Climate Change is a Political Battle, Not a Scientific One

quote-there-are-no-morals-in-politics-there-is-only-expedience-a-scoundrel-may-be-of-use-to-us-just-vladimir-lenin-110531Real climate scientists have been arguing against the climate alarmists for years, and they have done a great and helpful job. With basically zero resources, they have been able to at least fight the extremely well-funded climate alarmists to a stand still. With the recent election of President Trump, the balance has definitely tilted towards the climate realists. Unfortunately, that is only a temporary victory, and sooner or later, another president favorable to the alarmist’s position will get elected, and the cycle will start all over again.

To truly defeat the climate alarmists, and to send the climate change/global warming hysteria to the history books to join “The Coming Ice Age,” real climate scientists and climate realists must fight a two-front battle, and broaden their approach. The unfortunate reality is that climate change/global warming has, and never will be a scientific issue, it is a political issue. Real science simply isn’t involved. The minimum of any real science is the ability to model/define what is being observed. The climate models themselves reject the hypothesis of man-made climate change, and that is all the climate alarmists really have to go by. There are no experiments to support their claims, only sophistry.

To make my case, one only needs to read the reviews of the recent House Hearings on Climate Change. This quote is from an article titled:  A newcomer’s first opinion of Michael Mann in the context of science discourse.

I listened to the entire hearing yesterday, and while I don’t have any individual experience with any of the people on the panel, I can now understand why Dr. Mann is not liked, and globally not liked at that. For a scientist he speaks very well, very little equivocation that one would normally associate with having personal or professional doubts about the subject…He seemed to have no problem veering off into innuendo and personal attacks and weaved them into the threads of his testimony. And of course there was the preening megalomania of him reciting his CV … I heard all the science words and phrases but the one thing I did not hear from him was uncertainty, about anything, as though reading from a well-memorized script and the only thing he had to worry about was the presentation style. And then going off on Pielke and Curry repeatedly, right out in the open in one of the halls of Congress, while still portraying himself as the victim.

b6c6b01cf5d222b2616df5d59106f0b9Michael Mann’s behavior is the antithesis of a real scientist, but he doesn’t care, his objectives are political, not scientific. That is what the other real scientists don’t seem to understand. They aren’t debating in front of a professional science organization, seeking to reach the truth, they are testifying before congress. While Michael Mann is testifying to gain sound bits and greater funding, the real scientists are there trying to convince a divided congress that 50% of them are wrong. That is an insurmountable task. 50% of congress gets elected by constituents that expect them not to look behind the curtain and expose the fraud. Michael Mann’s objective is simply to throw red meat to his constituency. This part of the above quote is worth highlighting for emphasis.

I heard all the science words and phrases but the one thing I did not hear from him was uncertainty, about anything, as though reading from a well-memorized script and the only thing he had to worry about was the presentation style.

Michael Mann has a focus group tested presentation that is so well known that I could recite it in my sleep. It is pure nonsense, but he knows that all his supporters have bought into it, and that is what they expect. Those recited comments mean votes for the people that vote for climate change legislation. Facts and science have absolutely nothing to do with it.

The problem conservatives have arguing this issue is that we are conservatives. We look at the facts. We look for the truth. When the NYT or ex-President Obama makes a series to erroneous statements, we respond with rebuttals. The NYT and ex-President Obama reaches millions with their nonsense, conservatives reach very few with their rebuttals. Liberals are propagandists, conservatives are seeking the truth. Conservatives are only winning this battle because 50% of America leans right and their views are influenced by politics, not science.

a0a55a6d380a1c59ba7ab5ff45490c43From another article about the House Hearing on Climate Change, this was written.

Democratic members of the Committee did everything they could to remain alarmist and keep the Republicans confused.

Michael Mann repeated all the expected lies, … It appeared to me that questions the Democrats on the Committee asked Mann and the answers he gave had been scripted.

