Retired 40-Year Veteran German Climatologist: ‘CO2 A Scapegoat’, IPCC ‘A Marketing Organization’

The German-language RT recently conducted an interview with retired climatologist Prof. Werner Kirstein concerning President Donald Trump’s decision to pull out of the Paris Accord and the state of climate “science” itself.

Kirstein, a German climatologist of 40 years, has been one of Germany’s most high-profile critics of climate alarmism. He maintains that the warming over the past decades has been mostly due to natural causes associated with the climb out of the Little Ice Age, and therefore is not surprising.

“An invention”

In the RT interview, on the subject of Trump’s recently announced withdrawal, Kirstein says that it is no surprise because within the Republican party itself there have been a number of politicians who for 20 years long haven’t believed in man-made climate change, and that over the past ten years “hundreds of US scientists say it’s an invention“, and who even said so in a signed a letter to former President Obama.

On the claims made by the IPCC on how man is behind recent climate change (4:50 mark), Kirstein doesn’t buy it, reminding us that in the past CO2 has always varied, and that man’s contribution is puny in comparison to the natural ones.

In total Kirstein agrees that CO2 is “a harmless gas” and calls the IPCC’s conclusion that CO2 drives global temperature based on a coincidental correlation over 30 years, 1970 – 2000, a mistake.

When I go back and look at history, there’s absolutely no relationship between CO2 and temperature.”

CO2 used as a scapegoat

At the 9-minute mark, the retired professor tells that the claim that CO2 is a greenhouse gas is highly controversial and that the trace gas is, in fact, being used as a scapegoat by politicians, and says that the odds of cooling, based on history, are greater. “Eventually it is going to come.”

IPCC is about marketing, “fundamentally corrupt”

On the question as to why there has been so much climate-catastrophe panic spread by the media, Kirstein blames economic interests, and that governments, of course, can always find scientists who are willing to go along with the catastrophe scenarios – naming the PIK Potsdam Institute as an example.

He views the IPCC as a “marketing organization” run mostly by sociologists who have the task of marketing climate change. He quotes Vincent Gray (13:00): “The IPCC is fundamentally corrupt.” Kirstein tells the reporter: “That says it all, doesn’t it!” He adds: “Today you do not find scientists on the IPCC, instead you have political scientists.”

Kirstein reminds there is a big difference between climate protection and environmental protection and agrees the environment needs to be protected, but “one does not have anything to do with the other.”

Climate science is “a lie”

Kirstein finds it’s okay to be politically in favor of eliminating fossil fuels, but then “you shouldn’t lie to the public” about why it should be done.

When Kirstein is asked why he gives speeches criticizing climate science, he says (17:20):

Because I’m completely against it. Because I see that it just cannot be that the people are being dumbed down by having them believe that there is a climate catastrophe through CO2.”

Driven by funding

On the subject of consensus, Kirstein says he is not alone as a skeptic in Germany, and especially worldwide. Of those scientists who insist that man-made climate change is real, he points out that most of them have their sights on funding.

Read more at No Tricks Zone

Comments (2)

  • Avatar

    Steampunk Leather Gear


    I am curious to find out what blog system you have been utilizing?
    I’m having some small security problems with my latest blog and I’d like to find something more
    risk-free. Do you have any solutions?

  • Avatar

    David Lewis


    I once read an article written by a scientist who was in the IPCC and involved in one of the early assessment reports. He said that the politicians went around to the various groups and badgered them make their inputs more alarmist. Once the groups were done, it was the politicians, not the scientist who summarized the findings.

    “Kirstein finds it’s okay to be politically in favor of eliminating fossil fuels, but then “you shouldn’t lie to the public” about why it should be done.” Now he is talking about hidden political agendas. The reason there is so much lying about climate change, is they know without people believing there is a serious problem, fossil fuels will continue to be used.

Comments are closed