Friday Funny @Algore 'Climate Reality Project' – too stupid to know the difference between CO2 and water vapor

People send me stuff. Today I got a “please send money” solicitation from multi-millionaire climate crusader Al Gore, who reportedly has increased his net worth north of $200 million since losing his Presidential bid in 2000.

You’d think with all that cash at his disposal, he could hire a proofreader before he starts making pitches for money. Here is what was sent with the subject “Science must trump politics”:


The cheesy subject line is of course, a jab at president-elect Trump. In the email, the Gorebots go on to tell us how terrible it is:

Let’s face it: we have a long, hard road ahead of us in 2017. A president-elect who has denied the reality of the climate crisis is about to move into the White House, and he has nominated a list of oil industry insiders to serve in key cabinet positions responsible for the nation’s public lands, environment, and even foreign policy.

But despite these circumstances, we still have hope. That’s because people like you are standing up every day to support common-sense solutions to the climate crisis.

-, please make a gift today. With your support, you’ll help us mobilize activists around the world to accelerate the shift to clean energy and ensure President-elect Donald Trump follows through with the US’ commitment to the Paris Agreement. And for the next two days, your tax-deductible contribution will have 3X the impact.

Our challenge is crystal clear – but so is our opportunity to build on the incredible progress the movement for climate solutions has made this year.

This is our chance to speak up and stand tall.

This is our time to make a difference and create a healthy, sustainable future for our planet.

Science must trump politics in 2017. You can help. Give now.

– Your friends at Climate Reality

I’ve redacted the links to donations, for obvious reasons. I had to chuckle at the claim of “incredible progress”. Yes, it is incredible, just not how they view it.

But what’s really funny is the picture Gore’s people used. Of course they had to put the obligatory evil power plant in the pitch for money, and usually, they pick a smokestack that has been photoshopped to have darker, more menacing smoke and invisible CO2.

Today, hilariously, they used cooling towers venting water vapor, not CO2. They don’t even mention CO2 in the pitch, as they seem to be all about fighting Trump instead. Despite searching, I have not been able to locate the source photo to determine what power plant that photo is from, but wouldn’t it be doubly funny if it turned out to be cooling towers at a nuclear power plant?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 30, 2016 11:35 am

“… but wouldn’t it be doubly funny if it turned out to be cooling towers at a nuclear power plant?”
Yes, that would be a hoot. But the irony would probably be over the heads of the left-wing CO2 fighters.
We have had about 20 years of no warming despite all the alarm and hysteria. There is no proof that a few degrees of warming would be of any harm anyway, but the hysteria marches on.
How do these people get to be so stupid anyway? Is it the allure of being on the side of the angels and “saving the world”?

Reply to  markstoval
December 30, 2016 11:52 am

It’s the people who give who are stupid. Those receiving the money know exactly what they are doing.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
December 30, 2016 12:56 pm

That brings up a rather absurd thought: Is it really wrong to take money from those that are that stupid and voluntarily send it to him?

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
December 30, 2016 2:02 pm

“That brings up a rather absurd thought: Is it really wrong to take money from those that are that stupid and voluntarily send it to him?”
Why not, it worked for Donald Trump.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
December 30, 2016 4:38 pm

We have big news -:
For the next 38 hours – through midnight ET on New Years Eve – Every single dollar you give up to $110,000 to support the Climate Reality Project will be worth TRIPLE to help us reach our $240,000 goal.
With your support, you’ll help us mobilize activists around the world to accelerate the shift to clean energy and ensure President-elect Donald Trump follows through with the US’ commitment to the Paris Agreement.
And for the next two days, your tax-deductible contribution will have 3X the impact.

Does this mean someone if donating $2 for every $1 donated
does it just me they are very creative bookkeepers
do they intend to get by with 1/3 of their goal of $240,000?
Did I mis-read something or is this Fake-News?

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
December 30, 2016 4:39 pm

Did you send your money to Clinton? She was the one who collected immensely from the stupid ones. Many of her supporters are also suffering from “clinical projection.” Time and counseling should help heal and bring closure.
Now I would agree that Trump lead the MSM to give himself plenty of unflattering coverage that lead to his election. But as far as the $$$ go, you missed that by millions and in the wrong pocket.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
December 30, 2016 5:18 pm
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
December 30, 2016 10:21 pm

I thought hedge funders like George Soros were supposed to be smart. Even so they wasted almost $50 million on Hillary. I guess it was chump change for them and if Hillary had been elected their $50 million wager would have turned into billions.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
December 31, 2016 6:02 am

I think that a very good analysis of these people was done by Peter Taylor ,in his 2009 book ” Chill”,a reassessment of Global warming theory .Read chapter 13 ,Collusion, where he discusses Al Gore&Mark Lynas,, &Al Gores’ lawsuit against Roger Revelle &many other examples . ,i cannot quote directly because of copyright .

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
December 31, 2016 6:11 am

Ever read Charles Murray’s “The Bell Curve?” A significant percentage of the population are burdened with IQ’s that barely make it out of the retarded range. However, they’re not the ones donating to Gore or worrying about Global Worming; they haven’t the money or “education” to do so. The ones Gore is pandering to are the yuppie social climbers for whom “green” virtue-signalling is a badge of having Arrived in the Upper Middle Class. Think Patagonia, Prius, and knee-jerk lefty politics.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
December 31, 2016 6:33 am

with respect to the donations – it’s been pretty amusing to read the wailing of democrat donors from the last election cycle, as they realize they just collectively threw away $1 billion dollars and got nothing at all in return! One of them was quoted as saying “we might just as well have set our money on fire”.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Phillip Bratby
January 1, 2017 7:14 am

Chris, I predict big changes in your thinking and your endeavors as the props for the status quo fall out from under you. They will be frightening at first (you are young) but positive and enlightening for you. You have a leg up in being one of a small minority of non sceptical folks who come here to change or harass sceptics and are exposed to the thought provoking idea of questioning consensus and those you may think of as your betters. Happy New Year.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
January 1, 2017 9:48 am

> Is it really wrong to take money from those that are that stupid and voluntarily send it to him?
Fraud is still fraud, even if it’s performed on stupid people.

