Cruz – ‘Climate Change Is Not Science, It’s Religion’ – Video

“You want a skeptic?” asks Cruz. “I’m right here.”

“For the last 18 years, the satellite data show no significant warming what-so-ever,” says Cruz.


The video goes on to trash Cruz, saying that global warming is real because there is a “consensus.”

You can read about that so-called consensus here:

15 thoughts on “Cruz – ‘Climate Change Is Not Science, It’s Religion’ – Video

  1. Solar minimum period centered around 600 AD now named Late Antique Little Ice Age or (LALIA)

    Full file:


    Climate and culture

    In light of this, the researchers refer to the period from 536 to around 660 CE for the first time as the “Late Antique Little Ice Age” (LALIA). This was triggered by three major volcanic eruptions in 536, 540 and 547 CE[1], whose climatic impact was prolonged further by the retardant effect of the oceans and a minimum in solar activity.

    According to the team of naturalists, historians and linguists, this period bore witness to a whole series of social upheavals. After famine, the Justinian plague established itself between 541 and 543 CE, killing millions of people in the centuries that followed and possibly contributing to the decline of the Eastern Roman Empire.

    • I haven’t read the article yet, but I would suggest that the major volcanic eruptions were the result of a deep solar minimum. Again, they’re putting the cart before the horse.

      • Agreed, this was published on WUWT and the site will not accept gravitational influences which causes the trefoil orbit changes to the Sun’s Orbit around the Solar System BarryCentre during Solar Minimums.
        A key contributor on that site will also not accept that the Sun’s output varies much more than 1% over a period of several hundred years such as a 140 year warm period and a 32 year cool period conveniently forgetting that EUV can vary my as much as 16% .
        To WUWT solar minimums don’t count or at least any scientific paper which suggests otherwise.


          Suggests the major cause:

          The cooling, known as the A.D. 536 event, had been attributed to a number of sources over the years including a bolide impact. In 2008, analysis of ice cores recovered in Greenland and Antarctica — dated to A.D. 536 — showed similar levels of sulfate, indicating a massive tropical volcanic eruption had ejected ash around the planet. However, the location of a tropical volcano that erupted in A.D. 536 and produced a sufficient volume of ash to block the sun remained unknown. Some suggested Rabaul; others Krakatoa. But the dates and sedimentary evidence didn’t align.

  2. If you pay to attend University to get an education you must pass examinations. To pass an examination you must parrot what is taught. Failure to comply with this agenda results in a failing grade and hence a total waste of money.

    The idiot in the video – not Cruz – the critical idiot – can’t seem to grasp this simple reality – consensus means nothing !

    The history of mankind is littered with the detritus left once a universal consensus is shown to be wrong – this applies to all human endeavour but is especially evident in the sciences.

    The medical society locked Semmelweiss up because he believed in sanitation – the idea that failing to wash their hands after examining corpses before treating live patients could spread disease was universally rejected by doctors of the time !

    The medical society unanimously rejected Banting’s treatment of diabetes by insulin !

    Even as recent as the 1980’s the idea that Helicobacter pylori caused ulcers was unanimously rejected – it was stress !

    These are just a few examples of the thousands of times the “consensus” has been totally wrong.

    Consensus is based on “group think” – the very thing that underpins all religions.

    The smug idiot in the video is too stupid to even realise that quoting that there is a “faith” in climate science proves it is a religion.

    You rarely see theological scholars publishing anything that is not in total accord with the existing mantra – just like University students who don’t wish to simply piss their tuition fees away !

  3. And another stupid leftist blathers on about a study that has been debunked because of faulty evidence. In fact it has been reviewed and labeled a fail by more than one scientist. There is simply no factual data in the study itself that gives a 97% or 99% or whatever percent you want to make up consensus for MSM headlines.

  4. I can’t decide whether “climate change alarmism” or CCA is a religion or not.

    On the one hand, if it is a religion, it’s like the old-fashioned Catholic faith where anybody who disagrees with it is metaphorically burnt at the stake. But can’t they be more like the modern Church of England ( from no belief in God is necessary to fundamentalist).

    On the other hand, they keep mentioning “science”.

    Either way, we heretics should respect their views as they should respect ours.

  5. Nothing wrong with the pie chart he displayed. The poor man simply does not know how to think! I have met people like that. Some realize that they are not very smart and therefore are not arrogant like this man. This guy just isn’t self conscious enough to realize that he doesn’t know how to read a pie chart. The chart shows how many papers explicitly reject the consensus. It says nothing about how many papers explicitly accept the consensus; which happens to be about the same number as the ones that reject the consensus (if you read the meta analysis).

  6. Ted Cruz should have said it’s a cult but I understand what he meant when he said religion-big deal That bi-polar cretin in the video is a perfect example of a cool-aid drinker for globaloney.

  7. It seems that only Cruz and Trump have successfully resisted the quasi-scientific brainwashing. On the Democrat side both candidates are AGM disciples.

  8. I find it telling that so many leftists resort to twisted logic and name calling rather than an honest debate of the facts. For instance, in referring to the consensus on climate change, renaming their real agenda, which is pushing “Anthropogenic Global Warming” to “Climate Change” muddies the discussion. Of course the climate is changing. The climate always changes. The real question we should be asking is, “In what way is the climate changing and why?” That question separates dogma from science.

    They talk about the “facts” as if the “science was settled.” Yet they rely upon the “experts” to tell us about the science, rather than discussing the evidence and exercising critical thinking or using scientific methodology. For me, it is this very “belief without evidence” that makes it more akin to religion than to legitimate science. Even in contemplating God, I believe it is important to know (through personal experience) why you believe what you believe, rather than blindly accepting dogma. I have yet to meet a warmist who studies the evidence and exercises independent thought.

  9. Rosco–as a graduate myself, I heartily agree with your analysis. Obtaining a university degree is the way you “get into the club”. To be sure, there are brilliant minds in the halls of academe, but they are usually the mavericks.

  10. Ted Cruz is 100% wrong.

    Climate change is science, the science tells us that the climate has been changing all the time for billions of years, as long as there has been an atmosphere on earth, as long as there has been a climate.

    The science tells us that we have the good fortune to live in an era of mild temps (compared to other eras that have been much colder and hotter) and that there is no chance that it will last forever.

    But he’s too ignorant to know this, or explain it if he does. He’s just as ignorant as the Changers who unscientifically believe climate change is our fault, only in an equally wrong but opposite way. The scientific truth is, The climate will change, naturally, and there isn’t a damn thing we can do to make it stop changing.

  11. It’s really astonishing that ALL of the people running for the most powerful and important job in the world, the Presidency of the United States, are unprepared to deal honestly and intelligently with questions about climate change.

    If Ted Cruz wasn’t so clueless he’d have said, “Look, this is the chart showing 500,000,000 years of climate change from the Wikipedia article on Paleoclimatology.”

    “It shows hundreds of cycles of global warming and cooling in the last 50 million years, at intervals of approximatley 100,000 years, ten cycles of global warming and ice ages in the last million years. It shows that the warm era in which we live, the Holocene, began warming rapidly 12,000 years ago, ending a 75,000 year ice age that got 30 degrees colder than now.”

    “12,000 years ago there was so much glaciation that sea level was 400 feet lower than now, you could walk from Siberia to Alaska on dry land, as the ancestors of today’s Native Americands did.”

    “Less than 20,000 years ago Chicago was buried under a mile of ice, and the entire Puget Sound, in Washington, lay under an enormous glacier all the way from Canada down to Seattle, Tacoma, and Olympia.”

    “Past peak eras of global warming have typically lasted about 5,000 to 10,000 years, the past cyclical behavior of climate change is the best predictor we can have of future climate change, so it’s a near certainty, scientifically, that the next era of global cooling will begin, perhaps very soon. Maybe it already has, there have been a lot of cold and snow records set all over the world the last couple of years.”

    Now that woulda blown the interviewer away, I bet he’s never heard anything like that.

    But Ted Cruz is too clueless. And so are the rest of the wannabees. Why? This is a mystery. The science is out there for everybody to see. No secret. For something as important as the climate change debate, there is no excuse for such gross and wilful ignorance.

    But it says nothing good about the education and intelligence and wisdom and judgment of the people who want to be President.

Comments are closed.