THIS WEEK: The Heartland Institute’s Climate Reality Forum from COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland

THIS WEEK: The Heartland Institute’s Climate Reality Forum from COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland

Five hours of daily presentations begin at 9 am ET
on Tuesday, Nov. 2 and Wednesday, Nov. 3

Watch the live-stream at Heartland’s YouTube channel
or at

We have two days of GREAT programming. If you miss anything, all presentations will be archived at Heartland’s YouTube channel to watch at your leisure.

See the full schedule at this link (subject to change).

Our Presenters


The Heartland Institute, fresh off its successful 14th International Conference on Climate Change in October, is hosting a Climate Reality Forum in Glasgow, Scotland with an international cast of scientists and policy analysts to balance the discussion at the 26th Conference of the Parties (COP26) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Heartland, described just this week by The Intercept as “now the premiere think tank casting doubt” on climate alarmism regularly works with world-renowned scientists and policy experts who look at the data and do not see human activity causing an “existential” climate crisis. The Climate Reality Forum this week will comprise the only presentations of science and policy analysis that will counter the alarmist messaging of the United Nations’ COP26.

Watch presentations from all of Heartland’s previous conferences here, and learn more about what’s really going on with our climate at Heartland’s Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy

4.7 10 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 2, 2021 2:02 am
Reply to  spock
November 2, 2021 3:50 am

I think this is breach of copyright. Get it legally on Amazon.


Reply to  spock
November 2, 2021 6:11 am

just bought it on Amazon and happy to pay for it, why should Mr Moore not profit from his work ?

November 2, 2021 2:47 am

Climate reality?


Reply to  Allan MacRae
November 2, 2021 5:12 am

Globally the third warmest October according to UAH.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 5:53 am

Yeah, sure.

Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
November 2, 2021 6:48 am

Yes, sure.

This October was 0.37°C above the 1991-2020 average.

This is 0.01°C below last October, and 0.10°C below October 2017. Hence making it the 3rd warmest October in the UAH data set.

Here are the 10 warmest Octobers according to UAH.

   Year Anomaly
1  2017   0.47
2  2020   0.38
3  2021   0.37
4  2019   0.29
5  2015   0.28
6  2016   0.28
7  1998   0.24
8  2003   0.12
9  2005   0.11
10 2014   0.08
Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 7:11 am

Who cares?

Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 2, 2021 7:31 am

Yes, especially since no human being in history has ever lived under “average global temperature.”

Reply to  Capitalist-Dad
November 2, 2021 12:05 pm

And especially with thermometers that they could read hundredths of one degree from.

Instead of arguing over whose hundredths or thousandths of one degree temperature change in a month, constructed by averaging imprecise readings from various inconsistent, uncalibrated sources all around the world, actually means anything in reality, we should start ridiculing these meaningless conjectures at every opportunity.

Tell me who in the real world could tell the difference if their car tires had 35 or 35.09 psi air pressure in them.
And how they would react if some “expert” told them that they were endangering lives by driving on such over inflated tires.

Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 2, 2021 8:01 am

I would think that those alarmists claiming we are heading for a new ice age would care.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 12:15 pm

Yeah! You’ve really knocked them down a peg or two (whoever “they” are).

Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 2, 2021 3:47 pm

My initial comment was a response to Allan MacRae posting links to Electroverse. A site “Documenting Earth Changes during the next GSM and Pole Shift”.

Watts Up With That publishes the UAH global anomaly every month, Lord Monckton publishes an article documenting the “pause” using the same data every month, yet when I make a simple point about this months anomaly, trying to put the tails of global cooling into perspective, you think nobody cares, and I’m told it’s dishonest data, and the monthly average temperature anomaly doesn’t even exist. Funny, that.

Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 6:52 pm

Well, we’re half-way into an average 20,000 interglacial. The current Grand Minimum in solar sunspots certainly hasn’t RAISED temperatures.

Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 2, 2021 4:09 pm

Who cares?”
Clearly not you, but then that will be why you think there is no problem with temps going up.