Reply to  Phillip Bratby
January 1, 2017 10:13 pm

“That brings up a rather absurd thought: Is it really wrong to take money from those that are that stupid and voluntarily send it to him?”
Why not, it worked for The Clinton Foundation.

Reply to  markstoval
December 30, 2016 1:03 pm

They want to be stupid. I have a 2nd cousin just visited Cuba and was thrilled by their free education and healthcare but noted they have an awful financial system.
You can’t make that stuff up.

Clyde Spencer
Reply to  joel
December 30, 2016 2:55 pm

And Cuba has a cottage industry based on restoring 1950s-vintage automobiles. It’s the place to go if you want an authentic a restoration of Tijuana tuck&roll upholstery.

Pat Frank
Reply to  joel
December 30, 2016 9:22 pm

Cuba Archive points out that thousands of Cuban doctors and health workers are trafficked abroad and paid about $30/month by Cuba, while the Cuban government collects the much larger per-doctor allowance provided by the sponsor. The doctors are forced to leave their families behind as hostages.

Reply to  joel
December 31, 2016 1:01 am

If cuban healthcare is so good. Why Castro was treated by a Spanish (from Madrid, Spain) surgeon?

Reply to  joel
December 31, 2016 8:58 am

I had heard that the best Cuban healthcare was Miami.

Reply to  joel
December 31, 2016 11:57 am

They also made quality multi-purpose cigars enthusiastically endorsed by Bil Clinton.

Reply to  markstoval
December 30, 2016 1:55 pm

They aren’t stupid. They know that there are still plenty of misinformed people that will continue to fund their “save the world” agenda. What they fear is under Trump’s administration the government cash cow will be lost and there will be fewer misinformed public to fund their projects. I would like to know who is going to give double what is given by the public, Al Gore? I don’t think so. It will be interesting to see just how much they will be able to collect.

Reply to  fhhaynie
December 30, 2016 3:54 pm

I wondered the same thing. When they claim that a donation will “worth triple” and “Your tax-deductible donation will have 3X the impact”, are they required, by law, to reveal who is going to donate 2 pennies for every penny you spend on them?
I’d like to spend a penny on this horrible scam. (Old English definition.)

Reply to  fhhaynie
December 30, 2016 6:21 pm

I maybe a little ignorant here but didn’t Gore sell his tv station to oil interests?

Reply to  fhhaynie
December 31, 2016 1:04 am

Triple of nothing is still nothing.

michael hart
Reply to  fhhaynie
December 31, 2016 7:04 am

It’s probably the same formula that triples the CO2 warming by invoking an unsubstantiated water vapor feedback.

Reply to  michael hart
December 31, 2016 7:34 am

They based that on the Bode formula from electronics. Except that to get the triple feedback you need to input more energy. If this were actually true it’d be the greatest thing since sliced bread. Not only does it achieve unity, it exceeds it by 300%. It’s another reason their models are failing, among others. Thankfully, the undefined underlying natural
warming that I think that has occured, at least since the 1970’s, hasn’t been anywhere near the predictions/projections.
Of all the things unsaid, is that snow and ice cannot forever accumulate at the poles without an impact on the stability of rotation of the earth.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  fhhaynie
January 1, 2017 7:30 am

The beauty of it is that just Trump’s presence on the scene will chase off the faithful and Gore will be lucky to find people foolish enough to fund his dead enterprise. Gore’s currency and ‘currentcy’ is zero. He will quietly disappear from public view. I’m not sure his enterprise will qualify as a charitable corpus in a few weeks.

Robert from oz
Reply to  markstoval
December 30, 2016 3:52 pm

Just did a search of cooling tower photos and there are similar photos (taken at sunset) by Alamy , who ever they are .

John M. Ware
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 30, 2016 4:59 pm

I hate to parade my ignorance, but isn’t that cooling tower connected to a nuclear installation?

Robert from oz
Reply to  Robert from oz
December 30, 2016 8:19 pm

Could be wrong but cooling towers look very similar to Sutcliffe on sour plant , assuming pommie installation .
Could not find exact photo there were 100s of them but did find a few that matched the skyline and towers just taken a bit earlier , in the clouds you can just make out jet contrails and I found a series of three photos taken at different angles and times in the late evening that almost match the sky perfectly .

Reply to  markstoval
December 30, 2016 4:10 pm

How can they be so stupid that they think these cooling towers are polluting? You would think that if they are serious about their science, they could spend 30 minutes to at least learn the basics. I used to be an board the AGW bandwagon. “The science is settled” pushed me off, but if it had not, photos like this one would have.
What a bunch of yoyos!

Keith J
Reply to  Ken
December 30, 2016 10:00 pm

Water vapor IS the most influential GHG and the crux of the AGW…nay, CAGW, dystopian hypothesis. That being meta stable system triggered by ppm increase in narrow absorption band carbon dioxide to a run away Venus like heating. Pure balderdash.
Yes, water vapor IS responsible for most greenhouse effect. But it also is responsible for most albedo and a darn huge chunk of convective heat rejection from the surface.
Carbon dioxide also promotes noctilucent clouds, those sparse but significant weather structures in the mesosphere..but without thermometers at that altitude, quantification of effects are unknown. Carbonic acid becomes its conjugate anhydride at mesospheric P&T.

DC Cowboy
Reply to  Ken
December 31, 2016 4:15 am

“if they are serious about their science” ROFL. The only thing they are serious about is separating fools from their money.

Reply to  Ken
December 31, 2016 6:15 am

Given the compartmentalization of modern higher “education,” your lit and journalism majors, sociologists, basically anybody not STEM don’t know CO2 from their own methane. But they know how to work a “smart” phone app real good!

Reply to  markstoval
December 30, 2016 4:50 pm

It’s addiction coupled with projection. Carl Jung said: “Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol or morphine or idealism.”

Reply to  jorgekafkazar
December 31, 2016 3:03 am

I’ve always been a great fan of addiction myself, most especially morphine and alcohol. Will this help?

December 30, 2016 11:40 am

If the goal is only $240k, why are they tripling $110k?

