September 29, 2023 • 11 mins
What if everything you've been told about climate change is a carefully orchestrated exaggeration? Join us on the Climate Change Hoax Podcast, where host Karl Michael and the works of Dr. Indur M. Goklany turn the spotlight on the mainstream narrative surrounding global warming. This episode peels back the layers of fear-mongering, challenging the reliance on computer models that predict catastrophic climate futures. By contrasting these speculative simulations with hard evidence and historical context, we question whether the projected 1.6 degrees Celsius rise by 2050 is truly a cause for alarm, or just another data point in the Earth's natural climate variability.
Through our examination of satellite data and weather balloon measurements, we offer a fresh perspective that counters the doom-and-gloom predictions. Our discussion also highlights how cities with vastly different climates, like Oslo and Singapore, thrive regardless of their stark temperature disparities. This episode invites you to reconsider the climate change discourse with a focus on observation and historical data, urging a shift from speculative fear to informed understanding.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
The Climate Change Hoax.
If you're suspicious that thisclimate change stuff may be
exaggerated or just total BS,you've come to the right place.
Welcome to the Climate ChangeHoax Podcast With your host,
carl Michael.
Here you'll learn the truthabout the deceivers who want you
(00:25):
to believe we can actuallycontrol the weather.
We cannot.
The real goal is to control you.
This is the Climate Change Hoax.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Greetings crisis deniers.
In the past decades, the publichas been flooded with
fear-mongering stories tellingthem that global temperatures
will rise to catastrophicallyhigh levels.
Climate activists claim thatthe cause of all this impending
(01:03):
doom is the increasing amount ofCO2 produced by human
activities.
The proposed solution is theso-called net zero emission
policy, aimed at lowering humannet CO2 emissions to the levels
of the pre-industrial era of thelate 1700s.
Those activists also claim thatpeople should panic and that
(01:26):
time is running out.
Antonio Guterres, the UN chief,said this Be aware that it is
five minutes to midnight.
We must act without delay.
Well, antonio, many thousandsof scientists disagree.
In his numerous last morningspeeches, antonio Guterres
(01:50):
refers to computer simulations,not the real world.
Greta Thunberg testified to theUS Congress that there was no
science behind her panic comment.
This information cannot befound anywhere in the media.
So why is there such a bigdifference between this scaring
(02:10):
climate activist narrative andthe optimistic climate
scientist's message who believethere is no climate emergency?
Not many citizens are awarethat all the frightening climate
predictions have been generatedby computer models, and we know
from experience in many othercomplex areas how misleading
(02:31):
computer models can be.
For example, think of the manywrong predictions by economic
models.
Or think of the large mistakesin recent pandemic modeling.
Or think of the large mistakesin recent pandemic modeling.
The output of computer modelsdepends fully on the assumptions
that model makers put into them.
In the past 50 years, thepredictions of climate models
(03:01):
about global warming and theirdire effects have all been wrong
, and in the engineeringcommunity they would be
classified as useless.
More specifically, theassumptions in climate modeling
are such that predictedtemperature changes turn out to
be persistently too high.
Even worse, extreme weatherevents such as heat waves,
droughts, floods, hurricanes,etc.
Are intentionally used tosupport the extreme climate
(03:30):
predictions.
But if we position the currentextreme weather events in a
historical context, we see thatthese events are climate
business as usual, as pointedout by Dr Indur M Goklani.
By the way, dr Goklanycontinues to remain at odds with
the climate alarmists, becausehe is right.
(03:50):
His conclusion is that models,computer simulations, run too
hot and that predictions ofadverse effects on humans are
highly dubious.
They project a catastrophicfuture that is not born out of
observations.
It is much wiser and safer torely on measurements.
(04:13):
The history of science tells usthat significant steps forward
are always fueled byobservations from new
measurement instruments.
Think of the very recentspectacular images of outer
space by the new James WebbSpace Telescope.
The same good news applies tothe modern satellites that
deliver high-qualitymeasurements around the Earth
(04:34):
since 1979.
Satellite data shows no extremewarming, and this is
cross-checked by millions ofweather balloon measurements.
Therefore, let us make use ofthe abundant temperature
measurements made through theyears, those from the beginning
of the industrial period, 1850,until the present.
(04:57):
Measurements tell us that thetemperature in 2020 is 1.1
degrees C higher than in 1850.
Okay, let us extrapolate thesatellite temperatures to the
year 2050 by assuming that thetemperature increase of the past
40 years 1980 to 2020, willcarry on without any pausing and
(05:20):
cooling.
This generous projectionresults in a 2050 temperature
that is 1.6 degrees C higherthan in 1850.
Now here's the big question Isthe global warming of 1.6
degrees C a scary result?
Does this outcome really tellus that it is 5 minutes to
(05:43):
midnight?
Well, let us look at today'sdifference in mean temperature
between Oslo, one of the bigcities near the North Pole, and
Singapore, one of the big citiesnear the equator.
Measurements show that thedifference is as much as 22
degrees C, 20 times bigger thanthe global warming between 1850
(06:05):
and 2020, and almost 14 timesbigger than the so-called scary
global warming between 1850 and2050.
Despite this huge meantemperature difference of 22
degrees C, both cities are veryprosperous and the citizens in
both cities are enjoying life.
(06:26):
So why do the media tell us thatthe global warming of 1.6
degrees C or more will lead to adisaster?
The end is near, while 22degrees C difference between
Oslo and Singapore turns out tobe no problem whatsoever.
The answer is adaptation.
(06:46):
The answer is adaptation.
Mankind shows an impressivehistory, having survived many
big changes in its livingenvironment, including big
changes in the Earth's climate.
Thanks to our ingenuity, humanbeings have always found clever
solutions to cope with all pastchallenges again and again.
(07:07):
If you visit Oslo in Singapore,you see an impressive
demonstration of humans'capability to adapt to climate
differences of 22 degrees C.
There is another interestingobservation to make.
Gradual global warming is not aserious problem, whether it is
caused by CO2 or not.
(07:28):
Not mitigation, but adaptationis the solution.
So for all of those who wouldlike to think that the present
global warming is fully causedby CO2, our conclusion stays
unchanged.
Bear in mind that during thecooling period around 1900 and
(07:48):
the temperature pause in the 60s, the CO2 concentration in the
atmosphere continued to increasewithout delay.
Hence the anomalous temperaturebehavior in these two periods
were indisputably caused byMother Nature.
The same applies for the largeclimate difference between Oslo
and Singapore.
(08:09):
Finally, for those who stillbelieve that CO2 emissions are
pollution, we urge you toremember that CO2 is essential
for all life on Earth.
Additional CO2 in the air haspromoted growth in the global
biomass.
It is also very favorable foragriculture, increasing crop
yields worldwide.
(08:30):
If this fact of life isn'tconvincingly sufficient, please
realize that with theavailability of modern nuclear
power plants, we have ample timeto create a global energy
system with largely zeroemission.
But again, the big question iswhether zero emission is a
(08:51):
sensible goal.
In conclusion, don't let theterrifying stories of
institutions such as the UN, theEU and the WEF scare you
Particularly.
Climate alarmists must not useextreme weather events to poison
our children with fear.
To poison our children withfear.
The gradual global warmingwhich started around 1700, after
(09:15):
the end of the Little Ice Age,is a fact and has not caused any
serious problem.
Our advice is enjoy today'sclimate, because stories from
the Little Ice Age tell us thata cold climate is full of
hardship.
If we continue to invest ininnovation.
(09:36):
Mankind can easily cope withany effect of further warming.
Hence we must stop thedemoralizing back-to-the-past
mitigation solutions.
We observe that it only leadsto decline and poverty.
Climate-related deaths, floods,droughts, storms, wildfires,
extreme temperatures havedeclined precipitously because
(10:00):
richer and more resilientsocieties reduce disaster deaths
and swamp any potential climatesignal.
Thirty years of climate summitshave had no discernible effect
on the rise in atmospheric CO2concentration.
These summits cost an enormousamount of money.
Instead, we must focus on thepower of adaptation based on
(10:23):
science, technology andeducation.
It will lead us into an era ofprosperity for nature and
mankind.
The preceding was excerpts of apaper published in 2020 by
Professor Gus Burgout, emeritusProfessor of Geophysics and
(10:44):
member of the Royal NetherlandsAcademy of Arts and Sciences,
and the President of Clintel.
I thank Professor Burgout forletting me quote from his work.
By the way, the title of thisepisode is Latin, for let the
other side be heard.
Cheers.
Speaker 1 (11:07):
You've been listening to the Climate Change Hoax.
We hope you've enjoyed the show.
If you did, make sure to like,rate and review.
See you next time on theClimate Change Hoax.
The Climate Change Hoax.
If you're suspicious that thisclimate change stuff may be
exaggerated or just total BS,you've come to the right place.
Welcome to the Climate ChangeHoax Podcast With your host,
carl Michael.
Here you'll learn the truthabout the deceivers who want you
(00:25):
to believe we can actuallycontrol the weather.
We cannot.
The real goal is to control you.
This is the Climate Change Hoax.
Speaker 2 (00:41):
Greetings crisis deniers.
In the past decades, the publichas been flooded with
fear-mongering stories tellingthem that global temperatures
will rise to catastrophicallyhigh levels.
Climate activists claim thatthe cause of all this impending
(01:03):
doom is the increasing amount ofCO2 produced by human
activities.
The proposed solution is theso-called net zero emission
policy, aimed at lowering humannet CO2 emissions to the levels
of the pre-industrial era of thelate 1700s.
Those activists also claim thatpeople should panic and that
(01:26):
time is running out.
Antonio Guterres, the UN chief,said this Be aware that it is
five minutes to midnight.
We must act without delay.
Well, antonio, many thousandsof scientists disagree.
In his numerous last morningspeeches, antonio Guterres
(01:50):
refers to computer simulations,not the real world.
Greta Thunberg testified to theUS Congress that there was no
science behind her panic comment.
This information cannot befound anywhere in the media.
So why is there such a bigdifference between this scaring
(02:10):
climate activist narrative andthe optimistic climate
scientist's message who believethere is no climate emergency?
Not many citizens are awarethat all the frightening climate
predictions have been generatedby computer models, and we know
from experience in many othercomplex areas how misleading
(02:31):
computer models can be.
For example, think of the manywrong predictions by economic
models.
Or think of the large mistakesin recent pandemic modeling.
Or think of the large mistakesin recent pandemic modeling.
The output of computer modelsdepends fully on the assumptions
that model makers put into them.
In the past 50 years, thepredictions of climate models
(03:01):
about global warming and theirdire effects have all been wrong
, and in the engineeringcommunity they would be
classified as useless.
More specifically, theassumptions in climate modeling
are such that predictedtemperature changes turn out to
be persistently too high.
Even worse, extreme weatherevents such as heat waves,
droughts, floods, hurricanes,etc.
Are intentionally used tosupport the extreme climate
(03:30):
predictions.
But if we position the currentextreme weather events in a
historical context, we see thatthese events are climate
business as usual, as pointedout by Dr Indur M Goklani.
By the way, dr Goklanycontinues to remain at odds with
the climate alarmists, becausehe is right.
(03:50):
His conclusion is that models,computer simulations, run too
hot and that predictions ofadverse effects on humans are
highly dubious.
They project a catastrophicfuture that is not born out of
observations.
It is much wiser and safer torely on measurements.
(04:13):
The history of science tells usthat significant steps forward
are always fueled byobservations from new
measurement instruments.
Think of the very recentspectacular images of outer
space by the new James WebbSpace Telescope.
The same good news applies tothe modern satellites that
deliver high-qualitymeasurements around the Earth
(04:34):
since 1979.
Satellite data shows no extremewarming, and this is
cross-checked by millions ofweather balloon measurements.
Therefore, let us make use ofthe abundant temperature
measurements made through theyears, those from the beginning
of the industrial period, 1850,until the present.
(04:57):
Measurements tell us that thetemperature in 2020 is 1.1
degrees C higher than in 1850.
Okay, let us extrapolate thesatellite temperatures to the
year 2050 by assuming that thetemperature increase of the past
40 years 1980 to 2020, willcarry on without any pausing and
(05:20):
cooling.
This generous projectionresults in a 2050 temperature
that is 1.6 degrees C higherthan in 1850.
