Articles by Frank Pinney

Global Warming Hoax             November 9, 2015
Is Your President a Muslim?     October 28, 2016

# # #

Global Warming Hoax
by Frank Pinney

A reply in The Union (Grass Valley) newspaper
to its organized attacks on authors who
submit articles debunking AGW

There’s desperation in evidence by the Man-caused [Anthropogenic] Global Warming (AGW) zealots.  A concerned local like Norm Sauer makes the effort to educate himself about the misinformation circulating and writes a column for our small town paper in Grass Valley, CA.
     Who should show up to demonize and play whack-a-mole on him but a national leader of the hoaxers, Michael Mann,  who just “happened” to submit a hit piece on Norm from Pennsylvania on the very same day Norm’s article appeared.  Soon after, another wealth redistributer from the Bay Area chimes in.  Heidi Hall then makes another foolish decision and joins the beat down of Sauer.   
     The UK Sunday Telegraph said:  “Mann’s ‘Hockey Stick’ is the most celebrated of all attempts to rewrite the scientific evidence.  It has become the most discredited artifact in the history of science.”
     The House Energy & Commerce Committee cited Mann’s:  “Bad mathematics, where his conclusions cannot be supported by his analysis”.   The National Academy of Sciences declared his methodology:  “Inappropriate and based on bad science.”  Even the UN claimed he:   “Used inappropriate statistical tools and exaggerated the effect”.
     Australia’s world renowned scientist, Ian Plimer states:  “The ‘hockey stick’ graph is contrary to thousands of published papers.  Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof.  This was demolished by statistics.  In other fields of science it would be considered fraud and Mann stricken from practice”.     
     The UN itself stated:  “None of our studies to date has shown clear evidence or positively attributed climate change to man-made causes.  Climate model predictions should be considered plausible and illustrative and do not have probabilities attached”. 
     In 2008 UN IPCC expert reviewer and world’s foremost hurricane forecaster, Dr. Vincent Gray, resigned citing widespread and fraudulent manipulation of data at the IPCC saying:  “Genuine science has been distorted and ‘spun’ to support a global campaign which has no scientific basis.  Global  Warming is one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people.  All my colleagues agree”.     
     International leaders of the hoax, including Mann, were caught emailing their plans to delete reports from IPCC files, to change data to hide facts that don’t fit their models, admitting they can’t explain 18 years of cooling, for trying to get editors fired that print dissenting reports and for deleting raw data.
     Despite all this, Mann unleashes vicious personal character assassinations on sane, reasoned and factual rebuttals of his disproved theories.  Norm Sauer clearly has the better reputation and grasp of the truth than Michael Mann or Heidi Hall.
     Obama and minions like Mann and Hall are hoping to commit us to a disastrous UN takeover of our energy, environment and economy by a treaty at the UN Climate Change Convention this December in Paris without a vote in the Senate.  They are again depending on the stupidity of uninformed and misinformed Americans to give up their freedoms. 

     If the AGW theory were true why do the pushers resort to lies, fudging the numbers, refusing to debate and crucifying dissenters?  It would be easier to swallow if one couldn’t cite the following published, documented facts while keeping in mind if even one is correct the game is over.  
     Global warming is part of a natural 1,500 year cycle.  Not one of their computer models has been proven correct.  CO2 levels were 6 times higher 50 million years ago (with no humans).  Periods in history with the same temps have had 20 times more CO2 (which is proven to be a lagging indicator and not a cause of warming). 
     The recent warming trend ran from 1978 to 1997.  Since 1998 there has been cooling.  How can 19 years prove man causes warming but 18 years don’t prove there is no warming?   Polar bear populations are the healthiest and highest ever recorded.  There are 1 million more square kilometers of sea ice than 35 years ago. 
     Four years in the 1930s were the hottest on record.  The hottest year ever was 1934.  Not one year in the 2000s even made the top ten.  UK Telegraph reports:  NOAA “shamelessly manipulated” surface temps for decades.     
     It would take 166 years for a 1% loss in Arctic ice using the alarmist’s temps.  It would take 13,000 years to completely melt the Greenland Ice Sheet and the oceans would only rise 2 inches by 2130.
     Al Gore becomes a multibillionaire the day his exclusive cap and trade exchanges in London and Chicago open, then 4% commissions on trillions each year.   That’s huge skin in the game.  The chart at the end of his “documentary” proves that CO2 does not cause warmer temperatures. 
     Today’s plant species are a million years old and have survived 20 times today’s CO2 levels.  Coral bleaching is a natural changing of algae in a healing process and reefs survived in Mesozoic times with 3 to 6 times current CO2 levels.  The ocean around the Maldive Islands has fallen by 11 inches in 50 years.    
     In 1942 Allied planes ditched in Greenland, one was found in 1992 under 268 feet of glacial ice.  If all CO2 emitting power plants, vehicles and factories in the US were shut down today, it would decrease global warming by an undetectable .3 degree F  by 2100. 
     CO2 is a nutrient and essential fertilizer for life.  A pollutant must produce harmful effects.  CO2 is nontoxic, invisible and has no physiological effects.  Reducing CO2 by half by 2050 will cost $75 trillion for a 3 degree drop in temps that even warming proponents say will have little effect on climate. 
     In 1998, 17,000 scientists signed a statement that AGW does not exist.  The greatest “scientific consensus”  of “settled science” EVER told us the Earth was flat.  Another was that tectonic plates were not real.   Another said Earth was the center of the Universe.  Science cannot be “settled” by definition.
     Many of the same “scientists” preaching “AGW” today were the “Chicken Littles” screaming about a coming New Ice Age in the early 1970s.  In 2009 31,000 scientists (9,000 with PhDs) signed a petition stating AGW is wrong.  Any moron claiming he has 97% agreeing with AGW needs 1,002,333 scientists.  The Warming scientists are clearly in the minority.
     The Medieval Warm Period (900 to 1300 AD) saw temps 2 degees C warmer than today and Vikings farmed Greenland.  The Little Ice Age (1350 to 1800 AD) was 2 to 4 degrees C colder and millions died.
     New EPA Ozone regulations in the Clean Power Plan could cost $3.4 trillion and 2.9 million jobs by 2040.  That’s $1,570 per year per household and we aren’t allowed to even see their calculations and data.  How many tens of millions of jobs could be created overnight by abolishing the EPA?
     China is exempt from all UN regulations until 2030 and then only has to stop emissions at that date’s levels.  Meanwhile they open a new coal-fired plant every 10 days.  35 leading international climate scientists radically refute accurately projecting  climate even 10 years ahead, let alone 100.
     Warmers  refuse to debate the issue, claiming there is such a “near-unanimous consensus”  that no more debate should be permitted and “deniers”  should be jailed under the RICO laws.   “Deniers” is not the language of science and honest scientists don’t run scared from “Deniers”.
     The idiotic claim of a 97% consensus comes from the thoroughly discredited poll concocted by Warmer activist John Cook.  This guy has skin in the game running the pseudoscientific blog site “” that Mann touts. 
     Of his “12,000 papers studied”, he tossed 8,000 that said nothing about AGW.  There went 66%  of his 97%.  Of the 4,000 left, he counted any mention at all of warming as on his side.  Actually, only 65 papers specifically stated man was causing global warming.  Less than half of the papers said man even contributes and 78 said man had no role whatsoever.  These people are delusional saying 97% agree.
          Warmers never ask who funds their side of the debate, only where skeptics get money.    There is $2.5 billion each year in UN and Federal grants up for grabs and 95% of that goes to those who will back AGW.  Do you really think reputations aren’t sold for this kind of money? 
     Weather Channel founder, John Coleman, says:  “There is a total distortion of the data and an agenda-driven destructive episode of bad science gone berserk.  Politically funded, agenda-driven scientists have built their careers and livelihoods on this theory”.
     Dr. Gavin Schmidt is now director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.  He is also the keeper of, an anti-skeptic blog managed by CRU and NASA employees.  They exercise  censorship power  at major journals and feed biased material to mainstream journalists.
     Dr. Roy Spencer, former head of NASA climate studies says:  “The facts are simply made up.  There is no fingerprint of human caused versus naturally caused climate change.  Not one scientific paper published has ruled out natural climate variability for most of our warming”. 
     He further states:  “What you have is a bunch of physicists from other fields with no understanding of meteorology building climate models on computers.  Evidence from satellites shows that when the tropics warm up a natural cooling process kicks in.  All these climate computer models do the opposite and none include sun spot cycles”.
     James Hansen, his successor, controls NASA’s temp database.  He calls coal trains “death trains” and advocates that CEOs of fossil fuel companies be put on trial for crimes against humanity.    He has taken $250,000 from the Heinz family and $750,000 from George Soros to promote AGW.

          Christina Figueres, executive secretary for UN Climate Change Convention in Paris this year has admitted:  “The goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.  We are setting for ourselves the task of changing the economic model that has been reigning for 150 years”.     
     IPCC members have stated:  “Capitalism is the worst economic system ever developed and private property ownership is perverted”.  They demand $75 billion a year from the US under the guise of “Social Justice”, “Sustainable Development” and “Environmental Justice” with no say in how it is spent.
     US Senator Tom Wirth addressed the ’92 Rio Summit:  “We have got to ride the global warming issue.  Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy”.
     Rio Earth Summit organizer Maurice Strong in 1992 said:  “We may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrialized civilization to collapse.  Isn’t it our responsibility to bring this about?”.
     Obama’s director of Science and Technology, John Holdren, said:  “We need a massive campaign to de-develop the US, diverting resources and energy to underdeveloped countries”.
     Christine Stewart, Canadian Minister of the Environment and Warmer activist, said in 1998:  “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony……….climate change provides the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world”.
          IPCC  official, Ottmar Edenhofer, said in 2010:  “One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy.  Instead, climate change policy is about how we redistribute de facto the world’s wealth”.  Third world dictators are thrilled with anticipation.
     Mikhail Gorbachev in ’96 said:  “The threat of environmental crisis will be the international disaster key to unlock the New World Order”.
     India announced that they would rather save their people from poverty than “Global Warming”.  With the $50 billion [trillion?] it will cost to comply with new EPA regulations on CO2 we could electrify every home in the world.
     You really should do even minimal research on the opposition’s side before parroting foolish misinformation.  I can cite the authority for every statement made here.    
     Try reading “Unstoppable Warming:  Every 1,500 years” by Dr. Fred Singer, or “Climategate” by Brian Sussman or “Climate Confusion” by Dr. Roy Spencer or the many excellent essays by Dr. Michael Coffman to get real information.  Watch the new “Climate Hustle” movie or “The Great Global Warming Swindle”. 
     The EPA is implementing draconian regulations without one shred of empirical scientific evidence.    The IPCC convention in December in Paris is their last chance to take over the world economy and redistribute the world’s wealth, as too many people are wising up to their hoax.       
     Our local League of Women’s Voters hired two hacks to come to town recently and promote the 97% consensus lie, the “Hockey Stick” joke, that 13 of the 15 years since 2000 were the hottest on record, that there’s a five foot sea rise coming soon, that the Maldive Islands are sinking, that coral reefs are going extinct and other falsehoods.  With no rebuttal speakers is this really a non-partisan group? 
     K-12 classes are no longer taught US history and how we became great.  They learn instead how we warm the earth, make species extinct, exploited native Americans, overpopulate the earth, pollute the air and water, and create toxic waste. 
     In 1942 newspaper headlines declared :  “Arctic Is Warming” and “Radical Change in Climate” and “Some Glaciers Disappearing”.  In 1947 one headline read:  “International Agency Needed To Stop the Arctic Meltdown”.  In the 1970s banner headlines trumpeted warnings of the upcoming “New Ice Age” that would devastate the globe. 
     Environmental fearmongering is the hammer being used to implement UN Agenda 21 and a New UN World Order with Universal Health Care, right to housing, worldwide wealth redistribution, private property elimination, closed public lands and enforced compliance from local, state and federal governments.  Heidi Hall worked in the EPA while they brought some of these things about.
     Hysteria and fearmongering is no way to conduct energy or environmental policy.   Man-caused global warming hoaxers are relying on the stupidity of all Americans to give up their freedom and their country to the UN scam in Paris in December.  There is still time to take action.  Speak out, call and write your representatives.  Thank Congressman Doug LaMalfa for seeking the truth and acting on it.

The following editorial appeared a few weeks later, on Saturday, Nov. 28, 2015:

Warming or not, that is the question
by Robert Whiteaker

I want to thank The Union for the recent airings of differing views on so-called climate change. I find the claims from both sides of this debate interesting and wish I had a degree in climatology so I could research the data and determine for myself which side is right.

However, I am just an ordinary citizen trying to decipher whether the alarmist’s claims of man-caused global warming (MCGW) are correct, or the deniers are correct. If the alarmists are correct and MCGW will drastically imperil future living conditions on the earth, I should be very concerned.

But should I really believe the alarmists? There have been some false claims and data jockeying on the alarmist side such as the East Anglia fiasco; and the “97 percent of scientists agree” is certainly a contrived percentage. Another concern is the lack of any significant global warming in the last eighteen or so years. Those problems aside, there are several things that bother me about the alarmist claims.

First of all, I don’t trust the temperature data. How can one get accurate and meaningful temperature data from a few hundred, or even thousands, of temperature reading devices, and say that those readings represent the temperature of the entire earth? Temperature readings from satellites are probably better but do they really know what to do with the data?

Second, it seems to me that MCGW with disastrous predictions decades in the future exists only in models devised by the alarmists. So why should anyone believe it will happen decades from now when the weather forecasters only give probabilities for tomorrow’s weather?

Third, I am extremely distrustful of the alarmists when they insist that man-caused global warming is settled science.

This is a ridiculous position to take as scientific knowledge is seldom “settled.” Remember when chocolate was considered a bad food and is now claimed to be healthful because of the antioxidants contained in dark chocolate?

The fourth thing that bothers me about the alarmist views of global warming is that the government has decided to tax carbon emissions ostensibly to reduce it and prevent or delay MCGW.

The old adage of “follow the money” applies here. If the carbon tax is a cash cow for government coffers they have no incentive to accept any data to the contrary.

Our president has even called it the greatest problem the world is facing today. Really?

Not the wars and Russian intervention in the Middle East? Not terrorist attacks that are happening more frequently? Not the weakening World economies? Not government corruption or our massive, unpayable national debt of almost nineteen trillion dollars? All the better to focus on a problem that is decades away, I guess?

Incredibly, the Pope has also jumped on the MCGW bandwagon. Now, if he is in close contact with the God who created the Universe and its planet Earth, which He made for humans to inhabit, maybe we should all be worried. Maybe. Or, maybe God designed the Earth to handle varying levels of carbon dioxide. Certainly He would know increases would occur and it seems reasonable that He would have accounted for it in His design. Nevertheless, the Bible says that the Earth will come to an end at some point anyway. So why does the Pope worry about it now or even call attention to fixing it if it is ordained to happen anyway?

The fifth thing is that I am not convinced that some global warming is necessarily bad. A milder warming over the years might increase temperatures in colder areas enough to allow longer growing seasons and increased crop yields to feed the Earth’s growing population.

I don’t really expect to see a comprehensive and unbiased presentation of the whole MCGW thing just because it is so politically contaminated. And I am saddened by the lack of critical thinking about the subject and its so-called “settled science.”

Our high schools and universities seem to teach dogma rather than critical thinking these days, and that has allowed political correctness to prevail over common sense and undermine our unique American culture. Hopefully, The Union will continue to publish new information and studies about global climate change as they become available.

Robert Whiteaker lives in Lake Wildwood.

# # #
Is Your President a Muslim?     October 28, 2016
(I haven't fact checked this article but have respect for Frank Pinney's integrity.)

After reading this post, Frank Pinney sent the following informal comment:
"This was fact checked by me and Don Rogers (the publisher) and it took 4 whole days of arguing back and forth and producing proof of almost every claim to him before he would allow it in.  The ordeal was worth it.  There will be some really pissed off people who can't handle the truth."