Summer 2025 hadn't even started yet, but the media are already warning of heat waves,
droughts, forest fires and water shortages.
The reason for this is man-made climate change due to excessive CO2 emissions.
What is the truth behind headlines like these?
In a detailed presentation, climatologist and climate researcher Prof. Werner Kirstein discusses the most
widespread arguments in favor of man-made climate change and points out hidden counter-arguments.
The following is a brief summary of some of his most important statements from his AZK
presentation "Politogenic climate change".
1. Unprecedented heat? The fake field hockey stick curve!
Let me show you the climate, the movements of the climate over the last 11,000 years.
You can see on the far left here, 10,000 or 11,000 years ago, the last great cold
period, called the Ice Age, came to an end [...]
It got warmer, it got colder again, it got warmer, it got colder again.
So this has been going on up and down for a long time.
And then we had the Little Ice Age again, i.e. in the 17th/18th century, it cooled down again somewhat,
but not as much as in the more extreme cold periods.
And after that, we are just coming out of this Little Ice Age.
This means that when we leave a large or small Ice Age, it naturally has to get warmer.
I have heard the argument: "Yes, it has gotten warmer!"
- Yes, of course, it has naturally become warmer.
And today, we arrived at the far right end.
And what is climate science presenting us with? The lower curve.
Perhaps you have all heard of the field hockey stick curve that M. Mann propagated back then.
Yes, "propagated" is good, it exactly was just propaganda.
And you see, the climate was simply kept constant from the year 1000, 1200, 1400, 1600 etc., not much has changed.
Yes, you can see the real curve above.
So to speak, we are being led astray.
2. Climate models at odds with reality
I quote again Prof. Hans von Storch, who is behind climate change and propagates it:
[...] "We are facing a conundrum" - 2013, that was a few years ago - "temperatures have not risen for 15 years.
Yes
If global warming pauses for another five years, the models contain a fundamental error and
the predictions would have to be corrected."
3. Mauna Loa Curve:
CO2 as the cause of the temperature increase?
The fundamental mistake is that climate models always assume CO2.
CO2 is responsible for warming.
And if we look at this curve, a little further over here, you can see that the temperature has actually risen 25
years ago and the CO2 concentration - the famous Mauna Loa curve - both have been increasing.
And that is when the whole story actually emerged in the 80s, that people said:
If the temperature rises, the CO2 rises too, or vice versa, they wanted to say: CO2 rises and the temperature rises as a result.
But if we look at the sections before and after, we can see that this is, of course, no longer true.
But, please, what about the times before and after?
Here before these 25 years and after these 25 years? Obviously, that is not true.
On the contrary: the curves are diverging.
CO2 is rising, but the temperature has fallen in some periods. [...]
4. Correlation or causality? What storks have to do with the birth rate
So, and what you have to learn from this is what I have said over and over again in every statistics lecture with the
geographers: guys, correlation is not the same as causality!
That is a huge difference!
You all know this, don't you? I think it has become very well known.
This is another example of a spurious correlation. Source: Statistisches Bundesamt (Federal Statistical Office).
Here you can see the number of storks and births in Germany, in Sweden it is even more beautiful.
Whenever there were more storks (this is the blue curve here), the number of births increased.
And whenever the number of storks decreased again for any ecological reason, the number of births fell.
Thus, everyone must please conclude that this is a causal connection.
Yes, my ass!
A very high positive spurious correlation can also be found between divorce rates in the
US state of Maine and margarine consumption.
Please, that's the way it is!
You can look it up on the Internet, that's for sure!
In other words: When more margarine is eaten, divorces increase.
They stand there stunned.
I have another beautiful, cheerful one that even looks a little sad.
Deaths among wheelchair users always correlate highly with the prices of potato crisps.
I am saying this to really give my physicist colleagues a piece of my mind.
So if you want to bring such bogus correlations into the truth here.
5. CO2 benefits plants
So, the doubling of the CO2 concentration, that was always a big issue.
What happens if the concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere doubles?
So we have greenhouses, real greenhouses. This is a plantation here, for example, where fruit or vegetables grow.
I've been there myself in Iceland. I saw some huge containers outside at the entrance with CO2 written on them.
I was thinking, what are they doing with CO2 here now?
They said: "We use this for fertilization, the more CO2 we feed into this greenhouse
(thermal greenhouse), the better the plants grow".
It has long been known that CO2 is an excellent fertilizer for certain plants.
6. The glacier - fake!
Since we are here in the Alps, on the edge of the Alps so to speak, I'll talk about the Alpine glaciers again.
People always say: The glaciers are retreating, they are developing backwards.
If you take a closer look, this is also true - although again only for a certain time, for a certain period of time. [...]