My impressions from the hearing were not positive. Mann spoke for almost half of the time and boldly asserted the most extreme alarmist positions and factoids (quoting from my own notes): “devoted his life to science [about himself]”, “few individuals who represent tiny minority [about other three witnesses]”, “scientists continuously challenge each other [implying he is a scientist]”, “extremely broad agreement on the basic facts,” 97%, “climate change is real, human-caused, and has heavy impact”, “fingerprints of human-caused climate change on extreme events”, “anti-science forces launched a series of attack on scientists”, “time for republicans to put away doubts and focus on solutions”, “discourage investigations of climate scientists,” and “support by multiple national academic societies.”

The last statement is true, unfortunately. He also mentioned recent example of silencing of Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. by the Center for American Progress and Tom Steyer as another victory for his “climate science.”

Without acting even half as forceful as Mann had, the other three witnesses firmly rejected alarmist conclusions and revealed the subversion of the scientific method in the climate debate. Democrats easily extracted from Dr. Curry an admission that they deal with an extremely complex problem, and from Dr. Pielke Jr. that there are fundamental risks. If it had been my first time hearing about this subject I would have concluded that the climate alarmists were right.

The last line is worth highlighting and is especially important because it is being written by a skeptic.

If it had been my first time hearing about this subject I would have concluded that the climate alarmists were right.

6a6krzctxfsv-6g78foiflpmcczp8ahlzog_up41bfcThe climate alarmists are fighting a political fight, the real scientists are debating a scientific issue. The real scientists brought a pencil and ruler to a political gun fight. They simply didn’t have the correct armor for the battle. Dr. Ball seems to share my opinion.

Mann took it very seriously, was well prepared and exploited it for every political opportunity – he dominated the entire proceedings. He had the advantage of not caring or having to care about the truth. His performance was designed for most of the public who have no idea about what is true. He knows this works because that assumption has driven the juggernaut from the start.

Mann also understood the political and manipulative nature of Congressional hearings. They are charades supposedly seeking the truth, but are really designed to make the politicians look good.

In no way do I want any of my comments to be construed as being negative or critical of the good work done by Dr. Curry, Spencer and/or Pielke Jr.. Their work is critical, and as mentioned above, with very limited resources they have at least fought this battle to a stand- still. The purpose of this article is to survey the landscape, identify and define the enemy, recon and detail the battlefield, identify strengths and weaknesses, and construct a two-front battle plan what will lead to victory. A battle plan to win on both the science and political front. This is the first of a series to develop a political battle plan to assist those testifying before congress and the public.

Because this isn’t a real scientific debate, the old rules don’t apply. The scientific method doesn’t apply. Getting to the “truth” isn’t the goal of this “scientific” debate, getting income redistributed to your cause is the goal. The “truth” has absolutely nothing to do with it. The real climate battle isn’t being fought in our labs, free universities, debate/science clubs/organizations, the real battle is being fought in congress, elections and the courts



The Benefits of Higher CO2 Levels; Fewer Hurricanes, Greater Prosperity, Longer Life


Please Help Fight Against Censorship. I’ve been informed that this site has been banned on Facebook as being “Abusive.” If anything, I’ve been trying to bring awareness to the “abuse” perpetrated by the “Climate Bullies.” Please post these articles on as many sights as you can, and most importantly, forward them on to President Trump.  Help end the reign of the Climate Bullies.


U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt caused a carbon kerfuffle today.

In an interview on CNBC this morning, Pruitt raised doubts over whether or not carbon dioxide is the main driver behind climate change. Asked if CO2 is the “primary control knob for climate,” Pruitt said he wouldn’t agree with that assessment.

Let’s take the Alarmists at their word, and assume that CO2 is the “primary control knob of the climate,” and absolutely absurd claim for a molecule that is only 0.04% of the atmosphere, and whose absorption of IR decays logarithmically.  Let’s also assume that the “Science” magazines that make those claims require the application of the scientific method and reproducibility for publication, something they do not. Just what “Costs” have been inflicted on the earth?

#1: The number of Southern Hemisphere Hurricanes has fallen to the lowest level on record.


#2: There has been a tremendous “Greening” of the Northern Hemisphere.


#3) Crop yields and food production are reaching record levels.


#4) Life expectancy has DOUBLED.


#5) Standards of living have greatly increased.


