The Climate Hoax Tipping Point

by | Jun 4, 2017 | Newsletter | 21 comments

If the blathering blowhards of the dinosaur media and the Chicken Littles of the Twitterverse are to be believed, the world has officially come to an end. And in a way, maybe it has. Not “the” world, of course, but their world.

That’s because, as you will no doubt have heard by now, Trump just announced that the US will be pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord.

“I am fighting every day for the great people of this country,” Trump boasted in his Rose Garden press conference announcing his decision on the agreement, adopted in Paris in December 2015. “Therefore, in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord…”

If only he had stopped there. However, after a brief applause break greeting the announcement of the withdrawal, the Dissembler-in-Chief completed the sentence thusly: “…but begin negotiations to reenter either the Paris Accord or a really entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers.” And then, just to make sure he added enough political hogwash to confuse everyone, he pressed on: “So we’re getting out. But we will start to negotiate, and we will see if we can make a deal that’s fair. And if we can, that’s great. And if we can’t, that’s fine.

Learn more about what this “withdrawal” really means and whether we’re actually out of the woods in this week’s International Forecaster editorial. Also, stick around for James’ fun, subscriber-only interview with Joe Plummer of TragedyAndHope.info about his amazing secret talent.

For free access to this editorial, please CLICK HERE.

For full access to the subscriber newsletter, and to support this website, please become a member.

The Corbett Report Subscriber
vol 7 issue 20 (June 4, 2017)
SUBSCRIBER EXCLUSIVE VIDEO

Meet Joe Plummer, Drummer Extraordinaire! – Subscriber Exclusive #067

We all have hidden talents, but Joe Plummer’s is really amazing. You may know him as the author of Tragedy and Hope 101 at tragedyandhope.info, but I bet you didn’t know he rocked so hard.

by James Corbett
corbettreport.com
June 4, 2017

If the blathering blowhards of the dinosaur media and the Chicken Littles of the Twitterverse are to be believed, the world has officially come to an end. And in a way, maybe it has. Not “the” world, of course, but their world.

That’s because, as you will no doubt have heard by now, Trump just announced that the US will be pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord.

“I am fighting every day for the great people of this country,” Trump boasted in his Rose Garden press conference announcing his decision on the agreement, adopted in Paris in December 2015. “Therefore, in order to fulfill my solemn duty to protect America and its citizens, the United States will withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord…”

If only he had stopped there. However, after a brief applause break greeting the announcement of the withdrawal, the Dissembler-in-Chief completed the sentence thusly: “…but begin negotiations to reenter either the Paris Accord or a really entirely new transaction on terms that are fair to the United States, its businesses, its workers, its people, its taxpayers.” And then, just to make sure he added enough political hogwash to confuse everyone, he pressed on: “So we’re getting out. But we will start to negotiate, and we will see if we can make a deal that’s fair. And if we can, that’s great. And if we can’t, that’s fine.”

OK, then. So the US is withdrawing from the Paris Agreement not because it is the leading edge of the $100 trillion carbon swindle wedge. Not because it is based on the fake science of fundamentally flawed models with fundamentally incorrect inputs. Not because it brings us one step closer to the Edmund Rothschild-articulated vision of a “global conservation bank” to steward over the world economy or the century-old technocratic dream of an energy-based economy where people will be assigned “carbon credits” and forced to ration their activities in response to the dictates of a de facto world government. No, not for these reasons, but because the “deal” wasn’t “fair” for “American workers”? And the Trump Administration is going to immediately begin negotiations to reenter the agreement?

Sigh.

Is this another case of the right decision for the wrong reasons? And if so, should we take this as the closest we’re likely to get to actual victory in the war against the control freaks who are attempting to implement their globalist vision through the climate hoax?

Well, as it turns out, there is a bright spot in all of this, after all: The repudiation of the Paris Agreement represents a “tipping point” in the climate debate.

A “tipping point,” of course, is a point of no return, and the concept should be very familiar to aficionados of climate-doom porn. There have been so many so-called “climate tipping points” proclaimed by the fearmongers over the years that I’ve lost track. Thankfully, some intrepid researchers have compiled detailed lists of these dire warnings (all of which, would you believe it, failed to come true).

