Hi, Bill –

These statements are alarming:

• “Don’t take it from me. AI thinks we’re on track to breach the 1.5 degree temperature mark soon, and keep right on going.”

• “The model found a nearly 70% chance that the two-degree threshold would be crossed between 2044 and 2065, even if emissions rapidly decline.”

If this is true—there is solid reason to accept it as correct given the findings and admonitions in James Hansen et al’s December 13 preprint ‘Global warming in the pipeline’ (Bit.ly/Hansen-arXivDec22)—then Michael Mann’s “best climate science you’ve never heard of” is incorrect. (Bit.ly/CCN-Mann2Feb22)

Please take Dr. Mann up on the beer he promised and sort this out for me. I’ve been having a dialogue with another recognized world-class climate modeling scientist who was Al Gore’s science advisor during my 2007 Climate Project training in Nashville. He and I are frankly baffled by Gore’s statements at Sharm El Sheikh—statements that your quotes seem to contradict:

12:27-12:38 youtu.be/qLTcC7srnLw?t=747

12:39-12:45 youtu.be/qLTcC7srnLw?t=759

Appreciate you indefatigable “finger on the pulse” and graciously sharing an unbelievable wealth of knowledge about the proverbial “good, bad and ugly.”

Best regards,




Expand full comment

Correcting a technical error with the first URL link in this sentence: Bit.ly/Hansen-arXivDec22

If this is true—there is solid reason to accept it as correct given the findings and admonitions in James Hansen et al’s December 13 preprint ‘Global warming in the pipeline’ (Bit.ly/Hansen-arXivDec22) —then Michael Mann’s “best climate science you’ve never heard of” is incorrect. (Bit.ly/CCN-Mann2Feb22)

Expand full comment

I find it interesting that AI has such credence as of late. I’m not saying that such conclusions are false, only that machine learning seems to be a sort of “black box” where one doesn’t quite know where the truth lies.

Expand full comment

How many GW predictions have to not come true before these sheep realize they have been had?

1. The opportunistic, lying, scum sucking, politician Al Gore made a fictional movie called An Inconvenient Truth. In that he said the oceans would rise 21 feet and if we didn't do something right away within the next ten years we would all be doomed. Well that work of fiction came out in 2006 and the oceans didn't rise 21 feet.

2. In 2014 the lying swine said the artic ice cap would completely melt in 2014. Didn't happen.

3. 97% of all, ALL, scientist believed in global warming. The sheep took this lie at face value. Forbes ran two articles debunking that lie. There has to be thousands of scientists in the world. Did the lying left poll all of them?

Here are 2 Forbes papers:



The sheep believe anything their lying political leaders tell them.

The above is just three examples of lying. If someone came up to you and said buy XYZ. it is due to go through the roof and you invested a lot of your money on that stock tip and XYZ went bust. If the same guy or gal came up to you three years later and said buy ABC it is due to explode. You would tell him or her to get lost.

When it comes to money people would not believe the same lie but when it comes to an abstract the sheep will believe anything and all things their political idols tell them.

Well these GW lies are costing all of us money. Our scum sucking politicians are spending billions of our dollars on a lie.

It is hard for me to believe that smart people are not only believing these scurrilous lies but propagating them.

The industrialize nations run on energy and the GW crowd want to destroy the industrialized nations and replace them with a workers' paradise. If you don't believe me there were a Marxist husband and wife team at Columbia University that taught exactly that.


Expand full comment

Bill, I am disgusted with our government. Biden, like a Obama in 2011, is the gatekeeper allowing ConocoPhillips to proceed:

[HEADLINE] BLM releases positive review for ConocoPhillips Willow project in NPR-A

Feb. 1, 2023

“The Biden administration announced Feb. 1 its final environmental review and preferred development alternative for ConocoPhillips Inc.’s Willow oil project in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska (NPR-A) on Alaska’s North Slope.

“The supplemental environmental impact statement (EIS) amounts to tentative approval of the project, with the proviso that a record of decision (ROD) still must be issued as the last formal step. An ROD can be issued 30 days after publication of the supplemental EIS, and the Alaska delegation to Congress said in December that the administration had committed to getting the ROD done in that time frame.

“The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), in announcing release of the review, said its preferred alternative supports development of three of the five proposed drill sites, removes one site from consideration, and defers consideration of another.“ …


February 1, 2023

Dear Mr. Grandt,

Thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Hearing from passionate individuals like you inspires me every day, and I welcome the opportunity to respond to your letter.

While the challenges we face are among the most difficult in our history, I have never been more optimistic for the future of America. Our Nation has always turned crisis into opportunity, and I believe we are better positioned than any country in the world to lead in the 21st century and deliver real results for the American people.

Even though we may not always agree on how to solve every issue, I will continue working to be a President for all Americans. I am confident that we can find common ground to make America a more just, prosperous, and secure Nation.


/s/ Joe Biden

Expand full comment

I am appalled, just appalled, at how mad the ConocoPhillips plan for a massive new oil field development in Alaska is.

How can I help with stopping it?

I live in Aotearoa New Zealand.

Expand full comment