Reply to  Simon
November 3, 2021 8:26 am

Who cares when utter irrelevancies are being trotted out as if they were meaningful data.
Even if temperatures actually were going up, it would not be a problem.
We still have several degrees to go before we get back the the excellent conditions that the Earth enjoyed during the Holocene Optimum.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 10:48 am

Next year will be the 5th warmest (if we are lucky in the 8th year of the present cooling trend). I’m curious. Tell me just what it would take to cause you to reconsider or begin to have doubt about the advertised catastrophic global warming. The answers one gets are of two kinds.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
November 2, 2021 12:56 pm

Notice how the time frame keeps shrinking, as the climate keeps not cooperating with their apocalyptic predictions.

Since year on year measurements are falling, they have to pick out warm months to try and pretend relevance.

In a few years they will be telling us about how this past Oct 3rd is the 5th warmest on record.

Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 1:10 pm


Your own data shows that temps have risen .37 -.12 = .25 C since 2003, about .13 C per decade. This is essentially the same rate as the 1910 to 1940 temp increase. Yet, 100 years ago, the CO2 concentration and the rate of increase of CO2 was far lower than now. So what’s your point? That the “climate crisis” is bogus?

Richard Page
Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 6:22 am

Only in places. Naturally those are the places that are most heavily weighted in the global average.

Reply to  Richard Page
November 2, 2021 6:50 am

It’s a global average. Some places will be warmer others cooler.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 7:12 am

Golly, Sargent Carter!

Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 7:33 am

It’s a global average. “

No such thing, that’s nonsense.

Reply to  fretslider
November 2, 2021 8:03 am

Better tell Dr Spencer he’s wasting his time.

Richard Page
Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 7:35 am

Ah, finally an admission of culpability. Also quite naturally, you won’t be admitting that the cooler areas are becoming a little more common and the warmer areas a little less common, will you?

Reply to  Richard Page
November 2, 2021 8:05 am

Are they? Do you have evidence for that? If that was the case wouldn’t you expect the global average to be decreasing?

Richard Page
Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 9:18 am

“If that was the case wouldn’t you expect the global average to be decreasing?” You know, I probably might if I still had expectations of truth and honesty.

Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 8:28 am

Third warmest since 1979. Big whoop.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  MarkW
November 2, 2021 12:18 pm

And completely irrelevant over time spans of hundreds or thousands of years, where that graph collapses to a singularity.

Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 2, 2021 12:58 pm

Climate is chaotic, by definition. It’s hardly unusual to see big temperature spikes in the data. Both up and down.

Having to rely on monthly data is just more evidence that the bigger picture isn’t going their way.

Reply to  MarkW
November 3, 2021 4:44 am

Yes, that’s why Monckton’s monthly updates on the “pause” are so pointless.

Reply to  Bellman
November 3, 2021 8:28 am

So the fact that temperatures haven’t increased in 10 years is meaningless because monthly data is noisy?

Really, is that the best you can come up with.

Reply to  MarkW
November 3, 2021 9:00 am

Not sure what you mean by “haven’t increased in 10 years”. The warming rate over the last 10 years is 0.37°C / decade.

The pointlessness of the process is coming out every month to update the length of the pause to the nearest month, combined with the pointlessness of claiming a tend over a few years of chaotic monthly data, especially when you select the start date to show the trend you want.

Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 9:57 am

right with ya bro.
the warmest snowfall evah!!!

son of mulder
Reply to  Bellman
November 2, 2021 3:35 pm

So are you implying temperatures are going down? Or what?

Reply to  Bellman
November 6, 2021 11:27 am

The third warmest October, this is catastrophic.. Apparently CO2 has also been implicated in the yearly worldwide record high food crop yields. At first glance this looks like a good thing but we have to get the 3rd world to realize having enough to eat is over-rated especially since we have to save the planet from CO2 devastation. There seems to be a controversy about whether CO2 is causing global warming. It didn’t cause warming during the Minoan, Roman or Medieval Warm periods but it is now, today is different. The Earth cooled between 1945 and 1975 as CO2 increased the whole time but that CO2 is really tricky, sometimes it causes warming and sometimes it doesn’t. And let’s not forget the period between 1905 and 1945 where the Earth’s Temp increased significantly without a push from CO2. To paraphrase one of my favorite “go with how the wind blows” climate people Stephen Schneider. It’s OK to push whatever climate crap you want as long as you’re doing the right thing.

Reply to  Jay
November 7, 2021 4:52 pm

And then of course we have COP26 where we’re going to get some real climate change “work” done. I, myself don’t believe CO2 does anything except make my tomatoes grow bigger but I am waiting for world class alarmists like the IPCC BS machine to tell India and China that they both need to curb their CO2 output significantly. Forget about greater Africa getting any kind of quality power source, we have wind mills and solar panels planned for them. I foresee a time when China will actually thumb their nose at the IPCC and help African countries build coal power plants. I don’t want coal power plants anywhere but I see what’s going to happen. The West says Africa should use wind mills and solar panels and China will say they can build African countries coal power plants. What’s going to be their choice alarmists?. Will it be inefficient wind mills and solar panels or coal fired plants? What alarmists don’t understand is that people need to be helped out of poverty first before they’ll start thinking about “saving the planet”. When you need to stay alive today CO2 levels down the road mean little. So, when it comes to the big picture your average alarmist doesn’t have a clue. The hundreds of millions of people worldwide will look after their own best interest and that’s to have enough energy to live a life above the poverty line, which means burning fossil fuels. Someday the catastrophic CO2 alarmists will understand this simple concept but not before they put many of the world’s people through an energy nightmare.

Chris Wright
November 2, 2021 3:39 am

Here’s a wonderful video showing Biden being terrified by climate change at the COP26 circus….
Looks like the person in front of him was equally terrified.
What a joke.

Reply to  Chris Wright
November 2, 2021 4:27 am

Is that the “war like footing” the Prince is talking about?

Reply to  Chris Wright
November 2, 2021 5:47 am

I think Disney made a short documentary about that.

IIRC, the title was Rip Van Winkle.

November 2, 2021 3:52 am

Who funds Heartland? Who funds the GWPF?

We don’t know, because they don’t say.

and until they do, anything they say is suspect.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 4:02 am

Cmon Griff.

Pamela Matlack-Klein
Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 4:11 am
Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
November 2, 2021 8:30 am

More evidence that griff only repeats lies.

Reply to  MarkW
November 2, 2021 10:08 am

The needle on that gramophone griffophone is stuck, Mark.

“Weather is climate” skip

“Big oil” skip “Big oil” skip

“Unprecedented” skip “Unprecedented” skip “Unprecedented” skip

Someone always responds to the stuck-on-propaganda griffophone and bumps griff’s needle over a couple of grooves, but the griffophone just gets stuck again.

“Nonsense” skip “Nonsense” skip “Nonsense” skip…

Reply to  Pamela Matlack-Klein
November 2, 2021 12:27 pm

So no more than their annual income of $4.6 million comes from corporate donors – $230k.

One or two salaries & on-costs.

Compare this with how many salaries & on-costs are provided by governments & activist organisations to push the AGW conjecture.

Likening the Heartland’s capacity to run a Taliban-like guerilla campaign against the UN / IPCC as Griff and others do is risible.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 4:16 am

We have to be critically skeptical about all climate claims.

But only the prejudiced will reject an argument because of the corganization which sponsors an event where it is made.

Listen to the arguments and then decide. Many in these matters are funded by people who stand to gain if their arguments are correct and are accepted.

It behooves us all to examine the arguments critically. Do that, and you’ll see that the hysteria on view at the first day of COP26 was totally irrational. And that many of the critical arguments given a platform by GWPF and Heartland are valid.

Regardless of who is funding them. Just as the arguments for wind are not made any less valid if sponsored by the wind lobby. They are wrong on the merits.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 4:20 am

Why does the Guardian avoid paying its taxes Griff?

Not exactly how socially responsible progressive socialists are supposed to behave, is it?