Now here's the big question Isthe global warming of 1.6
degrees C a scary result?
Does this outcome really tellus that it is 5 minutes to
(05:43):
midnight?
Well, let us look at today'sdifference in mean temperature
between Oslo, one of the bigcities near the North Pole, and
Singapore, one of the big citiesnear the equator.
Measurements show that thedifference is as much as 22
degrees C, 20 times bigger thanthe global warming between 1850
(06:05):
and 2020, and almost 14 timesbigger than the so-called scary
global warming between 1850 and2050.
Despite this huge meantemperature difference of 22
degrees C, both cities are veryprosperous and the citizens in
both cities are enjoying life.
(06:26):
So why do the media tell us thatthe global warming of 1.6
degrees C or more will lead to adisaster?
The end is near, while 22degrees C difference between
Oslo and Singapore turns out tobe no problem whatsoever.
The answer is adaptation.
(06:46):
The answer is adaptation.
Mankind shows an impressivehistory, having survived many
big changes in its livingenvironment, including big
changes in the Earth's climate.
Thanks to our ingenuity, humanbeings have always found clever
solutions to cope with all pastchallenges again and again.
(07:07):
If you visit Oslo in Singapore,you see an impressive
demonstration of humans'capability to adapt to climate
differences of 22 degrees C.
There is another interestingobservation to make.
Gradual global warming is not aserious problem, whether it is
caused by CO2 or not.
(07:28):
Not mitigation, but adaptationis the solution.
So for all of those who wouldlike to think that the present
global warming is fully causedby CO2, our conclusion stays
unchanged.
Bear in mind that during thecooling period around 1900 and
(07:48):
the temperature pause in the 60s, the CO2 concentration in the
atmosphere continued to increasewithout delay.
Hence the anomalous temperaturebehavior in these two periods
were indisputably caused byMother Nature.
The same applies for the largeclimate difference between Oslo
and Singapore.
(08:09):
Finally, for those who stillbelieve that CO2 emissions are
pollution, we urge you toremember that CO2 is essential
for all life on Earth.
Additional CO2 in the air haspromoted growth in the global
biomass.
It is also very favorable foragriculture, increasing crop
yields worldwide.
(08:30):
If this fact of life isn'tconvincingly sufficient, please
realize that with theavailability of modern nuclear
power plants, we have ample timeto create a global energy
system with largely zeroemission.
But again, the big question iswhether zero emission is a
(08:51):
sensible goal.
In conclusion, don't let theterrifying stories of
institutions such as the UN, theEU and the WEF scare you
Particularly.
Climate alarmists must not useextreme weather events to poison
our children with fear.
To poison our children withfear.
The gradual global warmingwhich started around 1700, after
(09:15):
the end of the Little Ice Age,is a fact and has not caused any
serious problem.
Our advice is enjoy today'sclimate, because stories from
the Little Ice Age tell us thata cold climate is full of
hardship.
If we continue to invest ininnovation.
(09:36):
Mankind can easily cope withany effect of further warming.
Hence we must stop thedemoralizing back-to-the-past
mitigation solutions.
We observe that it only leadsto decline and poverty.
Climate-related deaths, floods,droughts, storms, wildfires,
extreme temperatures havedeclined precipitously because
(10:00):
richer and more resilientsocieties reduce disaster deaths
and swamp any potential climatesignal.
Thirty years of climate summitshave had no discernible effect
on the rise in atmospheric CO2concentration.
These summits cost an enormousamount of money.
Instead, we must focus on thepower of adaptation based on
(10:23):
science, technology andeducation.
It will lead us into an era ofprosperity for nature and
mankind.
The preceding was excerpts of apaper published in 2020 by
Professor Gus Burgout, emeritusProfessor of Geophysics and
(10:44):
member of the Royal NetherlandsAcademy of Arts and Sciences,
and the President of Clintel.
I thank Professor Burgout forletting me quote from his work.
By the way, the title of thisepisode is Latin, for let the
other side be heard.
Cheers.
Speaker 1 (11:07):
You've been listening to the Climate Change Hoax.
We hope you've enjoyed the show.
If you did, make sure to like,rate and review.
See you next time on theClimate Change Hoax.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.