Yes, ‘global warming’ is a hoax and here’s the proof

( In recent days many of the world’s leaders met in Paris, France, to hammer out a new and binding agreement that would “combat” man-caused global warming and climate change.

As in the past the confab was met with a combination of excitement, anticipation and eagerness – most notably by the people who want to control you and your progeny for millennia to come. Tops on that list, of course, was President Barack Obama, the man who never met an EPA regulation he didn’t like or a Republican he couldn’t loathe, with the possible exceptions of John Boehner, Mitch McConnell and, now it seems, House Speaker Paul Ryan.

Speaking of Republicans and other climate change “skeptics,” questioning the global warming cultists can get you into a heap of trouble, especially with guys like Obama who claim that they are just about the only ones who doubt global warming is real, since, you know, “99.5 percent of scientists in the world say this is a really urgent problem” (wait – when did that increase from the “97 percent” we have always been told about?).

Of course, the figure that Obama is lying not being honest about is refuted by this one – 31,000-plus climate experts, scientists and researchers say there is no such thing as man-caused global warming, that it’s a – shall we say it? – hoax perpetuated by globalist control freaks who are never going to live under the same rules and restrictions they intend to impose on you. Not quite the “99.5 percent” or even the “97 percent” we’re constantly told about.

But what’s a refutation of the cult without some facts, right? Let’s transport ourselves back to the mid-1970s, when “global warming” was actually “global cooling” and the big lie to get you to give up your fossil-fuel-burning life was that unless you surrendered modernity, you’re going to freeze yourself to death.

No, really. That was the scandal. And we can prove it. Below is a collection of “global cooling” statements and predictions, all predicated on “science” from back in the day when the next Ice Age was all the rage among Left-wing control freaks (H/T Master Resource):

“Many observers have speculated that the cooling [global] could be the beginning of a long and persistent trend in that direction—that is, an inevitable departure from an abnormally warm period in climatic history.”

– Paul and Anne Ehrlich and John Holdren. Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment (1977), p. 686.

Certainly the threat of another ice age was the topic of much scientific and popular discussion in the 1970s. Books and articles entitled ‘The Cooling,’ ‘Blizzard,’ ‘Ice,’ and ‘A Mini Ice Age Could Begin in a Decade,’ abounded. The ‘snow blitz’ theory was popularized on the public television presentation of ‘The Weather Machine’ in 1975. And certainly the winters of the late 1970s were enough to send shivers through our imaginations.

– Harold Bernard, Jr., The Greenhouse Effect (Cambridge, MA: Ballinger Publishing, 1980), p. 20.

The worriers about cooling included Science, the most influential scientific journal in the world, quoting an official of the World Meteorological Organization; the National Academy of Sciences worrying about the onset of a 10,000 year ice age; Newsweek warning that food production could be adversely affected within a decade; the New York Times quoting an official of the National Center for Atmospheric Research; and Science Digest, the science periodical with the largest circulation.

– Julian Simon, “What Does the Future Hold? The Forecast in a Nutshell,” in Simon, ed., The State of Humanity (Cambridge, Mass: Blackwell, 1995), p. 646. 

In the early 1970s, the northern hemisphere appeared to have been cooling at an alarming rate. There was frequent talk of a new ice age. Books and documentaries appeared, hypothesizing a snowblitz or sporting titles such as The Cooling. Even the CIA got into the act, sponsoring several meetings and writing a controversial report warning of threats to American security from the potential collapse of Third World Governments in the wake of climate change [EDITOR’S NOTE: Just to point out how little the alarmist strategy employed by the hoaxers has changed over the years – and to demonstrate that Barack Obama is not nearly as clever as he thinks he is – we are hearing this same nonsense today, this time out of his Pentagon, which has claimed, no doubt at the president’s insistence, that “climate change/warming is a ‘national security threat.’” Sigh.]

– Stephen Schneider, Global Warming: Are We Entering the Greenhouse Century? (San Francisco: Sierra Club Books, 1989), p. 199.

Some climatologists believe that the average temperature in the Northern Hemisphere, at least, may decline by two or three degrees by the end of the century. If that climate change occurs, there will be megadeaths and social upheaval because grain production in high latitudes (Canada, northern regions of China and the Soviet Union) will decrease.

– George Will, “A Change in the Weather,” Washington Post, January 24, 1975, quoted in James Fleming, Historical Perspectives on Climate Change (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), pp. 132-33.

The dramatic importance of climate changes to the world’s future has been dangerously underestimated by many, often because we have been lulled by modern technology into thinking we have conquered nature. This well-written book points out in clear language that the climatic threat could be as awesome as any we might face, and that massive world-wide actions to hedge against that threat deserve immediate consideration.

– Stephen Schneider, Back cover endorsement, Lowell Ponte, The Cooling: Has The Next Ice Age Already Begun? Can We Survive It (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1976).

There are many more quotes of this nature and you can (and should) read them here. But the point, we think, is well-made: This “global warming/climate change” stuff has many elements to it – part control freak, part radical environmentalist, part profit-motivated (green industries), part cultist – but it all has one purpose, and that is to reduce your standard of living (not the hoaxers – just yours) and funnel everyone into tightly-managed, centrally planned lifestyles that will, of course, be run by an elitist cabal that will never subject itself to the hardships they will impose on the rest of us.

Or it’s about something else altogether.

Either way, it’s all a bunch of bull and, thankfully, more of us are waking up to that fact. The problem is, we’ve got a radical Left-wing Marxist of a president who is pretending it’s real and is making policy based on the hoax, and ultimately – unless courts continue to side with reality – that’s going to be expensive for all of us.

But then, that was Obama’s master plan all along.




comments powered by Disqus