Leading Norwegian politician joins climate skeptics

Norway Finance Mininister Siv Jensen, picture by Bård Gudim, FrPMedia, source Wikimedia

Norway Finance Mininister Siv Jensen, picture by Bård Gudim, FrPMedia, source Wikimedia

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

Norway’s finance minister, who is also leader of the right wing Progress Party, stated in a press interview that she is skeptical that humans are causing climate change.

According to ABC News;

Norway’s finance minister says she doubts that global warming is man-made, seemingly contradicting the country’s official position in U.N. climate talks.

In an on-camera interview posted on the Aftenposten newspaper’s website on Tuesday, Siv Jensen answered “no” to a question about whether she was convinced that climate change was caused by humans.

Asked to clarify whether she was in doubt about man-made warming, she said “yes.”

Jensen, who leads the right-wing Progress Party, said she still backs the coalition government’s climate policies.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory/norways-finance-minister-doubts-global-warming-man-made-30667079

Norway is normally seen as a staunch supporter of green policies. An open expression of skepticism by a minister at the heart of the Norwegian government is certain to send shockwaves through the European political establishment.

Minister Siv Jensen’s sister, who is head of the Norway branch of the WWF, is reportedly unhappy about the Minister’s comments.

Advertisements

127 thoughts on “Leading Norwegian politician joins climate skeptics

    • The question she was asked was”DO you belive climate change last 10 years are caused by atroproghenic causes”. Since there has not been any GW or CAGW last 18 years a NO here would be the 100% consensus by all climate scientists?

      • I mean if she had said YES to that question above it would have meant that the PAUSE is atroproghenic caused?

  1. Siv Jensen later told Aftenposten her answers “lacked nuance” and said she didn’t want to start a debate on the issue.

    They do lack nuance. She would have been wiser to say that she was doubtful of dangerous, manmade climate change and not that man can influence the climate.
    And she won’t dare start a debate on the issue because it could break the coalition and climate change isn’t that important,
    But it’s another European politician daring to defy the zealots. And that’s good.

    • The questions didn’t provide nuance, so why should she have to? Besides, we all know exactly what they were asking. They kept the questions intentionally vague as a trap for her to walk into. Typical warmunist trick. Thankfully, she didn’t.

      • One rule for “us”, a different rule for “them”. If you support the majority view, you can state it any way you like. If you question the majority view, you must carefully nuance it and cite multiple supporting views, otherwise they tear you to pieces. So full marks to Siv Jensen for being very clear and very direct, and (she must be one tough cookie) not being torn to pieces.

    • “didn’t want to start a debate”
      No, we wouldn’t want THAT to happen. Imagine, talking about facts. The horror.

  2. Wow, a right-wing politician comes out against science. Someone alert the press.

    • Prioritising empirical data over unvalidated models is not being “against science”.
      And the fact that she’s the sister of the local head of the WWF shows that Norway’s version of right-wing is not the same as the USA’s.

    • “a right-wing politician comes out against science”
      FTFY; a right-wing Norwegian politician comes out against the AGW Consensus.

    • Seriously Flashman? Do you get some satisfaction from repeating left-wing propaganda talking points.
      Appeals to authority and consensus are antithetical to the scientific method.
      So it is you, my friend, that is “against science”.

      • @Lancifer666,
        Why is saying that a high percentage of right wing politicians do not believe in AGW anti science? It’s a fact based on surveys. No surprise there.

    • You should work on saying something original or nuanced … otherwise folks will think you’re a bot.

      • Might not be a bot, might be a minimum wage paid troll working from an old patterned response cheat-sheet. That whole one liner style canned snark with no substance just reeks of it…
        BTW, it is best not to feed the trolls.

    • So quick with a wit
      Which proves he’s a twit
      Does naught but evince
      A lack of good sense

    • Broken models equal science.
      Why don’t you learn a new schtick flashy, this one’s worn out.

    • Mathematics shows clearly that the cocksure claims of the warmunist pseudoscientists cannot be justified by their model runs, so it is you who doesn’t know the first thing about science. You are a propagandist and surely not owner of a hard science degree.

    • So flashy, first you all redefine Peer Review, then you redefine science, you clowns are nothing short of amazing.

    • “…Wow, a right-wing politician comes out against science…..”
      How the hell did come to this conclusion from the article above?
      And even if, why would you alert press?
      Is ” the science” a political issue?
      You think that street matches and riots should be organised?

    • Flashman have you turned 18 yet because if you are reaching adulthood sometime this year your lot will be pleased to know they haven’t experienced any measurable global warming in their lifetimes. You feeling relieved about that now?

    • Sir Harry Flashman on May 1, 2015 at 5:57 am
      Wow, a right-wing politician comes out against science. Someone alert the press.

      – – – – – – – –
      Sir Harry Flashman ,
      Wow, someone quickly shows up and says “Wow, a right-wing politician comes out against science. Someone alert the press.”.
      Did you hear the one about the man who walked into an empty bar by himself and asked the bartender for ten very dry martinis up without olives? It’s as funny.
      John

    • George M. Fraser is rolling over in his grave. Flashman of all characters would have skewered the warmist hoaxsters, but admired their ability to part fools from their grant money. Fraser himself detested liberal insanity and political correctness, as witness “Light’s On At Signpost”. Shame on you.

      • Probably, but Flashman would also have loathed the smug self-righteous certainty of this site. Generally speaking, though, he didn’t have much time for anything that didn’t meet his immediate need for a fine filly (in both senses) or escape from whatever risk was at hand.

      • The problem is that Thomas Hughes, who invented Harry Flashman, was a committed socialist. He would probably applaud our pseudo-Flashy.

      • Harry Flashman was the bully of Tom Brown’s School Days by Thomas Hughes. The Flashman stories by George MacDonald Fraser give a fictional career in the British Army, he is a cowardly, lying, womanising smug and self congratulatory drunkard. By a series of lucky events and coincidences he seems like a hero to the public and gains wealth and fame.
        A good series of novels but not a good alias.

      • Generally speaking, though, he didn’t have much time for anything that didn’t meet his immediate need for a fine filly (in both senses) or escape from whatever risk was at hand.

        Mmm, translates perfectly to the faux science leeches chasing grant money

    • “Wow, a right-wing politician comes out against bad science. Someone alert the press.”
      Fixed that for ya.

    • YOU ARE AN EFFING IDIOT; Right wing in Norway and europe are as communist as the US democrats. Engage brain before tapping keyboard

    • At the risk of feeding the troll, imagine that anyone would have the temerity to doubt computer models that can’t reproduce the average temperature on earth?

    • Actually, a right-wing politician comes out against Post Normal Science (ie, science subordinated to a political agenda), and supports true science by accepting doubt and skepticism as normal conditions of science.
      Sir Harry Flashman, you do know that scientists, meaning real scientists, celebrate Galileo’s challenge of orthodoxy, and despise those who try to enforce orthodoxy? Most of the folks at WUWT do not want to establish an anti-CAGW orthodoxy. They want to re-establish the basics of science, including testing hypotheses against real data, and letting the results fall where they may, even if inconvenient to some academic consensus.
      Science tells us that the models used to create the global warming scare predicted results that have not occurred in the last 2 decades. Those models are broken. New models are necessary….including models that include the hypothesis that either CO2 is a weak forcer of the climate or that intrinsic feedbacks in the climate are strongly negative against any forcing by CO2

    • Which science does she disagree with? The science that life begins at conception? That the 1093s yielded the highest instrument record temps EVER recorded in the US? That Antarctic ice extent keeps setting observational records? That Hurricane activity has dropped for the US and nearby?
      Be specific. I failed to read her “deny science”. I did read your implied denial of actual data.

    • Dramatic climate change in my home city … yesterday a deluge from a sub-tropical low and today beautiful warm bright sunshine … you’d think that the media has never witnessed sub-tropical low rain storm before !

  3. Probably learning that its only warmed 0.6C/century despite proponents of CAGW’s sustained efforts to cool the past and warm the present recorded number to make it steeper. The cynicism of hyping in the press the doom without reporting this piddling amount of warming, which is agreed with by IPCC and its climate scientists, is shameful. I am a scientist (and an engineer) but I, too, come out against thinly veiled socialist agenda support masquerading as science.

    • Since her party became part of the government they have been very carefully not saying things like this, in order not to upset their coalition colleagues.

