Return of the Climate Con “Experts” – The Real History Channel
With the Stupid-19 scamdemic having run its course and “monkey pox” failing to catch on — the Climate Con has returned to center stage with a scary feature story plastered front & top of page in The New York Times, with the headline Climate Disruption Is Now Locked In. The Next Moves Will Be Crucial. The Times spoke to two dozen experts who said decisions made now would spell the difference between a difficult future and something far worse.
Any day now they’ll be dusting off that gloomy little Swedish urchin to pick up where she (or he?) left off before the Globalists tortured us with the Stupid-19 hoax.
Utilizing the classic logical fallacy of “The Appeal to Authority,” Slimes scribblers John Branch & Brad Plumer boast of having “spoken with two dozen climate experts” — as if that actually settles anything.
Apart from the fact that the dead weight of numbers can never prove a theory — when so many of the “experts” are feeding from the same swine trough, it is to be expected that they would all squeal out the same tune.
To prove our hypothesis, The Anti-New York Times had to take only a superficial look at a few of the cited “experts” to spot the rigged “consensus” trick at work — “The Appeal to the Popular.”
Let’s have a look at the background of some of these featured “experts” to see if we can figure out their motivation for perpetuating the Climate Con which yours truly so thoroughly debunked in “Climate Bogeyman.”
Peter Kalmus
Employer: U.S. Federal Government (NASA / Deep State)
Professorette Katharine Hayhoe
Employer: Texas Tech — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Professor Jonathan Overpeck
Employer: University of Michigan — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Professor Cristian Proistosescu
Employer: University of Illinois — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Professor Stephen Pyne
Employer: University of Arizona — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Professorette Katharine Mach
Employer: University of Miami — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Juan Declet-Barreto
Employer: Union of Concerned Scientists — which is funded by Globalist Foundations, including George Soros’s “Open Society” (here)
Professor Greg Garrard
Employer: University of British Columbia (Canada) — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Alice Hill
Senior Fellow at the openly pro-world government Council on Foreign Relations — The CFR, eh? Do we even need to comment on that one?
Professorette Jennifer Balch
Employer: University of Colorado at Boulder — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Professor Noah Diffenbaugh
Employer: Stanford University — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Professor Amir Aghakouchak
Employer: University of California — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Professorette Susan Cutter
Employer: University of South Carolina — which has received grants to study “Climate Change” (here)
Ah— show us the shekels, my distinguished “scholars.” Show us the shekels.
The staggering sums of grant-money dumped onto College Avenue by the Billionaire Boy’s Club, their “philanthropic foundations,” and their wholly-owned politicians and bureaucrats attracts the whores of Academia like a $100 bill waved in front of a string of Baltimore crack-whores with withdrawal symptoms.
No matter what the grant proposal for a particular Climate Con study entails, as long as the false reality of CO2-based “warming” serves as the assumed underlying premise of the “research” — then there’s gold in that junk science. One can study the imaginary effects of man-made “Climate Change” ™ on the birds, the bees, the apples and the trees — just as long as the assumption itself is never challenged.
As for the ethical scientists who refuse to partake in this greasy game of “payola” that is so essential for propping-up the grand illusion of “consensus ™,” — their frightened silence serves the objectives of the Globalist Mafia almost as well.
That’s how the game works — and the sleazy scribblers of Sulzberger’s Slimes all know it.
See more here: realhistorychan
Header image: On The Wight
Please Donate Below To Support Our Ongoing Work To Defend The Scientific Method
PRINCIPIA SCIENTIFIC INTERNATIONAL, legally registered in the UK as a company 
incorporated for charitable purposes. Head Office: 27 Old Gloucester Street, London WC1N 3AX.
Trackback from your site.
Geraint HUghes
| #
Fakers spouting climate climatic claptrap can easily be defeated by showing them one of my experiments. Here is one.
https://principia-scientific.com/niblet-no-6-no-greenhouse-effect-exists/
Reply
Geraint HUghes
| #
Here is another.
My next book will show how to do all these and my experiment next year will be a bigger bolder version and the videos more professionally made.
Will be interesting to watch them squirm when they see the proof right in front of their eyes in my planned live demonstrations.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Gerainte,
One cannot model the NATURAL WORLD with a laboratory experiment. One must take the instruments out to the NATURAL WORLD to measure the NATURAL PHENOMENA.
http://weather.uwyo.edu/upperair/sounding.html
https://raws.dri.edu
https://www1.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/uscrn/products/hourly02/
https://gml.noaa.gov/grad/surfrad/dataplot.html
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Geraint Hughes
| #
Stop being so small minded Jerry. I am not modeling the natural world,. stop talking twaddle and talk sense. I am showing the very principle that climate crisis is ENTIRELY dependant upon to be false.
Reply
Carbon Bigfoot
| #
Jerry, Geraint and others Disaster Du Jour:
https://www.livescience.com/reactive-chemical-hydrotrioxides-atmospher?utm_source=SmartBrief&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=42D8AFC1-5EA8-43A4-9F22-B9F6A962F94B&utm_content=8F8F041B-AD62-4E58-93F8-190227808517&utm_term=2b02aba3-af9d-481c-bcad-f6bc5884838b
Never heard of this. Is this a liberal circle jerk since they are losing the CO2 argument??
Reply
Moffin
| #
Hi Carbon and readers. I note the article you reference states the chemicals COULD influence climate and health rather than it Does influence.
There are possibly more conspiracies than there are theories about those conspiracies.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Moffin,
Have you read that the droplets of the totally overcast clouds of Venus are droplet sulfuric acid solutions of varying concentrations? Have you read the some gaseous emissions of volcanic events are sulfur dioxide?
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Moffin
| #
Hi Jerry. I have never taken a lot of notice so I have just checked the structure of both molecules.
I note sulphuric acid is called ‘oil of vitriol’. Sounds like one PSI commenter.
Sulphur dioxide is the smell after striking a match and is around one part per million of earth’s atmosphere.
Thank you for bringing this to my attention, Jerry. Oh, Americans spell it funny.
Cheers. Matt
MattH
| #
The current global Mean Surface Level Pressure weather map, 7th June 2022. (below) took me a while to work out what was unusual.
What I have never seen before is Southern Hemisphere weather latitudinally overlapping Northern Hemisphere weather (Africa zone) and nearly overlapping latitudinally (Eastern Pacific) making the tropical zone the narrowest I have ever seen it.
http://www.bom.gov.au/australia/charts/global/gmslp.000.shtml
I cannot explain it but a possibility is that the Arctic and Antarctic meridional jet streams are latitudinally overlapping.
proof read. yep. send
Reply
MattH
| #
Correction. My earlier comment is so much in error. It would not be the polar jet streams but the sub tropical jet streams that may have been in aberration.. Normally these occur at around 30 degree latitude.
Plus the event mentioned resolved in the next updated weather map. Better to say nothing than to be so wrong. Oh well!
Reply
charles zilich
| #
The Manufacturing of Greta Thunberg – for Consent: The Political Economy of the Non-Profit Industrial Complex http://www.theartofannihilation.com/the-manufacturing-of-greta-thunberg-for-consent-the-political-economy-of-the-non-profit-industrial-complex/
Reply