Morano and Bastardi Host Zoom Event

Marc Morano and Joe Bastardi will be holding a Zoom event next week. They will be discussing their books, Green Fraud and the Weaponization of Weather in the Phony Climate War.

The event will be held Tuesday evening, August Aug 10, 2021 08:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)

Here is the link to register.

Y’all are invited. You can also use this post as an open thread.

5 13 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 6, 2021 6:39 pm

AGW denialism becomes a business model. Only in America, smfh.

Reply to  Loydo
August 6, 2021 7:17 pm

Typical knee jerk response from an alarmist …. accuse others of what you have been doing all along.

Reply to  Loydo
August 6, 2021 7:22 pm


AGW denial. Nope, man helps warm the planet via burning of Fossil Fuels. Should CO2 capture a narrow bandwidth of radiation and increase temperature slightly. Yes.

The question is then will that temperature cause the increase in temperature to the tune of 6.5 degrees Celsius before the end of the century? I am HIGHLY skeptical of it.

How about 4 degrees Celsius? I am still HIGHLY skeptical of it.

How about 2 degrees Celsius? I am Doubtful but it is NOW getting into the realm of possibility.

How about a ONE degree? Yes it is possible.

So please understand MOST of the “Denial” you are talking about is not DENIAL. There is skepticism to the headline and scaremongering in order to get people to act via fear that MOST people who are hesitant to embrace the “AGW”, Exaggerations? Lies? What do you call something that is almost surely not going to happen but you still say something like “The world could see a rise in temperature as much as 6 degrees in the next century” when you know it is about as likely to go down the same amount?

Most people here QUESTION the science which is a good thing. They 100% disagree with efforts that will have potential worldwide unintended consequences like massive solar farms and wind turbine farms.

Anyway, happy trolling.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Forrest
August 6, 2021 8:27 pm

It was never about global warming, except among he useful idiots. There isn’t a climate scientist on the planet who actually believes human emissions are causing a climate crisis. It has been all about “The Cause” since the bottom fell out of man-made global cooling and Paul Ehrlich’s fantasy work.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 6, 2021 10:25 pm

Ehrlich has never done anything right. Apart from being a foolish, Neo-Malthusian eugenicist, he has come up empty with every prediction he ever made.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 12:11 am

And you know all this how? Is it the voices in your head or your secret, Captain Marvel super decoder ring giving you the scoop?

Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 1:02 am

Great, so everyone is dead by 2025. That’s only three-and-a-bit years away. Problem solved, no point in arguing anything, is there?

Just one question, though, why is the cost of all petroleum-sourced products so stable? If it were tenfold as scarce as 10 years ago, shouldn’t it be at least triple the price?

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Joe
August 7, 2021 12:24 pm

Joe: Don’t encourage the troll. He’s got one thought (peak oil). He links to CNN – what does that tell you?

Reply to  Joe
August 7, 2021 9:49 pm

If prices fell, then that is the reason why production declined.
If production declined while demand stayed the same, then prices would have increased.
Econ 101, which you no doubt reject because it refutes what you want to believe.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 7:31 am

Oil hasn’t peaked, that won’t happen for many decades yet.

Rich Davis
Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 1:04 pm

Ok that latest string of nonsense pretty much clinches it that the Mark Ingraham persona is a trollbot.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 1:57 pm

Gulf of Mexico proved reserves are growing.

Gulf of Mexico production is growing.

The reserves to production ratio is 8 years, it has averaged 8 years since 1981. Proved reserves represents the volume of oil that can be produced from existing wells (>90% confidence), with existing technology and economic conditions.

Reply to  David Middleton
August 7, 2021 9:51 pm

Wait, in another article Ingraham assured us that Gulf oil production peaked several years ago. So how could volume actually be going up? /sarc

Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 7:22 am

China did a great job of eugenics with the “one child” policy. The nearly all male “government” managed to shoot itself in the foot. Instead of controlling population growth, which was starting to slow anyway, it created a generation of some 44million now in the 40 yr. bracket and facing virutally zero chance of marrying or having children.