Reply to  Kevin Roberts
December 31, 2016 2:51 pm

That’s easy. When it’s other people’s money, it’s a bottomless well. When it’s their money, that’s a different story. What does 240k buy you ? One administrators salary for a year.

Dave in Canmore
December 30, 2016 11:40 am

Again we see the language “follow through with Paris” rather than “submit Paris for approval.” They pretend it’s already been approved by the US just like they pretended to have debated the science!

Mark from the Midwest
Reply to  Dave in Canmore
December 30, 2016 12:07 pm

Nice catch on the language. For some reason it reminds me of the little old lady that walked into an ice cream parlor and asked for a 1/2 gallon of chocolate ice cream
Guy behind the counter: Sorry mam, we’re out of chocolate today
Little old Lady: Then I’ll take a quart of chocolate
Guy: Mam, we don’t have ANY chocolate
Little old Lady: Then how about a pint of chocolate ice cream.
Guy: Can you spell the VAN in vanilla?
Little old Lady: V – A – N
Guy: Can you spell the STRAW in Strawberry
Little old Lady: S – T – R – A- W
Guy: Can you spell the F&#K in chocolate
Little old Lady, acting confused: But there’s no F#&KIN chocolate
Guy: That’s what I’ve been saying, there’s no F*&KIN chocolate

R. Shearer
December 30, 2016 11:42 am
Reply to  R. Shearer
December 30, 2016 11:48 am


Reply to  R. Shearer
December 30, 2016 1:14 pm

That is not the same tower. The tower used by Gore does not have the characteristic outward curve at the top that appears on most nuclear plant cooling towers- which is also on the Gety photo.
Some nuclear plants towers do not have that outward curve, but the ones I’ve seen like that differ from Gore’s photo in that they are not as slim as the one shown.

Reply to  arthur4563
December 30, 2016 3:28 pm

It is a coal plant, notice the conveyor to the right of the front tower (Probably in front of the tower, hard to see with this lighting). Nuclear plants don’t need conveyors.

Reply to  arthur4563
December 30, 2016 5:01 pm

Probably not the same plant. The outward curve is definitely there, however, though the tower is distorted by the camera lens.

Reply to  arthur4563
December 30, 2016 5:17 pm

By the way, that horizontal object by the tower may be a cooling water return line. See this diagram:

Robert B
Reply to  arthur4563
December 30, 2016 7:32 pm

conveyor belts are unlikely to load coal halfway up a cooling tower.

Reply to  arthur4563
December 30, 2016 11:43 pm

December 30, 2016 at 3:28 pm
It is a coal plant, notice the conveyor to the right of the front tower (Probably in front of the tower, hard to see with this lighting). Nuclear plants don’t need conveyors.

This made me think of an old Flash Gordon serial, wherein Our Hero was captured by the Hawkmen, who enslaved him to work in their Atom Furnaces… where he spent his time shoveling something (Uranium? It’s never said) into the Atom Furnace through a grate, exactly as one would have done with coal.

Reply to  arthur4563
December 31, 2016 5:44 am

Cooling water cools the condensors under the steam turbines – not the reactor (which in effect is cooled by the steam turbines). The steam turbines in a nuclear power station are the same as those in a thermal power station. So the cooling towers of a nuclear power station are the same as those at a thermal power station.

Reply to  R. Shearer
December 30, 2016 1:24 pm

Sorry, but its not the same picture

Reply to  1saveenergy
December 30, 2016 1:49 pm

It doesn’t matter, sir–NO cooling tower ANYWHERE belches smoke–they aren’t even connected to a direct sour of combustion. Engineers design COOLING TOWERS to use WATER for cooling and that’s it.

Reply to  1saveenergy
December 31, 2016 11:15 am

First Trump Presidential Directive will be to label all photos of cooling towers as cooling towers, emitting steam.

December 30, 2016 11:45 am

‘ensure President-elect Donald Trump follows through with the US’ commitment to the Paris Agreement’
The U.S. made no commitment. Obama did. It seems everyone but Gore [knew] Obama was soon leaving. His commitments leave with him.

Pat Frank
Reply to  Gamecock
December 30, 2016 9:34 pm

Good point, Gamecock. Mr. Obama has publicly committed himself to AGW and the Paris accords.
We can suppose that following his return to private life, Mr. Obama’s lifestyle will reflect his principled commitment to a low-carbon footprint.

December 30, 2016 11:50 am

Good grief!
The Grauniad and countless others have tried that one before and been rumbled.
Gore might not be short of a bob or two, but originality is entirely lacking. I don’t see it as stupid, it’s propaganda (aka fake news)

Curious George
December 30, 2016 11:54 am

Please bear with people who can’t tell a cooling tower from a smokestack. They are too busy smoking – something.

Reply to  Curious George
December 30, 2016 3:38 pm

What would be worse than the inability to tell a cooling tower from a smokestack, is the clear subterfuge in recognizing that in the US smokestacks don’t make good billowing pictures and deciding to deliberately use something else. I hope it is ignorance, but maybe it is a calculated PR move recognizing the limits of their audience.

December 30, 2016 12:05 pm

Tesla is now saying that gas and coal electricity is needed but should be replaced with clean NUCLEAR energy so they can recharge cars? 60 years of Progressive Socialist left e=green lies about nuclear are now being reversed? ha ha ha – in progressive e=greens stupid is genetic.

Russell R.
December 30, 2016 12:08 pm

“3x the impact” because three times zero is still zero. They should have gone with 10x. The AlGorithm alchemy money machine can crank out 10x as well as 3x. No resistance to providing nothing.

John F. Hultquist
December 30, 2016 12:09 pm

Do they explain the source of funds to triple (3X) your donation? And finding their general source of funds is . . . Well, I didn’t.
This is not uncommon for a charity to have a major donor set something up such as this. However, the source of the funds is commonly explained (sometimes not) or handled via a group, such as:
In this case the main sources are Raynier Institute & Foundation and the Boeing Company.
That’s just one small example.

Mark from the Midwest
December 30, 2016 12:16 pm

Cooling towers, water vapor? Since water vapor is the number one greenhouse gas is Algore trying to rid the planet of water vapor?

