January 30, 2015

New Cartoon PERFECTLY Illustrates Why the Science of Man-Made Climate Change is a Scam

“It is the greatest deception in history and the extent of the damage has yet to be exposed and measured,” says Dr. Tim Ball in his new book, “The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science”.
Dr. Ball has been a climatologist for more than forty years and was one of the earliest critics of the global warming hoax that was initiated by the United Nations environmental program that was established in 1972 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) established in 1988.

Several UN conferences set in motion the hoax that is based on the assertion that carbon dioxide (CO2) was causing a dramatic surge in heating the Earth. IPCC reports have continued to spread this lie through their summaries for policy makers that influenced policies that have caused nations worldwide to spend billions to reduce and restrict CO2 emissions.
Manmade climate change—called anthropogenic global warming—continues to be the message though mankind plays no role whatever.
There is no scientific support for the UN theory.
CO2, despite being a minor element of the Earth’s atmosphere, is essential for all life on Earth because it is the food that nourishes all vegetation. The Earth has passed through many periods of high levels of CO2 and many cycles of warming and cooling that are part of the life of the planet.
“Science works by creating theories based on assumptions,” Dr. Ball notes, “then other scientists—performing their skeptical role—test them. The structure and mandate of the IPCC was in direct contradiction of this scientific method. They set out to prove the theory rather than disprove it.”

“The atmosphere,” Dr. Ball notes, “is three-dimensional and dynamic, so building a computer model that even approximates reality requires far more data than exists and much greater understanding of an extremely turbulent and complex system.” No computer model put forth by the IPCC in support of global warming has been accurate, nor ever could be.
Most of the reports were created by a small group of men working within the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia and all were members of the IPCC. The result was “a totally false picture supposedly based on science.”


  1. Christopher PringleJanuary 30, 2015 at 10:27 AM

    This cannot be!! - it is an article of faith - outside the cognoscenti - MSM and the woolly headed love this save the planet. Biggest problem is AGW - like any real 911 issues - are off-limits to any intellectual discourse. It distracts from real man-made problems - e.g. the Fuku Flu - bio-pharma-nano pollutants - someone has done a great sales job on the sheeple of earth.

  2. This sort of reasoning undermines an underscores all science.

    Congratulations. You have just discovered the truth of the pragmatic scientific era.

    Now, must we also discover the apocalyptic danger of it too?

    In an infinitely complex reality, the proposition that there is comprehensible causation that is humanly knowable, is tantamount to proclaiming omniscience. This is because the real question about scientific propriety (should we do this?) then devolves into, what is going to be the total tally of all the effects?

    And no one can ever know the answer to such a question.

    Who would vote to allow scientists to destroy the world? Good question, Einstein.

  3. Being a weather forecaster is much like being a doctor or a lawyer. You can be wrong 100% of the time...and still get paid.