Isn’t it time that journalists and students are taught to do research and ask questions about the climate instead of just regurgitating talking points pushing the green agenda?

We are constantly told that storms, floods, droughts, and other natural disasters are growing in frequency and intensity—so why don’t we see specific examples?

Like the severe drought and warm period in Europe in 1540 when temperatures were 9–13 degrees above today’s average during the little ice age?

For eleven months, there was practically no rain, temperatures were five to seven degrees [Celsius] [9–13 °F] above the normal values for the 20th century, in many places summer temperatures must have exceeded 40 °C (104 °F). Many forests in Europe went up in flames, choking smoke darkened the sun, not a single thunderstorm was reported in the summer of 1540. Water was already scarce in May, wells and springs dried up, mills stood still, people starved, livestock was slaughtered. Estimates are that in 1540 half a million people died, mostly from dysentery.

Or what about the massive fires in the United States in 1871? In 1871, the midwestern United States had a severe drought and warm weather, clearly not caused by humans and our use of natural resources. As a result of this heat and drought there were severe fires throughout the Midwest, including the Great Chicago Fire.

The temperature was 85 degrees on October 8, 1871. This year the high was 55 degrees, or thirty degrees cooler. Why isn’t Chicago warmer, after 152 years, with all the cement, people, and gas vehicles and equipment if they all cause warming?

The Chicago fire alone caused $200 million in damages, which is the equivalent to over $5 billion today.

I am 70 years old, and I don’t recall serious fires during my lifetime in the Midwest.

The narrative that humans and our use of natural resources are to blame for warming temperatures, in turn creating an existential threat to our survival, is contrary to the data and facts; scientific honesty would be forming a narrative based on the evidence, instead of forcing “evidence” to fit a story.

What about the medieval warming period 1,000 years ago where temperatures were similar to today? What caused that warming since it clearly wasn’t man’s use of natural resources? What about the fact that the earth then cooled from 1300–1850?

Scientists could ask if it is normal for the earth to cool after a warming period, or speculate as to what caused the earth to cool since it clearly wasn’t politicians and bureaucratic policies.

Perhaps they could ask why the earth cooled from 1940 to 1975 if all the things they are told cause warming actually do. They could ask why the media, scientists, and others predicted a coming ice age in the 1970s if our use of natural resources causes warming.

The evidence-based scientific statement on the climate is the one made by those of us who are called “climate change deniers”—we assert that the climate has always changed cyclically and naturally.

If a student can be indoctrinated into believing the leftist climate change story, he/she can easily be taught to hate Israel and the Jews.

Students that are constantly told that the U.S. is a racist and bad country can easily be taught to believe what Osama bin Laden said about America.

People who want to make America great again are not the ones that are dangerous to America, and are not the people who need to be deprogrammed.

There is zero chance that politicians, bureaucrats, or scientists can control the climate, with all the natural variables of Earth and its atmosphere, no matter how often it’s repeated. The purpose of the scam is to transfer as much money, power, and freedom away from the people and to the greedy government as fast as they can. The government then keeps a significant amount of money for itself and then kicks back a huge amount to green pushers who then vote for Democrats to keep the gravy-train rolling.  It is about greed. Period.

Image: Free image, Pixabay license, no attribution required.