And if you follow Prof. Gernot Patzelt from the University of Innsbruck, his explanations, he has found
evidence that these glaciers always advance and retreat. [...]
To summarize: In the last 11,000 years, the glaciers were smaller than today during 2/3 of this
time, which indicates warmer climatic conditions.
So it was warmer before and it was colder again.
And it was warmer again and it was colder again.
That's what's behind the glaciers making such a strange movement. [...]
So it is actually a well-known phenomenon, yet, it is not being publicized.
That's what he found out.
Interestingly enough, he examined trees that are located in areas where the glacier has now
retreated, where old trees are reappearing. [...]
And then he saw that there were old tree trunks under the retreating glaciers down there.
In other words, if we are led to believe that the glaciers have actually always retreated, that they used
to be deeper - well, where do these trees come from?
I have never seen a tree grow under ice!
It cannot be!
And that is actually real experimental proof, far removed from any theory.
But as I said, we won't find out.
7. Polar bears for climate PR?
The climate has many aspects. I can pick out a few to show you what we are told and how the media jump on it afterwards.
The polar bear has always been the symbol of climate activists and here we see - on the right - that the picture is a fake.
Has anyone discovered that something has been fitted here?
So this lonely polar bear is not endangered, yet, that's why they put him on a floe, photo-wise it should
look like this: Yes, my habitat is now disappearing. [...]
In reality, the polar bear population in Alaska and North America has increased from around 5,000 - which
was the low point - to 25,000 in the last 40 years.
So the polar bear population is increasing, not decreasing!
Yes, and why is that? Precisely because the hunting of polar bears has been banned.
What effect this has had: the shooting of polar bears is banned, although there are still some who do it,
but the polar bear population is already increasing.
In other words, this polar bear decline was actually only due to the shooting. [...]
By the way, polar bears have been around for 600,000 years.
600,000 years means that these polar bears have lived through all the Ice Ages, warm periods, Ice Ages and warm periods.
They survived it all, it did not harm them in the slightest.
8. The sinking islands
Another topic here: Sea level rise in the South Pacific.
In the Caroline Islands, it has been said that some islands are disappearing.
The sea level is rising so much that they are already getting their feet wet in some places, and they are
complaining: "Climate change is making our islands disappear".
Yes, what was really the case?
I saw it by chance on ZDF, I saw it myself in March 2009 - the sea level in Micronesia is supposedly rising.
In fact, there are longitudinal and vertical movements between the small Caroline Islands and the large Pacific plate.
If you look at this map, this tectonic map of the Earth, you know that it consists of many plates, large and small plates.
Now there are plates that move longitudinally or vertically or slide under each other, they slide underneath each other.
And what the ZDF should have known is that there are plates, especially here in the Caroline Islands, that are
sinking due to tectonics, and then it looks as if the sea level is rising when I stand on a sinking plate. [...]
If you put someone there (points to map) - a resident of the Caroline Plate - and put him there and he
stands on a sinking plate, he raises his hands and says: "For God's sake, the sea level is rising!"
This is how we are deceived.
And the same game - I don't need to repeat this now - also applies to the Fiji Islands.
At the climate conference in Bonn - one of the participants was from Fiji - he also said: "The sea
level will rise at some point and then we will be gone."
Yes, it's exactly the same on the Australian Plate and on the Pacific Plate.
I say the Fiji Islands could theoretically actually be washed over - so the man is right - if the local plate continues to sink.
And not, if global warming, or the warming of the atmosphere increases, but the plate could sink even further. [...]
And the developing countries have now understood how to capitalize on climate change.
They say: You industrialized countries are to blame for the fact that CO2 levels have risen so high.
And what do we do in the industrialized countries? We pay compensation to these countries!
Can you still understand that?
Conclusion
I have chosen Sonja Margolina for my closing remarks. [...]
She says as a non-expert in the field:
"Climate change" is a highly ideological concept that has elevated the utopia of "saving the climate" to
the goal of political action and a moral imperative."
[...] One must not overlook the fact that this model is linked to the vested interests of numerous
profiteers from politics, civil society and the eco-industry."
So, of course, there are profiteers here, too, which is why the whole story is going on.
According to Prof. Kirstein, the propagated climate change due to CO2 is neither scientific nor real.
It is an ideological concept that is used to make people feel guilty in order to take the necessary money out of their
pockets for alleged "climate protection projects" and CO2 taxes.
Nobody can doubt that weather extremes or environmental destruction still occur.
However, the media remain silent about the possible causes.
Kla.TV has reported in many programs about technologies that can massively influence the weather.
Some of them are shown below.
Help to make Kla.TV more widely known as a counter-voice to the system media.
This gives people a chance to form their own opinion.