In June 2023, Bayrischer Rundfunk reported: Researchers agree that current climate change is caused by humans.
The mass media keep telling us that over 97% of all scientists are convinced of man-made climate change.
But is this also the truth?
This so-called 97% consensus has already been exposed as a fake in our Kla.tv program (www.kla.tv/27453).
As we also reveal in this program, critical and independent studies even show that only 0.54% of
all scientists believe in man-made climate change.
Nevertheless, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) also claims in its 2021 report that it is undisputed
that humans are warming the atmosphere, oceans and land
and that this has already led to far-reaching and rapid changes in the atmosphere, the oceans, the cryosphere and the biosphere.
These claims are an outright lie in the eyes of countless scientists.
Accordingly, a list of 46 scientists was published who, as former contributors to the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, have sharply criticized the IPCC.
In fact, a number of climate scientists have already turned their backs on the IPCC and made its manipulative methods public.
The researchers uniformly criticize the massive manipulation of the available data.
Anything that does not fit into the desired picture is ignored
- and to support the narrative, false claims are knowingly published if necessary.
Some scientists are therefore playing this game in order to gain fame and research funding.
The IPCC reports are pure lobby documents that serve only a political purpose: To shamelessly exploit the public's
ignorance and credulity on the complex issue of climate change.
If you take a closer look at the history of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), you can guess that
the IPCC's publications contain a lot of misleading information and sometimes even lies and deception.
The IPCC emerged from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).
Maurice Strong was the founding father and first director of the UN Environment Program (UNEP), which later
became the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Mr. Maurice Strong's stated goal was (quote): It is our responsibility to bring down industrialized civilization.
At first glance, you might think that Maurice Strong cared a lot about the environment
and therefore wanted to bring down industrialized civilization. However, the fact that this is not the case is shown by the fact
that in 1976, shortly after his term of office, he moved from the United Nations Environment Program into
the Canadian oil business and made a career for himself.
But his connections to David Rockefeller, Klaus Schwab and the WEF also raise eyebrows.
Klaus Schwab verbatim:
In everything he (Maurice Strong) did, he took the mission of the World Economic Forum profoundly into account.
He was a great visionary, always ahead of our time in his thinking. He was my mentor
(Teacher) since the Forum was founded: an indispensable advisor; and a member of our Board of Trustees for many years.
Without him, the Forum would not have achieved its current significance.
Dear viewers, it is extremely worrying that the IPCC was created from the visions of men like
Maurice Strong, who was more than close to the WEF.
Is the IPCC therefore not inevitably a dubious instrument for enforcing the goals of the WEF?
Klaus Schwab and his WEF squad see the solution to environmental and global problems in the dismantling of industrial civilization
and all power in the hands of a coalition of large corporations, naturally without the
democratic right of the people to have a say.
Their vision is a Great Reset, with the aim that, according to the WEF 2030, we will own nothing and still be happy.
Below are some quotes from former IPCC scientists:
Dr. Robert Balling: The IPCC states that no significant acceleration of sea level rise was detected in the 20th century.
This did not appear in the IPCC summary for policy makers.
Dr. John Christy: The public is hardly aware that most of the scientists involved in the IPCC
do not believe that global warming is occurring.
His findings were repeatedly misrepresented and/or politicized with each subsequent report.
Dr. Judith Curry: I'm not going to just blather on and support the IPCC because I have no faith in the process.
Dr. Robert Davis: Global temperatures have not changed as predicted by modern climate models.
In the IPCC Summary for Policymakers there is not a single mention of satellite temperature observations.
Dr. Willem de Lang: In 1996 I was appointed by the IPCC as one of the
of about 3000 scientists who agreed that there is a recognizable human factor.
influence on the climate.
I did not do that.
There is no evidence to support the hypothesis that rapid, catastrophic climate change is due to human activity.
Dr. Eigil Friis-Christensen: The IPCC refused to consider the effects of the sun on the
Earth's climate as an issue worthy of investigation.
The IPCC saw its task as merely investigating possible human causes of climate change.
Dr. Vincent Gray: The statement on climate change is a staged litany of lies.
Dr. Mike Hulme: Claims such as 2500 of the world's leading scientists agree that human activities
have a significant impact on climate are disingenuous
... The actual number of scientists who supported this claim was only a few dozen.
Dr. Georg Kaser: This figure is not just a little wrong, it is way off by an order of magnitude
... It's so wrong that it's not even worth discussing.
Dr. Madhav Khandekar: I have carefully analyzed the negative impacts of climate change predicted by the IPCC and rejected
these claims as exaggerated and without supporting evidence.
Dr. Richard Lindzen: The IPCC process is driven more by politics than by science.
It uses summaries to misrepresent the statements of scientists,
and exploits the public's ignorance. Dr. Martin Manning: Some government officials who influence the IPCC Summary for
Policymakers misrepresent or contradict the lead authors.
Dr. Johannes Oerlemans: The IPCC has become too political.
Many scientists have been unable to resist the siren call for fame, research funding and meetings in exotic locations that
awaits them if they are willing to compromise scientific principles and integrity to
support the doctrine of man-made global warming.
Dr. Roger Pielke: All my comments were ignored without rebuttal.
At this point, I came to the conclusion that the IPCC reports were actually intended as
lobbying documents aimed at eliciting certain policies,
but not as a true and honest assessment of the understanding of the climate system. Dr.
Tom Segalstad: The IPCC's global warming model is not supported by the scientific data.
Has Klartv itself been instrumentalized by the climate whisperers in all this climate madness?
On February 10, there will be an exciting program to answer this important question.
Stay tuned!