What is the cost of higher CO2? An immeasurable “increase” in the “unadjusted” thermometer temperature record. If CO2 is such a powerful “control knob” for the climate, one would think they would be able to demonstrate it in a laboratory experiment. They can’t. Nor can they even write computer models to demonstrate their theory. In reality, all the climate “alarmists” have is political rhetoric, and the ability to censor those who disagree.

The Days of “Trust Me” Science Are Over


Last week was a complete disaster for the climate alarmists, and recent events only promise that things are going to get much worse. Toto finally peaked behind the curtain. On Wednesday the House passed a bill that would require the EPA to release its data to the public.

Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, said “the days of ‘trust me’ science are over,” adding that the House bill would restore confidence in the EPA’s decision-making process.

Personally, I was shocked that that wasn’t already a requirement. Just what is the purpose of a taxpayer funded agency designed to serve the public’s interest keeping its data and methods secret? Worse yet, this secret data must have been used to influence the Supreme Court’s recent costly decision to label CO2 a pollutant. Stalin would have been very proud of this system, but it has no place in an open and free Democracy. Not surprising however 198 Representatives voted against it, and I bet you can guess what party they are from. I didn’t know Mother Nature’s medical records were protected under HIPPA.

Connecticut Rep. Elizabeth Esty and other Democrats said the bill would cripple EPA’s ability to conduct scientific research based on confidential medical information and risks privacy violations by exposing sensitive patient data.

Republicans should take this decision a bit further and not only demand the release of the studies and data but also demand “reproducibility” of the studies supporting the EPA regulation. Recently it was discovered that much of the research published in major journals like Nature and Science magazine are not reproducible. This throws the entire “peer-review” process and the “consensus” that results from such “authorities” into question. Climate alarmists never argue data, facts, experiments, they argue “consensus” “peer-review” and computer models. The lack of reproducibility completely destroys the main pillars holding up the entire AGW movement. Without reproducibility, there is no real science. Science that isn’t reproducible is nothing more than witchcraft, black magic, and sorcery performed by Oracles and Soothsayers, not real scientistsCapture16

Additional safeguards would be to divide and compartmentalize any major research initiative. The problem with climate “science” is that power is extremely concentrated in the hands of very few self-interested organizations that control the entire process both vertically and horizontally. When the military designs a new weapon system, the process is designed so that no one person knows or controls all the parts. Things are done on a “need to know” basis. The Federal Government should treat the EPA, FDA, DOE, DOE like they treated Standard Oil and break up the Monopolies. People like Michale “Climate Crusader” Mann should never be given power in such easily corruptible systems.

NOAA/NASA and HADCRU should break the temperature reconstruction process into their fundamental components.

  1. Data Collection: Google/Oracle/IBM/ADP could bid to collect all the temperature data from all the temperature centers.
  2. Data Compilation: Google/Oracle/IBM/ADP could bid to compile the data in raw form.
  3. Data Adjustment: A transparent open source method could be created for “adjusting” the data. No longer would a single person or small group make those decisions.
  4. Data Analysis: Statistical research firms like IBM, SAP or Oracle should be hired. Considering the decisions made based upon the conclusions may cost the taxpayers TRILLIONS of dollars, this work is simply too important for government workers.
  5. Data Interpretation:  If research universities are going to play a part in developing the climate models and policy proposals they simply must demonstrate a political diversity of their staff. No conservative would have ever signed off on this climate change nonsense.
  6. Published Research: If published research is to be used, it must me reproducible by independent bodies, and the scientific method must have been applied.


Also on Wednesday, the climate science equivalent of the Titanic hitting the iceberg occurred when Michael “I’m a Victim”  Mann got completely owned by Dr. Judith Curry in the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology: Hearings on Climate Change, and inadvertently gave the climate “deniers” the battle plan on how to defeat the climate alarmists. That “battle plan” will be detailed in future blog posts, so stay tuned. BTW, Michael “Owned by Judith Curry” Mann used “denier” 4 times in his written testimony.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

