Regime Desperate To Promote “Climate Change” Claims “Climate Change” Worse Than Cancer

Listen to the podcast at Bitchute. New! Or Gab.

Here’s the headline: “Climate change much deadlier than cancer in some places, UNDP data shows”. It’s from the UN, naturally.

The Regime has a “climate change” problem, and a big one. Few buy it anymore.

It was thirty four years ago that James Hanson strode into an artificially heated hearing room (they turned the AC off to dramatize the event) and warned the world was doomed by global warming—unless something was done.

Now thirty four years is a long time. Many threatened “tipping points” have failed to be tipsy or pointed since then. Many “We only have five years left!”s have come and gone. Even three and half “We only have ten years left!”s have passed.

Everything was supposed to have gone bad by now. Every thing. Anything that is good, like crops and polar bears, was supposed to have been relentlessly beaten down by “climate change” by now. And everything that was bad, like snake bites and hurricanes, was supposed to have flourished or gone out of control by now.

There have been more predictions of “global warming”, a.k.a. “climate change”, related doom over the last fifty-some years than anybody can count. None of which has happened.

By the way, yes, “fifty-some” and not just thirty four, for it is true that back in the seventies the prediction was for climate change doom, but of the cold variety. One headline among many: “Space Satellites Show Ice Age Coming Fast (1974).”

The big difference between predictions of cold and heat doom was that there were only a handful of scientists predicting cold. Because then there were only a handful of climatologists. The number of scientists—cue the Expansion Team Effect speech—has exploded between then and now, and so it’s only natural the current cacophony is much louder.

In any case, there is only so much fear most people can stomach. The coronadoom panic proved you can rile the masses quite easily, and get them to quake in terror for a long time. But not forever, not about the same threat. Even though it is true there are a good handful of frightened people remaining, as we can all see by their shaky furtive eyes and pinched brows peeking out above their masks, this number is not really growing (though the coming winter will boost their numbers somewhat).

There are, as we shall see in posts over the coming weeks, a core of true believers in “climate change”, people who would, if they could, put a mask around the earth to block the sun — which is Bill Gates’s genius contribution. But even though this is a well-funded energetic dedicated group, it is not really growing, or not by much.

Though the propaganda has been relentless and total, so that the majority believes to some extent—but not to an extent large enough to panic.

Which is worrying to those who need to sell “climate change solutions”. Hence the Regime must continue to push fear. Not the same old fears, like polar bears dying off (which they rudely failed to do, instead choosing flourishing), and not vague “tipping points”, which are ever on the horizon.

No, they need something concrete. And what better than something they know works? Like deadly disease.

Hence the asinine title about “climate change” being worse than cancer. We know it is asinine for one solid reason: no one has ever died of “climate change”.

“What’ve I got, doc? Is it bad?”

“I’m afraid it’s climate change, Mr Peterson.”

“Not that!”

Here’s an example:

However, billions live in regions that have already experienced warming greater than the global average.

As an example, the platform pointed to Maracaibo, Venezuela, noting that in the 1990s it averaged 62 annual days with temperatures exceeding 35°C. However, by mid-century, that number will likely soar to 201 days.

Did you, like many, turn that “likely” into “certainly”?

This is a model. It is a guess of what might happen. And, as we’ve seen, not a good guess, either.

We’ll tackle that “regions that have already experienced warming greater than the global average” later this week. (Don’t miss that post. It will be fun.)

They say:

Although higher temperatures and a warmer climate put cardiovascular and respiratory systems under stress everywhere, outcomes will vary between places, according to communities that have the resources to adapt and those that do not.

This is false. As in not true. You’re as tired of the example as I am, but if this statement were true, everybody in Florida and Arizona would have stroked out by now or had a heart attack, whereas the fine folks in Michigan would live forever in their icy abodes.

Anyway, what’s all this frightening talk of cancer? Outside the headlines, the C-word is only mentioned once:

The study gives the example of Dhaka, Bangladesh, where under a scenario of very high emissions by 2100, additional deaths due to climate change could rise to nearly twice the country’s current annual death rate from all cancers, and 10 times its annual road traffic fatalities.

There must be some scientists waving his wee P around with that one, simpering, “Look how small my P is!”

It is no longer possible to take any of this seriously. How the Regime thinks it will sell “climate change solutions” with pathetic models like this says something important about how badly they are faltering. But it says nothing interesting about the climate.

They’re hoping, and it’s not a terrible hope, that most people won’t go beyond the headline and conclude “Climate change causes cancer.”

Buy my new book and learn to argue against the regime: Everything You Believe Is Wrong.

Subscribe or donate to support this site and its wholly independent host using credit card click here. For Zelle, use my email:

Categories: Statistics

14 replies »

  1. I prefer ‘Global Warming’ to ‘Climate Change’ as it stops the stupid from being even more stupid.
    The other day (on the BBC – where else) some UN woman was explaining that in certain countries the clotshot could not be given because of a ‘Climate Event’ – i.e. there was a flood. No! Madam this was a weather event !
    By changing ‘Weather’ into ‘Climate’ they can get away with such stupidity – and most people do not know sufficient to see the ‘bait and switch’.

  2. Briggs: ”It is no longer possible to take any of this seriously.”

    It’s all so obviously stupid that it’s astounding anyone could be so silly as to believe it. But then people are appallingly gullible. Sam Bank-Fraud and his nitwit girlfriend practically had neon signs flashing overhead warning: WE ARE FRAUDS! and yet gullible rubes still gave them millions.

    And the ponzi dudes — why does it always seem to be the Esquimeaux running these scams? — hmm… but never mind, anyway, the ponzi dudes, the film-flammers, the medicine show quacks, they all know this gullibility weakness in people. They have studied it deeply, and for a long time. It’s their business to know how to lie, cheat, steal, swindle, and deceive, for money and power. The climate scam is just another one of their tricks. It needs to be the business of us “marks” to learn about these tricksters and help wise up our fellow marks, as our host so ably does here, so we don’t get fleeced like sheep.

  3. The controllers think we’re really that stupid.

    After watching some random street interviews of PA voters, I fear they may be correct.

  4. “Climate change” is a hypothesis about the trend in the variance and as such is much more difficult to establish than a trend in the time series of the data alone. Indeed the hypothesis may be meaningless altogether.

  5. As an example, the platform pointed to Maracaibo, Venezuela, noting that in the 1990s it averaged 62 annual days with temperatures exceeding 35°C. However, by mid-century, that number will likely soar to 201 days.

    Did you, like many, turn that “likely” into “certainly”?

    This is a model. It is a guess of what might happen. And, as we’ve seen, not a good guess, either.

    Sounds like they’re cherry-picking a locale that’s currently an outlier with respect to temperature trends, then extrapolating into the indefinite future from the current local trend. This seems statistically… dubious, to say the least. The concept of “regression to the mean” might be useful here. They’re essentially drawing a target around the bullet hole and claiming to be expert marksmen.

  6. Government Made Climate Change. They push some clouds around to create drought in Republican states and then blame it on cars and cows. Forget them.

  7. The earth has been warming for the last 1 1/2 million years. The Sahara desert appeared in 2000 BC, historic time. They used to grow grain in the region outside Carthage. In between there have been periods of unseasonable cold. The winter of 1944-45 was one of the more recent. People still build expensive vacation homes 50 yards from the sea completely forgetting that sea levels rise and fall over the centuries and hurricanes appear regularly. Despite all this, some people appear to expect that weather (climate) is static and totally predictable. Just like COVID, those in power see an opportunity to acquire more power over others and are quick to seize it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *