Reader Question: Why Don’t I Believe the Climate is in Crisis?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Here’s the latest reader question, along with my reply!

Jim asks: I observe one does not attain being reposted on Lew Rockwell unless one’s climate opinion conforms with Lew’s. You make the cut as does Doug Casey. That said, I am sure you are your own man and not out to please Lew in this regard but I wonder where you get your information to arrive at your dismissal of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

My reply: One must unbox a lot.

Yes, the climate changes. Yes, there has been an observed increase in average temperatures over about the last 100 years. Yes, carbon dioxide is a “greenhouse gas. But is the climate changing catastrophically? If so, is human action the “driver”? These are the matters of dispute.

I have looked into this business extensively and there are a number of facts known to me which are red flags in re the whole thing.

The first is the oily use of political language to describe what is putatively a scientific phenomenon. Science is precise; one must be able to define what’s at issue in order to scientifically evaluate it. What does “climate change” mean, precisely? It means nothing, exactly.

Well, other than that the “climate” “changes.”

Warmer, colder – in between. Everything fits. This is not scientific. It is political. And the fact that a political term is used to describe a supposedly scientific concept does not sit well with me as a journalist well-trained in the arts of bullshit detection.

The second is the disparity between actual observed variances (facts) in temperature and projections about future temperature, premised on computer modeling scenarios. There has been an increase in average temperature of about 1 degree; this is far from a “crisis” – and well within the normal spectrum of variance. The same as regards C02 levels, which have been much higher in the past than they are now – long before human action could have affected them.

But the public is being deranged with fear over dramatic temperature increases which have not actually occurred. And this fear is being used to justify draconian political/economic controls on the population – but not the elites. This ought to trouble any reasonable-minded person.

If, indeed, the “climate” is in “crisis” then why aren’t the government of the world dramatically reducing the “carbon emissions” of their militaries? Surely an existential threat to our survival as a species is more urgent than F/18s on training flights punching holes through the sky – and “emitting” more C02 in one training flight than my ’76 Trans-Am has “emitted” since 1976.

If the elites urging us to believe actually believe themselves, why are they buying waterfront real estate?

It is all too . . . convenient. “Climate change” just happens become a “climate crisis” as Peak Oil is exposed as false (if not an outright deliberate con) and at just the moment in time when IC-powered cars have been refined to such a degree that they “emit” practically zero emissions – of the emissions which were used to justify the EPA apparat. All of a sudden a new “emission” (C02) is discovered to be an existential threat.

So, while I agree – because I must – that that climate has changed, I do not believe it is changing catastrophically because of human action.

And I urge anyone who does believe it to consider the story of Animal Farm and the pigs who urge the other animals to make sacrifices… while they live high on the hog (as it were) inside the farmer’s house.

. . .

Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in!

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

My latest eBook is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at and I will send you a copy directly!


Share Button


  1. If anyone wants a scientific case for why “climate change” is nonsense see Tony Heller’s website and youtube channel.

    Tony Heller is a geologist and engineer and approaches the data the way an engineer should and how I would approach it. The temperature record shows it has been getting slightly colder. Not warmer. Colder. By using data incorrectly and substituting faulty adjustments, estimates, and so on the climate scientists introduced a warming signal. Remove their work and there is no warming signal. They cannot create a strong enough case for a theory that hinges on expert decisions to adjust the data. Which is why it is a political argument.

    Oddly all the “error” they “correct” in the data amounts to an essentially perfect linear fit to CO2 concentration. The science behind “climate change” is for all purposes circular. Break the circle and it breaks. Which is why they want to shut people up.

  2. Theres a good video about Extinction Rebellion by Paul Joseph Watson. They plain admit that the climate change hoax is a tolo for bringing worldwide communism. Racial equality – 53 genders – the whold bunch of it. I believe “climate change” is required teaching in California now. Its all just communism.

  3. Animal Farm is an excellent book. Not hard to read either. Orwell was a genius and so far ahead of his time. I’m sure folks here know about the upcoming solar minimum. Sorry Greta the science isnt “settled”. How dare you!

  4. As I’ve said before, if we humans have the ability to change the climate, then that would make us some pretty powerful beings. Animal Farm is the perfect description of hypocrisy. Mr. Orwell wasn’t just an author; he was damn near a prophet.

    Interestingly enough, I don’t recall “The Great Dumb-erg” et al begging China or other heavily polluted countries to “sacrifice”. Apparently, only the “western world” is responsible for the “crisis”.

    • bg, the perfect virtue signalling the “civilized” countries. I must not be civilized since I don’t maim, steal or kill.

      • “I must not be civilized since I don’t maim, steal or kill.”

        Exactly! And if one must do such things in order to be considered “civilized”, then why is it that we get punished for doing so? Is it because our dear leaders actually believe in providing justice for the victims? Or is it because they don’t like…competition? lol

  5. The climate is always changing as Eric’s chart shows, and warmer is better than colder if you want to grow food. The whole hair on fire scenario is to scare everyone of us mundanes into subsistence existence while the Davos crowd fly their private jets around the world unimpeded. I would bet that any of the recent volcanic explosions have put more CO2 into the atmosphere than the sum of all vehicular “emissions” to date. Obama just bought a $15 million dollar mansion on Martha’s Vineyard (a small island off Massachusetts coast) so I don’t think he’s very concerned about rising sea levels. Funny how all former presidents end up being multi millionaires; when I was younger the joke was why would you spend millions of dollars for a job that paid $400k a year, the answer is pretty obvious.

      • When I was younger it was $100,000, Kennedy and Johnson. Before that it was $75,000. I”m guessing it has always gone up. Kennedy got paid a couple hundred “grains”. It should have continued that way.

        Who wants to run for president? Not me, no, not me….not me……Nobody? No Takers?

  6. The greenhouse effect was invented by a science fiction writer named Murray Leinster, can’t remember the the name of the story. Might have been several. I guess my point is that it is fiction.

    • Hi Ugg,

      The “greenhouse effect” is real – which is why “climate change” is such an effective con. Per Goebbels, you take a kernel of truth (in a closed system, temperatures can be raised by increasing humidity, solar radiation, etc. – as in a greenhouse) and exaggerate the Hell out of it and people buy in.

      • Eric:
        I understand that. The greenhouse effect is real in a green house. The earth is not a greenhouse. The point is that the phrase “Greenhouse effect” was invented by a science fiction writer. A good one that probably knew more about science than most of your readers especially the clover kind. It was siezed upon by certain individuals to justify their theft.

    • A planet with its atmosphere opened to the vacuum of space, compounded by a giant star that is the sole determinant of climate on this planet, cannot have its climate characteristics determined by a computer program or a 1 liter closed steel vessel in a research lab. Yes the sun is the sole determinant of climate here on Earth. All other effects are because of the presence of the sun. Once the politicians got involved, anyone could see where this CC was going.

  7. politicians make lousy scientists. And scientists make lousy politicians. When you put them together you end up with the worst of both.

  8. Didn’t read it, but as a teen until ’08, I never believed in that crap, due to Dr (Michael) Savage, Rush Limbaugh and everyone else

    I remember them calling it El Nino, remember it called Global Warming and all the idiots I’ve met who did believe in it.

    If I had a dollar, I could of bought a CRX by now and done a turbo K-swap with S2K gauge cluster and all sorts of misc goodies

  9. Michael Crichton’s “State of Fear” makes an excellent point on this. With the fall of the Soviet Union, something else was needed to keep people afraid and, of course, in need of a large, protecting government. No wonder this book was one of the few not made into a movie…

    • That’s right M67. I’ve read this book. And the CC crap really got going after the breakup of the old USSR. No coincidence there.

  10. My position is that if it is real, if it is a net negative, if it is primarily caused by human activity, if it can be stopped or reversed, none of this means it’s a good idea to give the worst environmental destroyers in history– governments– power to force the people to give up their life, liberty, or property.

    • The real fix would be to eliminate public ownership of property, then extend ownership to airspace. You “pollute” my airspace, you pay me compensation.

      Even better is to find a use for all that extra CO2 and create a true market for the stuff. That’s the theory behind Al Gore’s carbon credit market. Problem is no one can find a use for it that isn’t already getting all the CO2 they need.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here