Princeton scientist Michael Oppenheimer calls The Climate Hustle movie “dangerous.” Bill Nye, The Science Guy, gently mocked in the movie, Climate Hustle, says: “It’s not in the world’s interest.” (For more reviews, see here.)
Climate Hustle, the soon-to-be iconic culture-busting documentary that previewed last evening in theaters around America, pops gaping holes in the anthropogenic climate change monolithic narrative. It bares all about the issues that the other side does not want to raise, much less debate.
To read Michael Oppenheimer’s bio, you might assume he knows a thing or two about climate change. However, his condemnation of the movie, Climate Hustle, is curious as well as downright bizarre. Climate Hustle, after all, is full of humor, some slapstick, possibly “most important movie of the year,” and as rousing a debunking of climate change hysteria as possibly we have seen.
“It’s hard not to laugh,” say some. In Toronto, there were belly laughs and sardonic harrumphs. Same in Houston, says my editor.
Oppenheimer’s anti-CH (Climate Hustle) comment perhaps lays bare the lack of sincere scientific investigation from someone who renders a verdict without actually seeing the movie. So maybe this is the tone-setting for the chronic vacuum of investigation around climate change chronicled in CH.
If this movie is important, and crucial, even for folks who have been mired in green mythology, and if it lays bare the “climate agenda,” then what IS the climate agenda?
The agenda, it seems, is multifaceted and even cruel. It is also funny at times, and scornfully so. It is antique and chaotic, and egotistical.
In the film and its postscript, it is ascertained that during the testimony of James Hansen to a Congressional Hearing, announcing, in effect, a new age of Global Warming, they contrived to open the windows during an unusually warm season, turn off the air conditioning. Hansen is reportedly wiping his brow from the heat and dampness.
….today Dr. James E. Hansen of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration told a Congressional committee that it was 99 percent certain that the warming trend was not a natural variation but was caused by a buildup of carbon dioxide and other artificial gases in the atmosphere.
Of course, the retrospective on this august announcement of a new age of Global Warming is classically humorous. This was, after all, 1988. Hansen became a “climate hero.” Despite new and powerful evidence to the contrary, Dr. Hansen continues to warn us (2016) of continued global warming that would “raise sea levels by ‘several meters’ over the coming century, rendering most of the world’s coastal cities uninhabitable and helping unleash devastating storms.”
Hansen the Father of Global Warming continues his mantra. “What we are threatening to do to young people is irreversible, it’s irreparable harm.” The backdrop of the scientists who continue to warn of hell and high water, and stick to their guns against the refreshingly open remarks and studies of sceptics, has us deeply interested.
These are myths we have lived by, and they are challenged in this film, seriously, and variously.
The film takes us through a veritable romp of cold and warming warnings, with the complete sense that science really has little or no idea what it is doing with respect to predicting the weather. The film also chronicles sincere scientists, such as Judith Curry, former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology, who are not afraid to explain why they have challenged IPCC data and opinions, based on emerging reasonable questions of “science.”
Not afraid to comment on the “torqueing of science.” We would question if this can be called, “science” at all: the fatuous and famous “97% of all scientists believe”….is reduced to not even 97 scientists….and those selected by a fuzzy process. Curry argues that scientists have not factored in enough of what they don’t know: a whole “host” of unknowns.
That is what Morano emphasizes: and we come away with a strong feeling that scientists not only don’t know, but they are confusing us deeply with their pretentions of knowing. Alarmingly, public energy policy has rested its laurels on this lack of rigorous study.
But Climate Hustle is also humorous. Charles, Prince of Wales, seems perplexed, finally, after several film clips outlining his many attempts to warn the world of pending disaster, with yes, a tipping point. “Take action now, for the sake of your children, your grandchildren,” and “How many times do I need to say this?” he asks with a frustrating and bewildered expression.
From this dire warning, it is easy to take a light skip to massive non-performing wind turbine proliferation, again to “save your grandchildren.” We should perhaps not lighten the gravity of the high sentiment of saving the planet with the fact that the Royal Family benefits from renting out land to turbine developers.
Ultimately, the “agenda” is a conspiracy against the poor. The overwhelming concept, pushed for years, is that to protect “our great grandchildren” from “climate change,” we must make sacrifices at the altar. Build industrial wind turbines, solar arrays, wean ourselves from evil fossil fuels, and of course pay higher carbon taxes–and support the industries that will “save us.” This is the industrial climate complex exposed.
As we are reminded in the article by Matt Ridley in the Spectator, “we cannot make omelettes without breaking eggs.” Climate Hustle makes the connection between the effects of carbon fear, and energy policies that break the backs of the poor.
It also makes the connection between current energy policies that abandon common sense and facts, that obfuscate, and that are actually behind a larger agenda to, yes, ‘redistribute’ wealth. There is great irony in that little phrase.
The breaking-eggs-to-make-omelettes philosophy turns out to be breaking eggs to break even bigger eggs, senselessly, with complete waste, rotten eggs, and disastrous results. In fact, you need not look too far to see egg particulate in all manner of exploded climate alarmism, rotting up the countryside with industrial wind turbines and glossy solar panels. But not an omelette in sight.
The final photo montage in the film tantalizes us with news of a sequel that focuses on the events resulting FROM these colossal climate lies: you got it: wind turbines and solar. An antidote, absolutely; smoothly, comically, interestingly done. Wickedly funny they say, and they are right.
PS: For those who wish to separate the fraud of industrial wind from the climate-change fraud, we warn that they are one and the same. Fear not to adventure into both sets of lies. It will eventually in the public’s eye be difficult to disentangle them.