The Climate Hustle

I hear that climate change will destroy much of the world.

“There will be irreversible damage to the planet!” warns a CNN anchor.

Joe Biden says he’ll spend $500 billion a year to fight what his website calls an “existential threat to life.”

Really?

I’m a consumer reporter. Over the years, alarmed scientists have passionately warned me about many things that they thought were about to kill Americans.

“Asbestos in hair dryers, coffee, computer terminals, electric power lines, microwave ovens, cell phones (brain tumors!), electric blankets, computer terminals, herbicides, plastic residue, etc. are causing America’s cancer epidemic!”

If those things don’t get us, “West Nile Virus will!” Or SARS, Bird Flu, Ebola, flesh-eating bacteria or “killer bees.”

Experts told me millions would die on Jan. 1, 2000, because computers couldn’t handle the switch from 1999. Machines would fail; planes would crash.

The scientists were well-informed specialists in their fields. They were sincerely alarmed. The more knowledge you have about a threat, the more alarmed you get.

Yet, mass death didn’t happen. COVID-19 has been the only time in my 50 years of reporting that a scare proved true.

Maybe you accepted the phrase I used above: “America’s cancer epidemic.” But there is no cancer epidemic. Cancer rates are down. We simply live long enough to get diseases like cancer. But people think there’s a cancer epidemic.

The opposite is true. As we’ve been exposed to more plastics, pesticides, mysterious chemicals, food additives and new technologies, we live longer than ever!

That’s why I’m skeptical when I’m told: Climate change is a crisis!

Climate change is real. It’s a problem, but I doubt that it’s “an existential threat.”

Saying that makes alarmists mad.

When Marc Morano says it, activists try to prevent him from speaking.

“They do not want dissent,” says Morano, founder of ClimateDepot.com, a website that rebuts much of what climate activists teach in schools.

“It’s an indoctrination that’s so complete that by the time (kids) get to high school, they’re not even aware that there’s any scientific dissent.”

Morano’s new movie, “Climate Hustle 2,” presents that dissent. My new video this week features his movie.

Morano argues that politicians use fear of global warming in order to gain power.

“Climate Hustle 2” features Senator Chuck Schumer shouting: “If we would do more on climate change, we’d have fewer of these hurricanes and other types of storms! Everyone knows that!”

But everyone doesn’t know that. Many scientists refute it. Congress’ own hearings include testimony about how our warmer climate has not caused increases in the number of hurricanes or tornadoes. “Climate Hustle 2” includes many examples like that.

“Why should we believe you?” I ask Morano. “You’re getting money from the fossil fuel industry.” After all, Daily Kos calls him “Evil Personified” and says ExxonMobil funds him.

“Not at all,” he replies. “I’m paid by about 90% individual contributions from around the country. Why would ExxonMobil give me money (when) they want to appear green?”

Morano’s movie frustrates climate activists by pointing out how hypocritical some are.

Actor Leonardo DiCaprio says he lives a “green lifestyle… (using) energy-efficient appliances. I drive a hybrid car.”

Then he flies to Europe to attend a party.

I like watching Morano point out celebrities’ hypocrisy, but think one claim in his movie goes too far.

“Stopping climate change is not about saving the planet,” says narrator Kevin Sorbo. “It’s about climate elites trying to convince us to accept a future where they call all the shots.”

I push back at Morano: “I think they are genuinely concerned, and they want to save us.”

“Their vision of saving us is putting them in charge,” he replies.

And if they’re in charge, he says, they will destroy capitalism.

Image by Jody Davis from Pixabay

16 thoughts on “The Climate Hustle

  1. A quick look back in time, verified my evidence of civilization under glaciers tells the person with common sense, this is cyclical , not man made.

  2. Remember the carbon credits from a few years ago? That was a way for the wealthy to still fly in private jets, own multi-million dollar homes in several places and claim they were making a difference. I don’t remember if anybody audited those carbon credit banks. I think this was an Al Gore claim.

  3. “the issue is never the issue. The issue is always the revolution.”

    Once you understand this, it all makes sense.

      1. Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now you begin to understand me.”
        ― George Orwell, 1984

  4. Politicians said global cooling was a problem. Then they said it was global warming. That didn’t work, so they went to climate change. That works for them because no matter what happens they can say they were right. Politicians use this propaganda to maintain their power. That’s what it’s about; power

  5. Yes climate change is a major threat. Unfortunately the pollution of our waterways by plastic and sewage Is greater and more visible. Yet we are unable to do something about it. Why would we possibly think that we could do something about climate change that is not so visible. It would seem the only solution is for humans to die off.

  6. Always Follow the Money! Any information, data, trends, publications, studies, etc. that is incentivized by Money or Power must be thoroughly investigated not blindly accepted as fact.

  7. So CO2 Levels at 400+ PPM (vs the average of 260 PPM over the last ten thousand years) is just fine? No need to worry or act? Should we at least PREPARE for things like more droughts, fires, floods, storms? or is this also a Liberal / Elite agenda? You cannot be serious in believing the private sector has ‘incentives’ to prepare and mitigate the damage from man-made greenhouse gas emissions (and ecosystem collapse). Who’s going to lead the charge in slowing / mitigating this (if you concede this is even a problem)??

    What will you tell your grand kids 50 years from now when they ask about what we were doing / thinking when we saw that the climate was changing rapidly, and it was obvious man-made greenhouse gas emissions was the cause? Will you tell them that you fought against this by convincing people it wasn’t a problem??? Curious. Asking for a friend.

    1. I wonder what you will tell your grandchildren in 50 years when none of those things come to pass but you voted for politicians who stripped them of their basic rights slowly but surely for half a century.

      If the science is settled then why do all the leading scientists refuse to debate the issues? If it’s so obvious then why are many of the leading studies impossible to reproduce? If this has been honest research then why are scientists being discouraged from sharing any results that go against the narrative?

      It’s simple, the proof is not there. If that changes then we will modify our behavior immediately. Until then I refuse to vote against my best interests in order to stop a made up catastrophe.

  8. This is what I like about you; you are one of the few rational people who actually think for themselves. To not take everything at face value that people tell you, to look what’s behind it.

  9. Also, unless you have the chops to actually understand the underlying science and statistics, your opinions are essentially meaningless. You might still wield political power or social influence though. But if we are interested in actually understanding what is the most likely truth of the matter, then you need to have a deep understanding of the science… at least a somewhat strong understanding of the underlying statistical theory roughly equivalent to a year long college-level study of probability and statistics and a broad understanding of modern science. If you don’t know what a confidence interval is (and how such statistical methods can be validated and what can cause them to fail), then you should just stay out of the discussion. If there is actual scientific dissent, then that’s great. Let those scientists speak. I doubt Marc Moreno has much of an understanding of the science and statistics. I doubt you do either, John. I’m open to being proven wrong though.

  10. The hypocrisy of the Elites in Hollywood , Politics, and Academia is immense. They expect everyone to become vegan, walk to work, not protect themselves with firearms, etc. But they can fly all over the world polluting the atmosphere, live in ridiculously large homes that have to be heated and air conditioned and use vast amounts of energy, and have armed security guards and live in gated communities. It’s absurd. Of course I want our environment to be as clean as possible, we should utilize as much clean energy as possible, but are batteries used in electric cars really “clean energy”? They have to be disposed of some day. The glaciers have been melting since the end of the ice age. It’s not a new phenomenon. Much of North America was once covered in glaciers. Everyone is worried about the CO2 levels, but you never hear about the half life of the magnetic field. If it continues to decrease at the same rate it is now, it is due to dissipate by 3991 A.D. So, why sweat it? Just sayin’.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *