Climate change - people caught between knowledge and belief
Is the climate as easy to influence as politicians and the media keep telling us?
For many people, the pre-chewed opinions of the relevant lobbyists are completely sufficient, while others find
this topic too complex to deal with thoroughly themselves.
The author Prof. Dr. Werner Kirstein, an experienced climatologist and physicist, has been studying the scientific processes
of regional and global climate fluctuations for over 40 years.
In his new book: "CLIMATE CHANGE - Reality, Error or Lie? People caught between knowledge and belief", he
explains the facts about the "hot spots" of climate change in a way that everyone can understand.
In particular, it is shown: Climate change is reality, climate change is error and climate change is a lie.
[Despite these obvious contradictions, each of the three statements is correct.
How can that be? In his easy-to-read book of around 200 pages, Werner Kirstein addresses these and many other questions.
Some of these "hot spots" are highlighted in this documentary.
Some excerpts are taken directly from Werner Kirstein's book or abridged in his own words.
Climate change is a reality
The Earth's climate has always been changing, which means that climate change is a reality - meaning natural climate change!
The traces of climate change and climate fluctuations have long been researched by climatologists and geologists and have been
documented by evaluating tree rings, sediment analyses and changes in the relief of the earth's surface, among other things.
As the warm and cold periods changed, the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere also changed with a time lag.
The temperature always rose first, followed much later by the increase in CO2 concentration. [The temperature differences
were up to 10 °C, e.g. the temperature today is about 10 degrees lower than in the warm periods of the earth's history!
And the CO2 concentration was often much higher than it is today. The temperature changes were always based on natural causes, such
as solar activity and the Earth's orbital parameters; humans were never responsible for a changeable climate in any way.
Climate change is a mistake
In 1986, the German Physical Society issued a warning of an "impending global climate catastrophe"
due to an erroneous statistic, the Mauna Loa curve.
The Mauna Loa curve shows a spurious correlation* between temperature and CO2 increase.
It was then claimed that the earth's temperature depended on the air's content of trace gases such as CO2.
Computer simulations and model calculations based on this fatal error therefore always predicted warming.
Climate development in the past and the dynamics of cloud development and ocean currents cannot be correctly captured in
models either. This has led to completely incorrect predictions.
Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admitted in 2001: "In climate research and modelling, we should
recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system. Therefore, longer-term
predictions about climate development are not possible."
Climate change is a lie
This allowed the political threat of "global warming" to blow up into an incredibly big monster of lies, which the EU
Parliament used to declare a "climate emergency" in 2019.
But more and more scientists and even some politicians are turning away from the apocalyptic statements of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Various studies and temperature curves have been exposed as lies and fakes.
In the field hockey stick graph, for example, the real temperature fluctuations were balanced out with the long warm
phase in the 12th century and a quasi-stable climate was simulated for 800 years, only to attribute the rise in temperature
from 1900 onwards to CO2 emissions caused by industrialization.
Despite these recognized lies, government funding flows specifically into this "politically prioritized"
research. So-called man-made climate change has become a creed that tries to suppress the truth by all means.
Weather is not the same as climate
More than a hundred years ago, climatologists agreed to evaluate recorded weather events and parameters from at least thirty
years ago in order to be able to make climate predictions.
Climate is actually nothing more than a gigantic collection of weather data from the past, so climate cannot
be protected. Climate can only ever be observed over the long term and on a large scale.
The state-paid meteorologists in the leading media interpret even a few hot and dry days as extreme weather and
as proof that a climate catastrophe has already occurred.
However, these are only temporary and locally occurring weather phenomena that are
presented to the public as a climate catastrophe.
Are the terms weather and climate being deliberately blurred by politicians and the leading
media in order to unsettle and deceive citizens?
It is much easier to convince a people with fears about the future of the "climate targets" and get them in
the mood for climate taxes and further price increases.
The climate researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) also like to use the confusion between
weather and climate for their scaremongering. Are climate researchers focusing on funding for climate alarmism here?
The role of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was founded in 1988 by the United Nations Environment Programme
(UNEP) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO).
Former German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt expressed his distrust of the IPCC in his speech on global warming in Berlin in 2011:
"The documents provided by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) so far have been met with
skepticism, especially since some of the researchers involved have turned out to be frauds."
Of the initial 2,500 IPCC experts, only 5 remained who adhered to the hypothesis of man-made climate change.
Nevertheless, politicians who now shape the IPCC blindly trust the purely hypothetical models and ideological approaches.
Only in the early 1980s were climate experts actually represented in the IPCC. The question is
why the work is so unscientific and propagandistic.
Financial interests in the myth of man-made climate catastrophe are becoming apparent, as experts in the scene confirm.
Profiteers of the horrendous funds include private individuals such as Al Gore, the former US Vice President, Warren Buffet,
Elon Musk, who received 1.5 billion US dollars from taxpayers' money, Vinod Khosla and James Cameron. But research groups and
institutes that receive funding, as well as various branches of industry and banks such as
the World Bank, also benefit from this myth.
