be slightly incorrect, will throw the entire outcome into a tailspin. Add to that the fact that [u]entire macro systems[/u] such as solar variations or geothermal influences are often omitted altogether, and you have a stinking mess that is worse than bad junk science.

    Yet [u]THIS[/u] is what they call “settled science” that cannot be questioned or challenged…

    Reply

Leave a comment

Loading Disqus Comments ...

No Trackbacks.