Climate Change Hoax Part 2

Trudeau and French PM Renew Climate Deal (Epoch Times, 4/11/2024) Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and French Prime Minister Gabriel Attal have renewed a joint pledge on climate and environmental policies. The renewal of the “Canada–France Climate and Environment Partnership,” represents a “shared commitment to supporting the fight against climate change by promoting and implementing the Paris Agreement,” said a statement from Ottawa. The French under Globalist Macron also promoting the Climate Change Hoax! Watch the details of this plan in the Epoch Times documentary below entitled “No Farmers, No Food” Scientists Conduct Experiment With Aerosols in the Sky to Fight Climate Change | Facts Matter (Epoch TV, April 8, 2024) Unbeknownst to most people, scientists have begun to conduct a secretive experiment that involves shooting aerosols into the sky in the hope of preventing global warming. Specifically, this is a solar geoengineering experiment in San Francisco that’s trying to create brighter clouds that would, in theory at least, reflect more sunlight away from the earth. Climate Alarmists Battle to Censor Film Exposing ‘Climate Crisis Scam (Epoch Times, 3/31/2024) It’s been a little over a week since “Climate: The Movie,” a documentary produced by Thomas Nelson and directed by Martin Durkin, was released on Vimeo, YouTube, Rumble, and other platforms. And already, it’s garnered millions of views and thousands of reviews. “Watch this documentary to understand the lies, the pseudoscience, but also the self-interest of government-funded parasites pushing climate alarmism,” “The final nail in the coffin for the ‘human-induced climate change’ scam. An absolute MUST-WATCH!” Wide Awake Media posted on X while linking to the movie, which features an elite list of scientists, including Nobel Laureate John Clauser, Richard Lindzen, emeritus professor of meteorology at MIT, and Steven Koonin, a theoretical physicist and professor at NYU’s Tandon School of Engineering. Some reviewers went so far as to call for censorship. “I’m thinking we can get 10,000 people to report ‘Climate: The Movie’ on YouTube as having harmful and misleading content,” Eliot Jacobson, a retired mathematics and computer science professor, posted on X on March 23. Vimeo removed the video from its platform on March 24, citing a “violation of Vimeo’s Terms of Service and/or Guidelines.” “I never see [climate realists] saying, ‘let’s report people from the other side, and let’s take down their videos, let’s censor them.’ All the censorship is coming from one side, and all the free speech and ‘let’s debate’ is coming from our side. We want to talk about it because we’re confident with our evidence.” THE BOTTOM LINE: THE LEFT DON’T WANT TO HEAR THE TRUTH - CLIMATE CHANGE IS A HOAX! Drastic and Irreversible Climate Geoengineering Worries Scientists (Epoch Times, March 1, 2024) The Earth is too hot and only getting hotter, according to governments and global bodies such as the United Nations; and the efforts to reduce carbon dioxide aren’t having enough of an effect. “The world is passing through the 1.5°C ceiling and is headed much higher unless steps are taken to affect Earth’s energy imbalance,” James Hansen, previous director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said in January. Thus, to buy more time, on Feb. 28, scientists from NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released a report detailing a solution called “intentional stratospheric dehydration,” or in layman’s terms, flying planeloads of ice to 58,000 feet and spraying ice particles into the upper atmosphere. LUNATICS! The proposal is known as geoengineering—and NASA and NOAA’s joint plan is far from the only idea that’s jumped from the pages of science fiction, à la the 2013 Hollywood film “Snowpiercer,” to mainstream science. István Szapudi, an astronomer at the University of Hawaii Institute for Astronomy, has turned to essentially geoengineering a giant parasol, or what he calls, a “tethered solar shield” to shield the Earth from a portion of the sun’s energy. LUNATICS! But scientists such as Christopher Essex, emeritus professor of applied mathematics and physics at the University of Western Ontario and former director of its theoretical physics program, said carbon dioxide (CO2) isn’t the driver of Earth’s warmer temperature and that such geoengineering measures are “extraordinarily dangerous.” “I used to run a climate panel for the World Federation of Scientists,” he told The Epoch Times. “And we had one session where we presented on exactly why geoengineering is extraordinarily dangerous. It’s a crazy idea.” But, Make Sunsets claimed that, without mitigation such as reflective aerosols, “10s of millions of people will die, and 20 percent of species may go extinct.” INSANE WHACKOS! Indeed, Mr. Essex said he’s seen geoengineering ideas posited by scientists since the 1990s …. “The imagination of them all is quite extensive,” he said. Mr. Essex believes that governments will eventually want to “control the weather with tax policy.” Mr. Essex must be a visionary… the City of Toronto is trying to tax it’s people on how much rain falls on their properties…. you can’t make this lunacy up… it all starts with being a Left Wing Liberal radical extremist! Click the image below to watch a Video by Crossroads Josh Phillips about the Climate Change Hoax PBO Defends Decision Not to Include Climate Change Impact Costs in Budget Analysis (Epoch Times, 3/27/2024) The Parliamentary Budget Officer defended his decision not to include the impacts of climate change in his analysis of the upcoming federal budget, saying those costs are difficult to estimate and that global temperature changes would continue even in the absence of carbon emissions. What he’s really saying is “Nobody can estimate costs of the fake Climate Change Hoax and that carbon emissions are not the cause of any temperature changes on earth… we know the cause is the sun. Arsons in Alberta During Ms. Smith’s committee appearance, Liberal MP Irek Kusmierczyk asked her about the record number of wildfires Alberta faced in 2023, which burned 2.2 million hectares of land and caused 299 days of wildfire smoke choking the city of Edmonton. “Can you tell us whether climate change caused these wildfires and these smoke days?” he asked. Ms. Smith responded that 60 percent of the fires were caused by human activity, and the government of Alberta was launching a public campaign to raise awareness about the issue. (Epoch Times, 3/28/2024) Danielle Smith is correct… there has been a lot of arson in starting wildfires worldwide. The Bush Fires in Australia a couple years ago… they found that the majority were arson. Who is paying for these arsonists to set fires to support the Climate Change Hoax? My guess: George Soros. Look at the fires in Maui…. notice they don’t talk about those anymore? Did you know that the government in Maui won’t let the homeowners whose homes burned down rebuild? There is clear evidence that these fires were caused by Direct Energy Weapons - yes they were intentional as a “Land Grab” against the indigenous people of the island… where have you heard of this happening before??? The evidence is clear…. cars and homes were totally burned. Yet the roads the cars were on were not damaged at all! Asphalt burns at a lower temperture than aluminum. This was a set up by the rich elite to take over land. Globalists. Strangely enough, no fires touched the properties of Oprah Winfrey or The Rock on the island….what a coincidence! Australian Government Establishes Net Zero Authority (Epoch Times, 3/27/2024) The government is providing $189.3 million for the authority to spearhead the country’s net zero transition. The Albanese Labor government has introduced a law to set up a Net Zero Authority in Australia to support the country’s transition to net zero. The Labor government is pumping $189.3 million (US123.5 million) of taxpayer funds into the initiative to resource the authority. The Net Zero Economy Authority Bill 2024 (pdf) aims to promote an “orderly and positive economic transformation” as the “world decarbonises.” Mr. Albanese said the Net Zero Economy Authority will play a role in one of the most significant economic events in Australia’s history and position the country as a renewable energy superpower. Meanwhile, the Opposition is focussing its concerns on Labor’s “renewable-only strategy.” Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy Ted O'Brien called for nuclear in a post onFacebook on March 26. “Zero-emissions nuclear energy is a proven source of clean, reliable and low-cost energy used all around the world,” Mr. O'Brien said. “The Albanese Labor government refuses to even have a mature conversation about the role next- generation nuclear could play in cleaning up Australia’s grid.” These Left Wing idiots have no idea what they are doing! Net Zero carbon means we wipe out the human race! It is an extinction event or plan! Nuclear energy is clean and the way to providing all Canadians with FREE ENERGY IN THE FUTURE! The Freedom Party of Canada will work towards a future where Canadians don’t have a power or energy bill… where they will have free energy provided by the Canadian government under it’s nuclear energy program, the way the great Nikola Tesla envisioned! As you can see in the video above, Climate Change is a Fraud! Politicians are trying to dupe you! Click on the image below to see how Global Warming (aka Climate Change) is a Fraud! Ottawa Spent More Than $16M on ‘Climate Crisis’ Ads Since 2022 (Epoch Times, 3/21/2024) Environment Canada has spent more than $16 million in the past two years toward “climate crisis” advertising, according to government documents. The advertising statistics were published March 18 in response to a parliamentary question filed earlier this year by Conservative Party MP Gerald Soroka. Environment Canada spent $3.9 million on advertising in 2023 and has already spent more than $2 million on advertising so far this year. Cinema, television, print and digital ads and search engine marketing were in the budget both years. Social media ads were also a part of 2023’s advertising dollars. Ottawa spent approximately $140.8 million in advertising during the COVID-19 pandemic, the highest rate of spending by any Canadian federal government in history. Trudeau’s Liberals are trying to “brainwash” the public into believing there is a climate crisis… it’s a Climate Hoax pushed by the WEF, UN and WHO. Click below to watch the new movie: Climate the Movie - The Cold Truth by Martin Durkin “People need to wake up about how much this scam is being used against us,” Mr. Nelson told The Epoch Times. “In many ways, it’s a war against working people. There are so many ways that working people’s lives are being made worse by the climate scam.” Mr. Nelson said the push by governments and global organizations to control CO2 emissions is “going to make life way worse.” “The whole idea that CO2 is going to make our kids’ lives worse—that’s not going to happen. But this CO2 scam is absolutely going to make our kids’ lives worse if we don’t fight as hard as we can,” he said. “This is a huge, big money scam,” Tony Heller, a geologist who previously worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory, said in the documentary. “A lot of people’s livelihoods depend on it. They’re not going to give that up.” Mr. Nelson said that as a consequence of the above, scientists who examine natural, non-manmade causes of warming are seen as problematic. This leads to ostracization, loss of funding, and even loss of employment. In the film, Ross McKitrick, an economist and statistician at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, said silencing the opposition is a tactic used by those in power in order to reach their “consensus.” “If a scientifically qualified person stands up and says, ‘We don’t see an upward trend in the data on Pacific typhoons,’ well, suddenly they lose standing to address the topic of Pacific typhoons,” Mr. McKitrick said. “Not because what they said is wrong, but because it’s off-message. “They can marginalize any kind of criticism of the narrative by saying, ‘You are not qualified to talk about this because you don’t support the narrative.’ And then, having marginalized everyone who doesn’t support the narrative, they can turn around and say, ‘Well, everyone who counts supports the narrative. So, we must be right.’” Mr. Lindzen said the push to demonize CO2 has turned into a “cult.” “It’s completely divorced from science,” he said. “Climate the Movie” premiered in London, the Netherlands, and Virginia before being released to the general public. So far, Mr. Nelson said the response has been overwhelmingly positive. (Epoch Times, 3/20/2024) We don’t believe in the Climate Change Hoax…..but for those who do and for those who believe Justin Trudeau’s Carbon Tax (which has never reduced Canadian astmospheric carbon levels) is what we need to do….to punish Canadians financially far more than any other country on earth… if you believe that… look at the percent of the world’s carbon in the atmosphere that Canada contributes…. it’s 1.5%. 1.5% Now scientists tell us that trees absorb carbon. And that since Canada has trillions of trees… the number of trees we have far exceeds the number needed to absorb all of the carbon Canadians put into the atmosphere! And now Globalists like Bill Gates who also pushes the Climate Change Hoax, says we ….wait for it….need to “bury trees”…. the Left keep getting more loony by the day! Utter stupidity! Enough is Enough! There is no climate crisis… it is a political crisis by Globalist Communists trying to ruin countries to enslave the people and reduce the population of the world! Scientists Expose Major Problems With Climate Change Data (Epoch Times, Alex Newman, Feb 28/24) This article in the Epoch Times stated the following: ‘Climate activism has become the new religion of the 21st century—heretics are not welcome and not allowed to ask questions,’ said astrophysicist Willie Soon. Temperature records used by climate scientists and governments to build models that then forecast dangerous manmade global warming repercussions have serious problems and even corruption in the data, multiple scientists who have published recent studies on the issue told The Epoch Times. The Biden administration leans on its latest National Climate Assessment report as evidence that global warming is accelerating because of human activities. The document states that human emissions of “greenhouse gases” such as carbon dioxide are dangerously warming the Earth. The U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) holds the same view, and its leaders are pushing major global policy changes in response. But scientific experts from around the world in a variety of fields are pushing back. In peer-reviewed studies, they cite a wide range of flaws with the global temperature data used to reach the dire conclusions; they say it’s time to reexamine the whole narrative. Problems with temperature data include a lack of geographically and historically representative data, contamination of the records by heat from urban areas, and corruption of the data introduced by a process known as “homogenization.” The flaws are so significant that they make the temperature data—and the models based on it—essentially useless or worse, three independent scientists with the Center for Environmental Research and Earth Sciences (CERES) explained. The experts said that when data corruption is considered, the alleged “climate crisis” supposedly caused by human activities disappears. Instead, natural climate variability offers a much better explanation for what is being observed, they said. Some experts told The Epoch Times that deliberate fraud appeared to be at work, while others suggested more innocent explanations. But regardless of why the problems exist, the implications of the findings are hard to overstate. With no climate crisis, the justification for trillions of dollars in government spending and costly changes in public policy to restrict carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions collapses, the scientists explained in a series of interviews about their research. “For the last 35 years, the words of the IPCC have been taken to be gospel,” according to astrophysicist and CERES founder Willie Soon. Until recently, he was a researcher working with the Center for Astrophysics, Harvard & Smithsonian. “And indeed, climate activism has become the new religion of the 21st century—heretics are not welcome and not allowed to ask questions,” Mr. Soon told The Epoch Times. “But good science demands that scientists are encouraged to question the IPCC’s dogma. The supposed purity of the global temperature record is one of the most sacred dogmas of the IPCC.” The latest U.S. government National Climate Assessment report states: “Human activities are changing the climate. “The evidence for warming across multiple aspects of the Earth system is incontrovertible, and the science is unequivocal that increases in atmospheric greenhouse gases are driving many observed trends and changes.” In particular, according to the report, this is because of human activities such as burning fossil fuels for transportation, energy, and agriculture. Looking at timescales highlights major problems with this narrative, Mr. Soon said. “When people ask about global warming or climate change, it is essential to ask, ‘Since when?’ The data shows that it has warmed since the 1970s, but that this followed a period of cooling from the 1940s,” he said. While it is “definitely warmer” now than in the 19th century, Mr. Soon said that temperature proxy data show the 19th century “was exceptionally cold.” “It was the end of a period that’s known as the Little Ice Age,” he said. Data taken from rural temperature stations, ocean measurements, weather balloons, satellite measurements, and temperature proxies such as tree rings, glaciers, and lake sediments, “show that the climate has always changed,” Mr. Soon said. “They show that the current climate outside of cities is not unusual,” he said, adding that heat from urban areas is improperly affecting the data. “If we exclude the urban temperature data that only represents 3 percent of the planet, then we get a very different picture of the climate.” Homogenization One issue that scientists say is corrupting the data stems from an obscure process known as “homogenization.” According to climate scientists working with governments and the U.N., the algorithms used for homogenization are designed to correct, as much as possible, various biases that might exist in the raw temperature data. These biases include, among others, the relocation of temperature monitoring stations, changes in technology used to gather the data, or changes in the environment surrounding a thermometer that might impact its readings. For instance, if a temperature station was originally placed in an empty field but that field has since been paved over to become a parking lot, the record would appear to show much hotter temperatures. As such, it would make sense to try to correct the data collected. Virtually nobody argues against the need for some homogenization to control for various factors that may contaminate temperature data. But a closer examination of the process as it now occurs reveals major concerns, Ronan Connolly, an independent scientist at CERES, said. “While the scientific community has become addicted to blindly using these computer programs to fix the data biases, until recently nobody has bothered to look under the hood to see if the programs work when applied to real temperature data,” he told The Epoch Times. Since the early 2000s, various governmental and intergovernmental organizations creating global temperature records have relied on computer programs to automatically adjust the data. Mr. Soon, Mr. Connolly, and a team of scientists around the world spent years looking at the programs to determine how they worked and whether they were reliable. One of the scientists involved in the analysis, Peter O’Neill, has been tracking and downloading the data daily from the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and its Global Historical Climatology Network since 2011. He found that each day, NOAA applies different adjustments to the data. “They use the same homogenization computer program and re-run it roughly every 24 hours,” Mr. Connolly said. “But each day, the homogenization adjustments that they calculate for each temperature record are different.” This is “very bizarre,” he said. “If the adjustments for a given weather station have any basis in reality, then we would expect the computer program to calculate the same adjustments every time. What we found is this is not what’s happening,” Mr. Connolly said. These concerns are what first sparked the international investigation into the issue by Mr. Soon and his colleagues. Because NOAA doesn’t maintain historical information on its weather stations, the CERES scientists reached out to European scientists who had been compiling the data for the stations that they oversee. They found that just 17 percent of NOAA’s adjustments were consistently applied. And less than 20 percent of NOAA’s adjustments were clearly associated with a documented change to the station observations. “When we looked under the hood, we found that there was a hamster running in a wheel instead of an engine,” Mr. Connolly said. “It seems that with these homogenization programs, it is a case where the cure is worse than the disease.” A spokesman for NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information downplayed the significance, but said the agency was working to address the issues raised in the papers. “NOAA uses the well-documented Pairwise Homogenization Algorithm every day on GHCNm (monthly)—version 4, and the results of specific adjustments to individual station series can differ from run to run,” the spokesman said, adding that the papers in question didn’t support the view that the concerns about the homogenization of the data made it useless or worse. “NOAA is addressing the issues raised in both these papers in a future release of the GHCNm temperature dataset and its accompanying documentation.” Urban Heat Islands One of the major flaws in the temperature data that creates a need for homogenization in the first place is the so-called urban heat island effect. In essence, the temperature stations that were once located in rural areas are now in many cases surrounded by roads, buildings, airports, and cities. This produces additional localized warming around the thermometer, which gives the appearance of drastic “global warming” when many similar stations are examined together. The IPCC has acknowledged the urban heat island effect and the contamination of the data; however, according to the scientists who spoke with The Epoch Times, the U.N. agency has mistakenly assumed it’s a minor issue. In a new peer-reviewed study, the coalition of scientists estimate that as much as 40 percent of the observed warming since the 19th century used by the IPCC is actually the result of this urban heat bias—not CO2-driven global warming. “When we look at non-urban temperature data for the land, oceans, and other temperature records, the warming is much less dramatic and seems similar to other warm periods prior to the Industrial Revolution,” Mr. Connolly said. The IPCC doesn’t control for the urban heat island effect, he said. When Mr. Connolly and other scientists created a temperature record using only rural temperature stations, almost half of the global warming alleged by the U.N. body disappeared! Indeed, the rural-only datasets match the weather balloon and satellite data much more closely. Taken together, the rural-only record shows that the moderate warming is likely just a recovery from the Little Ice Age from about A.D. 1300 to A.D. 1900, which itself followed the Medieval Warm Period from about A.D. 800 to A.D. 1200 that saw Vikings farming in Greenland. “The Medieval Warm Period seems to have been about as warm as the modern warm period, but only when we use the rural-only record,” Mr. Connolly said. While there has been global warming since the end of the Little Ice Age, if the urban datasets are excluded, all of the primary global temperature estimates show “that the planet alternates between phases of warming and cooling,” he said. The current warming period began in the 1970s as scientists were still warning about alleged man- made global cooling, which had begun in the 1940s. Michael Connolly, another independent scientist at CERES and Ronan Connolly’s father, noted that urban warming in cities, which cover about 3 percent of the Earth’s land surface, is in fact becoming a “major problem” that ought to be addressed. “But, it cannot be cured by greenhouse gas policies,” he said. “Instead, we should be investing more into urban greening and other measures to try and reduce urban heat waves.” Blending Rural and Urban Data A separate issue with homogenization algorithms was examined in another paper published last year in the Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology. The problem, which Ronan Connolly and his colleagues refer to as “urban blending,” involves the comparisons made between temperature records from one station and others in the surrounding area. If one seems way out of sync with the others, the program assumes it was a non-climactic bias that should be corrected. Perhaps the biggest problem with this is that it allows urban warming to contaminate the entire temperature record by blending it with rural data. The result is that urban and rural data are blended together, allowing some of the urban warming to be mixed in with the rural data that doesn’t have the problem. “A useful analogy is if you mix strawberries and bananas in a blender, afterward you have a blended homogenous mix that is neither strawberries nor bananas,” Ronan Connolly said. “Looking at the temperature data, this means that the homogenized rural records contain the urban warming, too.” The supposed “unusual” global warming cited by the IPCC and other sources is only found in the urban data contaminated by heat associated with cities, he said. But by using the homogenized data, all of it becomes artificially biased by the urban heat effect. “If we look at the temperature data that has not been contaminated by urban warming, it seems that the temperature changes since before the Industrial Revolution have been almost cyclical—cooling periods followed by warming periods,” Ronan Connolly said. “This cannot be explained in terms of increasing greenhouse gases, since those have been only going upward. Instead, it suggests that the scientists who have been mistakenly mixing together urban warming with non-urban temperature changes have been chasing a red herring with their belief that CO2 is the main climate driver.” However, not everyone is convinced that these issues are as significant as CERES scientists have suggested. Professor Robert Lund, a recognized expert in this field and chair of the statistics department at the University of California–Santa Cruz, told The Epoch Times that the arguments put forth by Mr. Soon and his colleagues made him “cringe.” “It is true that many climate scientists generally don’t use the best methods to clean up the data,” Mr. Lund said. But the CERES scientists’ “contention that the warming inferences we are making are bunk because of the gauge changes and station relocation issues, and their suboptimal handling in homogenization procedures, are just not true,” he said. “In fact, no matter how you deal with the changepoint issues, all globally averaged series (like the IPCC series) contain strong upward trends. It’s just that simple.” The homogenization issue “might account for maybe 0.1 or 0.2 degrees Celsius per century of the 1.3 [degrees Celsius] that we are globally warming, but not more,” Mr. Lund said. He accused the CERES scientists of “trying to take any amount of uncertainty, exponentiate it, and discredit everything.” Asked if he was planning to refute their studies in a paper of his own, Mr. Lund said he and others in the field have grown weary of battling scientists who, he suggested, were mostly interested in discrediting the climate narrative. A number of other scientists on both sides of the debate didn’t respond to requests for comment. Several critics of the manmade global warming narrative asked to speak off the record for fear of retaliation by their institutions, colleagues, journals, or funding sources. Other Problems Historical temperature data don’t really exist prior to the 1970s, which hampers any type of long-term study. And outside of Europe and North America, there’s very little coverage. Until recently, data from the oceans—making up more than two-thirds of the planet’s surface—were also sparse, confined primarily to occasional readings from major shipping lanes in the Northern Hemisphere. NOAA has been criticized for allowing more than 90 percent of its climate stations to be affected by the urban heat bias, The Epoch Times reported in January, citing scientists and a separate study examining NOAA’s temperature records. By 2022, about 96 percent of the stations failed to meet the agency’s own standards for reliability, a study by meteorologist Anthony Watts revealed. Michael Connolly pointed out that when the weather stations were originally set up, they were meant to monitor day-to-day weather, not long-term climate changes. “While most of the scientists that I talk to on a personal level admit that they have reservations about aspects of the current climate change narrative, they say that their institutions would suffer if they speak out,” he said. Mr. Soon acknowledged that measuring climate change was a “very difficult scientific problem,” especially because the data are imperfect. But scientists have an obligation to be honest about that. “Many research groups—in a rush to get grants and to get their work published—seem to have overlooked the serious problems of the data they are using,” he said, adding that many scientists are concerned about job security and are unwilling to speak out. But some analysts who have seen the issues say it’s deliberate fraud. Scientist and engineer Tony Heller of the website Real Climate Science said that the temperature data—both historical and geographical—are “grossly inadequate.” Echoing the concerns about homogenization and blending, he told The Epoch Times that “the operating theory seems to be that mixing in a lot of very bad ingredients will create a good soup.” Mr. Heller accuses NOAA of tampering with its data to create the “appearance of warming” and calls the global and U.S. temperature records “propaganda, not science.” The misleading adjustments made to the data and the broader deception are “absolutely intentional,” he said. “Trillions of dollars are being poured in to push global warming and climate change.” So far, the studies by Mr. Soon and others haven’t been countered in any peer-reviewed literature. However, some prominent scientists working for the federal government and other bodies tied to the climate movement have ridiculed and insulted the authors, as The Epoch Times reported in October 2023. Neither the IPCC nor NASA’s top climate scientist Gavin Schmidt responded to a request for comment.