Reply to  Mark from the Midwest
December 30, 2016 1:15 pm

Try that argument on the Guardian website. I posted that statement and the comeback was “what would happen to water vapour if all the CO2 was extracted from the atmosphere?”
Duh!….who gives a monkey’s what happens to water vapour, were all dead anyway!

Reply to  HotScot
December 30, 2016 1:39 pm

Does Al Gore mean – like rain or humidity? Oh, yes he purchased a ocean front home in Santa Barbara where the world famous “TAR” beach is located. Oil seeps from the ocean floor – oh no. And he paid many millions so I guess he does not now fear oceans rising and flooding out the coasts. What a joke the E=green Gaia movement has become with real work in hard sciences disproving the Grant science.

Reply to  HotScot
December 30, 2016 5:08 pm

Profitup: Santa Barbara is located on the coast, yes. But It’s on a bluff well above sea level. I know of only one ocean-front private home in the area, and it’s a tiny bungalow.

Reply to  HotScot
December 31, 2016 12:06 pm

Profitup 10: Al Gore’s house is in Montecito, what you probably meant to say was it is as big as Santa Barbara.

Bill Powers
December 30, 2016 12:20 pm

Anyone who would use “reality of” and “climate crisis” in the same sentence is a thief and a liar and given the current climate of propaganda in education and the media one could make the case for armed robbery as the millions of people graduated by the supremely under- serving Public School systems and the casino’s masquerading as higher education are ignorant fools unable to defend themselves against the fear and guilt extravaganza that passes a collection basket.

December 30, 2016 12:34 pm

Notice the subliminal message of the setting sun implying that time is running out. Sadly they don’t understand that photovoltaic energy goes out at sunset too.

Reply to  Gary
December 30, 2016 2:04 pm

Are you sure it’s not sunrise?

Reply to  Gary
December 30, 2016 2:37 pm

I think it’s mainly for the back-lighting make the steam look dark .

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  Bob Armstrong
December 30, 2016 4:29 pm

No that’s photoshop

December 30, 2016 12:47 pm

I wonder what foreign donations will do after Jan. 1? It might look about as sad as foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation.

December 30, 2016 12:52 pm

Being that CO2 was at 280ppm before industrialisation, only 80ppm away from when plant life begins to die, and a mere 130ppm away from when all meaningful plant life and humanity is extinguished, I rather believe we are now emerging from a climate crisis, not entering one.
And whilst Al Gore is piling on the Pounds (OK, that’s British £’s…..US dollars doesn’t work for that joke) he could probably make even more money by telling us all to burn more coal, spend billions on particulate emissions (which are nasty) but pile CO2 into the atmosphere to help along the 14% greening that’s happened over the last 30 years.
But no, the man is so twisted that he would rather satisfy his own ego by turning a non-issue into an issue and make millions from it, just because he can.
It won’t happen, and I have said it before here (apologies for repeating it) but I really, really hope Trump, Putin or May will decide to prosecute these people for fraud, in the public interest. Make damn sure these charlatans will never blight our existence ever again and demonstrate to our children that they were lying to achieve nothing more than line their own pockets.

CD in Wisconsin
December 30, 2016 12:53 pm

Went to the Climate Reality website and tried to donate $0.02. Wouldn’t accept it–kept getting an error message saying the donation amount had to be greater than zero. Hugely disappointed because I really would like to give the former VP and his followers my 2 cents worth…..if you know what I mean.
Maybe I can mail it to them…..

Bruce Cobb
December 30, 2016 1:02 pm

“Science must trump politics”. Yep, that’s what we skeptics keep saying, because the CAGW monstrosity is about anything and everything BUT science. While we’re at it;
Truth must trump lies.
The US constitution must trump world government.
I’m sure there are more.

Reply to  Bruce Cobb
December 30, 2016 7:34 pm

Trump must un-politicize science.
Gore must stop making a trumpet of his …

December 30, 2016 1:05 pm

The group of young people suing the federal government for failing to protect their constitutional right to a stable climate is seeking testimony in their landmark case from Rex Tillerson, CEO of ExxonMobil and President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for secretary of state.
Attorneys representing the 21 young people in their federal climate lawsuit served the notice of deposition (pdf) on Thursday, demanding Tillerson’s testimony on January 19, 2017 in Dallas, Texas. They claim that “[a]s CEO of ExxonMobil, Tillerson has unique personal knowledge of the fossil fuel industry’s historical relationship with the federal government.”…
Background article I wrote awhile back:

Reply to  john
December 30, 2016 1:19 pm

The 21 ‘young people’ ought to be told to fork off and grow up. Even allowing litigation by uninformed brats on any subject is a travesty of justice. Nor do I care how intelligent they are, they still know sod all.

Reply to  HotScot
December 30, 2016 3:35 pm

I want to be deposed, I want to define the word STABLE which by historical norms is between -55 and +23 (Average over the surface) according to scientists.

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  HotScot
December 30, 2016 4:32 pm

Yes, I can imagine the careful plotting of the lawyers to get the case before amenable judges.

Keith J
Reply to  HotScot
December 31, 2016 3:44 am

If stable is between -55 and + 23, we can tolerate a few on the + side.

Janice Moore
Reply to  john
December 30, 2016 2:19 pm

So, I take it, john (and thanks for sharing), that because the defendant, “the federal government,” is pro-AGW (as per Obama Admin. policies), it has NOT moved to dismiss this CLEARLY frivolous and with no issue likely to prevail at trial lawsuit? Or did a pro-AGW activist (translation: “corrupt”) judge deny the defendant’s motion to dismiss?
Discovery ALLOWED? Pending an appeal of that denial? Not stayed?
Well, whatever legal shenanigans are being played the by the Climate Hu$tler$, come January 20, 2017, or soon after, there WILL be a successful motion to dismiss (and/or a judge out of a job) or it will be appealed until it is successful.
Those kids, if they grow up into thinking adults with a healthy, intact, conscience, will one day be ashamed of what they did. Hopefully, they realize that the blame lies not with them, but with the de jure adults involved.

Janice Moore
Reply to  Janice Moore
December 30, 2016 2:21 pm

Not to mention the ethical obligations of the defendant’s attorneys to zealously defend which makes (if this is the case) not moving for dismissal malpractice, imo.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Janice Moore
January 1, 2017 11:33 am

Grill the Demobrats on the evidence for and costs of damages done by warming- models not evidence.

Reply to  john
December 30, 2016 2:32 pm

Young people ? If they are old enough to file a lawsuit, they are of age. Maybe it’s to pay off their student loans. They have to get the money from somewhere. Whose donating the law fees? Communist like to call their lackeys,( useful idiots) young people, like a religious group calling their soldiers, students. Where’s the outrage in Chicago?
A stable environment…. as if that ever existed..

Reply to  rishrac
December 30, 2016 3:44 pm

The person behind the lawsuit is in this picture.
Wearing a green hat. Recognize him?

Reply to  rishrac
December 30, 2016 3:45 pm
Reply to  rishrac
December 30, 2016 7:52 pm

rd50 – Is that Homer Simpson?

Reply to  rishrac
December 30, 2016 10:40 pm

rd50…green hat? is that James Hansen in last row, upper left?!!

Reply to  john
December 30, 2016 5:23 pm

Those kids may be in for one very nasty shock.
They are about to play “bell the cat” only this cat is a full grown Bengal tiger.

Reply to  john
December 30, 2016 7:38 pm

“Constitutional right to a stable climate?” What Article of the Constitution did I not understand?

Reply to  Ronald P Ginzler
December 31, 2016 6:38 am

Possibly the same one that said that people have the constitutional right to ‘marry’ another person of the same sex. Or the one which allows women to destroy their unborn babies. Once judges are able to make judgements which merely express their own prejudices they can interpret the Constitution any way they wish.

Reply to  Ronald P Ginzler
December 31, 2016 2:00 pm

Alba dear you do understand the difference between an embryo and a human being is larger than that of a cat and you?
And the difference between a cell of you and an embryo is not that big either?
Not that your off topic choice of antiabortion rant would be meaningful. I do have tolerance on people disagreeing with me, it’s only that when conservatism is replaced with stupidity, I suddenly want to be a liberal.

Reply to  Ronald P Ginzler
December 31, 2016 2:54 pm

The SSM clause was written by the Founding Fathers in 1787 or so. Interesting – very progressive of them.
Did SCOTUS in the majority decision point to the specific spot where it’s found? Or was it just Mabo, the Constitution and the Vibe? (Non Australians should Google that.)

December 30, 2016 1:08 pm

I’m glad that somebody besides me has noticed the accepted fallacious practice of using images of visible smoke to highlight the supposed threats of an invisible gas. Isn’t that a form of false advertising?
I think I will now write an article on the dangers of people who use false imagery, using as my choice of illustration, a worm.

Reply to  Robert Kernodle
December 30, 2016 4:49 pm

It’s not smoke
it’s steam or water vapor

Keith J
Reply to  mikerestin
December 31, 2016 3:51 am

Water vapor is invisible..except to IR. So it IS a GHG.
We need to blanket the oceans to reduce water vapor to counter AGW ;*]
(Pure sarcasm as it is water vapor which drives convective heat rejection and latent heat loss)

December 30, 2016 1:19 pm

Although it could be, I haven’t seen a nuclear plant cooling tower that does not have the usual outward curve at the top AND is slim like the Gore photo. Some nuclear plants DO NOT have cooling towers, if their source of cooling water can be returned to a body of water at around the ambient temp without the need for a cooling tower. This due to a reg that prevents damage to aquatic life.

Keith J
Reply to  arthur4563
December 31, 2016 3:55 am

Power plants without deep freezing climate don’t need hyperbolic cooling towers if they have sufficient surface water. It isn’t just about thermal pollution although that is another issue. The laws of physics have greater enforcement powers.

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  arthur4563
January 1, 2017 5:48 am

Does the CANDU Pickering nuclear power plant have any cooling towers? I don’t remember any. It has a gas turbine exhaust pipe that emits steam which condenses into water droplets (fog),

December 30, 2016 1:22 pm

You might find the illustrations at the following link entertaining:
… how to visually dramatize a non-problem. It’s the false drama that is the REAL problem.

Reply to  Robert Kernodle
December 30, 2016 1:23 pm
December 30, 2016 1:28 pm

Why, why, why do we capitulate and call them greenhouse gases? It is merely the earth’s atmosphere – comprised of a teeny, tiny bit of CO2, lots of nitrogen and oxygen, a bit of methane, some dirt and lots and lots of water vapor (clouds, humidity, rain, snow, fog) – there is no greenhouse effect – its a GD atmosphere protecting the earth from cold, cold space

bill johnston
Reply to  jimmy_jimmy
December 30, 2016 5:58 pm

No money in that.

Bill Taylor
Reply to  jimmy_jimmy
December 31, 2016 8:41 am

calling it a greenhouse effect is a LIE…..there is NO glass enclosure around the earth, we do NOT have any greenhouse effect…..NOTHING is blocking CONVECTION.

December 30, 2016 1:29 pm

“With your support, you’ll help us mobilize activists around the world to accelerate the shift to clean energy ” HOW??? China and India are going to triple their output of CO2 over the next ten years, and the rest of the countries (other than Russia) output reductions of CO2 are lost in the rounding.errors. So the Paris accord assures that we double the production of CO2. Please explain how that helps? Seems like the agreement was modeled after the Iran Nuke agreement.

Barbara Skolaut
Reply to  usurbrain
December 30, 2016 2:44 pm

“Seems like the agreement was modeled after the Iran Nuke agreement.”
That’s because they’re both designed to royally screw over the United States.

Tom in Florida
December 30, 2016 1:31 pm

” please make a gift today. With your support, you’ll help us mobilize activists around the world to accelerate the shift to clean energy and ensure President-elect Donald Trump follows through with the US’ commitment to the Paris Agreement.”
This money is going to be used for propaganda , not to do any research, testing or anything scientific. This is in line with their mission statement. Anyone who donates must certainly understand they are financing other people to enjoy the high society life style hobnobbing all around the world. Pretty smart to target stupid people to pay for your adventures. After all, stupid people tend to lose all their money anyway, why not to them. Wish I had thought of that.

Keith J
Reply to  Tom in Florida
December 31, 2016 3:57 am

$30 for a tee shirt? All about the money.

December 30, 2016 1:36 pm

“With your support, you’ll help us mobilize activists around the world”
So they are saying that they need to pay their foreign activists? Or are they saying that they are going to ship their activist abroad?

Barbara Skolaut
Reply to  Brian
December 30, 2016 2:39 pm

Brian, embrace the power of “and.”

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Brian
January 1, 2017 11:45 am

In any case, they own up to having to pay to active.. er… actioning.. er.. activistulate…?

Dale Muncie
December 30, 2016 1:37 pm

Climate Reality is not our friend!

December 30, 2016 1:46 pm

Their Facebook page is almost dead.

Reply to  Tony
December 31, 2016 2:03 pm


December 30, 2016 2:00 pm

It’s interesting that you didn’t make the same comment about the recent carbon rather than CO2 post.

Reply to  Chris
January 1, 2017 11:53 pm

Chris December 30, 2016 at 2:00 pm
“It’s interesting that you didn’t make the same comment about the recent carbon rather than CO2 post.”
How many Carbon Credits do you get payed to foist upon the whole world the idea that CO2-Climate Change is always a disaster? I wouldn’t get payed anything either if I told everyone I saw as a Patient only that “You have a Disease.”

Berényi Péter
December 30, 2016 2:02 pm

Name of original image file at the Climate Reality site is “CR-EOY3-lightbox-20161220-smokestacks-r1.png”. Even there, objects shown are mis-identified as “smokestacks”. Hopeless.

Reply to  Berényi Péter
December 30, 2016 3:20 pm

We knew that from the website before you conclusively proved it again.

Reply to  Berényi Péter
December 31, 2016 2:08 pm

Stares in disbelief.
These people are the most ignorant know it alls in the world. I mean you couldnt possibly think there’s a smokestack. Unless you are a moron not knowing anything about energy production.

December 30, 2016 2:23 pm

Hyperbolic or natural draft cooling towers are not unique to nuclear power. They are found in very large, 1,000 MW +/- coal or NG Rankine plants where local ambient conditions allow for effective operation. Brayton Point is an example. Palo Verde Nuclear has low profile round crossflow towers, three each or nine of them, because hyperbolics don’t work well in the desert. It’s a trade off between cost, fan horsepower, heat load, etc. As much as 50% of the energy that enters the steam turbine is released to the atmosphere from condensing the turbine’s exhaust steam. Thermodynamic fact of life. Another reason why combined cycles are so popular. Typical Rankine is abut 35% efficient. Typical CCPP about 60%.

Reply to  Nicholas Schroeder
December 30, 2016 3:41 pm

More precise numbers. Nuclear ~31% efficient, cooling tower thermal energy loss 69% (reason is safety, as risk increases with steam temp and resulting pressure). Conventional subcritical coal ~34%, 66% cooling tower loss. USC coal ~45%, so 55% loss. By comparison, CCGT is 61% efficient. So 39% loss. Abut 2/3 of that is direct post heat exchanger exhaust gas loss, like in a car tailpipe. Only about 1/3 is in steam recondensation (like a car radiator), which is why CCGT dont have cooling towers at all. They use radiator equivalents.
The cooling water ‘steam’ is not from the ultrapure (therefore ultra expensive) boiler turbine circuit water. It is ordinary water ( like from a river or well) that showers onto and evaporates in the cooling tower to recondense the exposed pipe pure boiler circuit steam. The hyperbolic towers use natural convection to remove the heat now resident in the ordinary water vapor evaporate. Cross flow towers use base fans to move the evaporate heat up and out.

December 30, 2016 2:31 pm

Al-a-gor-ical what a great scientist! ;(

Barbara Skolaut
December 30, 2016 2:36 pm

“ensure President-elect Donald Trump follows through”
Presuming the Goracle was actually personally involved with this debacle, can you imagine how painful it was for NEVER-gonna-be-President Al Gore to write that? 😀

Gunga Din
December 30, 2016 2:38 pm

With your support, you’ll help us mobilize activists around the world to accelerate the shift to clean energy….

I found some typos.
That should read:
“With your money (not mine), you’ll help us pay demonstrators around the world to accelerate anarchy and poverty….”

December 30, 2016 2:41 pm

‘Science trumps politics’ is a tired slogan aimed at claiming the one ‘true’ science.
But it is supposed to contrast with others’ – what? data manipulation?
This when Gore’s own torturing of statistics is a scientific Guantanamo!

Reply to  J Cuttance
December 30, 2016 2:47 pm


December 30, 2016 2:46 pm

When all the donations are electronic transactions the funding drives don’t have to be as careful about who gets their requests for donations as they do with old style mailers. I read an article on that years ago, several fund drive directors making the same point about their mail donation processors having traumatic experiences opening those envelopes when they came back from people who hated their cause. They didn’t want to say what the worst items they received were, but I know a work acquaintance of mine who was extremely pro-gun rights got a mailer from a gun control group and he sent their envelope back with toilet paper in it. USED toilet paper. Can’t get stuff like that in an all electronic fund raising effort. I do not condone the TP thing. Maybe send the global warmist organization a picture of a hockey stick, though that humor would surely be missed by the peons they’ve conned into processing their mail.

December 30, 2016 2:49 pm

just discovered this guy. Forgive me if you think it off topic

Taylor Ponlman
Reply to  peter
December 30, 2016 3:18 pm

Not really off topic, but Milo makes a claim I had not heard – that he worked for a climate organization and was present at some conferences (he mentions Bali, for example). Anybody know who he worked for? He makes some pretty strong statements about scientists fudging results, that he says are from personal experience.

R. Shearer
Reply to  Taylor Ponlman
December 30, 2016 7:21 pm

“As “Wagner”, he worked as a speechwriter for Bianca Jagger, and is listed as her assistant on the World Future Council’s website, in an entry about a UN Framework Convention on Climate Change held in Bali in December 2007.”

