reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In this video, the speaker discusses their work and criticizes the idea that carbon dioxide (CO2) is harmful. They argue that CO2 is essential for life and that it is wrong to demonize it. The speaker mentions their independent research center and encourages viewers to visit their website for more information. They express a desire to be independent and set their own research agenda. The speaker believes that climate change is likely caused by the sun, not CO2. They question the idea of setting a specific global temperature and argue that the issue of global warming should be ignored and people should adapt to it.

The speaker argues that the current climate is not warmer than previous periods in history. They claim that carbon dioxide levels are at their lowest in 600 million years. They also mention that the medieval warm period was warmer than the present, but this information was allegedly removed from the IPCC reports to fit a specific narrative. The speaker suggests that those who challenge this narrative do not receive sufficient media coverage. They mention the large amount of money invested in climate change.

People are facing a mass extinction while discussions focus on economic growth. The climate alarm has evolved into a lucrative industry, driven by self-interest and government funding. Many careers depend on climate research, leading to a corruption of science. Skeptics face intimidation, and the narrative promotes increased government control. Historical climate data shows that current temperatures are not unprecedented; Earth has experienced much warmer periods. The role of CO2 in climate change is questioned, with evidence suggesting temperature changes precede CO2 increases. The climate crisis narrative serves to expand government power and control over individual lives. Many in the climate industry benefit financially from the alarmism, while ordinary people resist restrictions on their lifestyles, recognizing the agenda as an attack on freedom and prosperity.

The speaker argues that life on Earth is in crisis due to crop failure, social and ecological collapse, and mass extinction, framing these as part of Extinction Rebellion’s climate alarmist narrative and a broader political and financial “climate industrial complex” that aims to control purchases, diet, and travel in the name of sustainability and net-zero emissions. They contend that people rely on governments and the media rather than data, and promise to show that temperatures fluctuate, are not unprecedented, and that natural disasters are not getting worse. They claim climate data is unreliable and that CO2 plays a small role in climate, while presenting scientific evidence that we are not in a climate crisis. Using a 65-million-year temperature graph, the speaker states the Earth today is in a cool period and is coming out of an ice age, noting that life thrived in much warmer times without human CO2 emissions. They assert that over the last two thousand years there have been two warm periods and two cold periods, including the Roman warm period, the cold Dark Ages, the medieval warm period, and the Little Ice Age, with current warming described as a recovery from the Little Ice Age. The three degrees Fahrenheit of warming cited by scientists and the media is described as not unprecedented and not cause for alarm due to ongoing fluctuations. The speaker argues that warming and CO2 emissions have not made natural disasters more frequent or violent, citing hurricane and wildfire data. They reference a graph from the Bulletin of the American Urological Society showing a slight downward trend in US hurricanes per year since 1900, and a North Atlantic hurricane intensity graph from 1920 to 2016 showing no trend. They claim the 2014 US National Climate Assessment presents an illusory upward trend by focusing on a red-highlighted portion. They also claim that US and global acres burned by wildfires have been decreasing since 1900. Regarding data reliability, the speaker highlights a gap between climate model predictions and observed data, noting that temperature measurements from weather balloons align with satellite data, while climate models over-predict warming. They discuss the urban heat island effect, giving Paris as an example where city temperatures are much higher than surrounding rural areas, suggesting data can be biased to frighten the public. The speaker argues CO2 is not the climate control knob, as it is only 0.04% of the atmosphere, and that historical CO2 levels have been far higher than today. They cite MIT oceanographer Carl Wunsch (spelled as Karl Wench) to claim that when oceans warm, more CO2 is released, and when oceans are cold, CO2 is absorbed. A graph is described showing CO2 rising centuries after temperature increases, implying temperature drives CO2 more than the reverse. They acknowledge CO2 may have some small influence but emphasize many other factors—volcanic activity, cosmic rays, and the sun—and claim limiting CO2 would largely stunt biodiversity with little effect on temperature. The speaker argues CO2 is essential for photosynthesis and that farmers use high CO2 in greenhouses to boost crop yields, illustrating CO2 as a life-giving gas and stating it would green the planet and increase food supply if CO2 increases. They conclude that climate change is an existential threat in Western discourse but offer this as historical context from Aztecs to the Salem witch trials. They mention carbon taxes and individual CO2 budgets as signs of climate issues infiltrating daily life and frame their conclusion as pursuing truth by examining data themselves. In summary, the speaker presents historical temperature variability, critiques of data and models, downplays CO2’s role, highlights CO2’s benefits to plant growth, and asserts that the climate crisis is a hoax to be opposed by scrutinizing data personally.