Their biggest fear is a takeover and restructuring of the government by a storm of younger, more driven younger men.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 7:29 am

Prior to modern medicine, 3 out of 4 children would die before their 5th birthday.
Abortion while bad, is no where close to those numbers.
Please, for once, learn something that is actually true.

Ehrlich claimed that unless population numbers were drastically reduced, mass starvation would be inevitable.
Population numbers were not drastically reduced, yet none of the bad things Ehrlich predicted happend.

Reply to  MarkW
August 7, 2021 9:53 pm

I challenge your numbers. Also by 1850, medical technology had already made drastic improvements.

Reply to  MarkW
August 7, 2021 9:55 pm

It was way more than a simple math error, it was his whole argument and it was flat out wrong.

Funny, in another post, you attack the author for a typo. I guess you are a standard liberal.

Reply to  Forrest
August 6, 2021 8:43 pm

Without global warming, there is no need for renewables.
If CNN is covering it, it’s most probably wrong.
Can’t you find any reputable sources to promote your favorite myth?

Reply to  MarkW
August 6, 2021 9:09 pm

What a load of naive rubbish. Every time you use the word “they” give yourself an uppercut, it might release you up from the delusional spell of ‘us and them’.

Reply to  MarkW
August 7, 2021 7:32 am

So “they” are lying, and all the laws they are passing are just for show?

Reply to  Forrest
August 7, 2021 4:51 am

‘Liberals’ are extinct. They’ve been replaced by a nasty mix of socialicommimarxifascist, like the mutt no one likes & they throw stuff at it to shoo it away.

Nick Schroeder
Reply to  Forrest
August 7, 2021 6:39 am

The earth is cooler w/ atmos/albedo not warmer. 10% albedo is hotter than 30% albedo.
The GHGs require “extra” energy upwelling from the surface radiating as a black body.
As demonstrated by experiment such is not possible.

Back off.
That’s how actual science works.

Or as is more typical change the subject to something esoteric and unrelated and go ad hominem with insults.

Atmos Balances 052221.jpg
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
August 7, 2021 7:35 am

Actually, these claims have been refuted, over and over and over again.

Nick Schroeder
Reply to  MarkW
August 7, 2021 11:51 am

How does one refute 2 + 2 = 4

Reply to  Nick Schroeder
August 7, 2021 9:56 pm

If you think the math is that basic, then no wonder you aren’t able to follow it.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Loydo
August 6, 2021 8:22 pm

Excellent example of Confession Through Projection … that is what you intended, right?

Reply to  Loydo
August 6, 2021 8:41 pm

What is it about trolls and their inability to be honest about anything.
Only a tiny handful of people deny that man is changing the climate.
The argument has always been about how much and whether that amount is dangerous.

The evidence from the real world is that the tiny amount of warming caused by man is not only not dangerous, but is beneficial.

Reply to  MarkW
August 6, 2021 9:19 pm

You don’t actually think any one here disagreeing with you is a troll – otherwise you wouldn’t be doing the feeding. Its just that you’re so vapidly unimaginative you can’t think of anything better. Fella, you’re just cannon fodder and don’t realize it.

a tiny handful…” lol

Everyone who don’t believe man is changing the climate give me a down vote, those that do give me a plus.

Reply to  Loydo
August 6, 2021 11:08 pm

Or not to show how delusional he really is. 😉

Gregory Woods
Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 3:06 am

I’ll give you a down vote for just being such an idiot…

Richard Page
Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 5:23 am

If you weren’t such an idiot (or perhaps getting paid for each downvote per comment) you’d have reversed that idea – upvotes for don’t believe, downvote for believe. Would have been funny to see people struggle with it!

Rich Davis
Reply to  Richard Page
August 7, 2021 1:15 pm

No, the struggle was whether to give Loydoofus the downvote she deserves or play along and go against common sense.

Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 7:37 am

Where have I ever said or implied that every single person who disagrees with me is a troll?

I love the way the troll tries to pretend that downvotes actually means it’s right.

Reply to  MarkW
August 7, 2021 9:25 am

Ohh, a downvote, does that prove that I’m right?

Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 9:08 am

Loydo, you are moving goal posts. Man does change the local climate but not because of CO2.

When you take out forests and put in a black top highway you change local climate. But taking out forest and putting in wind mills is just as bad.

If you reject the silly notion that CO2 is culprit I would agree to a certain extent.

Reply to  mkelly
August 7, 2021 10:37 pm

“but not because of CO2.”

Tell MarkW, he says you don’t exist.

Reply to  Loydo
August 6, 2021 10:37 pm

More griff from Loydo. He qualifies for a job at NASA ‘s climate unit.

In order to be a true mainstream climate scientist, you’ve got to make scores of predictions, and every one has to be scary, alarmist, and WRONG!
Excerpt from my paper

“Rode and Fischbeck, professor of Social & Decision Sciences and Engineering & Public Policy, collected 79 predictions of climate-caused apocalypse going back to the first Earth Day in 1970. With the passage of time, many of these forecasts have since expired; the dates have come and gone uneventfully. In fact, 48 (61%) of the predictions have already expired as of the end of 2020.”
Climate doomsters have a perfect NEGATIVE predictive track record – every very-scary climate prediction, of the ~80 they have made since 1970, has FAILED TO HAPPEN.
Fully 48 of these predictions expired at the end of 2020. Never happened! Never will!
What are the odds at 50:50 per prediction?
3.6*10^-15 = 0.0000000000000036
That is one in 281 Trillion!
There is a powerful logic that says no rational person or group could be this wrong, this utterly obtuse, for this long; they followed a corrupt agenda, and they lied again and again.
The ability to predict is the best objective means of assessing scientific competence, and the global warming alarmists have NO predictive track record – they have been 100% wrong about everything and nobody should believe these fraudsters – about anything!

August 7, 2021 10:47 pm

As I previously pointed out you made one and scored zero. I guess that makes you infinitely stupid.

To reiterate: your hypothesis predicted cooling in 2020 but failed to predict even larger periods of cooling in 2007, 2011 and 2017. And of course hilariously failed to predict the even greater amount of warming over that period. But please, do keep repeating your ludicrous prediction, its most entertaining.

Reply to  Loydo
August 17, 2021 7:21 pm

Ouch, as of 18/8 no down votes.

Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 1:20 am

Where’s your proof of AGW?

Models don’t count

Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 4:47 am

Greenpiss and all the rest of the scum artists have the monopoly on the AGW/environmental business model

Andy Pattullo
Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 7:03 am

As usual the proponents of the theory can’t marshal any facts or observations for their argument, just playground taunts and childish petulance. The opportunity to debate based on real science has been provided by skeptics continuously. We will bring our science and observations but all your crowd ever does is name call and hide from reality. Good luck with that.

Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 7:38 am

Once again, Loydo can’t be bothered with refuting the actual arguments.

Bill Powers
Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 7:51 am

Speaking of business models, how much does Soros pay you Quad rats to supplement your grad school tuition for spreading disinformation on comment boards? Or does he pick up the whole tab? Room and Board as well? At some point you are going to have to go out into the real world and make it on your own Loydo. It is going to especially difficult after you and yours destroy the free market.

Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 9:16 am

Joe Bastardi has forgotten more about the weather and climate than you will ever learn and that is.less than a thimble full.

Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 11:26 pm

The Green and Left groups should have trade marked or patented the idea but they are against capitalism aren’t they 🙂

August 6, 2021 6:45 pm

At least this Joe knows what he is on about.

Nick Schroeder
August 6, 2021 8:05 pm

So, what’s the story here?
Why does everyone want to prolong this?
Both sides still milking the topic for books, papers, grants and conferences in exotic locations?

The earth is cooler with the atmosphere/albedo not warmer. Nikolov, Kramm and UCLA Diviner agree.
The GHGs require “extra” energy upwelling from the surface radiating as a black body which is painfully obvious in the K-T heat budget graphic and ALL of its clones.
As demonstrated by experiment such is not possible.

The 390/324 up/down loop could be erased from the attached example, likewise the plethora of clones, and make absolutely no difference in the balance.
This calculated 390 W/m^2 based on 15C and 1.0 emissivity serves as the denominator for calculating the surface emissivity of 0.17. The upwelling IR instruments that assume 1.0 assume wrong.

No GHG warming, (Not that 0.4% was capable anyway.)

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
August 6, 2021 8:30 pm

Take your bitterness elsewhere. You’re a one trick pony.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 6, 2021 8:44 pm

You are giving him way too much credit.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 6, 2021 9:23 pm

Thats quite good, I might use it.

Nick Schroeder
Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 5:53 am

How many does it take?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Nick Schroeder
August 7, 2021 10:22 am


Nick Schroeder
Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 6:03 am

A PhD does not mean correct.

Nick Schroeder
Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 6:04 am

If it were not for the ammonia refrigerant HVAC system the 250F solar wind would cook them.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 7:40 am

Half right, you are an idiot.

Reply to  Rory Forbes
August 7, 2021 7:41 am

Everybody dies eventually.

PS: Why the pathetic attempt to change the subject?

Reply to  Nick Schroeder
August 6, 2021 9:21 pm

Hi Nick, you can kick off today’s “tiny handful”.

Nick Schroeder
Reply to  Loydo
August 7, 2021 5:54 am

What’s that?

Reply to  Nick Schroeder
August 6, 2021 11:06 pm

His post is more informative and better than anything you have posted in the thread.


Reply to  Nick Schroeder
August 7, 2021 7:40 am

You know, you are starting to sound like Ingraham here.
Posting the same tired arguments, over and over again, demanding that everyone agree with you.

August 6, 2021 8:08 pm

I’ll be watching the cyber symposium. Not climate but very important to the policy Morano and Bastardi will be discussing.

Peta of Newark
August 6, 2021 10:24 pm

Here’s a one to give you brain-ache:

Here is Eggborough Power Station. They’re busy knocking it down and blowing it up. Before The Game is up as we all now.

Here comes the math:
Just look at the picture there, especially the cooling towers.Those towers are/were 114 metres tall.
Just as a rough guess and judging the proportions ‘by eye’, do we guess they are 30 metres diameter at the top?
Thus we get because they’re circular, an area of 700 square metres at the top of any one/all the towers.

Eggborough was rated at 2 Giga Watt of electrical output.
Just roughly and from Carnot’s Law, we’d get about 4 Giga Watts of ‘waste heat’
That’s in toto going up 8 towers so 500 Mega Watt going up each tower when Eggborough was running at full chat

I get that to be 714 kW per square metre coming off the tops of those towers.

Now and as per Climate Science, we will apply Stefan’s Law to discover that the temperature at the top of each tower is:
One Thousand Six Hundred and Ten degrees Celsius.

Does that make sense to you?

Not to me because I know that cooling towers generally run at about 30 Celsius

Now we do another Stefan calc, using an emissivity of unity because its water vapour in here, I get a radiant power of 459 Watts per square metre at the tops of the towers.

Those cooling towers are convecting 714kWatts/sqm and radiating 459Watts/sqm

Are you any closer to seeing why The Emperor is stark bollock nekkid (##) and almost everybody in this world is being made A Total Fool of.

## Not completely naked, I get him to be 459 divide 714000= 0.064% clothed.
Looking good int he?

PS Actual science:
Drax ani’t too far away from Eggborough and more by accident than design, I found myself driving past it in (am gonna guess) July 2019
No matter the date, it was an epic heatwave going on, a large High Pressure system was sitting on the UK = clear blue skies for ever more.

Drax was running at whatever chat, pumping melted trees out of its stack – so many melted trees in fact that it was inside its own Weather Bubble.

For about 4 or 5 miles diameter the sky had turned grey with cloud and it was actually raining in the centre – just as te station itself hoved into view.

TY Willis for the ’emergent phenomena’ – now we see just how much grunt is in there.
Sorry Stefan, You Iz Wimp

And as for Trenberth and his pathetic little diagram, I can’t find the words.
If just One Head went onto A Spike, that would be the one.

Last edited 1 year ago by Peta of Newark
Nick Schroeder
Reply to  Peta of Newark
August 7, 2021 6:02 am

A Rankine cycle sends about 50% of the input energy out the cooling system.
It’s from condensing the turbine exhaust steam back into water so it can be pumped back through the boiler.
About 15% up the stack.
About 35% as electricity.
The turbine steam blade path is actually rather efficient, turning around 90% of the throttle to exhaust energy into power.

Hyperbolics are frequently associated with nukes, but they are very dependent on local weather conditions.
Palo Verde has traditional induced fanned towers – nine HUGE ones!!!
Google earth the site.

Reply to  Peta of Newark
August 7, 2021 9:14 am

PETA, everyone knows that the hottest place on earth is a the foot of a 50000 W radio station antenna.

Rich Davis
Reply to  mkelly
August 7, 2021 3:52 pm

Oh come on you two. You’re obviously aware that a cooling tower works by evaporative cooling (latent heat). Not sure what you think that proves about Stefan-Boltzmann.

August 7, 2021 12:33 am

Here’s a recent interview by Andrew Bolt with Bjorn Lomborg and he updates the improvements and safety we experience in the 21 st century.
In the 1920s up to 500,000 people died every year from extreme weather events but today only about 11,000 die although the global population has increased from 1.8 bn then to 7.8 bn today. Unbelievable but true.
So far 2021 looks like being a very low number year of about 6,000 deaths from extreme weather events. Yet if you watch the video you’ll see a young girl crying at a demo about the end of the world. GEEEZZZZ where are her parents and how can they turn a blind eye to this poor girl? OH and Greta is spitting at the camera as usual.

August 7, 2021 1:24 am

Climate crisis update

London – rain and lots more rain


Where’s my global warming?

Reply to  fretslider
August 7, 2021 4:50 am

It morphed into “global weirding” when the seancetists realised the models were running too hot

August 7, 2021 8:16 am

The Global Warming fantasy seems to forget the sun, other than as a raw, constant source of energy.
Currently we are at the end of a 20 year solar minimum. It is extremely likely to be followed by another solar minimum, based on history and calculations.
Climate models don’t deal with the weather, except as broad averages. Weather forecasting can’t go beyond a week or so and can’t predict interactions with longterm climate interactions.
In the US, at least, we’ve been subject to a much stronger North-South influence on the jet stream causing it to sweep across the country in huge waves dipping as far as Texas and roughly 1000-1500 miles wide as they move across the country.

It’s called “climate change”. Not a gross temperature change, but a large, worldwide change in the climate compared to the last 40 years. The changeable weather puts a lot of strain on farmers, and can bollix up the best laid plans if they aren’t adaptable to abrupt weather changes. Not climate change per se, but unusual changes in the weather that will cause, and are causing problems now.

August 7, 2021 5:21 pm

Over the last several months I have correctly forecast every shift in temps in the 3.4 ENSO region. In my mind there is no longer any question that the sun directly influences temp changes in the ENSO regions. This means that the sun is the primary cause of temp shifts in the 3.4 region. As such that makes this the primary driver of climate on this planet. A new active region just moved into sight over the last dozen hours. Tropical Tidbits 3.4 graph clearly shows how temps in the 3.4 region first stopped climbing, and then started dropping as the active region appeared in the northern hemisphere of the sun. I will continue presenting similar evidence in order to get others interested in considering this concept.

%d bloggers like this: