Paris Agreement Relied on Fake News: No Surprise [MUST SEE!]

A whistleblower has finally come forward to expose the false climate data that powered much of the Paris Agreement on global warming.

A major promise of Donald Trump is that he will take the United States out of the Paris Agreement. Here are his own words:

Trending: Kellyanne Conway Makes HEAVY Statement on Kavanaugh Accuser

If you listen to what he says, you’ll notice that Donald Trump’s objection to the Paris Agreement has little to do with the reality (or not) of man-made global warming. He wants to preserve our nation’s sovereignty in setting energy policy. The Paris Agreement puts those decisions in the hands of a foreign government.

take our poll - story continues below

Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to The Constitution updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

But the so-called science behind the Paris Agreement was recently brought into question. The Daily Mail reported,

The Mail on Sunday today reveals astonishing evidence that the organisation that is the world’s leading source of climate data rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change.

A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and David Cameron at the UN climate conference in Paris in 2015.

The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected. Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers.

But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data.

Bates had tried to get the others at NOAA to be more honest, but that didn’t interest them.

Is anyone surprised by this? I suspect the answer to that question is no. Those who are willing to doubt the pronouncements behind the Paris Agreement have probably learned enough from experience that they have come to expect such stories to leak out. There are probably many more stories to come. Most of the rest won’t be surprised because they will refuse to look at the Daily Mail’s evidence. It is an article of faith for them that the internal combustion engine will destroy life on this planet.

Bear in mind, however, that even if Donald Trump thought that man-made global warming was real, he would still have reason to oppose the Paris Agreement on the basis of the science, apart from his concerns about American sovereignty. Why? Because, according to its own science, assuming all their fake news was true, the Paris Agreement wouldn’t stop the alleged global warming even as it raped the populace of trillions and trillions of dollars. Here is a quick explanation of what is going on:

Notice this presentation was published before the Daily Mail story. Even if man-made global warming is real, the Paris Agreement wouldn’t do a thing to stop it.

The choice, if man-made global warming is real, is between a warmer planet and cheap energy and a warmer planet impoverished by expensive energy.

Donald Trump is right to oppose the Paris Agreement.

Please leave your comments below

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.