In this video, the controversy surrounding climate change is discussed, questioning the consensus on the issue. The speakers highlight the financial incentives and funding that drive climate research and the climate industry. They argue that there is no evidence supporting the idea that human activity is causing catastrophic climate change, presenting data showing that past temperatures have been higher than they are today and that climate change is a natural occurrence. The video also challenges the notion that extreme weather events are increasing and questions the accuracy of climate models. It further explores how the climate crisis influences institutions and industries, with jobs and funding dependent on its existence. Dissenters are marginalized and face career repercussions. The climate alarm is seen as a tool to increase government power and control over people's lives. The environmental movement is criticized for opposing industrial development and hindering progress in developing countries. The video concludes by noting that the climate alarm is losing appeal among the masses, who are skeptical of the claims and resentful of the restrictions imposed on their lives.

This video provides a comprehensive critique of the theory of man-made global warming and its impact on climate change. It questions the scientific basis for human CO2 emissions causing global warming and emphasizes the influence of solar activity and natural climate variations. The video criticizes the reliance on computer models and the media's sensationalism of climate change. It also discusses skepticism surrounding the theory, including the long response time of the deep ocean and challenges to the idea of temperature rise leading to the spread of tropical diseases. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is criticized for alleged censorship and promotion of misinformation. The video highlights financial interests in climate science and the negative impact of climate policies on the world's poorest people. It concludes by raising moral concerns about restricting developing countries to expensive and unreliable forms of energy. Overall, the video suggests that the theory of man-made global warming is politically driven and lacks scientific evidence.

This video examines the climate change debate, questioning the prevailing narrative of man-made global warming. It emphasizes the financial incentives and funding that drive the climate industry, including research grants and job opportunities. The speakers argue that the scientific consensus on climate change is not as settled as portrayed, attributing significant impact to natural factors like solar activity and cloud cover. They challenge the notion that extreme weather events are increasing and present evidence contradicting this claim. The video suggests that climate alarmism is driven by political and financial interests rather than scientific evidence. It also discusses the influence of the climate crisis on various industries and institutions, highlighting its transformation into a multitrillion-dollar industry with many jobs and funding dependent on its existence. The video explores the pressure faced by individuals who question the climate crisis narrative, including scientists, researchers, and academics risking their careers and funding. It criticizes the climate consensus for suppressing dissenting views and stifling scientific inquiry, arguing that climate alarm is being used to increase government control and regulate individual behavior. Additionally, it addresses the impact of climate policies on developing countries and the growing skepticism and resistance from the public.

Climate change theory is dismissed as a conspiracy theory in this video. The speaker argues that the current narrative is false, claiming that carbon dioxide does not control world temperatures. They believe that it is actually world temperatures that control carbon dioxide concentration. The speaker also suggests that satellite data proves the climate is cooling, while accusing American and United Nations operations of manipulating data to make the past appear colder and the present warmer.

People are criticizing the focus on money and economic growth instead of addressing the mass extinction and collapsing ecosystems. The video explores the growth of the climate industry and the financial interests involved. It discusses the corruption of science, the intimidation of skeptics, and the assault on individual freedom. Eminent scientists challenge the claims of climate alarmists and argue that current temperatures are not unprecedented. They highlight the importance of considering Earth's climate history, which shows that the planet has been much warmer in the past. The video also questions the accuracy of the official temperature record, which is influenced by urban heat island effects. It concludes by raising doubts about the attribution of warming to human CO2 emissions.

Climate change theory is dismissed as a conspiracy theory in this video. The speaker argues that the current narrative is false, claiming that carbon dioxide does not control world temperatures. They believe that it is actually world temperatures that control the concentration of carbon dioxide. The speaker discredits the data produced by American and United Nations operations, accusing them of manipulating data to make the past appear colder and the present warmer. They assert that satellite data shows the actual climate is cooling.

Climate change theory is dismissed as a conspiracy theory in this video. The speaker argues that the current narrative is false, claiming that carbon dioxide does not control world temperatures. They believe that it is actually world temperatures that influence carbon dioxide levels. The speaker also accuses American and United Nations operations of manipulating data to make the past appear colder and the present warmer. They assert that satellite data shows the actual climate is cooling.

Climate change theory is dismissed as a conspiracy theory in this video. The speaker argues that the current narrative is false, claiming that carbon dioxide does not control world temperatures. They believe that it is actually world temperatures that control the concentration of carbon dioxide. The speaker also accuses American and United Nations operations of manipulating data to make it appear colder in the past and warmer in the present. They assert that satellite data shows the actual climate is cooling.

This video discusses the skepticism surrounding climate change and the influence of money and politics on the climate change industry. It explores alternative factors that may contribute to climate variations and challenges the notion that extreme weather events are solely caused by human-induced climate change. The video suggests that the climate change industry has become a lucrative business, with financial interests influencing research and policy decisions. It also highlights the pressure to conform to the climate alarm consensus and the political motivations behind it. The video concludes by emphasizing the growing skepticism and anger among the public towards the climate alarm and its impact on their lives and freedoms.

The speaker claims that the current climate is not warmer than it has been in history, stating that the carbon dioxide levels are the lowest in 600 million years. They also mention that the medieval warm period was warmer than the present, but it was removed from the IPCC's reports to fit a specific narrative. The speaker criticizes the lack of media coverage for those who challenge this narrative, attributing it to the large amount of money invested in the climate change agenda.

This video challenges the mainstream narrative on climate change, highlighting the financial incentives and biased research that drive the climate industry. It argues that the correlation between CO2 and temperature is not as straightforward as claimed, emphasizing the impact of natural factors like solar activity and cosmic rays. The consensus on climate change is enforced by the establishment, leading to backlash and career risks for those who question it. The video suggests that the climate alarm is a hoax used to increase government control and interfere in people's lives. It also points out the clash between the demands of the climate movement and the needs of developing countries. As the climate alarm becomes more costly and restrictive, protests against climate and COVID policies are growing, fueled by anger and skepticism towards the establishment. The video emphasizes the need for unbiased scientific research in order to address climate change effectively.

Climate scientist Judith Curry discusses her journey from being an alarmist to a skeptic of climate change. She explains how her research on hurricanes and global warming was misinterpreted by the media, leading to her being demonized by both sides of the debate. Curry criticizes the politicization of climate science and the pressure to conform to the consensus. She argues that the extreme scenarios and alarming predictions are not supported by the evidence and that the real underlying problems, such as poverty and poor governance, are being ignored. Curry emphasizes the need for a more balanced and nuanced approach to climate change.

Climate change theory is dismissed as a conspiracy theory in this video. The speaker argues that the current narrative is false, claiming that carbon dioxide does not control world temperatures. They believe that it is actually world temperatures that control the concentration of carbon dioxide. The speaker also accuses American and United Nations operations of manipulating data to make it appear colder in the past and warmer in the present. They assert that satellite data shows the actual climate is cooling.

The video claims that the climate change narrative is driven by financial interests rather than scientific evidence. It suggests that the climate industry, fueled by government funding and green subsidies, has created a consensus on climate change to secure more funds. The video argues that historical climate data does not support the idea that CO2 drives temperature change and that natural factors such as solar activity and cosmic rays have a greater impact. It also questions the validity of extreme weather events being attributed to climate change. The video discusses the influence and impact of the climate crisis industry, highlighting how it relies on the existence of a climate crisis to sustain itself. It explores the suppression of dissenting voices and the censorship of skeptical views within the scientific community, academia, and media. The video argues that the climate alarm is not only an attack on science but also a means to shape society and promote anti-capitalist ideologies. It concludes by highlighting the negative consequences of the climate alarm on developing countries and the growing skepticism among the general public. Overall, the video suggests that the focus on climate change is driven by financial incentives and raises concerns about the impact of the climate crisis industry on scientific discourse and societal development.

Climate change and the role of carbon dioxide in it are discussed in this video. The speaker questions the knowledge of politicians about the percentage of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. They argue that if carbon dioxide is only 0.04% of the atmosphere and human contribution is even smaller, it doesn't justify drastic measures like transitioning to renewable energy. The speaker criticizes the demonization of coal and the push for electric cars, claiming it puts the economy, jobs, and industry at risk. They also mention the export of coal to countries like China and India for cheap electricity.

The speaker argues that the current climate is not warmer than previous periods in history. They claim that carbon dioxide levels are at their lowest in 600 million years. They also mention that the medieval warm period was warmer than the present, but this information was removed from the IPCC reports to fit a specific narrative. The speaker believes that those who challenge this narrative are not receiving media attention. They highlight the significant amount of money invested in the climate change narrative.

This video explores the controversy surrounding climate change, focusing on the influence of money and politics on the issue. It presents arguments from scientists who challenge the mainstream narrative and question the consensus on climate change. The video argues that historical climate data and scientific evidence do not support the idea that human activity is the primary driver of climate change. It also highlights the financial incentives and career opportunities associated with promoting the climate change narrative. The video suggests that factors such as solar activity, cosmic rays, and cloud cover may have a greater impact on climate than carbon dioxide emissions. Additionally, the video discusses the influence of the climate crisis on various aspects of society, including education, media, funding, and careers. It emphasizes how the climate crisis has become a multitrillion dollar industry, with jobs and funding dependent on its existence. The video explores the suppression of dissenting voices and the impact on scientific inquiry, arguing that the climate alarm has been politicized and used as a tool to increase government power and control. It also criticizes the environmental movement for opposing industrial development in developing countries and the negative impact on the lives of ordinary people. The video concludes by highlighting the growing skepticism and anger among the public towards the climate alarm and its associated policies.

The speakers in the video discuss their skepticism towards the idea of climate change caused by CO2 emissions. They believe that CO2 is not a significant factor in climate change and that the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is misleading people. They argue that CO2 is actually beneficial for the planet and demonizing it is unnecessary. They also criticize figures like Al Gore and Bill Gates for their involvement in promoting vaccines and population reduction. The speakers suggest that there is a hidden agenda by global elites to create chaos, establish a world government, and control the population. They emphasize the need to stop these actions.

In this video, the speakers discuss the financial incentives and political motivations behind the climate change narrative. They explain how the climate industry has grown into a multitrillion dollar business, with many jobs and funding dependent on the existence of a climate crisis. They highlight the pressure to conform to the consensus and the consequences faced by those who question the narrative. The speakers argue that the climate scare is not only an attack on science but also a means for governments to increase their power and control over people's lives. They emphasize the need for open scientific inquiry and express concerns about the suppression of dissenting views.

This video explores the skepticism surrounding climate change and the influence of money and government funding in the climate industry. It presents the views of scientists who question the consensus on climate change, suggesting that factors like solar activity and cosmic rays may have a greater impact on temperature than CO2 emissions. The video challenges the notion that extreme weather events are increasing, presenting data that shows heatwaves, hurricanes, wildfires, and droughts have not significantly changed over time. It also highlights the growth of green jobs and the renewable energy sector, suggesting that the climate industry has become a lucrative business. Additionally, the video discusses the impact of the climate crisis on various aspects of society, including jobs and funding. It argues that the consensus on climate change is enforced through pressure, censorship, and marginalization of skeptics. The climate alarm is seen as a political tool to increase government power and control over people's lives. The video also points out the clash between the demands of environmentalists and the needs of developing countries, particularly in Africa. It suggests that the climate alarm is losing appeal among the masses due to its impact on their daily lives and the perceived self-interest and hypocrisy of those promoting it. As a result, anti-establishment movements and politicians are gaining support as people become skeptical and angry about the climate alarm.