In 1989, United Nations Environmental Programme Director Noel Brown warned us that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.”

In 2007, Rajendra Pachauri (the disgraced ex-chair of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) warned that “If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late.” Oddly, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change went ahead with the Paris Agreement anyway, despite being three years past the earth’s expiry date.

In July 2009, Prince Charles of the inbred eugenics-infatuated Saxe-Coburg-Gotha clan lectured his loyal subjects that there were just 96 months left to save the planet.

Three months later, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown wasn’t nearly so optimistic. He gave the planet only 50 days (and added, lest a skeptical public tempt fate by waiting 51 days to act, that there is “no Plan B!”).

You get the idea. We have been told ad nauseam by the powers-that-shouldn’t-be that unless we accept the latest “Treaty to Save the Planet,” we are all doomed! DOOMED, I tell you!

The Paris Accord is no exception: We’ve been told time and again that this agreement is essential in order to avoid the “tipping point“—a global average temperature rise of two degrees Celsius over the next hundred years—which “scientists predict” would mean “sea level rise, food and water shortage, severe flooding, and drought” and, presumably, dogs and cats marrying.

Never mind that “global average temperature” is an inherently nonsensical concept. Never mind that the thesis that carbon dioxide acts as a global thermostat has been falsified. Never mind that climate modeling has been a spectacular, unparalleled failure in the annals of science. Instead, we should simply entrust that, somehow or other, the wise oligarchs of the UNFCCC have not only the physical ability to constrain the rise of global average temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius over the next 80 years (to the tenth of a degree, no less!) but also the scientific knowledge necessary to do so.

And by “wise oligarchs” I mean, of course, oil company executives, bankers, CFR string-pullers, and other members of the psychopathic ruling class. For, make no mistake, they are the ones behind the swindle at every step.

After all, it was Enron and Goldman Sachs who pioneered the emissions trading swindles, which proved to be–surprise, surprise!–a complete and total fraud from top to bottom. It was companies like General Electric, DuPont, Johnson & Johnson, Pepsi, Siemens, AIG, BP, ConocoPhillips and GM who spearheaded the Waxman-Markey bill of 2009 by founding the US Climate Action Partnership, which wrote the “Blueprint for Legislative Action.” It was companies like EDF, Engie, Air France, Renault, and BNP Paribas who footed 20% of the bill for the Paris climate summit itself. And it is companies like Exxon and Shell (backed by the Daughter-in-Chief) who have been the Paris Agreement’s staunchest defenders.

Yes, the world is reaching a tipping point, but it has nothing to do with the trace amounts of life-giving carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Instead, the climate hoax itself is reaching a tipping point, the point at which the public stops listening to the apocalyptic predictions of the “End Is Nigh” crowd.

The evidence of this tipping point is appearing in the unlikeliest of places.

A recent Dilbert cartoon took the climate fearmongers to task for the way they treat their critics. Observe:

The surprising part is not that “Yale Climate Connections” (YCC) made a clumsy, straw man-laden non-rebuttal rebuttal of the comic strip—which in fact went on to demonstrate the very point of the strip itself. No, the surprising part is that the public so easily saw through the charade: The YCC video has twice as many thumbs down as thumbs up, and its comments section is full of arguments identifying the video’s flaws. (“The criticism is about models’ alleged inability to predict the future,” one such commenter notes. “The video is talking about how we are confident that the Earth has warmed. It’s a non-response.”)

These types of pushback against the seemingly ubiquitous “settled science” mantra are heartening given the 24/7 assault of climate propaganda that the world has been subjected to for the past two-and-a-half decades. And, hearteningly, they are becoming more frequent.

The real victory of Trump’s Paris withdrawal, then, is the fact that so many wide-awake citizens favor the idea of withdrawing from the Paris Agreement. Apparently, they can only take so many failed warnings of doom and gloom before they stop blindly believing what the billionaires promoting climate change are telling them.

So, if you want to end on a positive note, stop reading here.

