Climate chaos claims continue causing consternation

“What should climate disaster stalwarts do, when temperatures and sea levels refuse to cooperate with Al Gore speeches and computer model “projections” and “scenarios”?” asks Paul Driessen.

Climate chaos claims continue causing consternation

From the Oakland v. oil company lawsuit to ridiculous “research,” the onslaught never ends

By Paul Driessen

Anyone who thought “manmade climate cataclysm” rhetoric couldn’t possibly exceed Obama era levels should read the complaint filed in the “public nuisance” lawsuit that’s being argued before Federal District Court Judge William Alsup in a California courtroom: Oakland v BP and other oil companies.

The allegations read at times like they were written by a Monty Python comedy team and a couple of first year law students. Defendant companies “conspired” to produce dangerous fuels, the complaint asserts, and “followed the Big Tobacco playbook” to promote their use, while paying “denialist front groups” to question “established” climate science, “downplay” the “unprecedented” risks of manmade global warming, and launch “unfounded attacks on the integrity” of leading “consensus” scientists.

“People of color” and other “socially vulnerable” individuals will be most severely affected, it continues. (They’ll be far more severely impacted by climate policies that drive up energy and food prices.)

Oakland’s lawyers excoriate astrophysicist Wei Hock “Willie” Soon for committing the unpardonable sin of suggesting the sun might have something to do with climate change. They couldn’t even get his PhD degree right. They call him an “aerospace engineer,” and claim he personally received $1.2 million that was actually paid to Harvard University (as multiple, easily accessible documents make clear).

They don’t even mention the billions of taxpayer dollars that have been divvied up year after year among researchers and activists who promote alarmist views on global warming and renewable energy.

Oakland and its fellow litigants expect the court to accept their claims at face value, as “established” science, with no need to present real-world evidence to support them. They particularly emphasize rising seas and the resulting “imminent threat of catastrophic storm surges” that are “projected” by computer models that assume carbon dioxide from fossil fuels is now the primary or sole driver of climate change, replacing the sun, cosmic rays, ocean currents and other powerful natural forces that did so “previously.”

In suing the five major oil companies, they ignore the fact that the companies burn very few of the hydrocarbon fuels they produce. It is the plaintiff city governments and their constituents who have happily burned oil and natural gas for over a century, to fuel their cars, heat, cool, light and electrify their offices and homes, and make their industries, communications, health and living standards possible.

In the process, it is they who have generated the plant-fertilizing CO2 that is allegedly causing the unprecedented global warming, melting ice caps and rising seas. Hydrocarbons also fuel essential backup electricity generators for California’s wind and solar facilities – and provide raw materials for fabrics, plastics, paints, pharmaceuticals and countless other products the litigants use every day.

Equally problematical for the plaintiffs, the “established, consensus” science asserted throughout their complaint and courtroom presentations is increasingly uncertain and hotly debated. As Heartland Institute scholar Joe Bast points out, even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change now expresses numerous doubts and uncertainties about rates of sea level rise, the role of CO2, the cause and duration of a global warming “pause” that has now lasted some 23 years. Indeed, the temperature spike caused by the 2015-16 El Niño has now almost disappeared, as the oceans and atmosphere continue to cool once again.

The oil companies decided not to present much climate science in the courtroom. However, expert materials prepared by Christopher Monckton, Will Happer, Richard Lindzen and colleagues addressed questions about equilibrium climate sensitivity and related issues in amicus curiae filings for the court.

Oakland’s claim that the oil companies “conspired” to hide and misrepresent “the science” on global warming and climate change is on thin ice. Some reports say Judge Alsup dismissed the claim or ruled that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that there was a conspiracy. In any event, a decision on the merits will eventually be made, the losing party will appeal, and the case will likely end up in the US Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, climate chaos claims continue causing consternation in some circles. Too much money, power, prestige, control and wealth redistribution is at stake for anything else to happen.

Indeed, many in the $1.5-trillion-a-year Climate Industrial Complex are determined to use this issue (and equally malleable “sustainability” mantras) to replace free enterprise capitalism with totalitarian one-world governance; fossil fuel and nuclear power (the source of 85% of US and global energy) with expensive, land-intensive wind, solar and biofuel energy; and the hopes and dreams of poor people everywhere with policies that permit their living standards to improve only minimally, at the margins.

Actually, climate chaos hype-potheses now blame not just carbon dioxide and methane for runaway global warming, but also asthma inhalers and meat diets. The results aren’t just rising seas, warmer and colder weather, wetter and drier seasons, forest fires, nonexistent mass extinctions and the other oft-cited pseudo-cataclysms. They also include shrinking animals, a worse opioid crisis, and the endless litany of often amusing afflictions and disasters chronicled in The Warmlist and its video counterpart.

The “solution” isn’t just keeping fossil fuels in the ground. It also includes accepting profound lifestyle changes and dining on climate friendly insects (not ruling elites; just the rest of us).

And the real effects of manmade climate cataclysm fears are not just soaring prices for less available, less reliable, grid-destabilizing “green” electricity. They also include having to rescue adventurers who try to sail, snowmobile or trek across supposedly melting Arctic and Antarctic ice packs – only to become stranded and frostbitten or have their ships trapped in rapidly freezing ice.

So, what should climate disaster stalwarts do, when temperatures and sea levels refuse to cooperate with Al Gore speeches and computer model “projections” and “scenarios”? Or when forecasts of more hurricanes are followed by a record 12-year absence of any Category 3-5 storms hitting the US mainland?

One strategy is refusing to debate anyone who challenges the dire hypotheses, data or conclusions. Another involves “homogenizing,” “correcting” and manipulating original data, to make Dust Bowl era temperatures less warm – and this year’s long and bitterly cold winter not nearly so frigid, by adjusting records from local temperature stations by as much as 3.1 degrees Fahrenheit (1.7 Celsius).

As to the numerous articles and studies published on,,, and other sites that focus on evidence-based climate studies and research, and challenge assertions like those relied on in the Oakland complaint – the increasingly preferred strategy is to employ algorithms and other tactics that relegate their work to the bottom of search engine results. Long lists of alarmist claims, articles and perspectives appear first, unless a student or other researcher enters very specific search terms. Even the major shortcomings of wind power are hard to find, if you don’t know precisely what you are looking for.

Google, Facebook, You Tube and other search, information and social media sites appear determined to be the arbiters of what information, facts and realities we can access, what our children can learn. They help stigmatize and bully scientists whose research or views do not hew to accepted liberal perspectives, and have even enlisted corporate advertisers into policing the speech of political opponents.

All this from the champions  of free speech, tolerance, diversity and inclusion. Just bear in mind:

The issue is not whether our planet is warming, or whether climate and weather are changing. The issue is what is causing those fluctuations, how much is due to fossil fuels versus to natural forces, and whether any coming changes will be as catastrophic as natural forces have caused multiple times in the past. (Imagine what would happen to cities, farms and humanity if we had another Pleistocene ice age.)

All of this once again underscores why America and the world need “Red Team” climate science exercises, more evidence-based climate education, and a reversal of the Obama EPA’s unsupported finding that carbon dioxide emissions somehow endanger human health and welfare.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow ( and author of books and articles on energy and environmental policy.


15 thoughts on “Climate chaos claims continue causing consternation”

  1. Excellent piece, well said Paul Driessen. cAGW is not a done deal and should not be allowed to become one, it is nothing but foolish left wing political idea for wealth distribution.
    Climate changes — it always has and always will. Humans do not command or control climate, their major influence is from land usage change, and not much else.

  2. A group of members of the Greim find a refuge for skiers in Peñanevares completely covered by snow
    Sunday, 1 April 2018, 20:05
    The precipitations in the form of snow of the last weeks have left spectacular images like the one that the troops of the Group of Mountain of the Civil Guard (GREIM) of the Commander of the Civil Guard of Leon have captured in photography.
    The agents performed a regular public order service at the Ski Station of San Isidro and arrived, cross-country skiing, to the area known as Peñanevares.
    In that place is located a cabin that is normally used as a refuge for skiers. They observed that the large amount of rainfall during the storm had covered it to its roof.
    This cabin was the faithful reflection of all the snow that has fallen on the mountain of Leon in recent times. A shelter covered entirely by a white blanket that only left to see the top of the roof.×385@Leonoticias.jpg

  3. If the predictions based on your theory and the data (reality) don’t match then you have to abandon or modify your theory. These days the so called scientists just abandon the scientific method and modify the data.

    I’ve admired Dr Easterbrook’s honesty and humility because not only does he hold the record for longest correct call on climate (15+ years) he is honest enough to say “it could have been luck”. He doesn’t think it is but he is open to the possibility. So what does he do? He makes more predictions. A true scientist.

    If the predictions based on your theory don’t happen then your theory is wrong. If they do happen your theory is not wrong YET. Make some more predictions.

    The twin pillars of the scientific method (falsify and reproduce) are followed or it isn’t science.

    • It goes like this, in too much modern ‘science’. If the data doesnt fit my (perfect) model ( I spent all my gov grants and life on) then the DATA is wrong! (Not my model!) Try tell this to Einstein or Feynman! Who stated exactly the opposite.

  4. I really don’t think you know what the issue is. This is not an issue of science but an issue of power.
    The claims made are ultimately political. They amount to a demand that the populations of the world give up the industrial age in favor of the planet.

    The science is irrelevant. It is at best a set of talking points to gull the ignorant and credulous. At worst a razzle dazzle to direct attention from anti–human actions taken elsewhere.

    The more you put your emphasis on the science the more you play into their hands. They are in this to wield a psychological weapon to garner to themselves supreme power. You must not just denounce the science of global warming you must denounce the policy proposals as well.

    You will not give up heat, light or power for any reason and will not tolerate continued talk of the matter.

    Let me try to make my point another way which may make clear what I am saying. The Russians are currently accused without proof of a number of aggressive acts such as the Skripal matter and have attempted to point out the lack of proof or inanity of the accusations-to no avail. Many feel that continued pressure of this nature will bring a very real nuclear war.

    Given this ultimate consequence a policy which I would advise is to embrace the issue . The Russians should demand proof or an immediate apology, return of their diplomats to Britain and the end of associated sanctions or that they will nuke Britain from the face of the Earth. T

    They would of course inform the rest of the world that this is between Russia and Britain and no action will be taken against other countries unless they are attacked for whatever reason.

    The point is to stop warning of nuclear war or using it as an increasingly meaningless fear tactic and force confrontation immediately over the ultimate issue. Conceivably the world may be lost or Britain may be lost, but likely the world will be lost for sure if the current feckless behavior of the world’s states continues over such insane and manipulative issues.

    This is the situation with global warning also. Your opponents will never stop harassing you no matter how good the science in your favor for this is not about science but the immiseration of the world to the advantage of a small, vicious, dictatorial minority of well placed people. One of a number of tactics being employed to sow chaos.

    You must force your opponents into a fight over the policy objectives and then take every action to destroy them. Make it clear that the world can perish before you will give in.

    The science is false and the actions proposed are worthy of nuclear war if they are not given up. That is to be thrown in their faces. Take no prisoners. There is nothing else for it and the sooner you realize it the better.

  5. You would think they would be giddy happy then with all the snow in New York City in April, if warming is so bad. Nope, they don’t like it.

  6. Quote:
    All of this once again underscores why America and the world need “Red Team” climate science exercises, more evidence-based climate education, and a reversal of the Obama EPA’s unsupported finding that carbon dioxide emissions somehow endanger human health and welfare.
    What is needed is an unbiased approach to the collection, storage, and change management of the world climate data sets. The current set of (NOAA and UK Met) data managers cannot be trusted and any output they make to advise Government is wholly suspect, and not worth the paper it is printed on.
    The current incumbents in NOAA, NASA and the other five Anglo-Saxon Met Offices and climate research departments are wholly corrupted by 40 years of propaganda and by the false science of a small clutch of likeminded individuals at the heart of climate ology within the English speaking academia.
    Their game plan was to destroy the wests economic plan from within, using the tools of education and mass media to promote their false ideology that technological change, and the Energy Civilisation we have constructed over the last 100 years is bad, and that man need to return to the golden age of the hunter gatherer, and subsistence farmer last experienced during the Medieval Warm Period, and the series of similar Warm Period Epochs experienced by humans since the Holocene Maximum was reached.
    Their problem with these Epochs is the inconvenient cold phases in between each one, which both cold and warm is the result of the Sun’s energy activities. The Sun TSI may well only vary by 1% over the whole cycle, but as the Sun is a UV variable star, the critical energy band which controls the worlds Jet streams UV, varies by as much as 16% or more and that variation in track has been visible for the last 12 years.

  7. This is what conspiracies look like.

    Oh right, don’t forget to make sure to understand the step of demonizing anyone who points out that this is a concerted effort to deliberately deceive people with fabricated studies, statistics and science.

    No matter how blatantly obvious it all becomes.

  8. I have never understood why people think that the AGW scam is about “wealth redistribution,” since they almost inevitably never mention the nature of that redistribution. They all imply the same thing that the wealthy nations will be transferring funding to the poorer nations.

    The truth is ANY “wealth redistribution” will be from middle class and poorer tax payers in the industrialized nations to the wealthy aristocrats and NGO operators in poorer nations, and very little, if any, will end up in helping the poor. It will just continue concentrating the world’s wealth into as few hands as possible.

  9. Canadian Prairies Still -27 C , NO Spring In Sight
    The Canadian Press
    Published Monday, April 2, 2018
    REGINA – Environment Canada’s senior climatologist says he’s surprised how long winter is lasting on the Prairies and warns the cold temperatures could persist through the end of April.
    David Phillips blames a polar vortex for the current spring cold snap.
    Temperatures in the region are still in the negative double digits today, with lows reaching -27 C with the wind chill in parts of Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
    In southern Alberta, a snowfall warning is calling for up to 20 centimetres of the white stuff.

  10. Yeah, maybe the oil companies should just stop selling their product in areas where they are being sued. I mean, if it’s such a harmful product, they will be overjoyed when it’s gone, right?

  11. Problem I see in a court is that “Christopher Monckton, Will Happer, Richard Lindzen” are luke warmists that think there is a “wee bit of warming” due to CO2, although insignificant. This false argument (that CO2 has any effect what so ever on the climate) doesnt help fight the fake climate science dogma.

  12. This is the 400 year cycle Grand Solar Minimum at work. It is forecast to be at least 33 years long, before any reversal occurs. It could last 400 years, like the Maunder Minimum did, or even never return to anything as warm as the last 11,000 years until the end of the next full glacial epoch. What most people don’t realize is the fact that we are CURRENTLY in an Ice Age, and have been for over 2 MILLION years. ~100,000 years of major glaciation, punctuated by ~10,000 years of ‘Global Warming’. Stadials and Interstadials; the climate is always fluctuating, all without human intervention or modification. Greenland & Antarctic ice cores, lake bed sediment cores and other evidence show these climactic shifts. The Cult of Anthropogenic Climate Change is a Global Governance Tyrannical Tax Scheme to destroy the middle class that still remains and plunge most of the unwashed masses into depopulation, famine and pestilence that the 0.0001% rule over; Hell and the Satanic Overlords. Now is the time to opt out, resist and ultimately unite to destroy these evil monsters, with extreme prejudice.

Comments are closed.