  4. Maybe realising Norway has, pretty much, only one export industry, oil. And a very VERY large welfare state?

    • And fish: lots of dried cod (stockfish), herring, mackerel, farmed salmon,… and whale meat if you like it (I don’t: once, but never again. Tastes like whale oil, still have nightmares if I think about the daily glass of whale oil I had to drink in my youth in winter for vitamin D).
      But the oil exports make that the Norwegian Krone is too expensive and that sets the fish export under pressure…

      • You obvioudsly had whale meat that hadn’t been flensed properly, or been left to long next to the whale blubber. If the meat isn’t flensed properley then the oil from the blubber contaminates the meat and yes it tates foul. like they tried to sell in the UK during the war. If however,the meat is flensed properly then it is like best beef. I remember eating it back in the late sixties when working in Norway, and before it became taboo to eat it, and it had no trace of an oily taste.

      • I have never heard about whale oil, but we had to take cod liver oil when I was a kid, and it was terrible.
        We also had whale meat. It was cheap, but not very good, but not as bad as cod liver oil though.
        However, Norway has more than oil. Apart from fish, It is one of the worlds leading shipping nations, and it has a large aluminum and processing Industry.
        Before the oil we had a puchase power similar to an average west european country, not poor and not extraordinary wealthy. Now we have more money, but everything is also much more expensive so it does not make that much difference. And the housing prices in Norway are perverse.
        /Jan from Norway

      • I have never heard about whale oil, but we had to take cod liver oil when I was a kid, and it was terrible.
        We also had whale meat. It was cheap, but not very good, but not as bad as cod liver oil though.
        However, Norway has more than oil. Apart from fish, It is one of the worlds leading shipping nations, and it has a large aluminum and processing Industry.
        Before the oil we had a puchase power similar to an average west european country, not poor and not extraordinary wealthy. Now we have more money, but everything is also much more expensive so it does not make that much difference. And the housing prices in Norway are perverse.
        /Jan from Norway

    • Yes, the welfare state is large, very large, too large. But there are more exports: A huge shipping sector, Penguin missiles, car components and oddities such as sand and camels exported to Saudi-Arabia.
      There is also some cutting-edge research, such as this: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-atmospheric-and-solar-terrestrial-physics/most-downloaded-articles/
      Prof. Solheim has also been the editor of the Norwegian Climate Realist newsletter “Klimanytt”, which can be found here: http://www.klimarealistene.com/klimanytt/
      Regrettably only in Norwegian, but Google translate should fix that.

  5. This woman will now be slandered and demonized. It’s how the “warm-ista co-religists” work.
    She’ll regret her statement and most likely eventually “repent”. Galileo did…..
    She’s a politician and not a brilliant scientist like Galileo….her chances of not being forced into contrition are near nil….
    If she holds fast, I’ll be very impressed.
    And doesn’t Norway pay pretty much for it’s entire socialist economy on North Sea & Arctic sea crude oil?

  6. Minister Siv Jensen’s sister, who is head of the Norway branch of the WWF, is reportedly unhappy about the Minister’s comments.

    I bet unhappy is an understatement.

  7. Aw, she’s not a scientist. She’s just a politician. Not like Al Gore who’s a …
    Never mind.

  8. When I first saw that picture, I thought the article was going to be about Hillary.
    SHeesh, they could be the subject of one of those separated at birth pictures.

    • “When I first saw that picture, I thought the article was going to be about Hillary”
      If you’re suggesting that Ms. Jensen looks like HRC, maybe you need a better monitor?

      • You got that! Hillary looks like an upside down chicken pot pie with a wet yellow mop (sans handle) on top.

      • “…Hillary looks like an [trimmed] pies…”
        Doh, such an revolting visual…and that screeching voice.
        [The mods require you do not insult upside down chicken pot pies by comparing them to certain politicians and climate scientists .. .mod]

  9. At Last! A Norwegian shield maiden of a politician instead of the prissy little princesses more commonly seen.
    Give that woman a shield and an axe and long live that Viking spirit!

    • Hmm, we’ll see how courageous she is after the PC Police give here the treatment. I hear the sound of furious backpedalling approaching.

    • Just check out Gro H Brundtland, ex PM of Norway, ex WHO boss and now member of The Elders, for a real Norwegian viking woman. She’s the one who said it was immoral to question the science behind global warming.

  10. Science by definition builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions.
    Well here is a testable explanation and prediction: Twenty years ago it was predicted that continued burning of fossil fuels would increase the global temperature. Well, the test has been done and as satellite data shows, natural changes are dominating the climate system. So someone who doubts the original CAGW prediction is properly following basic science not “coming out against science”
    I’m disappointed in the quality of the contrarians on this blog of late. This blog stays healthy when there is differing opinion. Unfortunately, the most energetic of the contrarians seem to my mind to be science illiterate. They seem to think science is an argument from authority rather than an activity of replicating other results, questioning explanations and the curiosity of wondering what else could explain the observation. These are activities that anyone can engage in whether they are “ordained” as a scientist or not.
    As Flashman follows none of these pathways of actual science, what could otherwise be useful criticism serves only to muddy the waters not clarify the discussion.
    I applaud the minister for publicly voicing what is not politically correct. It seems most nuanced arguments don’t get transmitted effectively through the press anyway.

    • I try to be eloquently contrarian on the political debates. But I have no place telling Americans what to think about their own politicians.
      And although I’m not an alarmist but I can see how it’s hard to be intelligently contrarian whilst trying to ignore the Pause.

      • I try to be eloquently contrarian on the political debates. But I have no place telling Americans what to think about their own politicians.
        —————-
        Oh please, do jump in. It’s all good fun and what derserves more ridicule than an American politician?

      • “what derserves more ridicule than an American politician?”
        Well our news media for starters, then the elite Greenies, activist actors. You get the gist.

      • “…and what [deserves] more ridicule than an American politician?”
        The voters who elect them?

      • “The voters who elect them?”
        Okay yea Gruber said we’re not all that bright too. But we tend to be heavily influenced by the news media, elite Greenies, and activist actors.

      • “But we tend to be heavily influenced by the news media, elite Greenies, and activist actors.”
        The Farce can have a strong influence on the weak-minded.

    • What gives you the idea that the warmunists HAVE any scientific argument? They tried with the Hockeystick, Kevin Trenberth’s dumb energy exchange diagram, and with the models that are now all proven junk, and with fiddling the temperature average upwards at Gavin’s GISS.
      They still push all that junk in the media that they own. But there’s really no substance at all left anymore.

    • Dave in Canmore says:
      I’m disappointed in the quality of the contrarians on this blog of late. This blog stays healthy when there is differing opinion. Unfortunately, the most energetic of the contrarians seem to my mind to be science illiterate. They seem to think science is an argument from authority rather than an activity of replicating other results, questioning explanations and the curiosity of wondering what else could explain the observation.
      You said it right, Dave. They staked out their position before they understood the situation, and as new facts and evidence appear their response is to dig in their heels.
      Skeptics are exactly the opposite. I’ve said repeatedly that I will accept AGW as a problem if it is shown to be a problem. That hasn’t happened.
      I will not simply accept the baseless assertions of the alarmist crowd. They believe in the MMGW scare because they agreed with it early on before the data was in or the alarming predictions were debunked, and now they cannot/will not change their minds. The great Russian writer Leo Tolstoy had their number:
      I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives.

    • “I applaud the minister for publicly voicing what is not politically correct. It seems most nuanced arguments don’t get transmitted effectively through the press anyway…”
      I agree. But I think the minister’s “yes” and “no” responses cut through the fuzzy, too-clever language of the questioner. She cleared the air, and it’s a pity if she had to recant on anything she said. Why do you need nuance or qualification to express skepticism and doubt as to the concept of “global warming”, and especially its causes? Any need for clarification of that position merely redounds upon the illogic and bias of the questioners.

  11. A Norwegian politician poking her head out there for honesty and the greater good. This is huge.

  12. I like straight “yes” or “no” answers to “yes” or “no” questions. It’s the questions that lack nuance. And science.

  13. I suppose one would describe Siv Jensen as holding a mixture between “new” liberal and libertarian views; she is a big fan of Ayn Rand and supports the idea of “small” government, among other things.
    Being the only big party in Norway challenging the general climate of political correctness, FrP has for several years been the most disliked and even hated party in Norway. I think they are pretty used to being slandered, so I don’t think she’s very afraid of that. But now they are trying to adapt to their new rôle as a government co-party. Being the leader of Fremskrittspartiet=”the Progress Party” Jensen is naturally more careful about what she says in public now than when the party was in opposition. I’m pretty convinced that she would dismiss the idea of CAGW more thoroughly in private.
    That being said, I don’t often sympathize with any political view coming from her or her party, especially not their anti-immigration posture. I admire their courage anyway in challenging the “political correctness”-mafia in Norway. I’m very happy when any politician in Norway dares to oppose the CAGW madness, regardless of their other political beliefs.

    • Given what immigration has done to France and England, what’s wrong with not wanting to repeat the same mistakes in Norway?

      • Hmm…I would rather prefer to study how immigration has been handled historically in the USA. I wouldn’t want to look to Britain and France. I agree that it is unnecessary to repeat the mistakes of the past.

      • For most of our history, there were few if any limits on who could enter the country.
        At Ellis Island the only ones detained were those with contagious diseases and then only until they got better.
        The only ones rejected were those who admitted to having a criminal background.
        For our southern and northern borders there were no controls at all, people could wander back and forth at will.
        Unfortunately this all changed with the advent of the welfare state.
        A welfare state incompatible with substantial immigration.

      • I should add that those who immigrated in the past were expected to integrate into their adopted home.
        Learn the language, get jobs, join civic organizations, that sort of stuff.
        That appears to be beneath the dignity of too many modern immigrants.

      • “I should add that those who immigrated in the past were expected to integrate into their adopted home.
        Learn the language, get jobs, join civic organizations, that sort of stuff”.
        I look forward to seeing how the African-American slave trade is shoe-horned into this synthesis

      • The key to being successful in a new country should be hard work, but the welfare state is still needed to help people who really need it to stay alive at a decent, but comparatively low standard of living.
        The choice between being a successful worker earning high wages and a welfare recipient barely managing is not hard. Don’t blame the welfare state, but rather the lack of internal improvement of the economy when able-bodied and potentially productive people get stuck in the welfare system.

      • For most of our history, there were few if any limits on who could enter the country. At Ellis Island the only ones detained were those with contagious diseases and then only until they got better.

        Read more about the history of Chinese exclusion. “Chinese Exclusion Act”. My guess is, there have been other exclusions, but this was probably the most blatant.

      • “I look forward to seeing how the African-American slave trade is shoe-horned into this synthesis”
        Well, let’s see:
        Learn the language? Check.
        Get jobs? Double check.
        Join civic organizations? Not so much.

  14. Finance, a discipline where people appreciate the notion of explained variance and can deal with issues like accountability and cost effectiveness. Even better, they have their hands on the purse-strings. It’s only the beginning, but as my Great Uncle Guy’ often said, “the mightiest of smack-downs often begins with a modest jab.”

  15. Norway depends on climate chaos not some silly notion of a tiny bit of molecules disturbing such a powerful planet and its muscle. In this case its muscles are the ocean currents in the form of a swirling, curling Golf Stream meandering along its coastline. No man or woman, nor what they build, will ever be able to affect the very source of Norway’s warmth. Any other speculation related to a tiny fraction of a fraction of CO2 molecules being added to the vast depths of the heavens and oceans having Herculean power to change those meandering currents is…
    Nuts.
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/12/111202091148.htm
    (yeh yeh, science daily is a scab rag)

      • http://www.bing.com/search?q=Gulf+stream+slows+down&src=IE-TopResult&FORM=IETR02&conversationid=
        Talk about your mixed metaphors. LOL! I did a search about whether or not the Gulf Stream is slowing down up North. Reading the search result titles was like listening to my kids in the back seat of the car saying, “Did not!’ “Did too!”.
        Maybe this politician lady can do what I did. I used my fly swatter to stop the arguing. It had a longer reach from the front seat and I could drive in peace.
        We need to get back to ridding ourselves of real pollution. Like we used to. We were doing a bang up job of cleaning our rivers and smoke stacks of things we know are not good to drink or breath. Until all that work got sidelined.
        But I guess stupid is as stupid does.

  16. “Global warming did serve a couple of useful purposes. The issue has been a litmus test for our political class. Any politician who has stated a belief in global warming is either a cynical opportunist or an easily deluded fool. In neither case should that politician ever be taken seriously again. No excuses can be accepted.” Glad some politicians see the light – latest of my musings on this and other subjects at http://cleanenergypundit.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/spring-cleaning-time-those-nuremberg.html

  17. Funny thing that her sister is the head of WWF Norway!
    I live in Norway and in the whole of Scandinavia, Climatism is the new totalitarian cult that must be followed, especially by politicians or else.
    She may hold her heretic view, but if she didn’t accept the climate policies pushed by the other parties, there would be a political crisis in the country and her party wouldn’t have become a coalition partner in the government.
    She was encouraged shortly after that interview, to meet up at Cicero, a climate research institute connected to the Oslo University to be re-programmed into the right climate belief system, which funny enough is led by the former party leader of SV, the socialist left party Kristin Halvorsen.
    My suggestion to Ms Jensen is to ask for any scientific report based on empirical evidence which show high climate sensitivity of the climate system. I wouldn’t hold my breath, on that one!

    • How can Norway embrace climate change when its economy is so heavily dependent on fossil fuels. It’s the Al Gore defence (do as I say).

  18. To be completely objective, I think everyone should pay heed to the words of Siv Jensen who reminds me of a modern day shield maiden with good looks and devastating battle skills.

  19. Norway ought to be well aware of the extent of natural climate change, and that conditions today, are not as warm as they were in the relatively recent past. After all, it is no coincidence that the Vikings flourished in the MWP when they were able to colonise Greenland and sail to North America, so warm conditions ought to be well known to every Norwegian kid and government minister..
    Further, there is evidence of present day glacial retreat showing that Norway was warmer about 2000 years ago, compared to present temperatures. http://www.voanews.com/content/reuters-glacier-warming-helps-archeologists-find-pre-viking-tunic/1626080.html
    and http://www.voanews.com/content/reuters-glacier-warming-helps-archeologists-find-pre-viking-tunic/1626080.html
    Norway only has to look at its historical past to know that present day warming is not unprecedented, and that glaciers have been less extensive a number of times in the past 4000 years.

  20. Could be that the Pope’s “Human Climate Catastrophe” stunt is backfiring!
    Snicker snicker, Ha ha

    • Alexander Feht on May 1, 2015 at 10:46 am
      – – – – – – – –
      Alexander Feht,
      I had to look up what the concept of Jante Law is. It is intellectual crap in its extremely rabid collectivist hatred of individualism. Is the idea behind the Jante Law concept really applied formally or informally these days in Scandinavia?
      John

      • Created by a Norwegian in Denmark and daily practiced in Sweden. A good example of Nordic cooperation!
        A kind of deeply rooted left wing oriented jealousy …

      • The Jante law was described by the danish novelist Axel Sandemose. He moved to Norway so it was actually created by a Danish living in Norway.
        Axel Sandemose thought the law was universal in all small societies like a small town or island. it says something like:
        – Do not think you are anything special
        – Do not you know more than us
        – Do not think you can teach us anything.
        Etc.
        /Jan

      • Jan Kjetil,
        Yes, but … even though his father was Danish and he was born in Denmark christened as ‘Axel Nielsen‘, he saw himself more related to his mother as a Norwegian. He wrote mostly in Riksmål (version of Norvegian Bokmål). Literary he is seen as a Norwegian, which has been pointed out when I have been visiting friends in Norway, at times when they have joked about the Jante Law being mostly practiced in Sweden, hence my comment.

      • You are right SasjaL, he was 30 when he moved to Norway, but he wrote most of his novels after that, and he got a Norwegian citizenship.
        He could probably be described as Danish – Norwegian, and one of the candidates for the Nobel price in lliterature in 1963 by the way.

  21. Leave it to a finance minister to actually look at the numbers, especially the prediction errors.

  22. “Norway’s finance minister says she doubts that global warming is man-made, seemingly contradicting the country’s official position in U.N. climate talks.”
    Norway’s official position? How are these opinions obtained? I keep asking the dirt under my feet for its official position but I never get a reply.

  23. Could it be:
    Protestants = Climate Deniers; “It’s not our fault.”
    Catholics = Climate Alarmists; “Your are dirty, DIRTY. You must be PUNISHED!”
    😉 ha ha

  24. Minister Siv Jensen’s sister, who is head of the Norway branch of the Gestapo, is reportedly unhappy about the Minister’s comments.

  25. “Jensen, who leads the right-wing Progress Party, said she still backs the coalition government’s climate policies.”
    Why?

    • The Progress party is the third biggest and after 40+ years in opposition they have prepared intensely for participation in this government. It is far better for us all to have closet climate sceptics in goverment instead of hardcore leftists with a religious belief in CAGW.
      After all climate doomsday is down there at the bottom of the list of things concerning us from day to day.

  26. “Jensen, who leads the right-wing Progress Party, said she still backs the coalition government’s climate policies.”
    Apparently she is on the Climate Alarmists payroll, but, still wants to get support from the ever more skeptical people… SPIT
    If you don’t believe in the excuse for the policies why would you support the policies?? Because you believe all the other leftard crap and want to depopulate the earth as ordered by the head of the UNFCCC and want TOTAL CONTROL as all leftards.

  27. WOW. Right wing politician denies AGW. You must be struggling for headlines.

Comments are closed.