Elections could be a “tipping point” favoring con-artists like Al Gore

“As the 2016 United States presidential election approaches… the missionaries of global warming fight to spread their lies,” says disclose.tv/news. 

“It is fortunate that many are slowly becoming enlightened and learning about the hoax that is global warming. However… the brave experts who fight for the truth have stated that the deceivers may very well win the day in the November elections.”

“One among the experts is the Weather Channel founder John Coleman. He has warned that the elections could be a “tipping point” favoring con-artists like Al Gore, who continue to profit and prosper from the innocents who are deceived into believing the global warming racket.”

See entire article, entitled “At Least 30,000 scientists Dispute ‘Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming’ Claims”:
http://www.disclose.tv/news/at_least_30000_scientists_dispute_catastrophic_manmade_global_warming_claims/134865

Thanks to emviem for this link


13 thoughts on “Elections could be a “tipping point” favoring con-artists like Al Gore”

  1. The truth is, what I fear most about this election is that the MSM is “selling” Killary Clinton as the front runner while Trump is probably talking to far more people. By doing so, if She loses by a strong margin, I am sure the current administration will claim the election to have been tampered with and will void the results, leaving poor Mr. Obungler forced to serve a continuing term until the matter can be settled – assuming they can find a way to hold a hack free election without actually just switching to paper ballots, which would be just too “burdensome” on the text rather than talk generation. Obungler gets his “3rd term” so to speak, and every one in the world comes up a loser, accept those that own him – especially those that understand science enough to know that “you can’t model what you don’t know, and they don’t have a true clue what drives the climate.” Yes, they know some of the things that make certain things happen, but they can’t explain or predict the climate at all. If the predictions they make aren’t accurate, they aren’t worth the wasted electricity the computers used creating them.

      • Sir your ignorance overwhelms you. Educate yourself instead of hurling insults. Yes Tom O’s post has a tinge of politics but it relates to climate in that if Hillary is elected the policies of Obama will stay in force. In case you hadn’t noticed climate change is politics not science. The most drastic Obama policies were intentionally delayed to take effect after Obama is gone, if he leaves. There is concern, not just from fringe players, that Obama might declare a national emergency to stay in office if Hillary loses. It all seems a little crazy but if you have followed the climate change agenda the past few years elevating Trump to the presidency will send the warmists into a desperate frenzy and they will pull out all the stops to keep their agenda alive.

      • Just in case you DIDN’T notice, the article relates to politics. I suggest you try to remove your head from its present location and take a deep breath of fresh air.

  2. Now that Obama has or is giving control of the internet to the UN the propaganda and lies will increase a thousand fold.

    http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/obama-internet-huge-move-controlled/

    There will be no dissent, there will only be lies, deceit and internment camps. Obama will be made secretary general of the UN, as it plots to set up its one world government.

    All of the sci-fi movies you have ever watched of a totalitarian state will come true and all of the sacrifices our forebears made for freedom and democracy will have been in vain.

  3. All I know, is this site should stay politics free. I have 2 other sites which don’t do the partisan crap. Trump is for Trump, and is worse than a politician. What does it have to do with the main topic of ICE AGE? Nothing. The truth will be in the drastic weather change. Not an ideological position.

    • Democrats want to prosecute man-made global warming skeptics, of which I am one. Should I help elect someone who wants to prosecute me? Get real.

    • Tell me, HOW are the two separated? Climate change is a political venue. Do you really expect to have your pristine eyes only see what you want?

      As regards to “ice ages” and “climate changes,” the “proof” will not be in drastic weather changes, it will be in a gradual shift from one state to the other. Do you actual think that you are going to wake up each day and find the weather worse, and that somehow is proof of “climate change?” It will “creep” from one state to the next, not sprint.

  4. If Trump loses the election he will have no one to blame but himself because an election is a popularity contest – like it or not most people vote for who they think will do them the least harm – or not vote at all.

    Trump’s campaign made itself a big target and now seems to be falling apart according to the media.

    That bodes ill for his chances – controversial people who are made to look disruptive rarely win.

    That bodes ill for any chance of climate reality. This is the last chance for the climate alarmists – you can only keep running a fear campaign which has little basis in reality for so long – the old “you can fool some of the people some of the time” .. – well you know how that goes.

    Climate alarm has won but they need to force something on us all soon – “but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.”

    What are they going to do as any major retreat from hydrocarbon energy is going to cause absolute chaos in western societies built around plentiful affordable electricity and cheap transport ?

    The only thing that will work is totalitarianism – and that has never worked too well in the past in the long term.

    At least people in sub tropical and tropical climates have little need of heating but large numbers of people live where cold is a problem.

    It is only our lifestyle based on affordable energy to stay warm that creates the winter sport lifestyle.

    Try walking up the ski slope and then return to the lodge which doesn’t have heating and see how much fun that is.

    All I need is a beach umbrella.

    • Southern climate people are less concerned, about the loss of cheap energy, true. But southern climate people tend to forget that as the cold grows worse in the northern latitudes, far less food is grown on the planet, and that does affect southern climate people, who only need a beach umbrella.

      Also, since the world runs on “money,” even in the southern latitudes, they have to realize that the piece of beach they want to enjoy might not be available to them, and the beach umbrella might become the only place that keeps them out of the elements.

      With a proper energy program designed to facilitate northern latitude people staying in the north, the quiet, easy going life style you speak of will still be available to you. If the opposite is enforced, as it appears to be happening, you will be a pauper in your own land, and will be eating scraps from trash cans. Have you noticed that for the most part, northern latitude people have fought either nature or each other all their existence, and fighting for that southern latitude chance to live will be only too natural for them.

      So, in truth, it isn’t just something that northern people need to be concerned with. The strong WILL occupy the livable land. If that is the people that currently live there, then you will do fine. If it isn’t, well, you can fill in the expectations. Don’t ever forget desperate people do desperate things.

      • A High school friend of mine worked for mining exploration companies commencing in the late 70’s. The predominant scare at that time was peak oil – the 70’s cooling scare never really took off though it was most definitely reported.

        Australia was running out of oil – we had bucket-loads of easily recoverable coal but the only known unexploited oil at the time was shale and extraction techniques of the time prevented it being economic.

        If there was so much coal it stood to reason there should be oil somewhere.

        So he worked for nearly 2 decades drilling holes, finding lots of gas and capping the wells.

        There is now a lot of viable gas, easily recoverable coal seam gas, centuries of coal and potentially recoverable shale oil and gas.

        Indoor agriculture with plants fed on the exhaust of hydrocarbon energy will need to be developed if glaciation returns.

        A lot of the tropical lands might become temperate but often their soils are poor.

        So I guess what you are advocating is that we need a nuclear arsenal ASAP.

        I’ll forward your advice to the PM pronto.

  5. Just read this in an article http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1afa9a80-7126-11e6-9ac1-1055824ca907.html

    EU DIVIDED OVER WHEN AND HOW TO RATIFY PARIS CLIMATE DEAL

    “Mr Trump cannot single-handedly kill the agreement, painstakingly negotiated by more than 190 countries in December last year, and once it comes into force he would have to wait four years to withdraw the US from it completely.”

    And there you have it – the US “cannot” change their mind ?

    Who is going to stop him if he decides to simply say “F” off ?

    Congress ? I think not with all the taunts of Benedict Arnold congressmen awaiting such action.

    But that isn’t going to happen – I think Trump has little chance of reigniting his campaign.

Comments are closed.