The UN wants to "finalize the rule book" for the UN Paris Agreement.
By the Friends of Science Society. Take away the speculative technology embedded across scenarios and models and the entire policy architecture of the Paris Agreement and its parent, the UNFCCC, falls to pieces…. Carbon dioxide removal at massive scale is science fiction…
A new book analyzes America's near-total foreign dependency for critical minerals – and offers solutions.
By Greg Walcher Can no program be allowed to expire?
By Dr. Jay Lehr and Tom Harris -- Almost single-handedly, climate change evangelist and multi-millionaire Al Gore launched the scare that has frightened and depressed generations of school children and pushed normally sensible politicians into drastic, expensive and ultimately futile actions to “save the planet” by stopping climate change.
Flat Earthers? Moon landing deniers? Check with the team who planted America's flag on the moon. They saw the curvature of the Earth from a unique vantage point. They left their footprints in the lunar soil. Their credibility is undeniable.
Marc Morano posted a point-by-point analysis at CFACT's Climate Depot that reveals the President's remarks were "scientifically, politically and economically accurate."
Realist experts show why $60-80 trillion over next 17 years would be wasted.
The UN climate science panel's job is to write a scary report before the UN holds its next big climate conference this December in Poland. That's exactly what they did.
By Daniel W Nebert Historical weather and climate data prove the point.
At least this time the alarmists are giving themselves a little more time before they have to embarrassingly reset the doomsday climate clock.
The inconvenient fact is that sea level has been rising at a tiny 1 to 3 millimeters per year, as it has since before the industrial revolution with no significant acceleration.
It’s the latest in a slew of studies trying to figure out how much warming can be expected from a doubling of carbon dioxide levels. The answer: not much, according to Lewis and Curry.
A major new study says that the cost to meet the UN Paris Agreement's target of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees C is a whopping three times the cost to limit it to 2 degrees. That is a huge cost for a very small difference.
The question is what difference does this tiny difference make as far as future global impacts go?