Don’t Let Climate Change Alarmism Ruin Your Future

Many people today, especially the young, are making some terrible long-term decisions, and it’s because they assume that the “experts” are right when it comes to catastrophic man-made global warming. They buy the notion that we only have 12 years of life left on earth:

  • Many of them are not investing for their future. Why should they, if they have no future?
  • Many are experiencing depression because of climate change.
  • Many are choosing to not have children, so they can save the planet. And they’ll miss out on those experiences, as well as the joys of one day being a grandparent.

Last week, (5/23/19) published an article entitled, “Young People Blame Climate Change for Their Small 401(K) Balances.” They write, “Some 88% of millennials—a higher percentage than any other age group—accept that climate change is happening, and 69% say it will impact them in their lifetimes. Engulfed in a constant barrage of depressing news stories, many young people are skeptical about saving for an uncertain future.” The article notes that this bad news also negatively impacts their mental health.

Why not….if the “experts” are right? The reported last year (10/8/18): “We Have 12 Years To Limit Climate Change Catastrophe, Warns UN: Urgent changes needed to cut risk of extreme heat, drought, floods and poverty, says IPCC.”

The article notes the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warns of food scarcity, droughts, floods, rising seas impacting 10 million people worldwide, and an increase in poverty—unless we get climate change under control.

Recently, Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg made the cover of TIME (5/27/19) over this issue. She is “on strike for the planet”—until more governments take climate change more seriously.

But the Bible tells us: “The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him” (Proverbs 18:17). Sometimes the “experts” get it wrong. Dr. D. James Kennedy reminded us that the experts say everything. We must choose our experts wisely.

One geoscientist who does not agree with the climate change alarmists is author Greg Wrightstone. He says, “What they’re predicting and what’s actually happening are 180 degrees opposite.” Wrightstone has 35 years of experience of studying the earth as a geologist. He’s written the book, Inconvenient Facts: The Science that Al Gore Doesn’t Want You to Know. Wrightstone is also an expert with the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation.

I interviewed him on my radio show. He told me of an example of a failed prediction by climatologists, “In 2005, the UN announced that there would be 50 million plus climate refugees by the year 2010….They have a history of making these projections.”

Then he adds, cynically, “They need to make it 30-50 years in the future and not just ten because if it was 30 years, everybody would be dead or no one would remember.”

Wrightstone said of our planet, “We’ve been warming for 300 years. We’ve been adding CO2 in earnest in the last 60 or 70 years, shouldn’t we see something negative? But instead we see an earth and a humanity that are thriving and prospering. The earth is greening. That is what is actually happening.”

He said that when you look back at history, the warming trends, like the one we are currently in, have always led to huge prospering of civilization with bountiful crops. There was plenty of food for everybody. “You didn’t have to worry about grubbing for your next meal.”

He adds, “It was the cold periods, where crop failure, famine, pestilence, and mass depopulation took place. That’s exactly the opposite of what we’re being told.”

I asked him if CO2 is our enemy or friend? Answer: Friend. He called it, “the miracle molecule.” He said that climate change alarmism revolves around “a demonization of carbon dioxide.”

Greg Wrightstone is far from a lone voice. Recently, on his Fox-TV program, Mark Levin interviewed Patrick J. Michaels, a climate specialist who has taught at the University of Virginia for 30 years.

Michaels said this in reference to the climate change computer models which are done by governments: “There are 32 families of computer models that are used by the United Nations, each government sponsored. All of them are predicting far, far too much warming. The disparity between what’s been predicted to happen…and what is happening continues to grow.”

The models get it wrong, says Michaels, because they are “fudged.” also reports (5/23/19) that a top climate scientist, Professor John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, testified recently to Members of Parliament in a meeting at Westminster: “It’s warming up there, but at only about one third of the rate predicted by the models.” Therefore, the models cannot be trusted.

Tragically, many millennials are selling their future short by believing a giant hoax.

RELATED ARTICLE: Examining the Latest False Alarm on Climate: High seas won’t displace 187 million people—and the claim isn’t even new. – WSJ

Recent Energy & Environmental News

For the full version of the latest Energy and Environmental Newsletter, please click on that link. To review some of the highlights, see below.

FYI, Privately funded organization starts construction of border barrier in El Paso area. I made a donation, and if you’d like to, go here. Please pass it on.

Since there is such a diversity of interesting material this cycle, I’m subdividing the most noteworthy articles into four categories…


Global Warming (AGW)

The UN Extinction Report

Misc (Education, Science, Politics, etc.)

Note 1: We recommend reading the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone. Some documents (e.g. PDFs) are easier to read on a computer. We’ve tried to use common fonts, etc. to minimize issues.
Note 2: Our intention is to put some balance into what most people see from the mainstream media about energy and environmental issues… As always, please pass this on to open-minded citizens, and link to this on your social media sites. If there are others who you think would benefit from being on our energy & environmental email list, please let me know. If at any time you’d like to be taken off this list, simply send me an email saying that.
Note 3: This Newsletter is intended to supplement the material on our website, The most important page there is the Winning page.
Note 4: I am not an attorney, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or our website) should be construed as giving legal advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues.

PODCAST: Crazy subsidies of $7,500 per electric car! Trump says no deal to Nancy after her ‘cover up’ accusation!


Phil Kerpen, Founder and President of American Commitment. Prior to joining American Commitment, Kerpen was the principal policy and legislative strategist at Americans for Prosperity. He previously worked at the Free Enterprise Fund, the Club for Growth, and the Cato Institute. Kerpen is also a nationally syndicated columnist, chairman of the Internet Freedom Coalition, and author of the book Democracy Denied. How Obama is Ignoring You and Bypassing Congress to Radically Transform America. TOPIC…Crazy subsidies!! $7,500 per car that electric vehicles!! 

Sandy Rios is Director of Governmental Affairs for the American Family Association, one of America’s largest, pro-family grassroots organizations. Based in Washington, DC, she is host of “Sandy Rios in the Morning on AFR Talk” which can be heard on nearly 200 stations through the American Family Radio Network. TOPIC…Trump saying no deal to Nancy! after her “Cover Up” accusation!!

IT’S BA-A-ACK! TWA 800: From Mehrabad to Montoursville with love?

On 20 May 2019 President Donald Trump held a rally in the tiny Pennsylvania town of Montoursville.  This raises the obvious question of . . . why?  Trump is famous for basking in the adoration of huge crowds of 20,000-30,000 for his rallies.  Montoursville has a total population of 5,000.

In the special election held the following day, Republican Fred Keller won by a comfortable 2-1 margin.  He obviously did not need Trump’s help.  Besides, there are many other towns in Pennsylvania’s 12th district larger than Montoursville, including the well-known Williamsport.  But Trump choose Montoursville.  Why?

Could TWA 800 have had anything to do with it?

On 17 July 1996, 16 French-club students from Montoursville High School and five of their chaperones boarded the Boeing 747-131 for the TWA 800’s transatlantic flight destined for Paris and Rome. Twelve minutes later the plane exploded apart over the Atlantic ocean at nearly 14,000 feet, just off East Moriches on Long Island.  In all, there were 230 passengers, four pilots, and 14 flight attendants on board.  There were no survivors.

After four years of salvage, recovery and investigations, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) determined that the cause of the crash was a “defect” in the insulation around certain unspecified wires which allowed a “short” in those wires to ignite the “vapors” in the empty fuel tank causing the whole plane to explode.

Case closed, right?

Then why did Trump choose to hold a rally in tiny Montoursville, instead of the much larger nearby Williamsport–and in a district in which the Republican candidate was going to win hands down anyway?

Could it be because virtually no one on this planet believes the “official” explanation of what happened–including some of the investigators themselves?

Here is why so many people believe that the “official” explanation was a “cover-up” by the Clinton administration and the “Deep State” so the American public wouldn’t panic during the last few months before a presidential election:

An air traffic controller at NY TRACON allegedly claims that radar “indicated vertical movement intersecting TWA 800,” and then TWA 800 disappeared from the radar screen.  Numerous eye witnesses claim to have seen a “streak of light,” or “vapor trails” ascending from the ocean towards the plane, striking the plane, and then the plane exploded.  Two weeks later the FBI allowed the New York Times to interview only one of the 144 (at that time) witnesses, and he was one who only saw it “out of the corner of his eye.”  The NTSB eventually identified 258 eyewitnesses who had allegedly seen a glowing object streaking towards the aircraft.  At least 58 had followed the object from the horizon (i.e. from the ocean).  The NYT interviewed none of those 258.

Here is another interesting factoid.  The deputy Attorney General who oversaw the investigation, Jamie Gorelilck, left the Justice Department in 1997 to take a job with Fannie Mae, the government-run home loan outfit.  She would make more than $25 million dollars over the next six years.  A government worker would be lucky to make 1/20 of that amount in six years.  She also turned up in 2004 as the primary author of the highly flawed 9/11 report.


Trump’s visit to tiny Montoursville, Pennsylvania has brought all of the old conspiracy theories back out of the closet.

There have been theories galore:  Everything from an exploding meteorite coming apart just at the right time and place to intercept the aircraft, to a U.S. Navy training exercise gone awry, to a bomb placed on board, to an al-Qaeda strike as a prelude for 9/11.

But there is one rather obvious explanation that no one has mentioned yet–at least not on this side of the Atlantic–not during the original investigation two decades ago, and not now.


On 03 July 1988 an Iran Air Airbus A300, flight #655 took off from Iran’s Mehrabad International Airport in Tehran, Iran.  It stopped at Bandar Abbas International airport in Bandar Abbas, Iran to pick up more passengers before taking off again for its destination of Dubai International Airport on the other side of the Persian/Arab Gulf.

Personnel aboard the USS Vincennes operating in the area thought that the Iranian airliner was a military aircraft on a hostile mission (or so the official explanation goes), so they shot it down.  274 civilian passengers and 16 crew members all lost their lives that day.

When TWA was brought down eight years later, most everybody in the Middle East automatically assumed that it was retaliation for Iran Air flight #655.  That possibility was never entertained on this side of the Atlantic.  After all, if it indeed was a missile, the most likely weapon was a Stinger missile which can be fired by a single person holding a hand-held launching device, and which was designed to bring down aircraft at up to 15,700 feet, and everyone just “knew” that Iran did not possess Singer missiles–even though we had donated thousands of them to al-Qaeda’s MKK precursor in Afghanistan during their war against the Soviets in the 80s.

But, no way Iran could have Stinger missiles and be responsible for TWA 800, right?

So, why did Trump decide to visit tiny Montoursville now?

Could it have anything to do with the increasing tensions between Iran and the U.S.?  The war drums that are beating in both capitals?  Could it be that as tensions rise, more evidence keeps spilling into the public domain about Iranian cooperation with al-Qaeda and complicity in 9/11 (meaning that Iran likely had all the Singer Missiles it wanted by the mid-1990s), and Trump is building a case for war against Iran?

Or, could Trump only be sending a message for entirely domestic reasons?

  • Michael E. Horowitz, the current Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Justice (of which the FBI is a part) is currently conducting investigations into DOJ and FBI “improper actions” regarding the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal and the FISA abuses which led to the Mueller investigation of Trump.
  • John W. Huber, the U.S. Attorney for the district of Utah, is also reportedly still conducting an investigation into broader “Deep State” abuses involved with the Trump dossier, alleged “spying” on the Trump campaign, etc., and is allegedly coordinating his efforts with Inspector General Horowitz.  Their report is expected to be released soon.
  • Republican Senator Lindsay Graham has been leading a Senate investigation into alleged “Deep State” abuses regarding all of these issues.
  • Current U.S. Attorney General, William Barr, has recently announced that he has assigned a “team” to investigate CIA and FBI “Counter Intelligence spying” on the Trump campaign.
  • Trump has long been threatening to release the FISA warrant applications which allegedly would show fraud on the part of a number of FBI and DOJ officials.  Rumors have it that this will be done soon.

So, could Trump’s visit to Montoursville be a message that investigations into “Deep State” corruption and cover-ups are reaching clear back into the 1990s?

Above, we mentioned a Jamie Gorelick, who oversaw the grossly flawed TWA 800 investigation, and was the primary author of the flawed 9/11 commission report of 2004.

The head of the CIA during the time of the investigation of the TWA 800 take down, having been appointed in 1997, was Clinton dandy George Tenet.

Guess who was the head of the CIA when 9/11 happened?  That’s right, George Tenet.

This is important because the upper echelons of the CIA had more than ample evidence in the weeks leading up to 9/11 that al-Qaeda was going to attack sites in Washington and New York City in early September (actually one piece of evidence even pinpointed the date).  All that evidence was discounted because much of it entailed Iranian cooperation with al-Qaeda, and the upper echelons of the CIA refused to believe that Shi’a Iran and Sunni al-Qaeda could ever have anything to do with each other.

Guess who Tenet’s right-hand man for Counter Terrorism and Middle East issues was?

Clinton Crony John Brennan.

Yes, the same John Brennan who spearheaded (along with Robert Mueller) efforts to abolish all training materials and delete all data bases where any connection was made between any sort of “Islam,” (even “radical Islam), and any sort of “jihad,” including terrorism.  These actions were taken at the behest of entities which are part of the terrorist organization Muslim Brotherhood’s tentacles in the United States–yes that Muslim Brotherhood which is a declared enemy of the United States, thus making Brennan’s and Mueller’s actions a clear case of treason according to Article III section 3 of the U.S. Constitution.

Their treasonous actions by the way, led to the deaths of more Americans than did the downing of TWA 800.

So, now, as these investigations into “Deep State” misbehaviors, frauds, and crimes (up to and including treason) are intensifying, increasing numbers of fingers are being pointed to the likely instigator and ringmaster for all of the efforts against the Trump campaign and Trump personally.  And, guess who this ringmaster is turning out to be?

John Brennan.

Interesting, no?

For those of us who are spectators of the blood sport of full contact politics, and who get goose bumps of joy from watching “paybacks” . . . fasten your seat belts.  (Not that Trump every enjoys punching back at his attackers).  I have a very sneaky feeling that Trump’s rally in little Montoursville last Monday was a signal that the fun is about to begin.  Or so we can hope.

In Another Reversal, Apple Allows App Countering Climate Alarmism

Apple’s on-again, off-again relationship with an online smartphone application that challenges global warming alarmism is back on.

The app, Inconvenient Facts, is available again in Apple’s App Store, much to the delight of the geologist who inspired it.

“I thought that it was entirely political,” Gregory Wrightstone, author of the book “Inconvenient Facts: The Science That Al Gore Doesn’t Want You to Know,” said of Apple’s original ban of the app in March. “I still don’t know, but we are back up and available.”

The book by Wrightstone, who has more than three decades of experience as a geologist, serves as the source of information on the app.

As The Daily Signal previously reported on Apple’s decision to backpedal on offering the app, Wrightstone points out that the board of the California-based tech giant includes former Vice President Al Gore, a leading proponent of the view that mankind’s activities propel dangerous climate change.

Apple initially approved the Inconvenient Facts app for sale on its iPhones on Feb. 3, then reversed itself and pulled the app March 4.

“In their rejection, Apple blamed several factors,” Wrightstone said in an email to The Daily Signal. “One was lack of compelling content. Another was limited functionality and use of the iPhone features.”

“The limited functionality meant that it was an app that could be web-based,” he said. “So, we added the phone component so that you can take a picture using the app and your camera, and we added an I LOVE CO2 banner at the bottom of the photo. My app developer and partner thought that might do the trick.”

The Daily Signal sought comment from Apple’s media relations office by phone and email, but the company had not responded by publication time.

For more than two months, the app remained available to Android users through the Google Play Store, where it has been downloaded about 16,000 times.

Apple reinserted the Inconvenient Facts app into its App Store on May 17, making a total of 60 facts about the climate change debate from Wrightstone’s book available to Apple users as well as Android users.

Complete with data, charts, and videos, the facts challenge the premise of alarmist theories linking man-made carbon dioxide emissions to dangerous levels of global warming or climate change.

Gore’s campaign to convince the public that rising levels of carbon dioxide could trigger catastrophic global warming was the subject of the 2006 documentary An Inconvenient Truth” and the 2017 follow-up An Inconvenient Sequel: Truth to Power.”

The Daily Signal also sought comment from Gore via Delaware-based Carthage Group LLC, with which he is associated, and from the Climate Reality Project, which he founded. Neither organization had responded by publication time.

Karl G. Kowalski, Wrightstone’s app developer, told The Daily Signal that he isn’t clear on why Apple decided to readmit the Inconvenient Facts app.

“They generally only tell you why they reject something, not why they approve of it,” Kowalski said in an email, adding:

There’s a lot of posts about the inscrutableness of Apple’s approval/rejection process.

I’m glad we’re alive at Apple again. Of course, the work is never done! So, I’ll be thinking about other ways to increase features in the app, so we can dodge the next Apple review.

One addition to the app is what Kowalski and Wrightstone call  a Model of Assessment of Greenhouse Gas Induced Climate Change.

“This MAGICC is an important concept of just how tiny any reduction in warming would be for any given reduction in CO2,” Wrightstone said.

The feature models how much various reductions of carbon dioxide in the U.S. would curtail increases in temperature.

Wrightstone’s online commentary demonstrates the utility of the MAGICC feature in critiquing a “Climate Action Plan” rolled out in April by Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, a Democrat.

Wrightstone found that Wolf’s proposed 80 percent reduction in CO2 for Pennsylvania would avert only 0.0023 degrees Fahrenheit by 2050 and 0.0061 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.

“This extremely small effect should be a very important component in the discussions on whether to impose the significant burdens of the Climate Action Plan on the state and its citizens,” Wrightstone writes. “The justifications for imposing this plan are flawed, the costs and regulations are economically crippling, and the result is a temperature reduction so low that it is indistinguishable from zero.”

Users of the app simply tap on it to activate the features, including these “inconvenient facts”:

  • “First and foremost, CO2 is plant food.”
  • “140-million-year trend of dangerously decreasing CO2.”
  • “Recent inconvenient pause of 18 years in warming, despite rise in CO2.”
  • “The current warming trend is neither unusual nor unprecedented.”
  • “Cold kills far more people than heat every year.”
  • “There are more polar bears now than we’ve had for 50 years.”

Information about Wrightstone’s book and the app may be found at and on YouTube and Facebook.


Kevin Mooney

Kevin Mooney is an investigative reporter for The Daily Signal. Send an email to Kevin. Twitter: @KevinMooneyDC.

RELATED ARTICLE: Australia’s Election Shock Shows the Perils of Moralizing Climate Change

A Note for our Readers:

America’s trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so, given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C. and across the country.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it’s been painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Why? Because they are determined more than ever to give the government more control over your lives. Restoring your liberty and embracing freedom is the best thing for you and the country.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely only upon the support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

We do this because you deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal today.


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

Some Recent Energy & Environmental News

For the full version of the latest Energy and Environmental Newsletter, please click on that link. To review some of the highlights, see below.

Since there is such a diversity of interesting articles, I’m subdividing the most noteworthy material into four categories this issue. A new entry is the recent UN Extinction Report, where the originating UN agency is apparently competing with the IPCC to see which one can cause the most speculative consternation.


Global Warming (AGW)

When the GOP rolls out climate policies, it endorses the Left’s assumptions

Short good video: Bad Data

Short video: Antonin Scalia – On American Exceptionalism

Note 1: We recommend reading the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone. Some documents (e.g. PDFs) are easier to read on a computer. We’ve tried to use common fonts, etc. to minimize issues.

Note 2: Our intention is to put some balance into what most people see from the mainstream media about energy and environmental issues… As always, please pass this on to open-minded citizens, and link to this on your social media sites. If there are others who you think would benefit from being on our energy & environmental email list, please let me know. If at any time you’d like to be taken off this list, simply send me an email saying that.

Note 3: This Newsletter is intended to supplement the material on our website, The most important page there is the Winning page.

Note 4: I am not an attorney, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or our website) should be construed as giving legal advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues.

VIDEO: News Behind the News – WWG1WGA


Many still choose to be critical of Trump. People reach out to me, looking for ways to help them rebut such attacks as they are challenged on some of these issues and events. Some challenge me directly as well. People who in my view, mean well, but take the path at knocking President Trump for issues such as Venezuela, the declassification (why has it taken so long), and some of the neocon “deep staters” the President is often surrounded by. Then there is China, N. Korea, 5G, censorship, locking up Hillary, toxic vaccinations, and many other events of the day. Well for starters, I ask you, what have you done today to help resurrect America? Critics are a dime a dozen, as are Monday morning quarterbacks.

Get with the program. There are scores of excellent alternative sources for news provided here in this article and the videos and links within. Go check them out. Change the channel. Take a look at this since the Fake News will not report on it. Our President is accomplishing so much. Unprecedented in modern history. Thank you sir. Promises Kept.

If you are serious about helping to win this battle, seek truth. Spread truth. Expose lies. I can assure you, if you need some help at breaking free from controlled thought, breaking free from the matrix, read this post and the articles and videos within. And furthermore, if you are looking for ammunition to help direct others, share this post and encourage them to look at all that has been provided within.

Regurgitating Robots – The Robotic Hypnotic Flock

We hear the same regurgitating talking points day in and day out. Too bad much of them are not even in the vicinity of truth. This is an intel war right here, right now in 2019 as we engage in fighting America’s second revolution.

There is a reason that CNN’s ratings and viewership have cratered. According to Brent Bozell, and many other sources, there is an estimated number of less than 800,000 viewers and a population of over 320,000 million in the US, watching CNN. More people are watching pasta boil on the food channel than listening to the BS that CNN and others dish out. They have been exposed. It’s Fake News my friends, Fake News. As for Fox News, we have a bit of a voice there, but Fox should not be the core source if one wants to get to the news behind the news. Change the channel. Create an arsenal of alternative sources in your quest for truth. I will provide here some links to other articles and video clips of the subject at hand along with an offer for you to receive your free digital e-book, “How to Detect Truth from Lies in the age of Fake News”. This digital e-book is loaded with alternative links for you to explore in your quest for true news.

Facebook is under a Federal investigation. Google and Twitter have been hauled into hearings taking heat from Ted Cruz. We will be hearing more and more about antitrust laws and breaking up monopolies. President Trump has been tweeting about this as well as discussing this at the recent rally in Panama City Beach, Florida just the other night. It’s a long haul, but perhaps down the line we may restore free and fair press. In the meantime, its a citizen’s journalist world. We are the news. The sources mentioned in the videos and articles below may prove to be most helpful. Hannity, Tucker, Pirro, Levin, Rush and others are good. But controlled. DIg deeper for the news behind the news. I encourage you to watch excerpted videos below of my recent public talks on the subject at hand. Be on the right side of history. Then share it. WWG1WGA

News Behind the News

What Is Q?

VIDEO: Breaking Free from the Matrix

VIDEO:The Deep State

VIDEO: Fake News Advocating the Overthrow of the US Government

X22 Report

American Intelligence Media

Fake News Advocating the Overthrow of the US Government

America’s Starvation for Truth

You Have Little Faith – Trust The Plan

Ethics, Justice and the Media

Shadow Govt. Psychopaths and the Deep State

When the News becomes the News

A Nation Led By Lies, Dies

Hegelian Dialectic

VIDEO: The Green New Deal Is a ‘Guise’ to Usher in Socialism, Lawmaker Warns

Members of the conservative Republican Study Committee say Democrats’ Green New Deal would be an economic wrecking ball.

“This is something that should concern every single American, because it will impact their pocketbooks. It will impact their families. It would, in a literal sense, change the very nature of our country,” Rep. Mike Johnson, R-La., chairman of the Republican Study Committee, said Tuesday in an interview with The Daily Signal for the group’s second episode of “Elephants in the Room” on Facebook Live.

“It is a guise, I think, to usher in the principles of socialism,” he added.

“Elephants in the Room,” launched April 9, is a live series hosted by The Daily Signal, where Republican Study Committee members address pressing issues of the day.

Freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who has sponsored the Green New Deal, is headlining a rally May 13 in Washington, D.C., in support of the legislation.

The Green New Deal, introduced in the form of a nonbinding resolution Feb. 7, would, among other things, “phase out conventional fuels (that is, oil, natural gas, and coal) by 2030 … ; implement a federal jobs guarantee; retrofit all U.S. buildings; overhaul transportation with high-speed rail; and provide universal health care,” Heritage Foundation scholar Lee Edwards wrote in a recent commentary.

The GOP group has released a “13-page takedown” of the Green New Deal. The document notes that one of the main goals of the Green New Deal is to “meet 100 percent of power demand through zero-emission energy sources,” but it points out that only 17 percent of the country’s energy generation comes from renewable sources.

“We are ‘all-of-the-above’ folks” supporting a wide range of energy sources, Johnson said. “We believe not only in the president’s vision for energy independence, but energy dominance. We achieve that … through private-sector innovation, not government regulation.”

Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., the co-chairman of Congressional Republicans’ House Energy Action Team, said the Green New Deal would dismantle the gains the economy has made as a result of President Donald Trump’s policies.

“For the first time in my lifetime, we have jobs seeking employees, versus employees seeking jobs, and so, Trump policies, Republican policies, with taxes and with energy, have actually worked in this economy, and I don’t know why the Democrats would want to throw cold water on a robust economy,” Duncan said.

Johnson said the Green New Deal would force the American people to make drastic adjustments to their lifestyles to pay for the legislation, which he said “would do nothing” to improve the environment.

“Twenty-four percent of low-income families, they would have to make changes to cope with this. Twenty-four percent would have to go without food for a day, 37 percent would delay receiving medical attention, 34 percent would miss filling medications, and 23 percent would keep home temperatures at an unhealthy range,” Johnson said, citing figures from the study committee’s background paper, dubbed “A Greedy New Steal.”

Duncan said his Republican colleagues should instead be more focused on ways the country can capitalize on its abundant natural oil and gas reserves to promote energy independence and dominance.

“Energy dominance, being a nation of [exporting] crude oil and natural gas is not talked about enough by Republicans,” Duncan said. “We are not just meeting our domestic needs now. We have a surplus, and we are able to send it around the globe to improve the lives of people in poverty right now, in Africa or Third World countries.”


Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice is a reporter for The Daily Signal. She is a graduate of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Forge Leadership Network, and The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. Send an email to Rachel. Twitter: @LRacheldG.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump Calls Green New Deal A ‘Hoax,’ Compares It To Russia Collusion Conspiracy

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission.

VIDEO: Morano responds to Rolling Stone attack

When the UN released a report claiming we are in for mass species extinction, CFACT’s Marc Morano checked the facts, posted them at Climate Depot and spoke about what he learned on Fox News.

Rolling Stone Magazine does not want you to hear what Marc learned.  They called him a “quack,” and demanded he be censored and silenced.

Marc responds:

I had just authored a special report with dissenting scientists of the UN report. As I said on Fox News, “The UN has juiced up the issue and put themselves in charge of solving. That’s called a self-interested lobbying organization.”

Dr. Patrick Moore is an internationally recognized environmentalist and co-founder of Greenpeace.  Morano reports that:

Moore bluntly mocked species extinction claims made by biologist Edward O. Wilson from Harvard University. Wilson estimated that up to 50,000 species go extinct every year based on computer models of the number of potential, but as yet undiscovered species in the world. Moore: “There’s no scientific basis for saying that 50,000 species are going extinct. The only place you can find them is in Edward O. Wilson’s computer at Harvard University. They’re actually electrons on a hard drive. I want a list of Latin names of actual species.”

The UN has made a specialty of hysterically demanding it be given vast sums of money and repressive bureaucratic control to combat climate and ecological Armageddons that exist only in the virtual world of its computer models.  When analysts like Marc Morano point out that real world observational science and environmental history fail to support the UN’s claims, the media and pressure groups demand they be silenced.

In its coverage of the UN species extinction report, CNN dredged up serial alarmist Paul Ehrlich, who wrote The Population Bomb in 1968.   Ehrlich has been predicting the end of the world over and over again for more than half a century.  Morano reminded everyone that Ehrlich may have one of the longest losing streaks of failed predictions known to science.

Bad science must be challenged by hard facts.

All voices must be heard… including Marc Morano’s.

RELATED ARTICLE: Rolling Stone mag rips Morano as a ‘quack’ & slams Fox News for allowing him on about UN species report – Morano responds

Media recycle climate species ‘extinction’ fears – Dredge up discredited Paul Ehrlich for interviews

The UN has now officially expanded its mission now to include the “climate change” species extinction scare. The UN is once again calling for putting itself in charge of “solving” the newly hyped species “crisis.” “A huge transformation is needed across the economy and society to protect and restore nature, which provides people with food, medicines, and other materials, crop pollination, fresh water, and quality of life,” according to the new UN report. The AP quoted one of the activist scientists claiming “this is really our last chance to address all of that.” Hmmm. This is the same tactic the UN has used on climate for years. See:Every climate summit is hailed as the ‘last chance!’

This latest report has been touted as the IPCC for nature by the UN. “The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) included more than 450 researchers who used 15,000 scientific and government reports. The report’s summary had to be approved by representatives of all 109 nations,” the AP reported. Let’s repeat, “The report’s summary had to be approved by representatives of all 109 nations.” The same hijacking of science by politicians and UN bureaucrats that has always occurred in the UN IPCC climate reports. See: UN’s alleged scientific process features “government officials” having a say in each line of the report’s summary

But this is not the first time we have warned. As early as 1864, “tipping points” about the “extinction of the species”were issued.

But despite a massive track record of scientific failure about climate and species “crises” the UN, the media and the usual suspect scientists like failed overpopulation guru Paul Ehrlich are at it again.

(Why has Al Gore has gone silent on the extinction scare of polar bears? Gore featured the bears in 2006 film, but they were completely absent in his 2017 sequel. The reason?New Study: Polar bears ‘thriving’ as their numbers may have ‘quadrupled’ – Attempts to silence research)

Watch CNN clip – May 6, 2019: 

See: UN report urges ‘action’: Biodiversity crisis is about to put humanity at risk – 1 million species at risk of annihilation

Climate Depot’s Response – Some excerpts from Marc Morano’s new book, “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Climate Change.”:

Coming Soon: The ‘IPCC for Biodiversity’ – ‘On May 6, long-awaited assessment of State of Nature will be released’ — Stay tuned to hear what it concludes’ – Answer? We are all going to die! Pay up!

Greenpeace Co-Founder mocks human extinction claim: ‘We are presently the most successful species on the planet’

Greenpeace Co-Founder & Ecologist Dr. Patrick Moore challenges specious species claims: ‘That is so 1970s. Paul Ehrlich is pathetic and has been crying wolf for decades. While he pontificated doom for starving millions in the 1970 from his Ivory Tower at Stanford.’

See: 1972 Article Unearthed: ‘Worse than Hitler’: ‘Population Bomb’ author Paul Ehrlich suggested adding a forced sterilization agent to ‘staple food’ and ‘water supply’ – Warned of ‘Unpredictable climatic effects’ — Called on U.S. to ‘de-develop’

2012: Time for Next Eco-Scare: ‘As the global warming bubble deflates, another scare is being inflated – species extinction’– ‘History shows that it is the destiny of most species to be destroyed by periodic natural calamities or competition from other species…No species has an assured place on Earth. Some species can adapt and survive – those unable to adapt are removed from the gene pool. Because of Earth’s long turbulent history, most species surviving today are not ‘fragile’ …

Moore, in an interview with Climate Depot, refuted the claims of the species study. “The biggest extinction events in the human era occurred 60,000 years ago when humans arrived in Australia, 10-15,000 years ago when humans arrived in the New World, 800 years ago when humans found New Zealand, and 250 years ago when Europeans brought exotic species to the Pacific Islands such as Hawaii,” Moore explained.

“Since species extinction became a broad social concern, coinciding with the extinction of the passenger pigeon, we have done a pretty good job of preventing species extinctions,” Moore explained.

“I quit my life-long subscription to National Geographic when they published a similar ‘sixth mass extinction’ article in February 1999. This [latest journal] Nature article just re-hashes this theme,” he added. Moore left Greenpeace in 1986 because he felt the organization had become too radical.

This is not the first time Moore has gone to battle over alarming claims of species extinction. In the 2000 documentary “Amazon Rainforest: Clear-Cutting The Myths”, Moore bluntly mocked species extinction claims made by biologist Edward O. Wilson from Harvard University. Wilson estimated that up to 50,000 species go extinct every year based on computer models of the number of potential but as yet undiscovered species in the world.

Moore said in 2000: “There’s no scientific basis for saying that 50,000 species are going extinct. The only place you can find them is in Edward O. Wilson’s computer at Harvard University. They’re actually electrons on a hard drive. I want a list of Latin names of actual species.” Moore was interviewed by reporter Marc Morano (now with Climate Depot) in the 2000 Amazon rainforest documentary:

Environmental activist Tim Keating of Rainforest Relief was asked in the 2000 documentary if he could name any of the alleged 50,000 species that have gone extinct and he was unable.

“No, we can’t [name them], because we don’t know what those species are. But most of the species that we’re talking about in those estimates are things like insects and even microorganisms, like bacteria,” Keating explained.

UK scientist Professor Philip Stott, emeritus professor of Biogeography at the University of London, dismissed current species claims in the 2000 Amazon rainforest documentary.

“The earth has gone through many periods of major extinctions, some much bigger in size than even being contemplated today,” Stott, the author of a book on tropical rainforests, said in the 2000 documentary.

“Change is necessary to keep up with change in nature itself. In other words, change is the essence. And the idea that we can keep all species that now exist would be anti-evolutionary, anti-nature and anti the very nature of the earth in which we live,” Stott said.

2012: Time for Next Eco-Scare?! Obama follows lead of green movement and demotes global warming –UN now says case for savingspecies ‘more powerful than climate change’

Flashback 2011: Next Eco-Scare is Here! ‘Biodiversity’: ‘The new Big Lie’: The green movement is ditching ‘Climate Change’ in favor of species extinction fears

2010: Next Eco-Scare is Here! ‘Biodiversity’: ‘The new Big Lie’: The green movement is ditching ‘Climate Change’ in favor of species extinction fears –‘The independent platform will in many ways mirror the UN IPCC’ and ‘provide gold standard reports to governments. ‘Gold standard’, eh? Now where have I heard that phrase before? — Suddenly it becomes clear why they kept Pachauri on at the IPCC. Because the IPCC simply doesn’t matter any more’ — ‘Not only does the great big new Biodiversity scam already have its own IPCC but it even has its own pseudoeconomic, panic-generating Stern Report.’

This is not the first time we have warned. As early as 1864, “tipping points” about the “extinction of the species” were issued.
“As early as 1864 George Perkins Marsh, sometimes said to be the father of American ecology, warned that the earth was ‘fast becoming an unfit home for its “noblest inhabitant,”’ and that unless men changed their ways it would be reduced ‘to such a condition of impoverished productiveness, of shattered surface, of climatic excess, as to threaten the depravation, barbarism, and perhaps even extinction of the species.’” – —MIT professor Leo Marx

Round-up of the failures of Paul Ehrlich

In 1974, Paul Ehrlich told the U.S. Senate he wouldn’t bet a nickel U.S. still around in 1994

Ehrlich to U.S. Senate 1974: ‘If we have 20 years — which I wouldn’t put a nickel on — but if we have 20 years, we’re already 10 years too late in starting to do something about it.’ – ‘One of the big problems is how do you generate a feeling of urgency…’

‘If bad weather continues in the Midwest this year, and if the monsoon should fail this year in India, as it might, then I think you’re going to see the age of scarcity and many of the changes I’m talking about coming on next winter.’

Paul Ehrlich’s Epic Fail: Why The ‘Population Bomb’ Never Exploded

Flashback: ‘Accurate Tribute to Paul Ehrlich: ‘Mad…Kook…Lunatic…Disgraced…Worse than Hitler…fear-monger…parasite on Academic system’

Flashback 1980: Paul Ehrlich calls oil ‘a resource which we know damn well is going to be gone in 20 or 30 years’ (By year 2000 or 2010) – Ehrlich 1980: ‘Do we really want to threaten to blow up the world over a resource which we know damn well is going to be gone in 20 or 30 years anyway?’ – ‘Every country is now overpopulated.’ – ‘There is a finite pie. The more mice you have nibbling at it the smaller every mouses’ share.’

Overpopulation Guru Paul Ehrlich: ‘Climate Change’ Will Force Humans To ‘Eat Bodies of Dead’

Ehrlich predicts: Humans must soon begin contemplating “eat[ing] the bodies of your dead” after resources are depleted. Ehrlich claimed that scarcity of resources will get so bad that humans will need to drastically change our eating habits and agriculture. Instead, we will soon begin asking “is it perfectly okay to eat the bodies of your dead because we’re all so hungry?” He added that humanity is “moving in that direction with a ridiculous speed.” And clearly, this man knows “ridiculous.”

1972 Article Unearthed: ‘Worse than Hitler’: ‘Population Bomb’ author Paul Ehrlich suggested adding a forced sterilization agent to ‘staple food’ and ‘water supply’ – Warned of ‘Unpredictable climatic effects’ — Called on U.S. to ‘de-develop’

In 1974 Senate testimony Holdren proposed ‘limits both on population size and materials use per person’

Flashback 1974-John Holdren testifies before Congress abt need for “population limitation & redistribution of wealth” – John Holdren 1974: ‘I find myself firmly in the neo-Malthusian camp’

NYT mocks Paul Ehrlich’s Overpopulation Fears: ‘Apocalyptic predictions fell as flat as ancient theories about shape of the Earth’ –


‘In the 1960s, fears of overpopulation sparked campaigns for population control. But whatever became of the population bomb?’ …’One thing that happened on the road to doom was that the world figured out how to feed itself despite its rising numbers. No small measure of thanks belonged to Norman E. Borlaug, an American plant scientist whose breeding of high-yielding, disease-resistant crops led to the agricultural savior known as the Green Revolution.’

[ … ]

‘Fred Pearce, a British writer who specializes in global population. His concern is not that the world has too many people. In fact, birthrates are now below long-term replacement levels, or nearly so, across much of Earth, not just in the industrialized West and Japan but also in India, China, much of Southeast Asia, Latin America — just about everywhere except Africa, although even there the continent wide rates are declining. “Girls that are never born cannot have babies,” Mr. Pearce wrote in a 2010 book, “The Coming Population Crash and Our Planet’s Surprising Future”.

Warmist Paul Ehrlich on Rush Limbaugh’s and James Inhofe’s lack of fear of trace amounts of CO2: “They’re killing our grandkids”

PAUL EHRLICH BOMBS AGAIN: ‘In the more than four decades since The Population Bomb was published, the number of people inhabiting the Earth has more than doubled, but the death and poverty rates have dropped, and life expectancy has increased. Not only are we feeding more people than ever before, we’re doing it with less land’ – Meet the old  ‘consensus’, the same as the new ‘consensus’ — we’re all doomed! ‘Fears of overpopulation and its effect on the Earth’s ability to sustain human life peaked in the late 1960s and early ’70s, when the scientific ‘consensus’ was that overpopulation would result in large-scale famines. Paul Ehrlich, in his book The Population Bomb — which predicted that ‘hundreds of millions of people will starve to death’ in the ‘70s — articulated many of these concerns.

Ehrlich’s predictions proved false.’ ‘But Ehrlich did not learn his lesson: He is one of the scientists behind a statement titled, ;Scientific Consensus on Maintaining Humanity’s Life Support Systems in the 21st Century,’ which was recently released by the Millennium Alliance for Humanity and the Biosphere (MAHB) — a working group of natural and social scientists at Stanford University. The report argues that “the evidence that humans are damaging their ecological life-support systems is overwhelming” and that “human quality of life will suffer substantial degradation by the year 2050 if we continue on our current course.’

Paul Ehrlich admits it: ‘I am an alarmist. My colleagues are alarmists. We’re alarmed, and we’re frightened’ – Earlier this month, the biologist Paul Ehrlich used a similar defense after co-authoring a study that warned of a coming “annihilation” of vertebrates. “I am an alarmist,” Ehrlich told the Washington Post. “My colleagues are alarmists. We’re alarmed, and we’re frightened. And there’s no other way to put it.”

Flashback WaPo: Earth is on its way to the biggest mass extinction since the dinosaurs, scientists warn – Ehrlich said the point of the research is exactly that — to cause alarm. “I am an alarmist. My colleagues are alarmists. We’re alarmed, and we’re frightened. And there’s no other way to put it,” he said. “It’s largely a political and economic problem. We have a government that’s doing everything they can to push these things in the wrong direction. We have economists who think they can actually grow forever in a finite planet.”

How They Sold Paul Ehrlich’s ‘The Population Bomb’ – Threats of famine, dead children, bombs, nuclear war, & oblivion

FacebookTwitterEmailCopy LinkPocketLinkedInShare

Big oil goes big green: Green groups rake in fossil fuel cash

Climate alarmists often accuse skeptics, like myself and independent groups like CFACT, of being in the pay of Big Oil. This is completely false — we do not receive even a dime from them. It is part of the green fairy tale that skepticism only exists because the oil companies are funding it. That Exxon-Mobil threw a few million at various skeptical causes prior to 2007 is the standard example, but that was many years ago.  They have stopped sending any money whatsoever to skeptical causes since then.

So I did some digging and the reality turns out to be just the opposite. In fact the big oil companies are putting at least a billion dollars into alarmist projects and lobbying. Of course they have good commercial reasons, which are killing coal and making natural gas more “climate friendly.” After all, Big Oil is also Big Gas.

The central vehicle for moving these green billion dollars goes by a perfectly descriptive name — the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative or OGCI. If the false accusers were correct then “oil and gas” would never go together with “climate initiative” but there it is and it is very big.

OGCI members include these Big Oil names:

  • British Petroleum
  • Chevron
  • China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC)
  • Eni
  • Equinor
  • Exxon Mobil Corporation
  • Occidental Petroleum
  • Pemex – Petróleos Mexicanos
  • Petroleo Brasileiro – PETROBRAS
  • Repsol
  • Royal Dutch Shell
  • Saudi Aramco
  • Total

Collectively they claim to produce 30% of the world’s oil and gas.

The OGCI website features a lineup of Corporate CEOs, just to show how seriously green they are. Their latest annual report has a letter from the CEOs, including this gem:

As our ambition grows with the scale of the challenge, we look forward to working closely with policy-makers, regulators and all stakeholders to help develop the levers that can economically and sustainably accelerate the pace of the low carbon transition.”

OGCI was started in 2014, shortly after the famous Chesapeake Energy scandal. Chesapeake’s CEO was caught giving the Sierra Club millions of dollars to support the war on coal, but some Club members objected, given that they consider fossil fuels their enemy.

What seems to have happened is that the ever-wily big companies simply created their own green group. With a billion bucks in funding it may well be the biggest outfit in Big Green (not counting the green governments).

However, I also found that EDF is actively engaged with corporations, via its EDF+Business arm. In particular EDF has a huge methane reduction program — the Methane Challenge — that involves OGCI. This program is featured in the Sustainability Reports of several major oil companies. EDF is even building and launching their own satellite, cleverly called MethaneSAT.

EDF is clearly getting a lot of money for this. They say they get none directly from the companies, rather that they get it from unspecified “philanthropies.” Where these philanthropies get it may be a different story. They could easily be laundering Big Oil money. It may be telling that OGCI does not issue a financial report.

Space News actually asked EDF about this funding but got stonewalled. Here is their report:

However, EDF has provided few details about how much MethaneSAT will cost or how it will be funded. The project received last year a grant from a new initiative called The Audacious Project, although the size of the award was not disclosed. An EDF spokesman did not respond to an inquiry about the financial status of the project.”

Having EDF on their side is certainly a big plus for Big Oil.

In any case it is clear that Big Oil is spending at least a billion dollars on green stuff, which is a lot of green. There is no evidence that the skeptics are getting anything, but if some are it is trivial in comparison. Meanwhile OGCI is getting at least a billion and EDF maybe many millions.

When it comes to skepticism, the simple fact is that roughly half of Americans do not accept climate alarmism, right up to the President. No one is paying for this widespread skepticism. As for Big Oil, they are putting big bucks into green climate initiatives, not skepticism. Conservatives do have their think tanks, which happily manage to find some funding, but not from Big Oil for climate skepticism.

That Big Oil is responsible for skepticism is just another part of the alarmist fantasy world.


David Wojick

David Wojick, Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science, technology and policy. For origins click here. For over 100 prior articles for CFACT click here. Available for confidential research and consulting.

Batteries Can’t Make Wind and Solar Viable

Utilities are starting to experiment with adding batteries to wind and solar projects. These storage projects are feeding the mistaken belief that batteries can cure the intermittency that makes wind and solar unworkable as a reliable source of power.

The reality is that these battery projects are trivial in size compared to what would actually be needed to make wind or solar reliable. The cost of battery based reliability would actually be stupendous, far more than we could ever afford.

Here are some simple numbers to make the point. The reality would be far more complex, but the magnitude would not change much.

First comes the cost of utility scale battery facilities. This is much more than just the cost of the batteries. At utility scale these are large, complex facilities. Connecting all of the batteries involved and getting them to work properly together is a big challenge in itself. AC-DC-AC conversions are also a big deal, plus there are buildings, transmission stuff, etc.

In many cases these costs are proprietary, but the U.S. Energy Information Administration has surveyed a number of these facilities. See their “U.S. Battery Storage Market Trends,” May 2018.

The reported costs are pretty wide ranging, but the average is close to $1,500 per KWh, so let’s use that round number.

Note that this is the cost per KWh of storage capacity, not the KWh cost of energy from the batteries taken over time, which is a very different matter. There is a lot of confusion on this point. The KWh cost of juice goes down as the batteries are cycled more often, but the cost of the battery facilities themselves does not change. In fact the cost may go up because batteries that can be cycled faster cost more.

At utility scale we are talking about megawatts, not kilowatts, so the battery cost is $1.5 million per MWh. By coincidence, $1.5 million per MW is also roughly the cost of a wind farm. Much follows from this.

A smallish wind farm might have generating capacity of 100 MW, so costing around $150 million. The cost of the batteries to make this farm a reliable power generator turns out to be much, much greater.

Suppose we want to store enough juice to back up the wind farm for just one day, when the wind speed is too low to generate any power. Let’s say we simply need 100 MW for 24 hours, or 2,400 MWh.

At $1.5 million per MWh that is a whopping $3,600 million or $3.6 billion. In short, the batteries cost 24 times more than the “backed up” wind farm costs. In fact in this case the battery cost will be the number of hours times the wind farm cost.

This huge cost certainly makes the wind farm unaffordable, but it gets much worse. Under standard conditions a wind farm produces no power around 25% of the time, due to low wind conditions. Low wind periods of up to a week are fairly common, created by stagnant huge high pressure systems. The power battery system has to be big enough to accommodate these long periods of no wind power.

A week has 168 hours so we need 16,800 MWh of battery storage capacity, at the enormous cost of $25.2 billion, just to make a $150 million wind farm reliable. This would obviously be absurd, which makes the whole idea of battery backup absurd. Even if the cost of batteries were to come way down, say by 90%, the cost would still be wildly prohibitive.

The battery systems that are being announced by major utilities are nothing like real backup. They seldom store even an hour’s worth of generated power (at great price). But they are often touted as being a big step toward making renewables reliable. This is either deep ignorance or pure deception.

Batteries simply cannot make renewables reliable. They cost too much.


David Wojick

David Wojick, Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science, technology and policy. For origins click here. For over 100 prior articles for CFACT click here. Available for confidential research and consulting.


Global Warming Going the way of Russia Collusion

Newsweek slams ‘smiley Morano’ on Fox & Friends for accurately declaring CO2 is NOT ‘pollution’ – Morano responds

EDITORS NOTE: This CFACT column is republished with permission.

Latest Energy & Environmental News

For the full version of: Energy and Environmental Newsletter please click on that link. To review some of the highlights, see below.

Here is a simply amazing announcement: an affordable machine that can produce drinkable water just from the air — and at 8±¢ per gallon!  See here and here.

Since there is such a diversity of interesting articles, I’m subdividing the most noteworthy material into several categories:

Energy —

The Green New Deal’s Bad Science
Study: Renewable Energy Mandates are a costly failure
Worldwide Buyer’s Remorse Sets in for Costly Renewable Energy
Solar Energy Threatened by Wind Energy
The true cost of solar (and wind)
Dead bats and how radical Green propaganda relies on tragedy porn
Hypothesis: Radical Greens are the Great Killers of Our Age
Russia’s not-so-secret plan to control the world’s energy
The true feasibility of moving away from fossil fuels
Why 100% renewable energy goals are not practical policies
Battery Foolishness
Short good video: False Choice Cafe
Short video: Green Signaling
US Chamber of Commerce: American Energy — Cleaner and Stronger
Natural Gas Pulls Away from Renewables – The Gap Has Never Been Wider
Next generation nuclear: 25MW, smaller, safer, can be sited anywhere
Powering the future – with no compromises

The Green New Deal (GND)—

The Green New Deal: Economics and Policy Analytics
John Stossel: Green Dreams
Short excellent video: Hilarious Spoof of AOC by 8 Year Old

The Presidential Committee on Climate Science (PCCS) —

CO2Coalition’s Letter of Support for the PCCS
It’s about time to review the evidence for man-made global warming
Climate review to be led by nuclear weapons expert

Global Warming (AGW) —

Lunacy as the New Orthodoxy
What Will It Take to End Anti-Science Insanity?
Climate Change Is Socialist Groupthink
Climate Change and the Ten Warning Signs for Cults
The noble corruption of climate science
Galileo and the Medicis brought Revolution and Truth
Environmental Hypocrites of the Left
Peter Ridd has defeated the Climate Inquisition — thanks to you
Study: Electric vehicles emit more CO2 than diesel vehicles!
Falsified Hypotheses Are Rejected In Science — Except for Climate Science

Misc (Education, Science, etc.) —

How to Teach Children about Climate Change
The K-12 Education Achievement Gap Fails to Close
Short Video: Preferred Pronouns or Prison
Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news
How Long Until We’re All Happy?
The End of Being a Duke Professor and What It Means for the Future of Higher Education

Note 1: We recommend reading the Newsletter on your computer, not your phone. Some documents (e.g. PDFs) are easier to read on a computer. We’ve tried to use common fonts, etc. to minimize issues.
Note 2: Our intention is to put some balance into what most people see from the mainstream media about energy and environmental issues… As always, please pass this on to open-minded citizens, and link to this on your social media sites. If there are others who you think would benefit from being on our energy & environmental email list, please let me know. If at any time you’d like to be taken off this list, simply send me an email saying that.
Note 3: This Newsletter is intended to supplement the material on our website, The most important page there is the Winning page.
Note 4: I am not an attorney, so no material appearing in any of the Newsletters (or our website) should be construed as giving legal advice. My recommendation has always been: consult a competent licensed attorney when you are involved with legal issues.

MOVIE REVIEW: ‘Avengers Endgame’ has redeemed itself! A film that is pro-family, pro-humanity & patriotic

In May, 2017 I did a column titled “Avengers ‘Infinity War’: Teaching children that mass slaughter is okay for all the wrong reasons.” I wrote:

I used to be a fan of Marvel comics. Not anymore. The reason is the latest edition of 18 films in Marvel studios Avengers series titled “Infinity War.” After watching the film I was very disturbed by the message. Here is a key exchange between Thanos, the alien invader/protagonist, and Dr. Strange, one of the Avengers:

Thanos: When we faced extinction I offered a solution

Dr. Stephen Strange: Genocide?

Thanos: But random, dispassion is fair for rich and poor a like. They called me a mad man. What I predict came unannounced.

Dr. Stephen Strange: Congratulations, you’re a prophet

Thanos: I’m a survivor

Dr. Stephen Strange: Who wants to murder trillions

Thanos: With all the six stones I can simply snap my fingers, they will all cease to exist. I call that… mercy.

Dr. Stephen Strange: Then what?

Thanos: [I] finally rest, watch the sunrise on an ungrateful universe. The hardest choices require the strongest will.

In the end Thanos wins and trillions of people in the universe are slaughtered. The final scene is of Thanos in a green pasture admiring his work.


After watching “Avengers Endgame” I give credit to Marvel Studios for redeeming itself. While the film lasts 3 hours I was riveted to my seat.

Marvel Studios’ Avengers: Endgame – Official Trailer.

The film picks up where “Infinity War” left off. The opening scenes are compelling. The film personalizes the catastrophic losses suffered by those who Thanos did not slaughter, the survivors. This reminded me of those who lost family and loved ones during the Holocaust, during the reigns of Joseph Stalin and Mao, the Armenian genocide and in the killing fields of Pol Pot.

Of course there really are no super heroes with super powers. But we have witnessed over our brief American history the actions of real heroes who have done extraordinary things. This is the lesson of mankind.

As English writer, poet and philosopher G.K. Chesterton wrote, “The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him.”

What is behind mankind are the memories of those who were taken away from them by pure evil. Thanos, evil incarnate, slaughters half of all living creatures in the name of saving the universe from itself. This is not unlike those who today want to enslave all of mankind in the name of saving the planet earth (e.g. environmentalism, Green New Deal, One World Order).


As University of Maryland economist Julian Simon noted in his 1981 book that the human brain is the “ultimate resource.” And so it is in “Avengers Endgame.” We have seen the idea of time travel repeatedly in films. The fantasy of going back in time to stop evil is just that, a fantasy. “Avengers Endgame” pokes fun at  this fantasy and shows how, in part, how this is folly.

Of course this is Hollywood and all things are possible, even time travel to get a human redo.

The key to this film is redemption. The surviving Avengers know they failed in their quest to protect humanity. Their losses, on a personal level, drive them to use their own ultimate resources, their brains, to redeem themselves and put things right.


At the end all but two survive their quest for redemption. It reminded me of the Christian Crusades.

Thomas F. Madden, professor of Medieval History and Renaissance Studies as Saint Louis University, is a recognized expert on the Crusades. Professor Madden in his book “The Crusades Controversy: Setting the Record Straight” notes,

“Pope Urban II called the knights of Christendom to push back the conquests of Islam at the Council of Clermont in 1095. The response was tremendous. Many thousands of warriors took the vow of the cross and prepared for war.” Why did they do it? For two reasons:

  1. The first was to redeem [free from oppression] the Christians of the East.
  2. The second goal was the liberation of Jerusalem and the other places made holy by the life of Christ.

Professor Madden writes:

The word crusade is modern. Medieval crusaders saw themselves as pilgrims to the Holy Sepulcher.

[ … ]

The re-conquest of Jerusalem, therefore, was understood by Christians as an act of restoration and an open declaration of one’s love of God.

Perhaps we as humans need to turn to the God Abraham for our redemption and not to Hollywood?

The 10 Warning Signs For Cults Applied To Climate Change

By Will

Have you thought to yourself that the Climate Change movement seems more and more like a religious movement?

I have, so I researched how to identify a religious cult. Rick Ross, an expert on cults and intervention specialist, developed a list of ten warning signs for unsafe groups, which is published by the Cult Education Institute.

