The Biggest Fraud In History

Government scientists know perfectly well that global warming isn’t happening. Their best data is from satellites, which show no warming for almost twenty years.

ScreenHunter_10030 Jul. 30 09.22

Wood for Trees: Interactive Graphs

But there is $29 billion per year being distributed by the government to perpetuate this massive fraud – so it continues.

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to The Biggest Fraud In History

  1. Tony they are on the run. The climate extremists are now openly admitting what I call the “Dead Parrot talks” in Paris will be a failure. As you rightly point out the only non-human adjusted measurements shows no warming and worldwide politicians are ending their support.

    It’s now not a question of “if” the scam ends, but simply when.

    (and anyone like Clinton jumping on the global warming bandwagon at this late stage has got to be pretty desperate for votes).

  2. omanuel says:

    The Biggest Fraud In History” began on October 24, 1945 when formerly independent nations and national academies of science were united into a giant, worldwide “Orwellian Ministry of Consensus Science (UN)Truths” to save the planet from nuclear annihilation by forbidding public knowledge of the source of energy in cores of heavy atoms and ordinary stars:


    That is why

    1. The textbook definition of nuclear stability was falsely changed from
    _ a.) Lowest value of Aston’s nuclear packing fraction before WWII to
    _ b.) Highest value of Weizsacker’s average nuclear binding energy per nucleon after WWII

    2. The internal chemical composition of the Sun was changed from
    _ c.) Mostly
    iron (Fe) in 1945 to
    _ d.) Mostly hydrogen (H) in 1946

    Both changes are scientifically false, purposeful and fraudulent attempts to deceive the public by formerly independent national academies of science, like the US NAS and the UK’s RS, that betrayed the public to join Stalin’s 1945 plan “to save the planet from nuclear annihilation by deceit.”

    • omanuel says:

      The Biggest Fraud” We may realize the full extent of evil in our society when we know who benefited from the body parts of aborted infants?

    • Menicholas says:

      Is there a quick reference guide to your ideas?
      I am curious if there is a short and convincing proof of your assertions?


  3. “….The FBI are proceeding with incredible speed,
    Right in front of their faces all the evidence they need;
    Mother Nature arrested, brought in for questioning,
    The mastermind behind the whole climate change thing.

    There’s relief all around that the culprit’s been caught;
    So Mother Nature’s not as innocent as we had all thought.
    Seems that she’s been doing her thing for billions of years,
    And has just been hiding behind those ‘man-made’ fears.

    At the same time the FBI have discovered a fraud,
    Located a drain where billions of dollars were poured.
    Forensic evidence is now being gathered from the scene;
    Thousands of grants and subsidies, all tainted with green…..”


  4. $29,000 million. An almost unimaginable sum of money. How many fraudsters can you employ with that?

  5. ren says:

    North Atlantic temperature drop year on year.

      • ren says:

        You can see that in 2010, have been observed El Niño temperature increased significantly and in 2011 strongly decreased (La Nina). But what is happening this year?

        • bit chilly says:

          good question ,the answer fascinates me. i do not believe there is enough stored energy in the oceans to see a strong el nino this year or next. i think we are looking at the climate returning to that of the seventies and early eighties,that for here in scotland means proper seasons of spring ,summer ,autumn and winter, instead of the warm wet season and the cold wet season we have had since the mid nineties .

          i hope so anyway 🙂 as long as the nao errs on the negative side i will be happy,good fishing as a result.

        • AndyG55 says:

          Well spotted Ren.
          Each El Nino in the latter half of last century gave a step up in LT temperatures, particularly the 1998-2001 big El Nino.

          The 210 El Nino had a spike, but there was no step up in the LT temps.

          If we are currently in El Nino as some suggest.. there isn’t even a spike just a sort of slight bulge.

        • AndyG55 says:

          typo…… 2nd paragraph should obviously be 2010, not 210

        • rah says:

          Many, including Joe Bastardi, say we are in an El Nino but it hasn’t peaked yet. It is not typical though because the peak is looking like it will come during the winter season in the northern hemisphere.

        • Menicholas says:

          I think that the phenomenon was called el nino to begin with because it was usually observed to occur around Christmas time.
          So maybe winter el nino not so rare?

