97% of Scientists Do Not Agree on Climate Change

Climate change has become a religion in many circles and is driven primarily by emotions.

It has to be emotions because the climate models published by the IPCC have been wrong for 20 years.  At this point in the argument, New York City and other coastal areas should be under a foot of water based on early predictions by the IPCC.  The earth should have warmed by a degree, which did not happen.  The current CO2 concentration in the atmosphere should have increased dramatically, which it has not done.

Now NOAA and NASA are “cooking” the books by “re-revising” the data to include more data points.  They say that the additional data points show that the earth has been steadily warming.  This is similar to how the IPCC scientists “adjusted” their data to show the drastic increase in global temperatures at the end of the twentieth century.

Here’s a sample of some of emails pulled from 2011 ClimateGate articles:

“I have been talking w/ folks in the states about finding an investigative journalist to investigate and expose” skeptical scientist Steve McIntyre, Mann writes in another newly released email.

These new emails add weight to Climategate 1.0 emails revealing efforts to politicize the scientific debate. For example, Tom Wigley, a scientist at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, authored a Climategate 1.0 email asserting  that his fellow Climategate scientists “must get rid of” the editor for a peer-reviewed science journal because he published some papers contradicting assertions of a global warming crisis.

 More than revealing misconduct and improper motives, the newly released emails additionally reveal frank admissions of the scientific shortcomings of global warming assertions.

Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and approach and discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest. Phil, hopefully we can find time to discuss these further if necessary,” writes Peter Thorne of the UK Met Office.

“I also think the science is being manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes might not be too clever in the long run,” Thorne adds.

“Mike, The Figure you sent is very deceptive … there have been a number of dishonest presentations of model results by individual authors and by IPCC,” Wigley acknowledges.

 More damaging emails will likely be uncovered during the next few days as observers pour through the 5,000 emails. What is already clear, however, is the need for more objective research and ethical conduct by the scientists at the heart of the IPCC and the global warming discussion.

Published Mar 20, 2017 — 4:28


So many scientists do not agree with the frenzied climate alarmists, that over 31,000 of them have signed a petition to have the US government pull out of the 1997 Kyoto treaty because the restrictions of the treaty will harm the environment. hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

Petition to drop the 1997 Kyoto treaty