Paul Penrose
December 30, 2016 2:53 pm

So the have a “goal” of $240K total, and with the tripling (where is that coming from I wonder) they say they need up to $110K in donations. Wait, what? $240K / 3 = $80K. So why are they looking for up to $110K? As usual, the numbers don’t add up.
Also, I like the bit about “Climate Crisis Denier”. So now it’s climate crisis instead of climate change. LOL. At least being a “climate crisis denier” is closer to the truth. I deny that there is any reasonable proof that a crisis with the climate is happening or about to happen.

Leo Smith
December 30, 2016 3:07 pm

Oh C’mon now.
Pity the poor underpaid graphic artist:
‘Come up with a sinister feeling of time running out and CO2 being emitted’
‘What is CO2?’
‘Oh FFS. Who knows?’

December 30, 2016 3:11 pm

It’s a trick so stupid even a mentally challenged child would recognize it’s fake…ergo they know their audience is stupider than that.

December 30, 2016 3:40 pm

The image is named “CR-EOY3-lightbox-20161220-smokestacks-r1.png”, found by searching through the page source-code. Google finds only one instance, presumably because of the added text. Their filename says it all. They’re the fattest and squattest “smokestacks” I’ve ever seen.

Michael Jankowski
December 30, 2016 3:51 pm

They say they have “big news” and follow that with -: Seriously?

December 30, 2016 3:52 pm

The cover art of my ebook Blowing Smoke illustrated the same trick, discussed in the preface. The cover art professional was concerned about image copyright. She was relieved when I assured her it was public domain– lifted directly from the EPA who were perpetrating the deception.. She cropped the EPA image and added/placed all the lettering. She got a special mention because did such a good job

Reply to  ristvan
December 31, 2016 2:12 pm

Did EPA also call it a smokestack?

December 30, 2016 4:03 pm

I am waiting for some brave soul to report this to the police as a solicitation scam, that the information used to elicit the payment is deceptive and therefore constitutes fraud. For example by not explaining how the donation gets multiplied by three and the use of the deceptive image.

December 30, 2016 4:24 pm

“We need your help to reach our goal of raising $240,000 before the 2016 comes to an end.”
Hmm..can’t even proofread their begging appeal. Anyone know who is the “generous supporter” who will tripple your donation?

December 30, 2016 4:27 pm

Perhaps all cooling towers should be modified like some I saw at a power plant in Chile. They had “IT IS NOTHING BUT WATER VAPOR” in huge letters written on them (in spanish of course). It both informs the public and makes pictures of them politically useless.

Alan Ranger
Reply to  tty
December 30, 2016 7:49 pm

Do you have a link to photos? I’d love to grab a copy.

December 30, 2016 4:30 pm

It is to laugh.
I do agree with the last in-bold statement. It is a laugh that President-Elect Trump and his Cabinet Officers will be the ones who actually have a good chance and in their efforts, Science will Trump Climate Politics and Al Gore in particular.
So we should help Al spend his $200 million, and very quickly at that during 2017.
By the way, Al Gore has been on the Board of Directors at Apple Inc. since 2003. In 2013 he has some options to vest and netted a sweet $30 million. So I do hope that President-Elect Trump and his Cabinet Officers will give Al Gore a lot of motivation to loose that $200 million in 12 months.
With Al’s hand firmly yanking on the Sow’s Tit the Sow may have other ideas!
Ha ha

December 30, 2016 4:49 pm

Adding more H2O to the atmosphere has a net cooling effect as evidenced by the fact that the wet lapse rate is significantly less than the dry lapse rate. Global cooling is suppose to be good since global cooling is required to stop and reverse sea level rise.
Accordiing to the Paris Climate Agreement, the effort is suppose to be funded by the rich nations. The USA has a huge National Debt, huge annual deficits. and hugh annual trade deficits. We have become a poor debetor nation and cannot afford to fund anything. So it is totally not necessary for those of the USA to donate anything to the cause. It is all to be funded by other nations.

Alan Ranger
December 30, 2016 6:37 pm

The photographing at low light (sunrise/sunset) is a common trick, to make the nice white fluffy clouds of water vapour look like evil plumes of planet-punishing dirty black smoke. (Leftie warmist loopies wouldn’t know the difference, let alone being able to distinguish a coolong tower from a chimney).
But the best I’ve seen was Australian leftie actor, Michael (clueless) Caton, trying to con people in an ad campaign, to “embrace” the unmandated carbon tax foistered upon the Australian people.
So dopey were the producers of this propaganda, that they stood him affront of a picture of Battersea power station – decommissioned in 1983 in the UK !!

Nigel S
Reply to  Alan Ranger
December 31, 2016 4:59 am

Pigs will fly before that lot tell the truth. This would have made a better background.

Alan Ranger
Reply to  Nigel S
December 31, 2016 6:50 am

Seems my image has been pulled down. Maybe somebody who originally posted the fake news doesn’t like it being exposed as fake news. Not to worry. Here it is again

Nigel S
Reply to  Alan Ranger
December 31, 2016 5:08 am
December 30, 2016 7:22 pm

Anyone who donates must certainly understand they are financing other people to enjoy the high society life style hobnobbing all around the world.
Bwahahahahahahahahaha. That has to be the most asinine,stupid,completely illogical statement of 2016. If they understood ANYTHING,they would not donate a cent.
Ignorance can be fixed through education….stupid is forever.

December 30, 2016 7:42 pm

“I had to chuckle at the claim of “incredible progress”. Yes, it is incredible, just not how they view it” What is incredible is how they have been able to fool so many people, including a lot of smart ones. For those in the science profession it has to be tied to the money to be made. To bad they have sold their reputation for the bucks.

December 30, 2016 9:14 pm

Think this is it.
Caption reads:
Power plant at sunrise – Stock image
Coal-fired Power Station, Concrete, Dawn, Industrial Building, Power Station

Reply to  Greg F
December 30, 2016 9:41 pm

Yep, good find.

Pat Frank
Reply to  Greg F
December 30, 2016 10:12 pm

You got it, Greg. The picture keywords include “North Rhine Westphalia.” That was enough to track it down to the North Rhine-Westphalia, Grevenbroich, brown coal power station.
This image shows a cooling tower with the same profile and the same piping as in the head-post images and the same distant power pole to the lower left.

December 30, 2016 9:21 pm

Anthony Coming from Refinery work I know that large heaters all have to be completely purged with steam to safely eliminate any combustibles before the first match is struck in the fire box during start up. Virtually all the photos I have seen associated with global warming promotion showing these steam plumbs coming from heater stacks are merely capturing this pre start up phase before any combustion and therefore with absolutely no CO2 involved. Many are purposely captured with shaded light to make the pure white plumbs look ominously dark. In southern california, as I assume is true around the country, operators are fined for having any visible smoke at all coming from their stacks. These pictures are very disingenuous, and I presume most of the promoters and publishers know this. Certainly Al Gore does. The photo shown is I believe of a cooling tower which continuously emits only pure water vapor from the cooling process. Again no CO2 at all involved. Shameful

John Hardy
December 31, 2016 1:24 am

Same photo is used elsewhere:comment image?w=672&h=372&crop=1

December 31, 2016 3:44 am

Truly religion for the stupid?

Alan McIntire
December 31, 2016 6:08 am

What you can learn from Yahoo finance
Direct Holders (Forms 3 and 4)
Name Shares Date Reported
LEVINSON ARTHUR D 1,133,283 Aug 9, 2016
COOK TIMOTHY D 1,039,809 Aug 31, 2016
FEDERIGHI CRAIG 510,482 Oct 1, 2016
GORE ALBERT JR 442,994 Feb 1, 2016
I see Al Gor4 Jr is the fourth biggest Apple shareholder, with nearly 443,000 shares., currently trading at 115 per share, so based on his Apple shares alone, he’s worth about $50 million.

Timo Soren
December 31, 2016 7:05 am

They are using the CO2 feedback on your dollar. Give a dollar and C02 will multiply it to 1.45, methane will up it to 1.50 then water vapors feedback with a doubling to $3.00. Now when they go to the bank and demand that their balance be tripled would be a hoot to see.

Crispin in Waterloo
Reply to  Timo Soren
January 1, 2017 6:40 am

Possible explanation of the triple business:
Freely donated funds can be used without restriction. That means $240,000 can be spent on fundraising campaigns which will raise $1,000,000. That will leave $760,000 net. Normally the income is earmarked to a particular ’cause’. Mind you the million will be in the bank. That’s how to raise a million in earmarked money for a particular project.
This in not an unusual tactic in the NGO community, the yield seems low, however. If the yield is only three to one, it means they turn $240,000 in free money into only $720,000 of project funds. The free money is written off but it was other people’s money so it’s okay.
The push to get the money before year end is likely because they spent it already and are trying to cover the bill. Because the ’cause’ money has been raised and spent, and the free money was short, they are scrambling to meet the ad bill/fund raising obligation before year end. Why not carry it over into the next financial year? Because they may have spent other earmarked funds on it expecting the free money to continue to arrive, but it didn’t.
This sort of activity is common in the donor community. They often get caught spending earmarked funds on other things (slush-funding). Suppose you get ten grand in free money. You spend all of it on ads that brings in fifty grand and put ten aside for the project, spending the rest on more ads. The plan of course is to “get it rolling”. Suppose it doesn’t roll? Maybe they had raised $510,000 after spending $250,000. Oops. So appeal for the missing amount as free money, then cover the shortfall for the project. Accounting-wise, it all gets written down as ‘money donated’, ‘money raised for the project. The ‘temporary mis-spendings of earmarked donations on fundraising goes unreported because it was covered by year end, hopefully.

December 31, 2016 4:03 pm

Science trumps politics ?
Should read, Climate science triumphs via politics ?

December 31, 2016 11:07 pm

That image of water vapour doubling for invisiible CO2 is used all over including Australia’s national broadcaster the ABC
Whenever climate change is mentioned on the TV of that organisation they predictably cut to a stock shot of a steam cooling tower belching
water vapour

December 31, 2016 11:39 pm

If people want to give to the global warming religion so be it . Just quit trying to push their religion on everyone else that isn’t drinking their cool -aid .
Guaranteed they raise less than a quarter of the failed Green party election recount .
Without tax payer subsidies , grants and loan guarantees the earth has a fever religion is finished .

Ian Macdonald
January 1, 2017 7:26 am

The phony smoke is certainly a trading/advertising standards issue. In the UK anyway, I don’t think many adverts would be allowed to show competing products in a falsely negative manner. The implication is that competing energy sources belch out pollution even from their cooling facilities. This is a deliberate lie.
Maybe someone in the USA could take this up.

James in Philly
January 1, 2017 11:35 am

I would say it’s double-plus-funny-good indeed if they are cooling towers for a nuclear power plant!

January 2, 2017 9:43 am

Could that be the Davis-Besse nuclear power station?

Gene Barth
January 2, 2017 11:49 am

Plumes of water vapor in the light of the setting sun make awesome photos. The plumes take on the visual substance of a dark solid. They have been featured in Green propaganda since forever.
Remember back in November 2010, when experienced observers misattributed the water vapor plume of a jetliner as a submarine missile launch off the coast of California? The jet was moving toward the observers, low to the horizon in the light of the setting sun. Guys on the Internet quickly corrected the news services and even identified the flight as originating from Hawaii and on its descent path into the LA area.

January 3, 2017 3:56 am

I hope that Mr. Trump to take advantage of their knowledge which is confirmed by the work of Nikola Tesla and it will not be “stranded” in the shallows of knowledge on climate change that are based on stupid basis that the human factor is stronger than natural, and the natural factor is formed and the people .
I would ask Trump to explain when the main “culprit” of climate change, and in short, it is a magnetism that is a kind of “network magnetism” of the planets and the sun.
What man is so ignorant that claims that people are stronger than this overwhelming force produced by the planets and the sun, their mutual effect.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights