Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

Canada is NOT warming at twice the global average, as claimed by ECCC. A report by data scientist Joseph Hickey examined Canada's official temperature records. It found a sudden nationwide +1C jump in 1998 - the same year 72 new stations were added. The increase was simultaneous across the... country. But the climate doesn't behave like that. These step changes are what's known as 'measurement artifacts', typically caused by station moves or instrument changes. Remove the artificial jump, and Canada's warming over the past seven decades largely disappears. Also, the official ECCC dataset contains more than 10,000 cases where daily 'minimum' temperatures exceed 'maximums' - a physical impossibility. Canada's climate policy rests on this data. Correct it, and the government's core warming claim collapses.show more

Electroverse

34,369 subscribers

15,641 views • 5 months ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

Australia's Bureau of Meteorology has been audited station by station. The report reveals that the agency has systematically erased cooling trends from the historical record, replacing them with synthetic warming. At Rutherglen, Victoria for example, raw data from 1913 to 2006 showed a cooling trend. But the Bureau's adjusted chart flips this into warming. No physical justification, just statistical sleight of hand. Comparisons at Deniliquin also reveals the tactic - how past highs have been lowered to fit the narrative. Minimums from 1910 onward here are reduced by as much as 1.8C. These edits weren't based on new evidence. They were applied decades later by opaque homogenization models. The report's author calls it the rewriting of Australia's temperature history. But it's not just happening in Australia. Climate agencies in the UK and US have also cooled the past so as to exaggerate or even fabricate modern warming trends. This manipulated data is then paraded as truth by politicians and the media with the original measurements buried.

Australia's Bureau of Meteorology has been audited station by station. The report reveals that the agency has systematically erased cooling trends from the historical record, replacing them with synthetic warming. At Rutherglen, Victoria for example, raw data from 1913 to 2006 showed a cooling trend. But the Bureau's adjusted chart flips this into warming. No physical justification, just statistical sleight of hand. Comparisons at Deniliquin also reveals the tactic - how past highs have been lowered to fit the narrative. Minimums from 1910 onward here are reduced by as much as 1.8C. These edits weren't based on new evidence. They were applied decades later by opaque homogenization models. The report's author calls it the rewriting of Australia's temperature history. But it's not just happening in Australia. Climate agencies in the UK and US have also cooled the past so as to exaggerate or even fabricate modern warming trends. This manipulated data is then paraded as truth by politicians and the media with the original measurements buried.

Electroverse

242,014 views • 6 days ago

The global mean surface temperature today is only about 1C warmer than it was in 1880. This modest rise has been framed as a 'climate emergency,' yet in historical context it is trivial. Global temperatures have fluctuated by more than 10C over natural glacial cycles long before industrialization. Even during the Holocene, recent periods such as the Medieval Warm Period were far warmer than today without triggering catastrophe. The data show no runaway warming or planetary collapse. In fact, historical records reveal warmth is beneficial to humanity and to life in general. This disconnect between reality and the apocalyptic rhetoric exposes the ruse. There is no "climate crisis."

The global mean surface temperature today is only about 1C warmer than it was in 1880. This modest rise has been framed as a 'climate emergency,' yet in historical context it is trivial. Global temperatures have fluctuated by more than 10C over natural glacial cycles long before industrialization. Even during the Holocene, recent periods such as the Medieval Warm Period were far warmer than today without triggering catastrophe. The data show no runaway warming or planetary collapse. In fact, historical records reveal warmth is beneficial to humanity and to life in general. This disconnect between reality and the apocalyptic rhetoric exposes the ruse. There is no "climate crisis."

Electroverse

30,764 views • 3 days ago

In the early 2000s, climate models projected warming, but the actual observations did not follow. This gap between models and measurements became known as 'the global warming pause'. The response to this discrepancy was not to revisit the models, it was to revisit the measurements. More weather stations were added in the Arctic, the fastest warming region on earth, increasing its influence on the global average. Large areas with sparse measurements were filled using estimates. Stations in regions showing cooling, including parts of South America, were removed or down-weighted. Sea surface temperatures were also reprocessed. Older ship readings were adjusted cooler, with recent buoy data blended warmer. Homogenization algorithms lowered earlier temps and raised later ones, further steepening the trend. The models stayed fixed. The observations were adjusted to match them. That is how the pause disappeared. Climate scientists reversed the scientific method.

In the early 2000s, climate models projected warming, but the actual observations did not follow. This gap between models and measurements became known as 'the global warming pause'. The response to this discrepancy was not to revisit the models, it was to revisit the measurements. More weather stations were added in the Arctic, the fastest warming region on earth, increasing its influence on the global average. Large areas with sparse measurements were filled using estimates. Stations in regions showing cooling, including parts of South America, were removed or down-weighted. Sea surface temperatures were also reprocessed. Older ship readings were adjusted cooler, with recent buoy data blended warmer. Homogenization algorithms lowered earlier temps and raised later ones, further steepening the trend. The models stayed fixed. The observations were adjusted to match them. That is how the pause disappeared. Climate scientists reversed the scientific method.

Electroverse

34,837 views • 4 months ago

The Guardian claims ocean warming is causing a 'staggering' collapse in marine life, but the study it cites actually shows the opposite. When a year is warmer, fish biomass is found to increase - by as much as 24%. When years turn colder, biomass falls - by around 15%. That is the observed data. To preserve the climate narrative, however, the authors then abandon real year-to-year results and switch to a modeled decadal trend. The model assigns warming a negative effect and reports a decline. That decline is not observed. It is modeled. The authors go on to admit they cannot separate temperature effects from overfishing, which is the primary, well-known driver of fish declines worldwide. Since fishing pressure is not included, the model loads losses onto temperature by default. Even though, as per the study's own data, warmer years mean more fish. The collapse exists only in the model. And the headlines.

The Guardian claims ocean warming is causing a 'staggering' collapse in marine life, but the study it cites actually shows the opposite. When a year is warmer, fish biomass is found to increase - by as much as 24%. When years turn colder, biomass falls - by around 15%. That is the observed data. To preserve the climate narrative, however, the authors then abandon real year-to-year results and switch to a modeled decadal trend. The model assigns warming a negative effect and reports a decline. That decline is not observed. It is modeled. The authors go on to admit they cannot separate temperature effects from overfishing, which is the primary, well-known driver of fish declines worldwide. Since fishing pressure is not included, the model loads losses onto temperature by default. Even though, as per the study's own data, warmer years mean more fish. The collapse exists only in the model. And the headlines.

Electroverse

13,304 views • 4 months ago

Global warming? There is a clear global warming especially in the last 45 years, with 2023-2024 being the warmest years on satellite records. However, the current global temperature is not warm. It is only ~1.2°C higher than in 1850, one of the coldest years in the last 10,000 years. And the current climate is one of the coldest of the last 485 million years. Global warming is primarily driven by natural cycles. Humans are not the control factor. There is no man-made climate crisis. This is my usual compendium with automatic audio using a text-to-audio AI application. It still needs to improve, but it's already quite acceptable!

Global warming? There is a clear global warming especially in the last 45 years, with 2023-2024 being the warmest years on satellite records. However, the current global temperature is not warm. It is only ~1.2°C higher than in 1850, one of the coldest years in the last 10,000 years. And the current climate is one of the coldest of the last 485 million years. Global warming is primarily driven by natural cycles. Humans are not the control factor. There is no man-made climate crisis. This is my usual compendium with automatic audio using a text-to-audio AI application. It still needs to improve, but it's already quite acceptable!

JOSE GEFAELL

18,902 views • 1 year ago

Today's warming is not unusual. A new study using Antarctic ice core data reveals the roughly 1.1C warming of the past century is not unusual in Earth's climate history. The research analyzes temperatures preserved in ice cores stretching back hundreds of thousands of years. Looking at the last 20,000 years, the study finds that 16% of all centuries warmed by at least 1.1C. In other words, roughly one out of every six centuries warmed as much, or more, as the past hundred years. Also, the ice core records show temperatures rising about 12C since the last ice age, with the last interglacial period around 125,000 years ago several degrees warmer than today. The modern 1.1C century scale increase falls well within natural variability. There is nothing alarming or unprecedented or even rare occurring with Earth's climate.

Today's warming is not unusual. A new study using Antarctic ice core data reveals the roughly 1.1C warming of the past century is not unusual in Earth's climate history. The research analyzes temperatures preserved in ice cores stretching back hundreds of thousands of years. Looking at the last 20,000 years, the study finds that 16% of all centuries warmed by at least 1.1C. In other words, roughly one out of every six centuries warmed as much, or more, as the past hundred years. Also, the ice core records show temperatures rising about 12C since the last ice age, with the last interglacial period around 125,000 years ago several degrees warmer than today. The modern 1.1C century scale increase falls well within natural variability. There is nothing alarming or unprecedented or even rare occurring with Earth's climate.

Electroverse

17,876 views • 1 month ago

The UK Met Office has again been caught publishing temperatures from weather stations that don't exist. An FOI revealed Lowestoft closed in 2010, yet the Met Office kept issuing official temperatures for it. The office said they were using well-correlated neighboring stations, but the FOI revealed that this was a lie. The numbers were actually coming from a model that was inventing data from 'phantom' neighboring stations. When exposed, the office quietly deleted years of readings for Lowestoft, as well as a number of other stations, and added a disclaimer saying their data is "for general interest only." FOIs also show over one third of Met Office stations never existed, and that real high-quality sites like Colwood are ignored. Also, more than 80% of the network is low-grade class 4 or 5, by WMO standards, giving 2-5C uncertainty. This is the foundation of the UK's climate record – closed stations, imaginary stations and synthetic temperatures. The Met Office isn't credible.

The UK Met Office has again been caught publishing temperatures from weather stations that don't exist. An FOI revealed Lowestoft closed in 2010, yet the Met Office kept issuing official temperatures for it. The office said they were using well-correlated neighboring stations, but the FOI revealed that this was a lie. The numbers were actually coming from a model that was inventing data from 'phantom' neighboring stations. When exposed, the office quietly deleted years of readings for Lowestoft, as well as a number of other stations, and added a disclaimer saying their data is "for general interest only." FOIs also show over one third of Met Office stations never existed, and that real high-quality sites like Colwood are ignored. Also, more than 80% of the network is low-grade class 4 or 5, by WMO standards, giving 2-5C uncertainty. This is the foundation of the UK's climate record – closed stations, imaginary stations and synthetic temperatures. The Met Office isn't credible.

Electroverse

39,951 views • 2 months ago

THE CORRELATION OF TEMPERATURE TO CO2 IS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE ARE TOLD: TEMPERATURE CHANGE LEADS TO CO2 CHANGE, NOT VICEVERSA: CO2 lags earth temperature changes by 800 years, not the other way round. The CO2 causing Climate Change narrative is a hoax, climate change causes CO2 change instead, because it is emitted by the ocean, which acts as a temperature dependent carbon sink. SCIENTIFIC PROOF CO2 IS NOT THE CAUSE OF CLIMATE CHANGE Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III | Science "We have measured the isotopic composition of argon in air bubbles in the Vostok core during Termination III (∼240,000 years before the present). This record most likely reflects the temperature and accumulation change, although the mechanism remains unclear. The sequence of events during Termination III suggests that the CO2 increase lagged Antarctic deglacial warming by 800 ± 200 years and preceded the Northern Hemisphere deglaciation."

THE CORRELATION OF TEMPERATURE TO CO2 IS THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE ARE TOLD: TEMPERATURE CHANGE LEADS TO CO2 CHANGE, NOT VICEVERSA: CO2 lags earth temperature changes by 800 years, not the other way round. The CO2 causing Climate Change narrative is a hoax, climate change causes CO2 change instead, because it is emitted by the ocean, which acts as a temperature dependent carbon sink. SCIENTIFIC PROOF CO2 IS NOT THE CAUSE OF CLIMATE CHANGE Timing of Atmospheric CO2 and Antarctic Temperature Changes Across Termination III | Science "We have measured the isotopic composition of argon in air bubbles in the Vostok core during Termination III (∼240,000 years before the present). This record most likely reflects the temperature and accumulation change, although the mechanism remains unclear. The sequence of events during Termination III suggests that the CO2 increase lagged Antarctic deglacial warming by 800 ± 200 years and preceded the Northern Hemisphere deglaciation."

Robin Monotti

112,698 views • 1 year ago

Katharine Hayhoe, climate scientist and WEF agenda contributor: "And so often when I speak of climate change, I don't call it global warming, because as individuals, we don't experience the average temperature of the planet. But what I do call it is global weirding." "Because wherever people live, they recognize that something is weird. You can talk to almost anyone. can say, if you live here, do you feel the weather is weird? And they will say yes. Scientists have predicted this. We've known for a long time that climate change is loading the weather dice against us." "We've known that as the average temperature of the planet increases, heat waves will become more intense, the heat wave season will be extended. Heavy downpours will become more frequent, and flood risk will increase in many places." "The intensity of tropical storms, including cyclones, hurricanes, typhoons, will increase. And droughts, like the one being experienced in Syria right now, which would not be a drought if it were not for human-induced warming, would become more intense."

Katharine Hayhoe, climate scientist and WEF agenda contributor: "And so often when I speak of climate change, I don't call it global warming, because as individuals, we don't experience the average temperature of the planet. But what I do call it is global weirding." "Because wherever people live, they recognize that something is weird. You can talk to almost anyone. can say, if you live here, do you feel the weather is weird? And they will say yes. Scientists have predicted this. We've known for a long time that climate change is loading the weather dice against us." "We've known that as the average temperature of the planet increases, heat waves will become more intense, the heat wave season will be extended. Heavy downpours will become more frequent, and flood risk will increase in many places." "The intensity of tropical storms, including cyclones, hurricanes, typhoons, will increase. And droughts, like the one being experienced in Syria right now, which would not be a drought if it were not for human-induced warming, would become more intense."

Camus

50,067 views • 11 months ago

MUST-WATCH: Contrary to propaganda spouted by climate alarmists, rising temperatures are the CAUSE of increased atmospheric CO2, not the other way around, and the temperature of the Earth is regulated by solar activity. The climate has always changed, long before humans got here, and it will continue to change long after we're gone, but globalist bodies like the UN and WEF want us to believe that humans are causing it, as a pretext to exert absolute totalitarian control over the entire planet. From the documentary, ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle’. Watch the full documentary here: For more content like this, visit: #ClimateScam #NetZero

MUST-WATCH: Contrary to propaganda spouted by climate alarmists, rising temperatures are the CAUSE of increased atmospheric CO2, not the other way around, and the temperature of the Earth is regulated by solar activity. The climate has always changed, long before humans got here, and it will continue to change long after we're gone, but globalist bodies like the UN and WEF want us to believe that humans are causing it, as a pretext to exert absolute totalitarian control over the entire planet. From the documentary, ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle’. Watch the full documentary here: For more content like this, visit: #ClimateScam #NetZero

Wide Awake Media

739,745 views • 2 years ago

Sea Levels Not Surging Despite Years Of Climate Activists And Corporate Media Freaking Out, Study Finds | Audrey Streb, Daily Caller News Foundation One recent study compiling sea level rise data shows oceans are not surging as much as the scientific world previously projected and corporate media has repeatedly sounded the alarm over. The Journal of Marine Science and Engineering published the peer-reviewed study on Aug. 27, authored by Dutch engineering consultant Hessel G. Voortman and independent researcher Rob De Vos. The study concluded that the average rate of sea level rise in 2020 was well below other widely cited analyses, and that when projections were compared with local data, there was little evidence climate change was driving the acceleration seen in a few regions — a finding energy policy experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation challenges mainstream climate change orthodoxy. “Overall, this study indicates that in most places, sea levels are not rising unusually quickly. In the relatively few locations where sea levels are rising faster than average, the cause is almost certainly local factors such as land subsidence or ground compaction,” Sterling Burnett, director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy at The Heartland Institute, told the DCNF. “Global sea levels are currently rising more slowly than they have for much of the time since the last ice age ended — a period during which seas rose more than 400 feet. Any possible increase in the recent rate of rise compared with the past century is small, within the margin of error, and not outside historical patterns.” Though the report doesn’t account for sea level rise everywhere, Voortman told journalist Michael Shellenberger on Tuesday that he was surprised no one had compiled such a study before, noting it is the first to compare projections with recorded local data from the past century. The two data sets the researchers drew from did have some gaps, which meant that most sections in the world with usable data were in the Northern Hemisphere, with several of the “selected stations” spanning North America, Europe and Japan. Gaps in the data included regions around Australia, the northeast of Latin America, East Asia and most of Africa. “The average rate of sea level rise in 2020 is (only) around 1.5 mm/year (15 cm per century)” Voortman said Tuesday. “This is significantly lower than the 3 to 4 mm/year often reported by climate scientists in scientific literature and the media.” The report notes that in the data sets the researchers used, “approximately 95% of the suitable locations show no statistically significant acceleration of the rate of sea level rise,” and that regions that did see a spike in sea level likely “local, non-climatic phenomena are a plausible cause of the accelerated sea level rise observed at the remaining 5% of the suitable locations.” “It is crazy that it had not been done. … I started doing this research in 2021 by doing the literature review. ‘Who has done the comparison of the projections with the observations?’ And there were none,” Voortman said Tuesday. “I had to do a lot of programming and automate data imports and data management. I organized it by using databases so that I really knew what I was doing. It was very structured because I was dealing with 150,000 locations and, on average, 100 years of data. That made one and a half million lines of data. I found myself for days working on things that I felt, ‘This is more computer science than civil engineering.'” Steve Milloy, senior fellow at the Energy & Environment Legal Institute, told the DCNF that “there are a lot of additional factors that can affect tide gauge measurements including geological changes, groundwater withdrawal, and land use. But climate alarmists falsely chalk up all changes to polar ice melting caused by emissions-driven ‘global warming.'” A few other studies have been published of late that also challenge climate change hysteria, with one widely reported study showing that Arctic Sea ice melting has slowed in the last 20 years. Another recent report found that a 2024 climate change study — heavily cited by legacy media for projecting up to $38 trillion in global damages by 2050 — relied on inaccurate data.

Sea Levels Not Surging Despite Years Of Climate Activists And Corporate Media Freaking Out, Study Finds | Audrey Streb, Daily Caller News Foundation One recent study compiling sea level rise data shows oceans are not surging as much as the scientific world previously projected and corporate media has repeatedly sounded the alarm over. The Journal of Marine Science and Engineering published the peer-reviewed study on Aug. 27, authored by Dutch engineering consultant Hessel G. Voortman and independent researcher Rob De Vos. The study concluded that the average rate of sea level rise in 2020 was well below other widely cited analyses, and that when projections were compared with local data, there was little evidence climate change was driving the acceleration seen in a few regions — a finding energy policy experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation challenges mainstream climate change orthodoxy. “Overall, this study indicates that in most places, sea levels are not rising unusually quickly. In the relatively few locations where sea levels are rising faster than average, the cause is almost certainly local factors such as land subsidence or ground compaction,” Sterling Burnett, director of the Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy at The Heartland Institute, told the DCNF. “Global sea levels are currently rising more slowly than they have for much of the time since the last ice age ended — a period during which seas rose more than 400 feet. Any possible increase in the recent rate of rise compared with the past century is small, within the margin of error, and not outside historical patterns.” Though the report doesn’t account for sea level rise everywhere, Voortman told journalist Michael Shellenberger on Tuesday that he was surprised no one had compiled such a study before, noting it is the first to compare projections with recorded local data from the past century. The two data sets the researchers drew from did have some gaps, which meant that most sections in the world with usable data were in the Northern Hemisphere, with several of the “selected stations” spanning North America, Europe and Japan. Gaps in the data included regions around Australia, the northeast of Latin America, East Asia and most of Africa. “The average rate of sea level rise in 2020 is (only) around 1.5 mm/year (15 cm per century)” Voortman said Tuesday. “This is significantly lower than the 3 to 4 mm/year often reported by climate scientists in scientific literature and the media.” The report notes that in the data sets the researchers used, “approximately 95% of the suitable locations show no statistically significant acceleration of the rate of sea level rise,” and that regions that did see a spike in sea level likely “local, non-climatic phenomena are a plausible cause of the accelerated sea level rise observed at the remaining 5% of the suitable locations.” “It is crazy that it had not been done. … I started doing this research in 2021 by doing the literature review. ‘Who has done the comparison of the projections with the observations?’ And there were none,” Voortman said Tuesday. “I had to do a lot of programming and automate data imports and data management. I organized it by using databases so that I really knew what I was doing. It was very structured because I was dealing with 150,000 locations and, on average, 100 years of data. That made one and a half million lines of data. I found myself for days working on things that I felt, ‘This is more computer science than civil engineering.'” Steve Milloy, senior fellow at the Energy & Environment Legal Institute, told the DCNF that “there are a lot of additional factors that can affect tide gauge measurements including geological changes, groundwater withdrawal, and land use. But climate alarmists falsely chalk up all changes to polar ice melting caused by emissions-driven ‘global warming.'” A few other studies have been published of late that also challenge climate change hysteria, with one widely reported study showing that Arctic Sea ice melting has slowed in the last 20 years. Another recent report found that a 2024 climate change study — heavily cited by legacy media for projecting up to $38 trillion in global damages by 2050 — relied on inaccurate data.

Owen Gregorian

105,142 views • 10 months ago

The UN says 99% of coral reefs will vanish with just 2C of warming, but this claim collapses the moment you look at a map. Coral reefs are concentrated in the warmest waters on Earth because they need heat and sunlight to survive. If warmth killed coral, the Indo-Pacific and Caribbean would be barren. But they're not. They're instead the global hotspots of reef diversity. And as for the Great Barrier Reef (the world's most politicized reef), it has posted record coral cover over the past four years, directly contradicting decades of climate doom. As always, the "crisis narrative" collapses the moment you stop to take a look at the actual data.

The UN says 99% of coral reefs will vanish with just 2C of warming, but this claim collapses the moment you look at a map. Coral reefs are concentrated in the warmest waters on Earth because they need heat and sunlight to survive. If warmth killed coral, the Indo-Pacific and Caribbean would be barren. But they're not. They're instead the global hotspots of reef diversity. And as for the Great Barrier Reef (the world's most politicized reef), it has posted record coral cover over the past four years, directly contradicting decades of climate doom. As always, the "crisis narrative" collapses the moment you stop to take a look at the actual data.

Electroverse

19,569 views • 2 months ago

President Trump: "In 1982, the executive director of the United Nations Environmental Program predicted that by the year 2000 climate change would cause a global catastrophe. He said that it will be irreversible as any nuclear holocaust would be. This is what they said at the United Nations." "What happened? Here we are. Another UN official stated in 1989 that within a decade entire nations could be wiped off the map. By global warming. Not happening." "You know, it used to be global cooling. If you look back years ago in the 1920s and the 1930s they said global cooling will kill the world. We have to do something. Then they said global warming will kill the world. But then it started getting cooler." "So now they could just call it climate change because that way they can't miss. It's climate change. Because if it goes higher or lower, whatever the hell happens, there's climate change." "It's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion. Climate change, no matter what happens, you're involved in that. No more global warming." "No more global cooling. All of these predictions made by the United Nations and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were made by stupid people that have cost their country's fortunes and given those same countries no chance for success." "If you don't get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail. And I'm really good at predicting things, you know."

President Trump: "In 1982, the executive director of the United Nations Environmental Program predicted that by the year 2000 climate change would cause a global catastrophe. He said that it will be irreversible as any nuclear holocaust would be. This is what they said at the United Nations." "What happened? Here we are. Another UN official stated in 1989 that within a decade entire nations could be wiped off the map. By global warming. Not happening." "You know, it used to be global cooling. If you look back years ago in the 1920s and the 1930s they said global cooling will kill the world. We have to do something. Then they said global warming will kill the world. But then it started getting cooler." "So now they could just call it climate change because that way they can't miss. It's climate change. Because if it goes higher or lower, whatever the hell happens, there's climate change." "It's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion. Climate change, no matter what happens, you're involved in that. No more global warming." "No more global cooling. All of these predictions made by the United Nations and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were made by stupid people that have cost their country's fortunes and given those same countries no chance for success." "If you don't get away from this green scam, your country is going to fail. And I'm really good at predicting things, you know."

Camus

45,930 views • 9 months ago

According to documents I have obtained from the Met Office shows that a staggering 80% of UK temperature stations are classified as 'poor or unreliable' by international standards (WMO Class 3–5). These classifications are used globally by the UN to assess climate data integrity. Despite this, these lower-grade stations are still being used, without correction, in national climate datasets like HadUK-Grid, which directly inform Net Zero policy, media narratives, and claims of “record-breaking” temperatures. Even more concerning, the Met Office admitted it has conducted no internal audits or reviews to assess how these poor-quality stations might be distorting national climate trends. Not in the past decade. Possibly never. The Net Zero narrative could potentially collapse completely once its underlying data is properly scrutinised.

According to documents I have obtained from the Met Office shows that a staggering 80% of UK temperature stations are classified as 'poor or unreliable' by international standards (WMO Class 3–5). These classifications are used globally by the UN to assess climate data integrity. Despite this, these lower-grade stations are still being used, without correction, in national climate datasets like HadUK-Grid, which directly inform Net Zero policy, media narratives, and claims of “record-breaking” temperatures. Even more concerning, the Met Office admitted it has conducted no internal audits or reviews to assess how these poor-quality stations might be distorting national climate trends. Not in the past decade. Possibly never. The Net Zero narrative could potentially collapse completely once its underlying data is properly scrutinised.

Lewis Brackpool

235,605 views • 1 year ago

Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Science at MIT, says global warming fear isn't driven by data, but by money and control. He recently told the Daily Mail that politicians saw climate policy as a multi-trillion dollar opportunity to reshape industries, to push globalization. The public was fed panic over a minuscule temperature change that means almost nothing. Lindzen calculates that even a doubling of CO2 would warm the planet by only half a degree. He argues nature stabilizes, not amplifies, climate swings, and that today's warmth and CO2 levels actually help plants grow and expand farmland. "People are finally starting to question this," he said. "It'll be an embarrassment to our era."

Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Science at MIT, says global warming fear isn't driven by data, but by money and control. He recently told the Daily Mail that politicians saw climate policy as a multi-trillion dollar opportunity to reshape industries, to push globalization. The public was fed panic over a minuscule temperature change that means almost nothing. Lindzen calculates that even a doubling of CO2 would warm the planet by only half a degree. He argues nature stabilizes, not amplifies, climate swings, and that today's warmth and CO2 levels actually help plants grow and expand farmland. "People are finally starting to question this," he said. "It'll be an embarrassment to our era."

Electroverse

44,421 views • 2 months ago

In 2016, the Netherlands Meteorological Institute adjusted temperatures at De Bilt - the country's main climate station. Daily maximums from 1901 to 1950 were lowered by up to 1.9C, which removed 16 of 23 heatwaves from the record. The altered data were then used to claim modern heatwaves were unprecedented. Four researchers challenged the changes. But the institute dismissed the criticism. So the analysis went to peer review. In 2021, it was published, conclusively demonstrating the method systematically erased historical heat extremes. Today, the Meteorological Institute has quietly changed its approach, and as a result, seven erased heatwaves have been restored. Here again, we have a government agency caught rewriting climate history. The Netherlands Meteorological Institute erased heatwaves of the past, ignored critics, and reinstated the truth only when the evidence became impossible to ignore. Policies were built on that manipulated record. Dutch farmers lost livelihoods. Industry and the wider economy paid the price. But accountability is coming...

In 2016, the Netherlands Meteorological Institute adjusted temperatures at De Bilt - the country's main climate station. Daily maximums from 1901 to 1950 were lowered by up to 1.9C, which removed 16 of 23 heatwaves from the record. The altered data were then used to claim modern heatwaves were unprecedented. Four researchers challenged the changes. But the institute dismissed the criticism. So the analysis went to peer review. In 2021, it was published, conclusively demonstrating the method systematically erased historical heat extremes. Today, the Meteorological Institute has quietly changed its approach, and as a result, seven erased heatwaves have been restored. Here again, we have a government agency caught rewriting climate history. The Netherlands Meteorological Institute erased heatwaves of the past, ignored critics, and reinstated the truth only when the evidence became impossible to ignore. Policies were built on that manipulated record. Dutch farmers lost livelihoods. Industry and the wider economy paid the price. But accountability is coming...

Electroverse

472,625 views • 5 months ago

Greenland Temperature Study Challenges Climate Narratives: The Data Speaks | Climate Conservative Consumer Recent analysis of MODIS satellite data (2000–2019) reveals Greenland’s surface temperatures remained remarkably stable, challenging narratives of rapid Arctic warming. The study, covering 31,464 observations across 36 sub-regions, found minimal long-term trends—only a slight cooling of ~0.05°C per decade, with three of four regions showing no significant change and the South region cooling slightly. This contrasts with expectations of accelerated warming, though seasonal patterns remained consistent. The findings suggest factors beyond surface temperature, such as ocean currents or ice dynamics, may drive observed ice sheet changes. Ice-free areas showed higher average temperatures than ice-covered regions but neither displayed significant warming, challenging assumptions that ice-free regions would warm faster. The study aligns with other research indicating slowed warming since the 1990s, complicating climate model assumptions. While MODIS data has limitations (e.g., cloud cover), the results highlight complex Arctic climate dynamics, urging reevaluation of ice melt drivers and their implications for sea level projections. The analysis divided Greenland into four primary regions (North, Central-North, Central-South, South), each with nine sub-regions, using statistical methods to isolate long-term trends from seasonal variability. These results underscore the need for honest integration of such findings into climate science discourse, emphasizing the complexity of Arctic climate dynamics and demanding reassessment of current climate models. Read more:

Greenland Temperature Study Challenges Climate Narratives: The Data Speaks | Climate Conservative Consumer Recent analysis of MODIS satellite data (2000–2019) reveals Greenland’s surface temperatures remained remarkably stable, challenging narratives of rapid Arctic warming. The study, covering 31,464 observations across 36 sub-regions, found minimal long-term trends—only a slight cooling of ~0.05°C per decade, with three of four regions showing no significant change and the South region cooling slightly. This contrasts with expectations of accelerated warming, though seasonal patterns remained consistent. The findings suggest factors beyond surface temperature, such as ocean currents or ice dynamics, may drive observed ice sheet changes. Ice-free areas showed higher average temperatures than ice-covered regions but neither displayed significant warming, challenging assumptions that ice-free regions would warm faster. The study aligns with other research indicating slowed warming since the 1990s, complicating climate model assumptions. While MODIS data has limitations (e.g., cloud cover), the results highlight complex Arctic climate dynamics, urging reevaluation of ice melt drivers and their implications for sea level projections. The analysis divided Greenland into four primary regions (North, Central-North, Central-South, South), each with nine sub-regions, using statistical methods to isolate long-term trends from seasonal variability. These results underscore the need for honest integration of such findings into climate science discourse, emphasizing the complexity of Arctic climate dynamics and demanding reassessment of current climate models. Read more:

Owen Gregorian

129,879 views • 1 year ago

$A seismic shift is underway in the climate debate, as new scientific voices challenge long-held orthodoxies with compelling data. A blockbuster sea-level study is making waves, claiming to turn prevailing climate narratives "on its head." The research, titled "A Global Perspective on Sea Level Changes," conducted a rigorous statistical analysis and arrived at a staggering conclusion: approximately 95% of suitable coastal locations show no statistically significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise. For the remaining 5%, the study suggests local, non-climatic factors like tectonic shifts are the "plausible cause"—not human activity. This bold research highlights a growing divergence between established climate institutions and a new cohort of scientists—the "Subtle Science crew"—who are speaking out with factual bravery. This fracture is further evidenced by pushback against radical geoengineering proposals. As figures like Bill Gates advocate for solar radiation modification (blocking out the sun), leading institutions like the Scripps Institute are issuing stark warnings. Experts caution that ideas like stratospheric aerosol injections are not only unlikely to help but could actively harm the global ecosystem. The public is taking note. A major survey in the UK reveals that public skepticism is soaring. The number of Britons who believe the dangers of global warming are exaggerated has jumped by over 50% in just four years, with one in four voters now questioning the severity of the crisis, driven largely by concerns over the crippling costs of net-zero policies. The message is clear: the climate conversation is being fundamentally reshaped by data-driven science and a public increasingly wary of alarmism and unproven, costly solutions.$

A seismic shift is underway in the climate debate, as new scientific voices challenge long-held orthodoxies with compelling data. A blockbuster sea-level study is making waves, claiming to turn prevailing climate narratives "on its head." The research, titled "A Global Perspective on Sea Level Changes," conducted a rigorous statistical analysis and arrived at a staggering conclusion: approximately 95% of suitable coastal locations show no statistically significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise. For the remaining 5%, the study suggests local, non-climatic factors like tectonic shifts are the "plausible cause"—not human activity. This bold research highlights a growing divergence between established climate institutions and a new cohort of scientists—the "Subtle Science crew"—who are speaking out with factual bravery. This fracture is further evidenced by pushback against radical geoengineering proposals. As figures like Bill Gates advocate for solar radiation modification (blocking out the sun), leading institutions like the Scripps Institute are issuing stark warnings. Experts caution that ideas like stratospheric aerosol injections are not only unlikely to help but could actively harm the global ecosystem. The public is taking note. A major survey in the UK reveals that public skepticism is soaring. The number of Britons who believe the dangers of global warming are exaggerated has jumped by over 50% in just four years, with one in four voters now questioning the severity of the crisis, driven largely by concerns over the crippling costs of net-zero policies. The message is clear: the climate conversation is being fundamentally reshaped by data-driven science and a public increasingly wary of alarmism and unproven, costly solutions.

Camus

29,566 views • 9 months ago

Dr. Michael Yeadon Exposes the Foundational Lie of Climate Alarmism What if everything you’ve been told about climate change is not just exaggerated, but a deliberate, orchestrated lie? Former Pfizer VP & Chief Scientist Dr. Michael Yeadon delivers a stunning, evidence-based takedown of the climate change narrative that will make you question everything. He begins by tracing the origins. “If you do nothing else, have a look at the Club of Rome, the Trilateral Commission,” Dr. Yeadon states. “Honestly, things like climate change and pandemic diseases were decided to be used by people concerned about population... They decided at the same time to frighten you with diseases and changes to climate. It's the same group of people at the same time. And after that, there was a diaspora of propaganda.” But what about the science? Dr. Yeadon, an expert in parsing complex data, did his own research. “I found at least three or four people who've spent longer in atmospheric science than I've spent in pharma R&D. And there is no question that there is no significant change to the climate since pre-industrial times.” He dismantles the core data itself. “Where do you think they got the temperature data from when there were virtually no thermometers? They weren't calibrated. No one checked the records. This idea that they know it's 1.5 degrees warmer? It's a lie.” Then, he goes for the jugular: the alleged link between CO2 and temperature. “There is no connection between CO2 in the air and the temperature of the surface... We don't live in a greenhouse. A greenhouse is a closed system. Our atmosphere is open; energy radiates back into space.” The proof? Ice core data. “What several independent groups all show is that changes in temperature ALWAYS preceded change in atmospheric CO2. CO2 moves in response to temperature. Warm water holds less CO2. Everyone knows a warm fizzy drink goes flat. It’s basic science.” His conclusion is unequivocal: “When the Earth warms due to changes in solar output or orbital cycles, the CO2 movement takes place afterwards. All of this fear-mongering about burning fossil fuels adding CO2 and changing the climate? It is a lie. They're lying to you to frighten you and to get you to accept restrictions on your life.” This isn’t a conspiracy theory. It’s a call for intellectual honesty from a renowned scientist. It’s time to stop being frightened by a crisis that doesn’t exist. Share if you’re ready to question the narrative. Follow for more unflinching analysis from world-class experts.

Dr. Michael Yeadon Exposes the Foundational Lie of Climate Alarmism What if everything you’ve been told about climate change is not just exaggerated, but a deliberate, orchestrated lie? Former Pfizer VP & Chief Scientist Dr. Michael Yeadon delivers a stunning, evidence-based takedown of the climate change narrative that will make you question everything. He begins by tracing the origins. “If you do nothing else, have a look at the Club of Rome, the Trilateral Commission,” Dr. Yeadon states. “Honestly, things like climate change and pandemic diseases were decided to be used by people concerned about population... They decided at the same time to frighten you with diseases and changes to climate. It's the same group of people at the same time. And after that, there was a diaspora of propaganda.” But what about the science? Dr. Yeadon, an expert in parsing complex data, did his own research. “I found at least three or four people who've spent longer in atmospheric science than I've spent in pharma R&D. And there is no question that there is no significant change to the climate since pre-industrial times.” He dismantles the core data itself. “Where do you think they got the temperature data from when there were virtually no thermometers? They weren't calibrated. No one checked the records. This idea that they know it's 1.5 degrees warmer? It's a lie.” Then, he goes for the jugular: the alleged link between CO2 and temperature. “There is no connection between CO2 in the air and the temperature of the surface... We don't live in a greenhouse. A greenhouse is a closed system. Our atmosphere is open; energy radiates back into space.” The proof? Ice core data. “What several independent groups all show is that changes in temperature ALWAYS preceded change in atmospheric CO2. CO2 moves in response to temperature. Warm water holds less CO2. Everyone knows a warm fizzy drink goes flat. It’s basic science.” His conclusion is unequivocal: “When the Earth warms due to changes in solar output or orbital cycles, the CO2 movement takes place afterwards. All of this fear-mongering about burning fossil fuels adding CO2 and changing the climate? It is a lie. They're lying to you to frighten you and to get you to accept restrictions on your life.” This isn’t a conspiracy theory. It’s a call for intellectual honesty from a renowned scientist. It’s time to stop being frightened by a crisis that doesn’t exist. Share if you’re ready to question the narrative. Follow for more unflinching analysis from world-class experts.

Camus

20,811 views • 10 months ago