        • rah says:

          “Menicholas says:
          July 31, 2015 at 8:25 pm

          I think that the phenomenon was called el nino to begin with because it was usually observed to occur around Christmas time.
          So maybe winter el nino not so rare?”

          Winter in the southern hemisphere! This one appears to be set to peak durign the coming winter in the northern hemisphere. And so far, instead of the warmest water piling up along the Peruvian coast as it did before for the last two events, it’s appearing out to the west away from the coast.

        • Ummm, the last time I checked … Christmas was observed at the same time regardless of which hemisphere one happened to be in.

        • bit chilly says:

          i was out fuishing today on the north east coast of scotland ren, i felt that 🙂

        • bit chilly says:

          just looked at the date that is forecast for, i must have felt its little brother,it sure was damp and cold.

        • rah says:

          Your right Fowler my bad. I’m an idiot!

        • Personally I am a strong believer in the theory of the Algor Effect, which predicts that, the most threatening and politically avaricious climate conference in history is expected at around the same time, there will be extremely low global mean temperature during the coming northern winter.

          This would seem to preclude a strongly positive ENSO happening between now and then.


        • I should probably clarify that the previous comment was not a “sarc”, even if it has some comedic quality to it. (A reflection of the fact that God has woven much irony into the fabric of His Creation.)

        • (And yes, for the record, I do consider space to be flat, but the pun was not intentional.)

  6. markstoval says:

    “But there is $29 billion per year being distributed by the government to perpetuate this massive fraud – so it continues.”

    The question is why did the various western governments decided to spend $29 billion per year (or more perhaps) on this scam? The “science” was bought and paid for, but why was the buyer in the market?

    I think the answer is because the governments see the CO2 scam as a way to expand its control over their citizens. More and more control. That, my friends, is my answer to why.

    • D. Self says:

      Obviously they believe the returns will be huge or why else invest.

      • omanuel says:

        That is $29 billion of public tax funds that are spent to deceive the public.

      • omanuel says:

        Thanks to the honest science of Nobel Laureate Max Planck of E = hv fame, we now have assurance that “a conscious and intelligent Mind” directs the force of creation in the fountain of energy Copernicus discovered at the gravitational center of the solar system in 1543.

        Arrogant, self-centered world leaders did not, and still do not, want the public to know that a Higher Power control’s Earth’s climate and the fate of all humanity.

    • Snowleopard says:

      Can’t speak for other governments, but in USA, who receives the funds to get elected / stay in office at federal level is controlled by big banks (and their owned/controlled corporations). These big banks would like to have the revenue stream (equivalent to a tax on the world economy) that could be theirs in fees when/if a world carbon trading format is agreed on, so I expect it might be the same story elsewhere. Since their scam also increases the power of government(s) (as you point out) even those not on the corporate contribution payroll are easy to convince.

  7. Latitude says:

    What has always struck me odd about the satellite record…
    ..we know we’re making hot spots (UHI)…we know cities are making it warmer etc

    and yet the satellite record keeps going down

    • omanuel says:

      Almost all of us had difficulty believing that the US National Academy of Sciences would betray the American public for research grant funds, but . . .

      there is no more viable explanation for the Climategate emails that surfaced in late November 2009, followed by six years of official excuses for deceitful global temperatures.

  8. markstoval says:

    I wonder what we would find if we took the raw data at a few well placed sites in the US that have not changed over the last 100 years or so and looked at a chart of the average of those sites. Say 25 sites in lower 48? No moves. No reason to suspect we need to “adjust” at all — just solid raw data. As solid as human readers/recorders can do.

    I wager that there would be a slight warming over the last 100 years but not much. Anyone know of someone who has done anything like this already?

    • The raw USHCN record is quite credible.

      • Andy DC says:

        I would believe the records from cooperative observers, most farmers, from the 1930’s. Far more so than any of these manufactured NWS records from today, given their clear political agenda.

    • Menicholas says:

      I am of the strong belief that the people who recorded weather data in the past were very careful and very conscientious, and also had no reason to be biased.
      I have not a shred of doubt that the adjustments and alterations of the historical data have been nearly the exact opposite of what should be done to account for urbanization and human influence in general.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s