As for the rest of you, be aware that Trump’s bold pronouncement is only the beginning of a two-year wait before the US can actually begin the process of withdrawing from the agreement itself. And even if Trump does persist and proceed with the withdrawal in November 2019, it still would not undermine the UNFCCC itself, which underlies the agreement, and thus would not derail the IPCC or the entire global governmental climate hoax.

Sigh.

So yet again it comes down to a footrace between the awake and aware who understand what is really being done in the name of this climate hoax and the sleepwalking masses who are allowing themselves to be shepherded by the Chicken Littles of the world. The only question is whether we are the plodding tortoise or the fleet-footed hare, and which one will have the perseverance to run this race to the end.

Recommended Reading and Viewing

Recommended Reading

Govt Destroys Community Fruit Forest Over Permit Issue – Activist Post
Cops’ Attempt to Shame Man on Facebook Backfires Spectacularly – FTP
Vedic Anarchism – Actual Anarchy

Recommended Listening

Ray McGovern talks USS Liberty and Middle East Foreign Policy

Recommended Viewing

Posobiec vs Bermas on Trump Ties To Bilderberg
CERN Exposed – Quantum Computing And The Future Of AI
The Bilderberg Plan For Agenda 2030 On Steroids

Just For Fun

‘Ken M’ Strikes Again!

Ken M – Know Your Meme

KenM subreddit

[supsystic-price-table id=59]

 

To access this week’s edition of The Corbett Report Subscriber, please  and continue reading below.

Not a Corbett Report member yet? Sign up to BECOME A MEMBER of the website and read the full newsletter or ACCESS THE EDITORIAL FOR FREE on my Substack.

21 Comments

  1. There exists so much controversy over this issue that I can’t help suspecting that it is something within ourselves that’s becoming warmer – something denied. Heat has an anagram we love to project onto others.

    We call an individual prone to angry outbursts ‘hot-headed’. We ask such persons to ‘cool it’. We have ‘heated’ arguments. There are things that make our ‘blood boil’. Anger ‘smoulders’ and ‘burns’. Some have a ‘short fuse’ then ‘explode’; others get ‘hot under the collar’ or exhibit ‘fire in their eyes’ etc.

    Global Warming may simply be a metaphor for rising global anger.

  2. My best achievements in life have been inspired by others hard work and dedication. Being surrounded by excellence constantly reminds me I can and should strive to be better at whatever I do. Whether that is in my profession, hobby, household, community or personal relationships. I can eventually do better.

    Thanks for all the inspiration Corbett Report community.

  3. https://www.curbed.com/2017/6/1/15726376/paris-accord-climate-change-mayors-trump

    American mayors are taking matters into their own hands. Could this be due to pressure from corporate interests? Or ‘group think’, and naivety of the fact this is not a settled science?

    “187 mayors adopt Paris climate accord after U.S. pulls out”

    “The group of mayors, who represent more than 52 million Americans and some of the largest U.S. cities, outlined a plan to align with the other 194 nations that adopted the accord:

    ‘We will continue to lead. We are increasing investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency. We will buy and create more demand for electric cars and trucks. We will increase our efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions, create a clean energy economy, and stand for environmental justice. And if the President wants to break the promises made to our allies enshrined in the historic Paris Agreement, we’ll build and strengthen relationships around the world to protect the planet from devastating climate risks.'”

  4. There were a lot of good comments on the YCC video. An amusing comment from the comments section of the video that points out the flaws in faulty climate change arguments that we probably all see and hear too often:

    “If I argue science, I will point out how my hypothesis makes predictions and show how it predicts. Example: I claim I can predict the movement of massive bodies (dynamics) I state my hypothesis: F = m*a I show how to measure the mass of the ball, length and time, and force (with say, with a spring) I show how I the massive bodies move under a given force move at a given acceleration, as my hypothesis predicts. You can then verify the hypothesis yourself by experiment. That’s not the argument being made for climate scientist. They say, for example: Consensus! (argumentum ad populum) We’re experts! (appeal to authority) If we don’t do something now, there will be disaster! (Emotional appeal) Do it even if we’re wrong, just in case we’re right (pascal’s wager) If you disagree with us, you’re a science denier (ad hom) Correlation proves causation! (post hoc, ergo proctor hoc)”

    • Nice analogy of the argument.

    • He’s got them figure out. These people are not very good scientists, but they are master manipulators.

  5. “So, if you want to end on a positive note, stop reading here.”

    Hahahahahaha

    • …which “scientists predict” would mean “sea level rise, food and water shortage, severe flooding, and drought” and, presumably, dogs and cats marrying.

  6. nosoapradio,
    Ha!…I hear ya!
    There is some astounding talent and skill with so many folks in the Corbett Report Universe.

    I guess we all could feel somewhat intimidated like the left arm said to the right.
    Reggie briefly explains…(40 seconds)…
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkIgXlE8bSo

    Being like-minded individuals of the Corbett Report Universe, makes up one hell of a whole. Like a well tuned body with each of its many parts well developed.

  7. Aesthetics and higher wavelengths

    I tend to enjoy these “subscriber only videos”. Not only are they personable and real, but often they touch upon the creative nature of an individual.

    To me, this creative nature is a higher wavelength, perhaps closer to the non-physical aspect of an individual’s spirituality and essence. When this creative nature is manifested in the physical universe, the beauty and aesthetic value is always something to behold.

    And there are so many ways this creative nature manifests… art, music, cooking, gardening, the raising of children, writing, even business.
    It is like watching a puppy play and getting teary eyed at the beauty of it all.
    Or when we were young children rising early in the morning and silently observing the grass, trees, and birds as the day starts. And they were wondrous and beautiful.

  8. Just figure out what kind of things you like to do and do them a lot. Practice makes perfect and all that. It can literally be anything at all (art, writing, gardening, research, speaking, hiking, etc. etc.)

    • You said it. Practice.

  9. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1002/2015EA000154/asset/ess278.pdf;jsessionid=37A6F66412931E80739D23EBC3920659.f01t01?v=1&t=j3m1illo&s=1959cf2463a63df91cf0f392a58daf8683e0fa38

    Conclusion #3 in the “Estimating climate sensitivity using two-zone energy balance models” study says it all: “In particular, any underestimation of the value of the tropical radiative response coefficient by comparison with observations, such as has been indicated by recent studies to exist in current GCMs, can cause the GCMs to give a SUBSTANTIAL OVERESTIMATION of the effective climate sensitivity” [emphasis added].

    And here we have the IPCC using the zero-dimensional model (more simplistic and blanket model), and this study is stating that even with the more complex model (two-zone model), the underestimation of one input (the tropical aspect of climate), can cause overestimation of climate sensitivity. So even by taking more factors into account by using the complex model, slight differences can cause a huge amount of uncertainty. And this is a settled science, right?

      • Indeed. One of the most common rebuttals I’ve seen to any logical arguments on the infeasibility of getting some exact measurement of human-caused global warming, is the “even if we’re wrong, let’s support the climate change movement just in case we’re right (pascal’s wager logical fallacy). The, “there’s nothing wrong with trying to protect the planet” argument.

        So much of this climate change hype seems to be coming from a lack of critical thinking ability. I would venture to guess that the majority of people fighting for political action on climate change don’t know squat about any of the science or how the IPCC makes their determinations. It’s just all about “let’s save the planet no matter what”. This is almost a ‘war on climate change’ just like people get fired up when “their” country is at war against another country. “We must defend our country and people no matter what!” They don’t investigate anything and just have this primal instinct of “it’s us against them.”

        What can be done about this, if anything? Or are the PTSB just playing their expert knowledge of sociology against us?

  10. Massive Government Report Says Climate Is Warming And Humans Are The Cause
    http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/02/561608576/massive-government-report-says-climate-is-warming-and-humans-are-the-cause

    Dun dun dun. Looks like we are all going die guys. Nice knowing you all.

    David Wojick, in his article, Trying to perpetuate alarmist climate “science”, brings up good points about what the release of such an alarmist official government document could mean when its major points are discredited. He also directs people to Judith Curry’s blog where they will be disecting parts of this new 600 page report.
    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2017/10/21/trying-to-perpetuate-alarmist-climate-science/

Submit a Comment


SUPPORT

Become a Corbett Report member

RECENT POSTS


RECENT COMMENTS


ARCHIVES