The admission of an alarmist
James Lovelock, who explains in an interview that he was wrong in his alarmist predictions, impressively
shows how a climate believer was transformed from Saul to Paul by a "Damascus experience".
He has thought more carefully about the models on the basis of which the climate catastrophe is predicted.
According to Lovelock, these models no longer convinced him.
"The problem is that we still know far too little about the climate. Just 20 years ago,
we thought we had everything under control.
This then led to some alarmist books, including mine, because it looked so clear. But it didn't happen.
The climate is running its usual program. Basically, nothing out of the ordinary has happened.
We had assumed that we were halfway to an overheated world today. However, the world has barely
warmed up since the beginning of the millennium.
The temperature has remained almost constant, although it should have risen. There is no doubt that the carbon
dioxide content has continued to rise over the same period."
Climate change: faith versus knowledge
In his work, Werner Kirstein illustrates how people are caught between 'belief' and 'knowledge'. Here are just three examples:
1st belief: Old photos show extensive Alpine glaciers, while more recent photos show receding glaciers in
comparison. Alarm signal of an approaching climate catastrophe?
[Knowledge: Based on tree and plant remains in now glacier-free zones, it has been proven
that there were no glaciers here in earlier times.
From such evidence it can be concluded that during 65 percent of the last 10,000 years the Alpine glaciers were smaller
and the temperatures higher - without human intervention!
2nd Belief: The population of polar bears is severely threatened by man-made global warming.
Knowledge: Polar bears already existed 600,000 years ago in the Arctic Ocean. This means that they
survived all the warm periods (between the ice ages).
In warmer periods, they also eat grasses, shrubs and berries and are therefore considered clever hunters.
Since the Canadian government banned shooting, the number of animals has grown from around 5,000 to 25,000.
3rd belief: The ice at the poles is melting inexorably.
The well-known Larsen B ice shelf has lost three quarters of its ice mass. It is only a matter of time
before the Arctic and Antarctic are completely ice-free.
[Knowledge: It has been known for several decades that Arctic and Antarctic temperatures fluctuate in opposite directions.
This means that while temperatures at the South Pole are falling, they are simultaneously rising at the North Pole.
This phenomenon is also known as the 'bipolar swing' or Arctic-Antarctic coupling.
It turns out that a closer look may reveal a different picture of a situation.
In the current climate debate, on the other hand, emotional persuasion seems to be more
important, even if it contradicts factual knowledge.
What is eco-nihilism?
According to Albert Camus, a French writer, philosopher and Nobel Prize winner for literature, nihilism means
not believing in nothing, but not believing in what is.
[Nihilists often do everything they can to achieve something supposedly good, but pay no attention to the consequences.
These can be serious and go completely against the principles of scientific and logical thinking.
Nihilism accepts violations of human dignity for the supposedly good cause.
In eco-nihilism, a highly exaggerated, stubborn determination to save the environment is
at the forefront of this philosophy of life.
It is an ideology that is sometimes characterized by ruthless eco-terror.
Edgar Gärtner, author of the book "Eco-Nihilism: A Critique of Political Ecology", is not alone in seeing climate
protection as the most dangerous form of nihilism at present.
Gärtner: "What is eco-nihilism?
Economic suicide in installments, because everything is put on one card without thinking about the costs."
The "climate policy" is thoughtlessly accepting famine by (deliberately) increasing the price of energy
sources and food in order to protect a statistical construct.
"Climate protection" - by curbing CO2 emissions with the help of "renewable" energies - is a stupid, immature idea.
Solar and wind energy don't come for free, the costs of technical implementation are enormous and anything but CO2-neutral.
Leveraging democracy through climate emergency
The EU has been declaring a climate emergency for some time now and many German cities
have already entered this undemocratic level.
Political opponents are to be eliminated with emergency rights. It is no longer the better arguments
that should prevail, but the ideological direction.
But the extreme demands harbor enormous potential for social and economic conflict.
Concerns about the concept of a state of emergency are more than justified, as this can
open the door to questioning the rule of law.
The Climate Manifesto
The Bavarian Values Union published a climate manifesto at the beginning of 2020. The core statements here in short form:
1. the sun controls our climate, not CO2.
[Climate protection measures - such as the failed energy transition - are a political mistake.
[Germany needs a stable and affordable energy supply.
The points are set out in more detail in the Climate Manifesto 2020. Among other things, WerteUnion firmly
rejects the "Green Deal" and CO2 pricing in accordance with the German government's "climate package".
The Climate Manifesto calls for an end to the climate myth and an education offensive on the
subject of "climate, solar cycles and carbon dioxide".
You can read more about this in the Bavarian Values Union's Climate Manifesto 2020.
Fears and scaremongering are the only way for politicians to make people listen and comply. The threat of a
climate catastrophe is currently the instrument for this.
But: if the new little ice age can no longer be denied in a few years' time, there is only one answer that can be
given to the 'climate scientists', the politicians of global warming and the journalists of climate propaganda:
'He who calls into the forest must also endure the echo, even if it sounds completely different. Prof. Dr. Werner Kirstein