Guess who made up the slack for these egregious tax dodging hacktivists. That’s right, the ordinary working person.


Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 4:26 am

Who funds IPCC ?
Who funds COP26 ?
Who funds your story telling ?
What is funding telling us ?

Richard Page
Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 2, 2021 6:28 am

China directly funds the IPCC and indirectly through the other UN bodies. How can we be sure of the IPCC’s impartiality when it receives funding from the world’s largest polluter?

Reply to  Richard Page
November 2, 2021 6:49 am

It was only a rhetoric question 😀

Richard Page
Reply to  Krishna Gans
November 2, 2021 7:36 am

I know but it was too good an opening to miss, frankly!

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Richard Page
November 2, 2021 11:09 am

It seems China also funded the World Health Org. Anything come of that?

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 4:37 am
08/23/2021 – The Minister of Research of the State of Brandenburg, Manja Schüle, today handed over a grant of 10.3 million euros to the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) for the establishment of a new type of computer cluster for the analysis of scientific climate data. The new high-performance computer cluster on Potsdam’s Telegrafenberg is necessary to enable the growing interest of the scientific community in linking climate data from a wide range of topics and research fields.
The institute is a member of the Leibniz Association and receives core funding of about 11 million euros from the German federal government and the Federal State of Brandenburg. A similar amount of additional project funding is raised from external sources in competition with other institutions, a large part coming from grant programmes of the European Union.

David Kamakaris
Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 4:55 am

“Who funds Heartland? Who funds the GWPF?”

Pretty sure it isn’t your sugar daddy George Soros.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 5:11 am

It has not been shown how much of the CO2 increase is due to man. It has not been proven that CO2 causes any global warming.

Matthew Siekierski
Reply to  Anti-griff
November 2, 2021 5:22 am

You mean correlation doesn’t prove causation? But the Science!™ is settled.

Jan Benes
Reply to  Anti-griff
November 2, 2021 5:42 am
Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 5:36 am

Who funds you????? And regardless, everything you say is suspect.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 5:45 am

Facts are facts. Whoever pays for the research is irrelevant. So deal with the data. But, by your logic, until you give us all the details of your bank account anything you say is suspect.
On the other hand, suspicion is a very good approach to adopt. We should not think something is true just because ‘experts’, ‘scientists’ or even a ‘consensus of scientists’ tell us it is true. So be more suspicious of your own ideas, for a start.

Walter Horsting
Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 5:54 am

Few know how lucky we are to be living during a mild thaw up out of the coldest era of the past 8,000-years called the Little Ice Age:

There is no justification to spend $150 Trillion fighting the most essential trace gas of life that is CO2:

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 5:58 am

Well, what about full disclosure? Who funds you. Until we know anything you say is suspect.

Me? I’m a pensioner and live of a pension totalling about half the median UK income. And no, I have no connection at all with fossil fuel companies, except than that I give them money when I pay the gas bill.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 7:38 am

I know Heartland Institute and have occasionally contributed to its work. But while on the subject of “who funds what,” do the billions from governments slobbering for regulatory increases and carbon taxes not count as a negative influence? It seems this is the main source of politicized “science” that insists we substitute computer models for data, because actual data doesn’t support the glamour for controls and looting.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 8:29 am

As usual, since griff knows he can’t refute anything published, he attacks the source.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 10:00 am

Who funds Griff? Inquiring minds want to know.

Reply to  Pathway
November 2, 2021 1:00 pm

My guess would be, his mother.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 11:11 am

All Griff can do is attack the messenger because he cannot attack the message successfully.

This is what people who have no argument do. They try to smear the messenger in an effort to divert attention from the message.

Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 2, 2021 4:13 pm

“All Griff can do is attack the messenger because he cannot attack the message successfully.
This is what people who have no argument do. They try to smear the messenger in an effort to divert attention from the message.”
But you must adit it happens an awful lot here Tom.

Reply to  griff
November 2, 2021 12:20 pm

OK Griff, let’s have open disclosures then.
Who funds the Tides Foundation, the Suzuki Foundation and many other such “dark money” environmental insurgencies?

The Tides Foundation for example is an active player in Canadian elections, funneling millions of USD to selected political candidates who will work to undermine legitimate resource businesses.

November 2, 2021 4:51 am

Firstly, we have got to realise that any kind of Net Zero is going to be phenomenally expensive. There is a new Nature study that shows what a 95 per cent reduction in US emissions by 2050 would look like. The cost would be 11.9 per cent of US GDP annually. That equates to about $11,300 per person per year. A survey has shown that a majority of Americans would vote against a climate tax on energy bills worth just $24 – Net Zero is about 500 times that cost. This is simply not sustainable – governments will get voted out if they do it. – Bjorn Lomborg

What Bjorn fails to appreciate is all political parties [in the UK] are on the same wavelength, they only argue about the timescale.

This is why a referendum on Net Zero is most definitely required and why it will never be held; they know what the answer would be. And they’re not going there again.

November 2, 2021 5:11 am

Where we are with this, and why this event by Heartland is particularly valuable, is that everyone is going around paying lip service to things they do not believe, but owing to social pressures are unwilling to admit they don’t believe.

Its not just climate, its also happening on a huge scale with gender and race where the claims made are more conceptually incoherent and where the slightest dissent, no matter how fancifully it has to be construed as that, is policed even more fiercely. As Katherine Stock and Dorian S. Abbot recently found out.

This event is almost one of the only ones you will find where people who don’t believe it actually say publicly they don’t.

Its extraordinary. Even the Chinese and the Russians, who obviously don’t believe a word of it, don’t seem to be able to come right out and say it. Their non-attendance speaks for them implicitly, but they don’t call it. Despite both having models which are completely unalarming in their predictions, and you can be sure that neither one would tolerate that if they did believe the story.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  michel
November 2, 2021 6:04 am

Vlad is too much of a diplomat to say it loudly. But I’m sure he looks in awe at the insanity destroying the industrialised democracies of the West from within.

Jeroen B.
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
November 2, 2021 7:42 am

Why would they say anything while we keep being dependent on their produicts whilst destroying our ability to be independent of them ?

Reply to  michel
November 2, 2021 6:54 am

“its also happening on a huge scale with gender and race “

“Dr. Kathleen Stock, a philosophy professor at The University of Sussex, has resigned from her position following prolonged harassment from trans activists. Earlier this month, Dr. Stock was warned by police to avoid the campus for her own safety as students demonstrated against her view that biological sex cannot be changed.”

What was that about safe spaces?

Gary Pearse
Reply to  michel
November 2, 2021 11:17 am

I wonder what kind of attendance, or other feedback Heartland gets to gauge the success in getting the message across.

November 2, 2021 5:14 am

I left out another of these cases, Professor Fenton

Vilfied and threatened on social media for discussing the UK statistics on vaccination, Covid and deaths which have appeared in government publications…

November 2, 2021 9:40 am

COP 26: Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds
Never in the field of human history has so much complete nonsense been spoken at one place by so many. Apocalyptic forecasts and imaginary impossible non -solutions to a non existent problem provide a cacophony of Blah, Blah ,Blah, Blah,Blah as Greta correctly said or as Johnson said “Humanity has long since run down the clock on climate change. It’s one minute to midnight on that doomsday clock and we need to act now,”
The West’s Main Stream Media notably the BBC, Guardian, NYT, Washington Post, NBC ,ABC, CBS,PBS and the US Cable networks have been the greatest propagators of this blizzard of misinformation. They have produced a generation of scared and psychologically disturbed teenagers and green fanatics who believe that the world has no future if fossil fuels continue to be used.
The whole COP 26 Net Zero campaign is founded on the IPCC published model forecasts of coming dangerous temperature increases  A very large majority of the consensus establishment  climate scientists have succumbed to a virulent infectious disease – the CO2 Derangement Syndrome. Those afflicted by this syndrome present with a spectrum of symptoms .
The first is the abandonment of any consideration of the thermodynamics of energy flows, the different energy densities of the different energy sources or the extreme difficulty of transitioning from the reliable high density power of f0ssil fuels to the diffuse inconstant power of solar and wind systems or the entropy losses inherent in suggested hydrogen systems.  Critical thinking capacity is badly degraded.  Intellectual hubris, confirmation bias, group think, the messiah complex and a need to feel at once powerful and at the same time morally self-righteous caused those worst affected to delude first themselves, then politicians, governments, the politically correct chattering classes and almost the entire UK and US media that anthropogenic CO2 was the main climate driver. This led governments to introduce policies which have wasted trillions of dollars in a quixotic and futile attempt to control earth’s temperature by reducing CO2 emissions.
The second is a total inability to recognize the most obvious Millennial and 60 year emergent cyclic patterns which are trivially obvious in the astronomic data , and in solar activity and drive earth’s temperature with a delay caused by the oceanic temperature inertia.
Here is the Abstract of my paper at
This paper begins by reviewing the relationship between CO2 and Millennial temperature cycles. CO2 levels follow temperature changes. CO2 is the dependent variable and there is no calculable consistent relationship between the two. The uncertainties and wide range of out-comes of model calculations of climate radiative forcing arise from the improbable basic assumption that anthropogenic CO2 is the major controller of global temperatures. Earth’s climate is the result of resonances and beats between the phases of cyclic processes of varying wavelengths and amplitudes. At all scales, including the scale of the solar planetary system, sub-sets of oscillating systems develop synchronous behaviors which then produce changing patterns of periodicities in time and space in the emergent data. Solar activity as represented by the Oulu cosmic ray count is here correlated with the Hadsst3 temperatures and is the main driver of global temperatures at Millennial scales. The Millennial pattern is projected forwards to 2037. Earth has just passed the peak of a Millennial cycle and will generally cool until 2680 – 2700. At the same time, and not merely coincidentally, the earth has now reached a new population peak which brought with it an associated covid pandemic, and global poverty and income disparity increases which threaten the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. During the last major influenza epidemic world population was 1.9 billion. It is now 7.8 billion+/. The establishment science “consensus” that a modelled future increase in CO2 levels and not this actual fourfold population increase is the main threat to human civilization is clearly untenable. The cost of the proposed rapid transition to non- fossil fuels would create an unnecessary, enormously expensive. obstacle in the way of the effort to attain a modern ecologically viable sustainable global economy.  We must adapt to the most likely future changes and build back smarter when losses occur.  
The effect of C02 on temperature is immeasurably small. There is no CO2 caused climate crisis.
For other posts on this topic scroll down through

Tom Abbott
November 2, 2021 11:22 am

I bet ole Biden wouldn’t sleep through a Heartland presentation!

He would be so shocked he couldn’t go to sleep.

I wonder if Biden has ever heard a skeptical climate argument? Not that it would matter as he sees the benefit in using CO2 to scare the people into submission.

I hear Biden is going to impose large restrictions on Methane now. If he is successful, we can expect our gasoline prices to go even higher. Biden is a real fool. He’s so much of a fool, that it makes him dangerous. Dangerous to the U.S. economy and everyone in it, and dangerous for the world as he runs away from his responsibility to rein in the Bad Guys.

Carlo, Monte
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 2, 2021 12:23 pm

With some assistance from Capitol Hill, Creepy Joe is almost single-handedly destroying the Democrat Party.

Reply to  Carlo, Monte
November 2, 2021 1:02 pm

Leading Democrats are already telling us that the Virginia governor’s race is utterly meaningless and will be completely forgotten by this time next year.

All of the “major” news media completely ignored the Virginia election in their coverage last night.

Gotta excuse and bury the bad news after all.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  Tom Abbott
November 2, 2021 2:14 pm

Never in the field of human history has so much complete nonsense been spoken at one place by so many

… to so few!

These people are just in a circle-jerk echo chamber. Realists don’t listen to them at all, and the activists harangue them for not doing anything. Attendees fall asleep (I don’t blame them). A complete waste of money and ‘carbon’.

Verified by MonsterInsights