Our real manmade climate crisis

John Kerry - Caricature

John Kerry – Caricature (Photo credit: DonkeyHotey)

The crisis is due not to climate change, but to actions taken in the name of preventing change

Guest Post by Paul Driessen

In his first address as Secretary of State, John Kerry said we must safeguard “the most sacred trust” we owe to our children and grandchildren: “an environment not ravaged by rising seas, deadly superstorms, devastating droughts, and the other hallmarks of a dramatically changing climate.”

Even the IPCC and British Meteorological Office now recognize that average global temperatures haven’t budged in almost 17 years. Little evidence suggests that sea level rise, storms, droughts, polar ice and temperatures or other weather and climate events and trends display any statistically significant difference from what Earth and mankind have experienced over the last 100-plus years.

However, we do face imminent manmade climate disasters. Global warming is the greatest moral issue of our time. We must do all we can to prevent looming climate catastrophes.

But those cataclysms have nothing to do with alleged human contributions to planetary climate systems that have always been chaotic, unpredictable and often disastrous: ice ages, little ice ages, dust bowls, droughts and monster storms that ravaged and sometimes even toppled cities and civilizations.

Our real climate crisis is our responses to Mr. Kerry’s illusory crises. It takes four closely related forms.

Influence peddling. Over the past three years, the Tides Foundation and Tides Center alone poured $335 million into environmentalist climate campaigns, and $1 billion into green lobbies at large, notes Undue Influence author Ron Arnold. Major US donors gave $199 million to Canadian environmental groups just for anti-oil sands and Keystone pipeline battles during the last twelve years, analysts Vivian Krause and Brian Seasholes estimate; the Tides Foundation poured $10 million into these battles during 2009-2012.

All told, US foundations alone have “invested” over $797 million in environmentalist climate campaigns since 2000! And over $19.3 billion in “environmental” efforts since 1995, Arnold calculates! Add to that the tens of billions that environmental activist groups, universities and other organizations have received from individual donors, corporations and government agencies to promote “manmade climate disaster” theories – and pretty soon you’re talking real money.

Moreover, that’s just US cash. It doesn’t include EU, UN and other climate cataclysm contributions. Nor does it include US or global spending on wind, solar, biofuel and other “renewable” energy schemes. That this money has caused widespread pernicious and corrupting effects should surprise no one.

Politicized science, markets and ethics. The corrupting cash has feathered careers, supported entire departments, companies and industries, and sullied our political, economic and ethical systems. It has taken countless billions out of productive sectors of our economy, and given it to politically connected, politically correct institutions that promote climate alarmism and renewable energy (and which use some of this crony capitalist taxpayer and consumer cash to help reelect their political sponsors).

Toe the line – pocket the cash, bask in the limelight. Question the dogma – get vilified, harassed and even dismissed from university or state climatologist positions for threatening the grants pipeline.

The system has replaced honest, robust, evidence-based, peer-reviewed science with pseudo-science based on activism, computer models, doctored data, “pal reviews,” press releases and other chicanery that resulted in Climategate, IPCC exposés, and growing outrage. Practitioners of these dark sciences almost never debate climate disaster deniers or skeptics; climate millionaire Al Gore won’t even take questions that he has not preapproved; and colleges have become centers for “socially responsible investing” campaigns based on climate chaos, “sustainable development” and anti-hydrocarbon ideologies.

Increasingly powerful, well-funded, unelected and unaccountable activist groups and bureaucracies use manmade global warming claims to impose regulations that bypass legislatures and ignore job and economic considerations. They employ sweetheart lawsuits that let activists and agencies agree to legally binding agreements that leave out the parties who will actually be impacted by the court decisions.

The green behemoth wields increasing power over nearly every aspect of our lives and liberties, with no accountability for screw-ups or even deliberate harm to large segments of our population. All in the name of controlling Earth’s temperature and preventing climate change

Climate eco-imperialism impoverishes and kills. Climate alarmism and pseudo science have justified all manner of regulations, carbon trading, carbon taxes, renewable energy programs and other initiatives that increase the cost of everything we make, grow, ship, eat, heat, cool, wear and do – and thus impair job creation, economic growth, living standards, health, welfare and ecological values.

Excessive EPA rules have closed numerous coal-fired power plants, and the agency plans to regulate most of the US hydrocarbon-based economy by restricting carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles, generating plants, cement kilns, factories, malls, hospitals and other “significant” sources. Were it not for the hydraulic fracturing revolution that has made natural gas and gas-fired generation abundant and cheap, US electricity prices would be skyrocketing – just as they have in Britain and Germany.

