reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Some individuals believe in global warming but not in the idea that human CO2 emissions are causing it. Climate change dissent is met with intolerance and politicians are afraid to express doubt. Senior climate scientists argue that the scientific basis for the theory is weakening. They point out that periods in Earth's history with much higher CO2 levels did not result in significant temperature changes. The claim of a consensus among thousands of scientists is disputed, as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is seen as politically driven and includes non-scientists in its ranks. Climate scientists are accused of exaggerating the issue to secure funding, and the global warming industry has become a source of employment for many. Dissenting voices are met with anger and censorship.

According to consensus science, there is no evidence of human influence on hurricanes in the past century. Heat waves in the US have not become more frequent since 1900, and incidents have remained steady for the past 60 years. Global wildfires have actually decreased by about 25% since 2003, despite notable fires in Australia and California in 2020. The information on climate change goes through a chain from research papers to assessment reports, summaries, media, and finally reaches the public. This process leaves room for misinformation and manipulation. The speaker questions why individuals like Greta Thunberg, who hold catastrophic views, receive platforms while knowledgeable scientists who don't share the same perspective are overlooked. The speaker also mentions H. L. Mencken's quote about politicians using imaginary threats to keep the public alarmed.

We are being misled with exaggerated information about a climate crisis. Human carbon dioxide emissions are said to drive global warming, but only account for 3% of emissions. The rest is natural. The climate hysteria is about money, not the environment. Expensive electricity bills and job losses are linked to this deception. It is a con not supported by science.

Speaker 0 argues that in the last four years there have been four “once in a century storms,” naming hurricane Helene, the Maui fires, and California wildfires. They claim these events are part of a pattern of engineered weather, stating that “they openly admitted at Davos, and our government is geoengineering” and that chemicals such as nickel ion are sprayed into the sky from aircraft to soak up moisture. The white trails seen across the sky are described as absorbing water, expanding, and then being guided with frequencies and directed energy weapons to create these storms. The speaker asserts that there will be “undeniable…proof that our government engineered this storm,” and asks how long it would take before someone is imprisoned for poisoning a road with water that freezes and causes deadly accidents, using an analogy about a steep hill and a road turned to ice. They claim the coming storm will kill American citizens and wonder when those responsible will be held accountable, inviting viewers to check out the video for proof of government geoengineering. Speaker 1 responds by stating the elephant in the room: the flight path is not normal. They note four different planes, including a Boeing KC-135 Stratotanker, flying highly unusual patterns right before the historic ice storm. They explain that the Stratotanker is typically used for aerial refueling, but these patterns suggest otherwise, mentioning that the KC-135 Stratotanker “could potentially be adapted for geoengineering purposes, such as stratospheric aerosol injection,” which releases reflective particles to cool the planet. They imply the United States Air Force is seeding clouds before the storm, calling it a coincidence yet suggesting it is related to geoengineering. They describe “the produce, the chemtrail” of USAF Stratotankers flying in circles over the Front Range. Speaker 0 adds that not only is there fumigation across nearly every state ahead of the historic ice storm, but in Tennessee there are visible signs of a massive amount of electromagnetic energy being pumped into the atmosphere ahead of the storm, while suggesting it is not a coincidence. They note Texas appears cloudy, followed by Indiana, and then claim to observe “frequency waves.” Speaker 1 reiterates the focus on Oklahoma, underscoring the widespread pattern and the associated frequency waves as part of the atmospheric manipulation preceding the storm.

We are being misled with exaggerated information about a climate crisis that doesn't exist. Human carbon dioxide emissions are not proven to cause global warming, as only 3% of emissions are from humans. The focus on climate change is driven by money, not environmental concerns. Expensive electricity bills and job insecurity are direct results of this deception. This is a major scam not supported by science.

In 1952, Australia experienced a hot summer, as shown by a graph from the Bureau of Meteorology. However, the graph mysteriously disappeared from the bureau's website after the election. Another graph later appeared, indicating that 2018 had the highest number of hot days. Additionally, the new graph included extra hot days in 2011 that were not present in the old graph. This raises suspicions about the bureau altering the data to make the past seem colder and the present warmer. The investigation into these changes is ongoing, as the manipulation of facts undermines the truth.

Russia's deadly wildfires, smog-filled cities, and poor harvest are being seen by some as signs of climate change. Piers Corbin, an astrophysicist and founder of Weather Action, disagrees. He believes that climate has always been changing and that the extreme heat in East Europe and Russia was predicted due to a certain circulation pattern caused by solar activity and the phases of the moon. He dismisses the idea that man is responsible for these events, citing similar occurrences in the past. Corbin acknowledges that these patterns come in bursts but asserts that they have nothing to do with carbon emissions. He also criticizes climate change scientists, claiming they are motivated by financial gain.

Speaker 0 discusses the formation of FSOC’s new Household Resilience Working Group, which will focus on American households’ financial condition. She notes that communities nationwide, especially in Texas’s 29th district, have faced destabilizing climate-disaster effects, with property insurance providers leaving states like Texas, California, and Florida due to growing climate risks. She asks what the administration is doing to address the risk that mortgages and other credit could become unavailable in certain regions because of climate change. Speaker 1 responds: “Again, congresswoman, are you familiar with KLW 24? No. It it was the base for everything that was done with climate and with all the proposed climate legislation and it has been discredited. So everything that FSOC previously did based on climate—” He asks, “Who discredited it?” Speaker 1 clarifies: “Nature Magazine has retracted the economic commitment of climate change more than eighteen months after first learning that the paper was fatally flawed with officers acknowledging that its errors are too substantial for a correction.”

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.

Speaker 0 questions when the world will end. Speaker 1 jokes about the hottest day ever recorded in 125,000 years. Speaker 0 asks where the temperature reading was taken, suggesting it was near an RAF base after fighter jets landed. Speaker 1 finds this insulting and denies lying. Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of lying and insults them. Speaker 1 takes offense and calls Speaker 0 disrespectful. Speaker 0 accuses both of betraying Britain and science. Speaker 1 clarifies they are talking about global temperatures. Speaker 0 argues that the hottest day ever recorded in Britain was at an inaccurate weather station. Speaker 1 claims they are engaged in an information campaign. The conversation ends with Speaker 0 calling Speaker 1 a lord and asking if they know something.

Climate change skeptics are often dismissed and mocked by the media. However, there is a manufactured consensus among climate scientists, driven by incentives like fame and fortune. Researcher Judith Curry, who spreads alarm about climate change, published a study claiming that the intensity of hurricanes had doubled. This was picked up by the media, who tied extreme weather events to global warming. Curry became popular among environmental advocacy groups and received media attention, being treated like a rock star. However, some researchers pointed out gaps in her research, including years with low levels of hurricane activity.

Climate change is real. The destruction of hard drives, my husband's frequent trips to Epstein's Island, my loss in the 2016 election, and my husband's infidelity are all attributed to climate change. Even Jeffrey Epstein's death is blamed on climate change. It wasn't me, it was definitely climate change.

The speakers express concern about the mainstream media accepting false information about climate change. They argue that hurricanes, sea levels, bushfires, and climate-related deaths are not increasing as claimed. They criticize the lack of evidence supporting the idea that human emissions drive global warming. Despite the inaccuracies in their predictions, the speakers believe that the media continues to promote scare stories for attention. They highlight the absence of proof in arguments against coal, gas, and hydrocarbons. Overall, they question why the media's credibility remains intact despite their track record of incorrect predictions.

Climate scientists are struggling to comprehend the prevalence of misinformation and disinformation regarding climate change. Despite decades of evidence and record-breaking climate extremes, some people still refuse to believe in the risks of climate change. The speaker gives an example from Brazil, where a populist president opposed science and vaccination, resulting in high COVID-19 mortality rates. The erosion of trust in science continues, as even with a new government, only 70% of people have taken the COVID-19 vaccine. The speaker questions why populist leaders, both right-wing and left-wing, who are often anti-science, are being elected in democracies.

This summer, Europe experienced record-breaking heat, leading to devastating wildfires in Greece and Spain, followed by destructive floods. Extreme weather events, from Slovenia to Bulgaria, demonstrated the chaos and destruction caused by global warming. It is clear that our planet is boiling, marking the end of the era of global warming and the beginning of the era of global boiling.

Last Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday were the hottest days on record. Extreme temperatures are now a common occurrence, affecting us all globally. The world is getting hotter and more perilous for everyone.

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, they quietly deleted years of readings for Lower Stoft, 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 Cowood are ignored. Also, more than 80% of the network is low grade class four or five by WMO standards giving two to five c uncertainty. This is the foundation of The UK's climate record. Closed stations, imaginary stations, and synthetic data underpin the published time series and analyses. The disclosure underscores a pattern of relying on non-existent or non-operational stations to generate climate trends, rather than solely on active, recognized sites. The revelations point to a significant discrepancy between the official temperature records and the on-the-ground reality of station operation. The claimed use of well correlated neighboring stations is contradicted by evidence that the numbers were produced by a modeling approach using phantom stations. The subsequent removal of readings from certain stations after exposure indicates a corrective action that still leaves the underlying practice visible. The disclaimer added indicates that the data are for general interest only, rather than a definitive, fully validated record. In summary, the FOIs allege that a substantial portion of the Met Office station network is either non-existent or of questionable quality, with the majority of the network categorized as low grade, resulting in uncertainties in the reported temperatures. The result is described as the foundation of The UK's climate record, built on closed, imaginary, and synthetic stations. The transcript frames this as a systemic issue affecting the integrity of temperature reporting and the credibility of the climate data presented to the public.

In the European Parliament, colleagues are feeling fearful as they realize they are not serving the people's best interests. They acknowledge that the current government is not for the people but for global misanthropists. People are no longer fooled by climate change rhetoric, and the truth is starting to come to light.

Can't tell people the weather is controlled by Gerald from Top secret CAA weather control division. Dick speaking. There is no escape. Flooding and even hurricanes could be subject to weather modification. To block sunlight from reaching the earth. Lasers really to change the weather? The chemicals that they're spraying from the air. We've been doing this since the nineteen forties and fifties. We have been manipulating weather for a very long time.

The atmosphere in the European Parliament is tense. Many colleagues are realizing they are not serving the people's best interests. It's no longer about the people, but about a global elite. They are starting to see that the public is no longer fooled by climate change rhetoric and are standing up against it.

Weather modification is real, and the US government has been involved since the 1940s. The speaker suggests a conspiracy theory: the government might be manufacturing climate events to prove climate change is real. NOAA monitors weather modification projects and publishes reports. Mike Adams reported that these reports are being scrubbed. According to NOAA, weather modification is any activity intended to artificially change the atmosphere's composition, behavior, or dynamics, citing federal regulations. Examples include using aircraft propeller downwash or lasers. The speaker promotes TomRens.com, highlighting the 404 series books, ranger buckets, and organic emergency storable food. Discounts are available, especially with the checkout code "Rens."

The atmosphere in the European Parliament is tense. Colleagues are realizing they are not serving the people's best interests. They feel the government is controlled by global elitists, not the people. People are no longer fooled by climate change narratives, and the truth is starting to come to light.

Multiple whistleblowers warn of man-made extreme weather events, increasing in frequency and intensity, designed to cause destruction, economic collapse, and population reduction. They claim globalists have built-in deniability, branding dissenters as conspiracy theorists. Evidence allegedly includes government documents proving weather manipulation via HAARP, now recalibrated to target domestic populations. HAARP, initially a wartime test, is now used to target the US, causing extreme weather. Congressional hearings revealed HAARP's ability to manage the ionosphere by injecting energy. A HAARP whistleblower claims the technology is weaponized, targeting specific US areas to cause harm, not study natural events, with potential for destruction rivaling atomic weapons. HAARP is also allegedly operating in Antarctica. A former HAARP tomographer claims HAARP can trigger earthquakes, while an Antarctic researcher alleges the South Pole Station has technology for vehicle detection, faster-than-light communications, and earthquake generation. He also claims an ELF system and a green laser are used for nefarious purposes. The researcher suggests a hidden power source exists at the station. The speaker claims globalists are weaponizing weather using technologies like HAARP, causing destruction on a massive scale.

Check out my weather app. I switched from radar to the clouds filter, and the whole world appears covered in a gray haze. In the U.S., only Miami is clear, but everywhere else, including the oceans and Canada, is shrouded. I've monitored this map daily for two years, and for the past two weeks, it's been consistently overcast. We haven't seen the sun at all during this time. This isn't just a local issue; it's a global phenomenon. What’s happening to our skies?

How are we going to address the atmosphere filled with metals and sensors, considering we've been manipulating the weather since the 1970s? I urge the Library of Congress to prioritize honesty and reveal the truth about the information it has acquired.