American Lung Association Never Mentions CO2 as Harmful to Human Health

I just finished watching Chris Wallace grill EPA director Scott Pruitt and was shocked to see the questioning of Chris Wallace. It was if he got his talking points from MSNBC or Michael Mann. The one comment he repeated were highly speculative comments made about the clean power act saving thousands of lives. To support these claims he referenced the American Lung Association’s position multiple times. I found that extremely odd. If there is any organization that understands that CO2 is not a pollution, it is the American Lung Association.  The entire purpose of the lung is to manage the delicate balance between CO2 and O2 in the human body. CO2 is necessary for the lung and blood to function. Too little or too much CO2 in the lung and the pH of the blood can change, hyper- ventilating can cause a person to lose consciousness, too much CO2 and a person can suffocate.  The standard level of CO2 in the lung is between 2.7 to 7.5%. To put that in perspective atmospheric CO2 is 400 ppm, or 0.04%. 2.7 to 7.5% or 27,000 ppm to 75,000 ppm is between 67 and 187x the level of the atmosphere. Submarines can have CO2 levels near 10,000 ppm. The lungs have absolutely no problem handling high levels of CO2. Plants are the same. Higher CO2 levels make plants more drought resistant and greatly increases their yields. Plants die when CO2 drops below 180 ppm.

typical or physiological CO2 levels in the lungs which range from about 20 to 50 mm Hg or from about 2.7 to 7.5%.

It is for that reason, I questioned Chris Wallace’s approach and had to check out the American Lung Association. Sure enough, the American Lung Association makes the obligatory platitudes towards “climate change,” but never with an “N” mentions CO2 as a harmful pollutant. Sometimes a half-truth is often quite the lie. They did nothing to clarify the critical role CO2 plays in improving and saving the lives of every living organism. They do vaguely mention “carbon pollution” and state that utility plants produce CO2, but conveniently never mention CO2 as a health risk. Interestingly, they do mention that “biomass plants” are major sources of pollution. I’m pretty sure far more people die and suffer from natural causes of asthma and hayfever than CO2. I’ve never heard of anyone having an allergic or asthma reaction to CO2.  The very concept is laughable.


Climate “Scientists” Make the Election Pollsters Look Accurate…and 10x as Smart

160615_gma_dowd2_16x9_992What good is spending trillions of dollars on a “science” if it can’t accurately define what it is studying? Scientists that study gravity have a nice simple model of 9.8m/sec^2, scientists that study quantum physics have E=mc^2, and scientists have study motion have F=ma. The value of a real science is that it helps us understand the world in which we live. If that is the definition of a real science, climate “science” is about as unscientific as one can get. Their models and forecasts don’t even come close.Screen-Shot-2017-04-02-at-2.22.05-PM-down-1

Worst of all, their recommendations are extremely fluid and dangerous for society. Back in the 1970’s coming ice age scare, the climate alarmists were recommending spreading black soot over the North Pole in order to MELT THE ARCTIC SEA ICE!!! That isn’t a joke. Today they are hysterical about the natural variation of it being on the down-swing. Note how no matter what the situation, the answer is always greater government involvement and spending more of other people’s money.Capture13

While melting the Polar Ice Caps and stockpiling food back in the 1970s would have been one of the greatest misallocation or resources since Stalin collectivized the Soviet Farms, the political left just doesn’t seem to learn from history. In an effort to prepare for the “Endless California Drought,” California ironically didn’t build desalination plants to produce clean fresh water to address the water shortage, they implemented strict water rationing and built wind and solar farms. That may make sense to a population that buys “skinny jeans” to lose weight, and drive “smart cars” and use “smart phones” and live is “smart homes” on the “smart grid” to make these pseudo-intellectuals feel intelligent. To a real person, intelligence is demonstrated by developing proper and feasible solutions to existing real problems.


Californians must have failed basic geometry, or slept through the class where the lecture was the “shortest distance between two points is a straight line.” To solve a water shortage, the most effective way to address the problem is by building desalination plants. California has an unlimited supply of water called the Pacific Ocean, they just need to process it for drinking. I fail to make the connection between a water shortage, CO2 and building wind and solar farms. If feeling smug and sanctimonious made it rain, then California would have its solution. Unfortunately, self-defeating symbolic efforts may make misguided Californians feel good about themselves, it doesn’t solve the water problem.

Anywho, that isn’t the point. The point is that by following the advice of climate “experts” California was focused on an endless drought when they should have been focused on the coming floods. California has a cyclical history of droughts and floods, man- made CO2 didn’t repeal that natural cycle. Californian droughts ALWAYS end, they always have, and they always will, regardless of the amount of man-made CO2. The real problem Californians now face is that their dams and other river/water control infrastructure have been severely neglected. Money that would have been better spent preparing for the near certainty of the eventual rains, was misspent on Quixotic ventures like building wind and solar farms. Now all reasonable people can do is sit back and say “see, I told you so.” To add injury to insult, Jerry “Moonbeam” Brown is considering a run for the Whitehouse. I guess misery loves company, and Jerry wants everyone to suffer along with California.

California snowpack is one of the biggest ever recorded, and now poses a flooding risk

The 2016-17 winter created one of the largest snowpacks in California’s recorded history and it’s loaded with enough water to keep reservoirs and rivers swollen for months to come.

As of Thursday, the snowpack across the entire Sierra was at 164% of average for this time of year. The northern region was at 147%, the central was at 175% and the southern was 164% of average, respectively, state data showed.

When that spot was a dusty patch of land for Gehrke two years ago, he was filmed by a phalanx of cameras and joined by Gov. Jerry Brown, who argued that the absence of snow was emblematic of the state’s punishing drought and that water users needed to prepare for sacrifices.

The governor declared a state of emergency and instituted strict water use restrictions that remain in place for some people today.

California has been inundated with more than 30 atmospheric river events — warm, Pacific-based storms that drop massive amounts of rain — since October and is on track for one of its rainiest water years (measured from Oct. 1 — Sept. 30) in history.

In the meantime, cities and utility companies are preparing for what could be a paradoxically fruitful and disastrous spring and summer when all that snow begins to melt.

BTW, the MO of the Climate Alarmists is to deny, deflect, deceive, distort, and attack. One favorite tactic is to “appeal to authority,” who are often the “Fact Checkers.” These favorite attack dogs are a tainted jury at best.

Be sure to “Like,” “Share,” “Subscribe,” and “Comment.” If you are real ambitious, please forward it on to President Trump.

Read More: How to Discuss Global Warming with a “Climate Alarmist.” Scientific Talking Points to Win the Debate

Michael Mann Just Jumped the Climate Change Shark

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

WARNING!!! I’ve been Informed Facebook has blocked this article or at least parts of it. If you are a safe-space seeking, participation trophy collecting Snowflake,  please avoid reading any further. The information may be dangerous to your health. The truth can be very very painful.

I tried to post on Facebook. Got this message: “Warning: This Message Contains Blocked Content

This has been one very very very strange week for the self-defeating and self-destructive political left-wing. The first bizarre event was public comments made by Dr. Farkas — the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense specializing in Russia. She basically admitted on The Morning Joe Show that she led/participated in a conspiracy to leak sensitive information in an effort to undermine President Trump.

Dr. Farkas — the former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense specializing in Russia, who said “get as much information as you can” to persons inside the intelligence apparatus — for the purposes of preserving intel on the Trump team in an effort to hide it from the incoming administration.

Listening to here comments I just kept asking myself, “does she understand what she is saying?” She was so blinded by her delusion that she didn’t even seem to grasp that not only what she was saying was highly unethical and most likely illegal, but also epically wrong. She seems to be suffering from “Noble Cause Corruption.”

Noble Cause Corruption seems to be endemic to the left-wing as Michael “Capone” Mann gave an absolutely catastrophic testimony to the US Congress, during which he as not caught lying but he also provided the answer to how best to address the climate change issue. The following graphic is an actual clip from Michael “Emasculated” Mann’s written testimony.

Denier 3


First the lying part. Michael Mann, playing the victim, made the absurd comment that “statements that have been attributed to me are not correct, and I don’t believe I called anyone here a ‘denier.” Dr. Judith Curry immediately interrupted by snapped back with the epic humiliating smackdown of “it’s in your written testimony, I’ll read it again.” This is an actual screenshot of Michael “Homer” Mann’s facial reaction. I would say this measures about a 100 on the “pucker factor scale.”