So let’s take a look at all ten signs and compare:

1. Absolute authoritarianism without meaningful accountability.

The leading advocates of the Climate Change movement are politicians, entertainers, and even children. Climate preachers such as Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio lack any formal scientific training whatsoever, and live personal lives of unparalleled luxury while prescribing carbon austerity for the masses. Yet no one is permitted to point out their scientific ignorance or call attention to their hypocritical lifestyles.

Child advocates such as Greta Thuneberg and the crudely indoctrinated children of the “Sunrise movement” are essentially sock puppets for their shameless activist handlers. Refuse to bend the knee to these tiny fascists, as Diane Feinstein most recently did, and the mainstream left will relentlessly attack you as an accessory to mass murder.

The authority of Climate Change leaders is entirely unmerited and absolute, yet no one is permitted to hold them accountable for their ignorance, inexperience, or brazen lies. Thus, the Climate Change movement clearly meets the first warning sign for unsafe groups.

2. No tolerance for questions or critical inquiry.

The conclusions of the Climate Change movement may not be challenged or questioned under any circumstances. Those who dare scrutinize the conclusions, methodology, or prescriptions of “climate scientists” are categorically dismissed as a “Climate Denier”, an excommunicated untouchable whose opinion is no longer valid on any subject.

Questions and critical inquiry aren’t merely dismissed or refuted. The unfortunate heretic immediately experiences a relentless ad hominem onslaught of scorn and hatred from the political and media left, and is often subjected to accusations of outright murder. Simply question the effectiveness of a “carbon tax” and you may find yourself tied to a stake.

There is no tolerance for questioning the Climate Change movement, and thus it clearly meets the second warning sign for unsafe groups.

3. No meaningful financial disclosure regarding budget, expenses such as an independently audited financial statement.

Hardly anyone knows just how much money is spent on “Climate research” every year. The cost is spread out among laughably useless study grants, wind and solar farm subsidies, carbon offset credits, “green” building code evaluation and enforcement, salaries for bureaucrats solely dedicated to “climate concerns”……you get the idea, it’s a lot of hazy money.

The abhorrent practice of “sue and settle” was a flat out money laundering scheme that allowed sympathetic government officials to transfer millions of tax dollars to radical leftist environmental groups. The practice only ended when the Trump administration used executive power to clamp down on it.

The total amount of yearly financial expenditure on the Climate Change movement is vague, difficult to track, and often carried out in unethical manners. Thus, the Climate Change movement exhibits the third warning sign for unsafe groups.

4. Unreasonable fear about the outside world, such as impending catastrophe, evil conspiracies and persecutions.

This one is pretty obvious. The Climate Change movement always shouts out revised and updated apocalypse predictions, eerily reminiscent of the stereotypical bum on the sidewalk with that “The End Is Near” sign. “The world will end in X years if we don’t do X” is the constant refrain. The years always pass, and the apocalypse never happens. Interestingly, this is a characteristic of multiple religious cults (such as the Seekers of Chicago, and the Order of the Solar Temple). At the moment, we apparently have 12 years to nationalize the entire economy and phase out fossil fuels before we all die a fiery death.

There’s also no shortage of conspiracy theories about who they consider to be Earth’s greatest saboteurs. They have an enemies list. The fossil fuel industry is at the top of it, with widespread tinfoil hat theories about oil companies burying patents for efficient renewable fuel recipes to keep us all guzzling gasoline.

The “repent or burn” doomsday preaching is the most well-known staple of the Climate Change movement, and quite clearly exemplifies the fourth warning sign for unsafe groups.

5. There is no legitimate reason to leave, former followers are always wrong in leaving, negative or even evil.

Climate alarmists who leave, step back from, or even lightly criticize the movement are immediately subjected to vicious smear campaigns. Dutch professor Richard Tol experienced this phenomenon firsthand when he removed his name from an IPCC climate report and criticized the reports excessively apocalyptic predictions.

The smear campaign was led by Bob Ward, director of policy at the London School of Economics’ Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change ‘This has all the characteristics of a smear campaign”, Tol said. “It’s all about taking away my credibility as an expert.”

The treatment of Professor Tol is not uncommon, and clearly demonstrates that the Climate Change movement exhibits the fifth warning sign for unsafe groups.

6. Former members often relate the same stories of abuse and reflect a similar pattern of grievances.

Professor Tol is not an anomaly. Dr. Richard Lindzen of MITDr. Nils-Axel Mörner, and countless other former IPCC in-crowd climate experts were subjected to smear campaigns from their colleagues and the news media for the crime of throwing cold water on the outlandish predictions of the Climate Change movement.

This pattern is all too familiar to anyone who has studied what happens to individuals who leave the Church of Scientology, and clearly meets the sixth warning sign for unsafe groups.

7. There are records, books, news articles, or television programs that document the abuses of the group/leader.

The abuses of the Climate Change movement are loud and proud. They vociferously attack their perceived enemies for public consumption, and are cheered on by fellow travelers in the journalism class. Most recently they brainwashed a bunch of kids and marched them into an octogenarian Democrat Senator’s office to beg not to be murdered by a ‘No’ vote on impossible legislation. Have you seen those kids in Diane Feinstein’s office? You should, it’s creepy, here they are.

These tantrums and protests aren’t only meant to rally supporters of the Climate Change movement. They are a form of intimidation, a tactic used to silence those who question the gospel. There is ample evidence that the Climate Change movement meets the seventh warning sign of an unsafe group.

8. Followers feel they can never be “good enough.”

The atonement process for Climate warriors always demands more. It started with using a recycling bin and grocery bags. Now, in 2019, being a good follower means imposing veganism on the masses and issuing fatwahs against innocuous objects such as plastic straws and grocery bags. Despite all the efforts of the faithful, Climate minions maintain a constant state of dread and despair, knowing they can never truly do enough to stop the coming doom.

Clearly, the eighth warning sign for unsafe groups applies to the Climate Change movement.

9. The group/leader is always right.

When have the climate leaders been called wrong for their failed predictions? Regardless of the weather, they are always intrinsically correct.

Flood? Climate Change. Drought? Climate Change.

No Snow? Climate Change. Too much snow? Climate Change.

Tornado? Climate Change. Hurricane? Climate Change. Lack of hurricanes? Climate Change.

See how this works?

One of the best aspects of the movement is “weather is climate until it isn’t”. The acolytes of Climate Change will point out the window in a heat wave and say, “See? We’re right!”

If a skeptic points out the window during a blizzard, the same acolytes will simply cry “Weather isn’t climate!” It’s a game they can never lose, one in which they are never wrong and always right.

Thus, the ninth warning sign for unsafe groups clearly applies.

10. The group/leader is the exclusive means of knowing “truth” or receiving validation, no other process of discovery is really acceptable or credible.

The path to discovery for the Climate Change movement is an intentionally vague discipline referred to as “climate science”.

Did you carry out a study on gender and glaciers? Climate Science.

Did you think up the worst possible scenarios that have no actual chance of happening (actual portion of latest National Climate Assessment)? Climate Science.

Any “science” that confirms the tenets of the Climate Change movement is deemed “climate science”, while actual scientific research that disputes their conclusions is derided as “denialism”.

The tenth warning sign for unsafe groups is clearly met.

The Verdict: It’s a cult

According to the established, scientific guidelines developed by cult experts, the Climate Change movement fits the bill for a potentially unsafe group.

When I looked up these established warning signs, I honestly expected Climate Changeists to meet two or three of them, NOT TEN! The disturbingly religious nature of this supposedly “scientific” movement should alarm any thinking human being, especially since the movement now openly seeks to nationalize the entire economy.

It’s time for conservatives to realize what they are dealing with, and act accordingly. Rather than debating Climate Change activists, it may be time to start staging interventions.

If someone you know is a member of the Climate Change Movement, and you are interested in intervention strategies, please visit

Printed by permission from Will, a nom de plume, who can be followed on Twitter at @Oil_Guns_Merica.

RELATED ARTICLE: On Earth Day, Gloomy Predictions Haven’t Come to Pass

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column by Will is republished with permission.