EU papers carry almost daily articles about fuel poverty, potential blackouts, outsourcing, job losses, economic malaise and despair, and deforestation for fire wood in those and other European countries, due to their focus on climate alarmism and “green” energy. California electricity prices are already highest in USA, thanks to its EU-style programs. The alarms are misplaced, the programs do nothing to reduce Chinese, Indian or global emissions, and renewable energy is hardly eco-friendly or sustainable.

Wind energy requires perpetual subsidies and “backup” fossil fuel power plants that actually produce 80% of the electricity attributed to wind, and blankets wildlife habitats with turbines and transmission lines that kill millions of birds and bats every year. In fact, industrial wind facilities remain viable only because they are exempted from many environmental review, wildlife and bird protection laws that are enforced with heavy penalties for all other industries. Solar smothers habitats with glossy panels, and biofuels divert crops and cropland to replace fuels that we have in abundance but refuse to develop.

Now climate activists and EPA want to regulate fracking for gas that was once their preferred option.

By far the worst climate crisis, however, is eco-imperialism perpetrated against African and other poor nations. When their country was building a new power plant that would burn natural gas that previously was wasted through “flaring,” President Obama told Ghanaians they should use their “bountiful” wind, solar, geothermal and biofuels energy, instead of fossil fuels that threaten us with dangerous global warming. Meanwhile, his Administration refused to support loans for South Africa’s critically needed, state-of-the-art Medupi coal-fired power plant, which the Center for American Progress, Friends of the Earth, Sierra Club and other radical groups stridently opposed.

The actions ignored both the livelihoods and living standards that electricity has brought the world, and the millions of deaths from lung infections and intestinal diseases that these power plants would prevent.

Ready-made excuse for incompetence. Hurricane / Superstorm Sandy proved how “dangerous manmade climate change” can give politicians a handy excuse for ill-considered development decisions that increase storm and flood risk, failure to prepare their communities for inevitable severe weather events, misleading storm warnings, and slow or incompetent responses in their aftermath. Blaming carbon dioxide emissions and rising seas is always easier than manning up and shouldering the blame for Bloombergian failures. Citing IPCC computer forecasts of nastier storms and flooded coastlines likewise gives insurers a convenient excuse for hiking insurance rates.

When the conversation next turns to climate change, discussing the real climate crisis – and the true meaning of environmental justice – could open a few eyes.

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power – Black death.


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

I will say again: If people want to be full of superstition regarding weather and climate, so much so that they essentially take leave of their senses, that has real consequences on grown-ups around the world. However, among the ways that this holiday from reality does the very most damage is the effect that it has on children! No one exemplifies the AGW comfort level with terrorizing the very young than James Hansen with his unconscionable Storms of My Grandchildren.
Is it too much to ask that the young be given an accurate idea of the storms of their great-great-grandfathers? Is it too much to ask that grownups be grownups? (I know it is.)


Of the funds poured into the environmentalist and activist movements, does anyone know whether Bill McKibben received any, whether directly or via any organisation such as 350.org?

A C Osborn

This is a great rebuttal to so called “denier” dirty Oil funding.
Just think what good that money could have been used for instead of being wasted as it has been.


The political class seem to have no qualms at all about ripping up the sacred trust not to burden our children and grandchildren with a monstrous debt that exists beyond any shadow of a doubt. Why then do they get all dewy-eyed about taking care not to “burden” them with scarely discernable changes in the weather which in any case seem not to be developing?
I guess you can’t fail when you try to fix a problem that doesn’t exist so there’s no harm is making a fuss about what a hero you are for all the steps you’re taking. You can’t lose.


These Gestapo style tactics must be highlighted.
The worst catastrophy imposed on the environment is the environmentalist Nazis.


My post was refused presumably because I used the ”N” word.
Call them what they are and expose their hypocrisy.

The Ghost Of Big Jim Cooley

Mr Kerry hasn’t gone down too well here in England after his visit. Not only did he fail to take the opportunity to chastise Argentina over its Falklands stance, but failed to show any support at all for the islanders right to vote! He is, what would unpolitely be called here, a pratt.


This is exactly why I call those who believe in CAGW the CAGW:
Catastrophic (this is truly a castrophie: a momentous tragic event ranging from extreme misfortune to utter overthrow or ruin)
Anthropogenic (defined as: resulting from the influence of human beings on nature)
Genocidal (defined as: the deliberate and systematic extermination of a racial or national group–in this case the global poor by making food scarce and expensive but also extends to birds and bats by the millions.)
Warmistas (defined as: “the warmist cult”, or “the religion of warmism”).
May their efforts prove futile and their crimes be heaped on their heads!

lurker passing through, laughing

This is one of the best opinion pieces you have ever written.
The out of control NGO industry and hiding incompetence and malfeasance behind climate excuses are damaging us all.
You have summed it up- with documentation- very well.

Echoing Michael Crichton’s 2003 Caltech Michelin Lecture “Aliens Cause Global Warming” . In which, in the spirit of his science fiction writing, Crichton details the fallacies relative to global warming alarmism. http://www.tsaugust.org/images/Lecture_by_Crichton_at_Caltech.pdf
Thet/we didn’t listen then, why now?

I’m glad that nothing about this post is in any way alarmist.


Excellent! Not that those who should be reading this and taking it to heart will actually do so. But at least it’s here and we can link to this article for anyone who starts spouting the alarmist line.

Fred from Canuckistan

Modern environmentalism. . . All the democracy you can buy.

greg holmes

The man is a muppet, knows not a lot, just learns his script.

Nigel S

I see a boat heading up a **** creek to the sound of the Doors’ ‘The End’.
“The Horror… the Horror…”

J. Murphy

Instead of using a newspaper article from someone reckoning to know what the British Met Office said, supposedly from a Met Office report (which doesn’t exist), why not ask the Met Office themselves ? Or link to their response to the article : http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/10/14/met-office-in-the-media-14-october-2012/#comments

J. Murphy

A better Met Office link – to the article itself, rather than the comments :

Coach Springer

Love the article. Fighting a changing climate that naturally changes unpredictably is “our most sacred trust”? Fighting demagogues would be more like it.

In his first address as Secretary of State, John Kerry said we must safeguard “the most sacred trust” we owe to our children and grandchildren: “an environment not ravaged by rising seas, deadly superstorms, devastating droughts, and the other hallmarks of a dramatically changing climate.”

Are you sure this isn’t from The Onion, or maybe something extracted from history (about the time they burned witches and such?)
During a former precognitive (literally: before curious human observation/investigation), pre-science era?
One wonders what ‘age’ this elder statesman lives, thinks.


Well…its all coming together with leadership that has no boundary. Combined with the power given to use a plethora of agencies to regulate and fee monger. A health tax that is going to strip the economy. Pile on the guilt trip that mankind causes climate disasters with global tax schemes as a stand off remedy. More storms, need more taxes to assure mediation. All promoted by a media that is in step with any and all the b.s. from our beloved whited house imperialist.
The camps are ready for those who need mental help to realign their anti agenda attitudes. Especially climate skeptics. Maybe there is a slight chance of some awakening. But…Not going to rely on it.

Since we elect the politicians the fault is our own. We get the policies we deserve.

Reblogged this on This Got My Attention and commented:
The REAL manmade climate crisis: politicized science and corruption.

bruce ryan

greg, it saddens me that you don’t wish to accept verifiable realities.

John F. Hultquist

John Kerry met his wife at an environmental event when she was the wife of the now deceased Sen. John Heinz – so SofS Kerry is not new to the views expressed at the top of the post.
@ lurker – Anthony did not write this – go back to the beginning.
Washington State’s new Gov. – Jay Inslee, is also clueless about science. Just more proof that this issue is not about science.

Bruce Cobb

coeruleus says:
March 8, 2013 at 5:23 am
I’m glad that nothing about this post is in any way alarmist.
The truth hurts, huh.

Chris B

Nigel S says:
March 8, 2013 at 6:10 am
I see a boat heading up a **** creek to the sound of the Doors’ ‘The End’.
“The Horror… the Horror…”
With Hansen as Colonel Kurtz?

Jeff Alberts

lurker passing through, laughing says:
March 8, 2013 at 5:09 am
This is one of the best opinion pieces you have ever written.
The out of control NGO industry and hiding incompetence and malfeasance behind climate excuses are damaging us all.
You have summed it up- with documentation- very well.

Anthony didn’t write this. It’s a guest post.

Doug Huffman says:
March 8, 2013 at 5:14 am
Well worth reading. Hits the nail right on the head.

Jeff Alberts

John F. Hultquist says:
March 8, 2013 at 7:07 am
None of the comments so far support what he’s doing either, lol. Not that there are many comments, and two of them are yours and mine 😉

Tom J

‘In his first address as Secretary of State, John Kerry said we must safeguard “the most sacred trust” we owe to our children and grandchildren: “an environment not ravaged by …a dramatically changing climate.”’
I couldn’t agree more and I think one of his first acts should be to bicycle over to Egypt and tell Morsi to install solar panels on those Abrams tanks and F16 fighters we so responsibly sold to them. While he’s at it, he could advise them to use ecologically responsible explosives when they blow up the pyramids and sphinx (you know, no bad influences on people’s minds or the environment).
Then Sec of State Kerry could make a little detour over to Iran and have a pleasant face-to-face chit chat with Ayatollah Khameini. Perhaps Kerry could explain to him that he need not fear any damage to Iran’s Fordo nuclear facility so long as they produce ‘green’ nuclear weapons: After all, the U.S. is opposed to mountain top removal schemes.
One place our hardy diplomat should avoid when he bicycles and sailboats (the sail boat part is actually probably a bit true) back home is Benghazi. He’ll want to avoid that at all costs.

Ilma-350 is affiliated with the New Economics Institute that used to be known as the Schumacher Society. NEI and the Global Transitions 2012 agenda that carried over after the new year gets Ford Foundation funding.
A lot of the research I have done into the real definitions of Global Citizenship and systems thinking and a new type of capitalism that is in no way, shape or form about free markets or consumer choice always seems to track back to a prof with a Ford endowed professorship at some well-known institution. In fact if I had the time I might cross reference who has those endowed professorships with what they are really pushing.
Also the Aspen Institute pushes a lot of these ideas but it in turn gets funded by the big foundations. But it sounds better to say something is supported by the Aspen Institute rather than the Annie B Casey or Hewlett Foundation.

In his first address as Secretary of State, John Kerry said we must safeguard “the most sacred trust” we owe to our children and grandchildren:
To borrow against their future so that some can life high on the hog today. To leave our children and grandchildren a lifetime of debt from which they will never escape. To sell them into slavery, with the deed held by the banks. The plantation owners of old dressed in banker’s clothing.
In 1865 Lincoln freed the slaves. 150 years later the entire nation had been sold into slavery – only they didn’t yet know it. Having kept interest rates low, the chains were applied without anyone noticing. Only as interest rates began to rise did the chains begin to bite.


lsvalgaard says:
March 8, 2013 at 6:51 am
Since we elect the politicians the fault is our own. We get the policies we deserve.


coeruleus says:
March 8, 2013 at 5:23 am
I’m glad that nothing about this post is in any way alarmist.
Sometimes alarmism is necessary. Paul Revere comes to mind.
The point of the essay is that contrived and exaggerated alarmism in this case is exploitative and destructive. I think you might have missed that.


Kerry is a self-absorbed idiot. It’s why he got the job. Or else he’s in cahoots with the Goreacle, lookin’ for a big payday.

Mindert Eiting

Paul Driessen is close to a fact, discovered in psychological experiments decades ago. Seeing is not believing but believing is seeing. A friend of mine often goes to Indonesia. For years he said that the climate there was disrupted. When I asked him how, I never got an answer, but something was wrong. You could see it. More recently he stopped with these messages. Perhaps Lewandowsky could have a look at the work of his former colleagues when he is ready with his conspiracy theories.

Doug Danhoff

I first met Kerry in Viet Nam. A very clever self promoter with little real intelligence. He has always had his eye on the main prize…..leadership of this country. Pray that he does not acheive his dfream..

Very true.

lsvalgaard says:
March 8, 2013 at 6:51 am
Since we elect the politicians the fault is our own. We get the policies we deserve.
Nowhere on the ballot does it say “none of the above”. Instead we have a choice between a crook or an incompetent. The tens of millions it costs to run a political campaign to win a job that pays a hundred thousand effectively prevents the honest citizen from entering politics.
Every ballot should have “none of the above” as the last item on the ballot. If “none of the above” wins, then everyone else on the ballot should be barred from holding public office for a period of 10 years. This would very quickly clean up the political system.
Electoral reform starts with giving the people voting a real choice. “None of the above” would do this. If all candidates are bad, then you should be free to reject all of them.

Had “None of the Above” been a choice of the last presidential election, who would have won?

cRR Kampen

[snip – too snarky to bother with given your history here -mod]

Thanks Paul, good article.
Yes, it is man-made, and yes, it is a real crisis!

If someone was to legally change their name to
None_of_the_Above Zzzz
Then they would appear as the last selection on the ballot as;
Zzzz, None_of_the_Above


lsvalgaard says:
March 8, 2013 at 6:51 am
Since we elect the politicians the fault is our own. We get the policies we deserve.

That statement might be true if democracy were working properly. It isn’t.

Congress has been “corrupted” by its members’ dependence on money from lobbyists—and from the special interests hiring those lobbyists—to fund their reelection campaigns. … Members of Congress now spend between 30 and 70 percent of their time raising money rather than deliberating as they were elected to do. http://harvardmagazine.com/2012/07/a-radical-fix-for-the-republic

The folks you voted for aren’t working for your benefit. They are working for the benefit of those who paid for their campaigns. Any other course of action would guarantee that they would not be re-elected and no politician will risk that.

A Lovell

This may be a cheap shot, but it’s not often a caricature is better looking than the real thing.

Tim B

Maybe a bit off-topic but the UK “Daily Mail” chart of the MET office “peaked” my curiosity. Has anyone done a regression on the peaks of the anomalies to see if they favor a season? I would presume that steady warming should produce peaks of “above normal” temperatures randomly without regard to a season. For example, if the average temperature increased a 0.5 degree globally, their will be random peaks above that (independant of season) and below that. But if the peaks favor a season (i.e. a statistically significant number of peaks are in Northern Hemisphere summers), that would seem to indicate a signal beyond “Global Warming” and could be things like Land vs. Sea temperature stations, Urban Heat Island effect, temp station weighting, etc. Has anyone ever seen such a regression. A seasonal or X day average warming binning by year regressed against other years shouldn’t have any correlation.

The situation that is described by Mr. Driessen is a product of the deceptive argument called the “equivocation fallacy.” To draw a conclusion from an argument in which a term changes meanings in the middle of this argument is the equivocation fallacy. By logical rule, to draw such a conclusion is improper.
An example is:
Major premise: A plane is a carpenter’s tool.
Minor premise: A Boeing 737 is a plane.
Conclusion: A Boeing 737 is a carpenter’s tool.
That the term “plane” has the dual meanings of “carpenter’s plane” and “airplane” leads to the false conclusion that “A Boeing 737 is a carpenter’s tool.”
Climatologists use the equivocation fallacy in making arguments about the methodologies of their studies. A consequence is for people like Secretary of State Kerry to be duped into concluding that the methodology of science is being employed in climatological studies when this conclusion is not true. Scientists and skeptics are among the many who are duped by the same deceptive argument.


I noticed that Paul Driessen’s wiki page describes him as a “Lobbyist.” Wonder if that is a Connolley construct.

john robertson

As the US dollar disappears into Zimbabwe equivalencies, more people will pay attention,for abstract policies, that sound odd but do not seem to effect me, are ignored until they hurt.
Good post, nice commentary, I’m with Rocky Road on this, Genocide for sure.
Poverty is a vicious wake up call. The longer the one world bureaucracy, anti-humanist eco-phonies, believe they are winning the more we get to see their true nature.
Their religion(the cause) runs contrary to human nature, history and physical nature.
But faith will overcome and the end justifies the means?
Seems like after all that money spent on promoting the cause, protecting the message and persecuting inquirers, communicating the cause, is still failing.
The most recent posts here on WUWT indicate the promoters of the “Cause” are doubling down on their message, displaying an obsession with the message, a contempt for the intelligence of the public and a desperation that indicates they know they are failing but do no comprehend why.
The best expression of that was a statement, last year, complaining about sceptics obsession with discussing the science, as if that was idiotic behaviour.
I may be wrong, but I love the smell of desperation inherent in these hysterical proclamations from the media, academia and selected politicians.
Extreme weather??
When caught on a series of lies, restore credibility by lying louder, faster, more repetitiously?
The “Cause” was cloaked in a thin veneer of science, due to their contempt for the taxpayer, the team “knew” that no one would check or could check,i.e.; we lost the data?
Now that pretence of science has come back to bite the faith, nature cycles on and human nature says payback will happen.
I can understand the desperation of the faithful, a policy of abuse, personal attack and deceit could leave one suffering from projection terrors. Given the behaviour they have displayed, one can only imagine the savagery they fear.
I wonder if the UN has computer models, projecting the reaction of the taxpayers to their revealed mendacity ?

tony nordberg

Given that the climate has stopped changing, the only other measurement that the Great Hoax now depends on, is the series of CO2 readings from the Mauna Loa volcano. As I understand it, there is one instrument used for producing the reference gas, and another one on the top of the volcano.
As the world’s economy is directly affected by the readings of these two instruments, plus the post-processing of the data, it would seem obvious that there has been a really critical study of the the design and performance of these instruments and their place in the whole process of CO2 measurement and reporting.
Can anybody point to such a report?