AT: Top-level climate modeler goes rogue, criticizes ‘nonsense’ of ‘global warming crisis’

I can’t make sense of the Amazon page where the free Kindle book is available, but from the summary AT provides Dr. Nakamura appears to be worthy of attention.

9 thoughts on “AT: Top-level climate modeler goes rogue, criticizes ‘nonsense’ of ‘global warming crisis’

  1. A grand conspiracy seems to be the agenda according to Heller.


    There must be thousands around the world sworn by some blood oath. A few names here and there pop up as lying or cheating. But why are they able to control so many scientists with an efficiency that Stalin would have admired?

    Less dependency on coal is good. If not for climate change as Heller seems to indicate is a total hoax, then at least to breathe better air without masks.

    Wind and solar are not going to replace all fossil fuel for a while. But more efficient use of fuels combined with alternative sources can wean us away from burning resources for heat and light. Sources that are finite.

    So we have an Eco-Illuminati on one side. Maybe. And big oil on the other. Definitely.

    That is my take.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. If that’s what you got from Heller’s video, go back and watch it again.

      You don’t understand the way the IPCC works. The conspiracy need not involve thousands of scientists, just a few hundred corrupt UN politicians.

      The IPCC doesn’t do any peer reviewed research. Hundreds of peer reviewed papers, and other non-peer reviewed documents, are reviewed by teams of scientists to prepare three reports on the basic science, effects and mitigation strategies. Those 3 reports are merged by representatives of the three teams to prepare a synthesis report,

      Those 3 reports and the synthesis are submitted to a committee of UN politicians who prepare the “Summary for Policy Makers” which is all most people read. The Summary for Policy Makers is negotiated by the politicians, with each of the 135 countries having 1 vote regardless of size, or qualifications. Some of the seats are sold to the highest bidder. Lord Christopher Monckton usually buys Siri Lanka’s seat. and reports to the skeptic community, providing us with the first order draft of the 4 reports prepared by scientists.

      After the Summary for Policy Makers is negotiated by the politicians, the 4 reports it is based on are (I swear this is true)edited to conform to the Summary. Yes, the scientist’s work is ‘corrected’ by the politicians. That is why it is not uncommon for scientists who participated in the studies demanding their names be removed but they never are. Objecting can be a career ender.

      So, no worldwide conspiracy of scientists is required, all that is necessary is for corrupt politicians to be corrupt with some flare.

      So, go back and watch the video, and note the cherry picking of starting dates for the graphs used, keeping in mind that most policy makers and journalists accept those graphs as Gospel, and tell me that our policies and public opinion are not being manipulated by corrupt UN politicians using the IPCC to redistribute the wealth of the world under their control.


  2. If what you are saying is true, then all the major media, and I mean all, must be in on the scam. And that would include respected journals on both sides of the political spectrum.

    You are exposing a major corruption scandal in a fashion that even Big Oil has not been able report despite its billions. There has to be more exposure than the occasional skeptic with bonafides.

    I understand the benefit to a more equitable distribution of wealth and resources particularly among the smaller third world nations. Remember you’ve stated in the past that a clean environment is a luxury for the first world.

    I also know that there are island nations in the Pacific that are visibly shrinking, so sea level rise is very real to them.

    I saw the “cherry picking”. I am not sure that numbers from the 1930’s, for example, are indicative of warming trends or just an aberration in those areas we could accurately measure then.

    I am not a scientist. My eyes glaze over when numbers start to fly around. But I try to think like a reasonable person when it come to who is benefiting and why.

    I don’t believe a cleaner world environment will end civilization as we know it.


    Liked by 2 people

    1. Miss Thunberg is known to have Aspergers. For ANY publication to refer to that disease as a “mental issue” is wrong headed on so many levels. I wonder how many of those at that publication are alcoholics.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s