For those of us who don’t lie awake at night fretting about global warming or wake up in the morning in a cold sweat wondering if, when we open the curtains, the world as we know it will still exist, the excellent film Climate: The Movie is exactly what we have been waiting for.
In seventy minutes, every climate change myth is tackled head on, with evidence, and alternative plausible explanations for observations about fluctuating temperatures are presented.
Anyone expecting a bunch of swivel-eyed conspiracy theorists proposing that the great and the good – Bill Gates, the WEF or the One World Government – are aiming to wipe out civilisation will be disappointed.
Instead, inconveniently for the global warming lobby, an impressive array of Ivy League academics including an eminent Nobel Prize winning scientist, physicists, astrophysicists and climate scientists present the heterodox view on climate change. It is notable that the co-founder of Greenpeace is also interviewed; his conclusion is that there is not a shred of evidence for global warming. Fancy that!
The main plank of the argument against global warming, and especially any notion of a climate change emergency, are the data on carbon dioxide emissions. First, it is crucial to understand that even if the levels of carbon emissions increased by 100%, they would still be less than 1% of the atmosphere. Carbon dioxide levels do vary. They were extremely low in the dim and distant pre-historic past according to records obtained from fossils and ice bores. Far from being positive, these extremely low levels of carbon dioxide threatened plant life and therefore life itself on the planet.
As any schoolboy (and, I imagine, many a schoolgirl) knows, carbon dioxide is absorbed by plants, metabolised in photosynthesis to produce glucose and, thereby, sustains the plant life on which the remainder of the food chain depends. The climate change fanatics seem to forget that we humans are at the end of that food chain.
But the clincher regarding fluctuating carbon dioxide levels and their relationship to global warming is that increases in global warming – there is no denying that this is a real phenomenon – precede increases in levels of carbon dioxide. ‘Bazinga!’ as Sheldon would say in Big Bang Theory. The chronological relationship between these two phenomena is demonstrated several times.
We do not have to depend on prehistoric data. I am old enough to remember the very harsh winters of my childhood in the 1950s. These followed a period of heatwaves in the 1930s and 1940s. There are photographs in my parents’ collection of snow drifts towering above them, burying vehicles up to the roof. I recall, literally, digging ourselves out of our houses with snow up to the window frames. In both periods, that of heatwave and of extreme winters, levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere were very high.
The climate scaremongers cannot have it both ways.
Convincing evidence is presented from the UK and USA, which have both kept good weather records for the longest periods, that there is no global warming. It is a myth and, if anything, there has been a slight but not particularly significant decline in the period over which these records have been maintained. The truth is that summers are getting no warmer but that winters are getting slightly milder. Anyone who can turn that into a global climate emergency needs a psychiatric referral.
So, what does account for the fluctuations in global temperatures?
Clearly, it is not carbon dioxide levels. For the explanation we must look into space, both deep space and within our own solar system. One explanation for increases lies with the death of supernovas which expire with a spectacular bang sending cosmic rays off to infinity. When these reach earth they seed the condensation of water vapour in the atmosphere; a common phenomenon known as clouds. As every sunbather knows, clouds have a cooling effect: they reflect solar energy back out into space. Working in opposition to this is the phenomenon of solar wind which blocks cosmic rays from reaching earth, thus, reducing cloud cover. Data strongly suggests that the fluctuations in the twin phenomena of cosmic rays and solar wind account for the fluctuations in global temperatures.
Of course, the climate-obsessed either do not see or refuse to acknowledge such fluctuations; all they see are the upticks and this has led to widespread corruption of climate related science. This corruption is explained by some of the main players who are interviewed in the film. They refer to the massive land army of climate advisers and carbon dioxide consultants who milk major corporations, to the green industry manufacturing products which will help us ‘save the planet’ and to the reasons why government funding is never allocated to sceptical climatologists.
A hallmark of Climate: The Movie is the good humour with which those involved present their case. The film is light-hearted and the perfect antidote to the dramatic fear-mongering propaganda perpetuated by the likes of extinctionists Greta ‘How dare you?’ Thunberg, George Monbiot and Chris Packham.
You will not see this film reviewed in the mainstream media, nor will it ever be shown on the BBC.
It is still available on YouTube but has been removed once, apparently, and is very hard to find.
As I write, it can be accessed directly from Google. However, if you go to YouTube and search for it you will find that it is missing from your search history (if you have already viewed it) and to find it you will have to scroll right past 25 climate films, all pushing climate change orthodoxy.
Heresy!
The first of these is a clip from the BBC with that execrable pansy of natural philosophy, Professor Brian Cox, pushing the party line. The film is also available on Vimeo but, given their censoriousness over Covid-19 related information, I would not guarantee its longevity.
Probably better to go to Rumble or BitChute.
Wherever you go, I urge you to watch it soon.
Roger Watson is a retired academic, editor and writer. He is a columnist with Unity News Network and writes regularly for a range of conservative journals including The Salisbury Review and The European Conservative. He has travelled and worked extensively in the Far East and the Middle East. He lives in Kingston upon Hull, UK.
This piece first appeared in Country Squire Magazine, and is reproduced by kind permission.
If you enjoy The New Conservative and would like to support our work, please consider buying us a coffee – it would really help to keep us going. Thank you!
I would concur with Roger, this is the most excellent film and helps solidify many of the conclusions one had already come to about the Net Zero scam.
The people who most need to see this film will refuse point blank to, those who do either willingly or by accident will undoubtedly cry ‘misinformation’ as they’ve been subliminally taught to. Only a very small % will actually be able to grasp that the population at large have been had and that TPTB are corrupt. It’s an excellent film but can it compete for the educational levels and short attention spans of those in awe of the ilk of Attenborough and DiCaprio?
Not perhaps the best place to leave this thought, but if Swiss Grannys have established in law that they have a human right to be defended against Climate Change and yet it’s obvious that States have no descernable impact upon this false ’emergency’ – shouldn’t we be now demanding the State provides nuclear shelters for all, since States do have control over Foreign Policy and War.