Heartland’s “Six Reasons To Be A Climate-Change Skeptic” Are Six Demonstrable Falsehoods
Ethan Siegel

Ethan, I enjoy many of the articles you write, and know (somewhat) your background. That’s why I was extremely disappointed in your treatment of the AGW scam! (Yes, I am extremely skeptical of the AGW… now Climate Change… so called crisis!)

There is no argument that the Earth’s climate changes, but tremendous disagreement (fomented by the IPCC and radical Environmentalists) that our current pattern of change is related to anything other than natural processes!

Human activities contribute between 1% and 4% of the CO2 released into the atmosphere, and the plants immediately absorb 50% of that.

You state that a CO2 level of 500 ppm would be dangerous level for the world! I have to ask you… WHY? Our submarine fleet sets their CO2 warning meters at 8,000 ppm… few adverse effects are observed at even higher levels.” According to Senate testimony of Dr. William Happer.

I have read that most plants grow best at CO2 levels of 1,000 to 2,000 ppm, and Greenhouses buy CO2 to speed up plant growth and increase size.

Your contention that the sea level has risen 7 inches since 1900, and will be a major problem… omits both plate tectonics, and the FACT that, depending on where a person lives, sea level has both risen slightly (to be expected, as the world is still warming from “The Little Ice Age”), and on other coastlines… has fallen!

Australia, for example has had 7,000 years of falling sea levels! (http://joannenova.com.au/2012/10/australian-sea-levels-have-been-falling-for-7000-years/) As that continent is much more stable than others, tectonically… It may be the best place to study if the world is actually experiencing a sea level rise… or not, As there is great concern about the bleaching of the corals of the Great Barrier Reef, from falling sea levels that cannot be entirely explained by El Nino alone.

I suggest both you, and your followers, look at the sea level of La Jolla cove, in San Diego, CA. https://realclimatescience.com/2017/03/sea-level-change-at-la-jolla-california-since-1871/ And research the Maldives as well!

A new study from NASA confirms sea levels are falling — not rising.

iceagenow.info reports:

Jul 25th, 2017 8:23 pm

“NASA satellite sea level observations for the past 24 years show that — on average — sea levels have been rising 3.4 millimeters per year. That’s 0.134 inches, about the thickness of a dime and a nickel stacked together, per year.

As I said, that’s the average. But when you focus in on 2016 and 2017, you get a different picture.

Sea levels fell in 2016, and with all of this winter’s record-breaking snowfall, I wouldn’t be surprised if they decline again this year.

I clicked and zoomed on the above chart as NASA suggested, and obtained a closeup screen shot of sea levels from Jan 2016 to March 2017. This clearly shows the decline.”

All of the talk about the sea rising “is nothing but a colossal scare story,” Booker said, citing Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Morner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change, who “for 35 years has been using every known scientific method to study sea levels all over the globe.”

I have live on the west coast of California for 70 plus years… No sea level rise apparent here!

Despite fluctuations down as well as up, “the sea is not rising,” Morner says. “It hasn’t risen in 50 years.” If there is any rise this century it will “not be more than 10cm (four inches), with an uncertainty of plus or minus 10cm”.

Since 1988, when the IPCC, and it’s cadre of scientists & politicians… were picked solely to “prove human burning of fossil fuels is causing global warming”… have used computer models for predicting the future. Their track record of predictions… is horrendous! No educated honest person could disagree!

AGW pundits… seem to have developed a strategy, of both, cherry picking only that which you can use to promote their point of view, and use the “lie of omission” to do the same!

Then there is CERN… (The European Organization for Nuclear Research) which published in the Journal “NATURE”


MANKIND’S burning of fossil fuels may not be the primary cause of global warming, according to the shock results of a new study by scientists behind the Large Hadron Collider (LCH).

Boffins from CERN have also discovered projected temperature increases over the next century may have been over estimated.

Researchers found trees may have been putting similar aerosols into the air as burning fossil fuels, long before the industrial revolution, meaning humans may have had less impact on the climate than we thought.

SO… THE STATEMENT “Predictions of increased extreme weather events and accelerated sea-level rise have failed to come true.” Is true!

“There are unexplained pauses and cooling periods, that models cannot account for.”

“The Earth is warming, greenhouse gases are the cause, and natural variability does not overwhelm the human-made effects.” This is merely an ASSumption on your part… as the failed models are NOT evidence! CERN certainly disagrees with this statement.

5. A slightly warmer climate might actually be good for us.

Yes it would… and has been! Verified by NASA! “from 1/4 to 1/2 of Earth’s vegetated lands have shown significant greening over the last 35 years! This includes an 11% greening of the Earth’s arid lands! https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/carbon-dioxide-fertilization-greening-earth

“Climate scientists have been terrible at predicting temperatures”

You claim there was an error made by Dr. Roy Spencer in his 2013 regarding the failed IPCC climate models that was found the following year.

Interesting that the latest RSS satellite dataset, published in July of this year, shows he was correct then, and now!

“From recent media reports (e.g. the WaPo’s Capital Weather Gang) you would think that the new RSS satellite dataset for the lower troposphere (LT) has resolved the discrepancy between climate models and observations.”

“But the new LT dataset (Version 4, compared to Version 3.3) didn’t really change in the tropics. This can be seen in the following plot of a variety of observational datasets and the average of 102 CMIP5 climate model simulations.”

I am not a scientist, but have learned over the last 6 years to be very skeptical of anyone who tries to tell me “The science is settled”… Especially after I came across the interviews of Ottmar Endenhofer, Co-chair of IPCC working group 3 and Christiana Figueres, UN climate Chief, telling the world:


“We (UN-IPCC) redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy…” “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore…”

Dr. Ottmar Endenhofer, IPCC co-chair of Working Group 3, November 13, 2010 interview (H/t Dr. Charles Battig)

UN climate chief Christina Figueres candidly remarked, at a news conference in Brussels, “The true aim of the recent Paris climate conference was “to change the [capitalist] economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”

It seems to me, the billions of dollars spent, trying to convince a rather skeptical public, that the world will end… without spending $100 trillion to possibly reduce global temps by less than 1/2 degree by 2100, could have been used to improve the lives and health of all of the worlds population!

Like what you read? Give G Horner a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.