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

Ironically Michael “Slick-Willy” Mann may have been technically correct, much like Bill Clinton may have been technically correct when he stated “it depends on what the definition of ‘is’ ‘is,'” but people expect much more ethical behavior from “Nobel Prize Winning” scientists than they do from developmentally arrested politicians. Michael “Silver Tounge” Mann’s comment is at best an unethical and deceitful half-truth and at worst criminal perjury.

Michael “McCarthy” Mann is the ring leader of a cabal of climate bullies who’s MO is to threaten, intimidate, censor and smear scientists that dare to question their climate orthodoxy. While Michael Piltdown Mann may have not actually verbalized in written testimony, his tactic of smearing others with the “denier” label is well documented. He wrote an article for the Washington Post titled “Deniers club: Meet the people clouding the climate change debate,” where he published the equivalent of a scientific black-list, naming names, and smearing the “heretics.” He also recently wrote a book titled “The Madhouse Effect: How Climate Change Denial Is Threatening Our Planet, Destroying Our Politics, and Driving Us Crazy.”

Michael “Drama Queen”  Mann’s attempt at feigning outrage and playing the victim, however, is the real gift that he gave his critics. Climate change is and always has been a political movement, using “science” as guise to fool the gullible. Up until now, real scientists have fought Michael and his ilk using scientific arguments, attempting to debunk the countless stream of nonsense that flows out of the climate “science” departments of our government funded universities. The problem with this approach is that the climate alarmists have almost limitless resources and a complicit educational system, media and until recently government. People seeking the truth simply don’t have the resources to debunk every piece of garbage produced by the climate alarmists.

The problem conservatives have arguing this issue is that we are conservatives. We look at the facts. We look for the truth. When the NYT or ex-President Obama makes a series to erroneous statements, we respond with rebuttals. The NYT and ex-President Obama reaches millions with their nonsense, conservatives reach very few with their rebuttals. Liberals are propagandists, conservatives are seeking the truth. Conservatives are only winning this battle because 50% of America lean right and their views are influenced by politics, not science.

Michael “Hollywood” Mann has his left-wing talking points rehearsed and can recite them in his sleep. Others are coached to recite similar talking points. The MO is obvious, appeal to authority, refer to the “consensus,” and never ever ever mention the results of the climate models or application of the scientific method. The climate alarmists are very very very comfortable with this approach, and challenging the climate “scientists” on the science plays to their strength. Not because the science supports their position, but because the left-wing propaganda machine favors that approach. To win the scientific argument, you have to have an extremely scientific literate public and congress, which simply doesn’t and won’t exist. It is unlikely the public will ever understand or even care about the difference between linear and logarithmic, and its relevance to global warming, but they can easily understand and have already accepted that being a bully isn’t good. Lion portrait

While Michael “Pope Urban VIII” Mann may be able to fool the public with his sophistry and intimidate the climate “heretics,” it is unlikely he and the climate alarmists can win a political war, and his actions prove it. Michael “Smoke-and-Mirrors” Mann has no trouble at all holding his own when it comes to reciting his focus group tested “scientific” talking points. Even his critics admire the ease at which they spew from his mouth.

For a scientist he speaks very well, very little equivocation that one would normally associate with having personal or professional doubts about the subject, seems to transition smoothly from one topic to the next, almost glib

Michael “The Bold” Mann is king of the jungle when it comes to scientific sophistry, but when the inquiry turns political he flees the battle and resorts to pathetic attempts of deceit, deception, half-truths and outright lies. In this video Louisiana Rep Mr. Higgins asks Michael “The Lamb” Mann about his affiliation with groups calling for the prosecution of climate “skeptics,” he behaves as if he was being accused of being a member of the Communist Party.

The other video evidence is his denial of smearing others as “deniers” which was already covered. If conservatives want to win this political war, they need to execute a two-front battle plan. The first front is to continue fighting the scientific arguements,  and the second front is to fight the political fight. Michael Mann’s actions have exposed the Achilles’Heel of the climate alarmists’ approach. Their support structure remains in place as long as they can maintain the illusion of moral and scientific superiority. All that comes crumbling down once Michael Mann and his ilk are exposed as the modern day equivalent of the black-listing Senator Joseph McCarthy and fear mongering Wizard of Oz. This most recent congressional testimony demonstrates how climate realists can take the offensive and finally put the arrogant, condescending, smug climate bullies on the defensive. It is time for Toto to pull away the curtain, and expose the climate “science” as the fraud that it is. In this “social media” world of hyper-sensitive safe-space seeking snowflakes, no one wants to be labeled a “bully.” The quickest way to get “unfriended” is by being outed as a bully, and if there is any label that truly fits Michael “Scott FarcusMann, it is bully.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

BTW, the MO of the Climate Alarmists is to deny, deflect, deceive, distort, and attack. One favorite tactic is to “appeal to authority,” who are often the “Fact Checkers.” These favorite attack dogs are a tainted jury at best.

Be sure to “Like,” “Share,” “Subscribe,” and “Comment.” If you are real ambitious, please forward it on to President Trump.

Read More: How to Discuss Global Warming with a “Climate Alarmist.” Scientific Talking Points to Win the Debate

Northern Atlantic Storm Shows How Natural Causes Affect Arctic Sea Ice

A few years ago the climate alarmists were going hysterical about the sudden loss of Arctic Sea Ice. Alarmist claims of an ice free North Pole dominated the headlines.

It’s been a little over four years since an “Arctic expert” claimed the North Pole would be ice-free by the summer of 2016.

That never happened.

When I dug further into the issue, I discovered that an Arctic Hurricane was responsible for the sudden loss of ice. I didn’t even know Hurricanes occurred that far north and the media did nothing to inform me of the event.

Monster Storm Becomes Strongest on Record for Alaska

A powerful storm has moved into the Bering Sea and has become the most intense storm to ever impact the region.
The former Super Typhoon Nuri has tracked northward into the Bering Sea, located in between Alaska and Russia, and has lost all tropical characteristics.
The system has undergone rapid intensification, producing howling winds as the central pressure plummets to near record levels.

1988-1996_oldice21 (1)Storms in the Bering Sea are most damaging because they tend to push ice out of the Arctic and into the Northern Atlantic.  Russia and Alaska create a natural barrier for the ice, so when the wind blows from Iceland towards the Bering Sea, the ice tends to get trapped and thicken. When the wind pattern reverses, the ice gets blown out of the Arctic, reducing the ice extent and thickness. The phenomenon has everything to do with wind patterns, and absolutely nothing to do with CO2. Just last year in 2016, two storms hit the Arctic, shrinking the extent and thickness of the ice. Never to allow a “good crisis go to waste,” the alarmists used the opportunity to try to influence the election.

Pair of Arctic Storms Sparked Severe Polar Warming, Sea Ice Melt for November 2016
Folks — we’re in a climate emergency. Tell everyone you know. — Eric Holthaus

There are weather and climate records, and then there are truly exceptional events that leave all others in the dust. Such has been the case across Earth’s high latitudes during this last quarter of 2016… — Bob Henson at WeatherUnderground

Global warming doesn’t care about the election. — Dr Gavin Schmidt of NASA GISS

This weather pattern, however, has been shifting, and the winds are now blowing in the direction that bodes ill for the climate alarmists. The winds are now resulting in the accumulation of Arctic Sea ice, as with wind pattern is now blowing from Iceland towards Alaska.N_daily_extent-8

While I’ve written about this event in the past, I wanted to post an update because the Weather Channel published a fantastic video demonstrating how a storm in the Northern Atlantic is pushing the ice towards Newfoundland and the Arctic. Here is the link to the video.

Massive North Atlantic Storm Sends Surge of Ice Into St. John’s, Newfoundland Harbornewfy-storm-31mar17-explain

My bet is that once the Arctic Sea Ice begins to increase in both extent and thickness, Arctic Sea Ice will simply disappear completely from the liberal media, and the only way you will hear about it is by visiting blogs like this one.