The Climate Change Hoax:

Banksy Contributes Yet Another Piece of Establishment Agitprop 


“The Foundation of Empire is Art & Science

Remove them or Degrade them & the Empire is No More…”

-William Blake (1757 – 1827)


There’s a common saying across the internet these days: “Get woke, go broke.” The phrase acknowledges when a business emphasizes Social Justice Virtue Signalling instead of producing quality results, the bottom line will suffer.

Joining the Orwellian flock of conforming sheep, bleating out allegiance to the latest leftist trends, leads to annoyed audiences and alienated consumers. No healthy business actively seeks to piss off big parts of its customer base, but it’s been happening with increasing frequency for years. It’s gotten so bad even major corporations are serving notice they will no longer run their operations with efficiency and competence, but will squander resources chasing the ever moving goalposts of social engineering. Blame our Postmodern establishment, which has degenerated into acting as enablers and enforcers for the totalitarian left. Their abuses have warped many professions, especially the arts.

Art is not about money. Or at least real art isn’t, despite the manipulations and miseducation practiced by our current corrupt arts institutions. They exterminated ideals of quality and skill from art, so price tags act as a stand-in for measuring achievement. But a shady and inflated purchase price doesn’t add integrity to a work of art; it definitely can’t change non-art into an actual artistic accomplishment.

Postmodern partisans control the mass communication purse strings. They make sure only the ideologically pure get funding and exposure. Support is possible as long as an artist parrots the approved talking points, or fits into the favored diversity check boxes.

So assuming the money aspect gets covered by submitting to political expectations, are compliant artists then able to create meaningful, evocative artwork?

No. Even with a monopoly over cultural expression, the skewed messages favored by our self-appointed creative class censors are failing to connect, even with sympathetic audiences.

Take the relentless Climate Change Hoax, and how a 2015 art show bent the knee to it.

I’m 50 years old, and for my entire life I’ve been hearing we are teetering on the brink of an environmental catastrophe which never actually arrives. As supposedly urgent climate deadlines go whizzing by, the nature and timing of the threat constantly mutates, but the remedy is always the same: the people must sacrifice comforts, wealth and freedom so the New Aristocracy of the Well Connected can keep living the high life. ,

The graphic timeline below charts more than my whole existence, and lists just some of the erroneous claims made by the Mean Greens:


Seriously people. Looking at these 50+ years of fail, it can’t be any clearer. The predictions aren’t accurate. The models don’t work. The fears are unfounded.

It’s a plot to grab money, attention, and power. These schemers hate any part of humanity they don’t see when they look into their own mirrors. They are indifferent to the suffering they would unleash, as long as they get to be in control. Get a load of this poor brainwashed thug-in-the-making:.


Doomsday Addams Wants You to Stop Breathing Right Now. For the Children. 


Does this look like someone manifesting long term planning, reason and compassion? Or is the face of someone who can’t wait to segregate us into our assigned cattle cars?

“Climate Change” isn’t science. It is mass hysteria and rent-seeking disguised as an emergency. The Progressives intend to progress us right back into the Dark Ages.

Art got recruited to be part of this charade in 2015, at the United Nations affiliated ArtCOP 21 event in Paris. “Climate is culture!” the bureaucratically  engaged creatives cried, instead of recognizing that culture is culture, and climate is weather.

A Horse Is a Horse, of Course, of Course? 

Take the example of this participant, performance artist Marion Laval-Jeantet. Her “art”  is described as:

Marion Laval-Jeantet allowed herself to be injected with horse blood plasma containing the entire spectrum of foreign immunoglobulins (following several months of precautions to build up her immune system). after the transfusion, the artist performed a communication ritual with a horse while wearing prosthetic horse-like stilts before her hybrid blood was extracted and freeze-dried…

“I had the feeling of being extra-human, I was not in my usual body. I was hyper-powerful, hyper-sensitive, hyper-nervous and very diffident. the emotionalism of an herbivore. I could not sleep. I probably felt a bit like a horse.”

Doctor Moreau, call your office. Thank goodness we have such paragons of science hyper-involved in the arts! What this actually has to do with climate, I couldn’t tell you, but surely she got paid to make this madness happen. Horse-like stilts are probably very expensive.

What is interesting is that a study was done of how the various artworks at the climate change carnival influenced the viewers. Not too much, it seems. Artnet explains:


Can Art Change Minds About Climate Change? New Research Says It Can—But Only If It’s a Very Specific Kind of Art

Only three works out of 37 left viewers feeling inspired to take action.

Researchers have found that art on show in Paris during the 2015 United Nations climate change summit did change people’s feelings about the environmental crisis, but only if it contained a hopeful message.

In a new paper published in the journal Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the ArtsLaura Kim Sommer and Christian A. Klöckner of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology have identified a narrow set of parameters for what makes activist art effective in altering public opinion.

The study surveyed 874 visitors’ reactions to works on view at the ArtCOP21 climate change festival, which saw artworks scattered throughout the city of Paris to coincide with the World Climate Change Conference. It looked at their emotional reactions, the relevance of each work of art to their daily lives, and how much the works inspired personal reflection or action, according to Pacific Standard. Based on the results, researchers were able to divide the show into four categories: “the comforting utopia,” “the challenging dystopia,” “the mediocre mythology,” and “the awesome solution.”

In the end, only three works among the 37 on view made people feel like they were able to do something about climate change. All three, which were categorized under “the awesome solution,” were “beautiful and colorful depictions of sublime nature that are showing solutions to environmental problems,” Klöckner and Sommer wrote…

To the researchers surprise, the participatory works on view did not have much effect on visitors. “It did not make them reflect much on their own role within the climate crisis or the consequences a changing climate would have for them,” Sommer told artnet News in an email. “It just gave them a sense of belonging, which is why we called it the ‘comforting utopia.’ I was expecting that offering people a way to participate would lead to more engagement. But it seems that people want to be made aware of something awe-inspiring by someone that thinks differently, rather than be part of the creative process.” [emphasis mine]

So let me get this straight. People enjoyed the beautiful artwork, which showed them something they judged to be beyond their own skill levels. It made them feel more connected. And that is striking a blow for climate change activism?

Or is what described actually a very traditional experience of art, and the climate change con artists are hijacking the response, claiming it fulfills their agendas?

The Postmodern Establishment is trying to switch off the Enlightenment. The climate change hoax is an attempt to de-industrialize the West, even as our political classes continue to live in luxury. They try to use art as one of their tools of propaganda. Even when their hand-picked artists fail to get the desired result, they co-opt the interpretation, and explain why they win again.

As I state in my book, “Remodern America: How the Renewal of the Arts Will Change the Course of Western Civilization:” 


The Modern age was the greatest liberation of humanity in history. As we became more efficient in providing the necessities of existence, we had more freedom to determine what kind of lives we wanted to live. As Modernism rose to highlight the potentials of individual initiative, leftist political movements counterattacked. Their goal was to squash humanity back into undifferentiated, subservient masses.

The elitists understood to maintain power, they had to undermine resistance. That’s why the top down cultural forces have made Postmodernism so prevalent. Using mass media to communicate their sickening message, the establishment made dispiriting Postmodernism the terrain we all must navigate, the atmosphere we all must breathe, the environment we all must adapt to.

The real climate change we need is the annihilation of Postmodern corruption. The Remodern Age has already begun.


Catering to Postmodern Madness is Thinking the Crocodile Will Eat You Last 


  1. Let’s not confuse hard science with extrapolations based on its findings, interpretations based on extrapolations, and the politicization of interpretations. Real science can’t get away with hoaxes because it needs to be proved in controlled, repeatable experiments, and corroborated, and findings are subject to intensive peer review. It is rigorously objective by its very nature, and has myriad fail-safes to prevent false findings.

    In the case of climate change exact predictions can’t be made for the very simple reason that the climate doesn’t exist in a petri dish, and can’t be subjected to repeatable controlled experiments. We can’t, for example, have 10 different climates in cups where we control the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere in order to determine precisely what will happen. Scientists have to work a lot harder with such a big subject, and they are.

    Your copy-pasted list of scientific hoaxes has nothing to do with science. All the predictions are politicized interpretations of extrapolations, and mostly or entirely not made by actual scientists or scientific bodies. You neglected to mention the ozone layer and cloroflourocarbon hoax, which you undoubtedly lived through, probably because it wasn’t a hoax. The ozone layer has significantly replenished because of regulations restricting use of CFCs. That is because of the same science that addresses climate change.

    The science is real. Climate change is real. You think all scientific bodies, NASA, and everyone else is in on a hoax?! And we should instead belief people who have no real scientific background?

    Go look up what actual scientists have to say, and their arguments. You undoubtedly believe sience about anything and everything except this one issue. Just becuase a radical left narrative embraces climate change doesn’t mean it isn’t real.

  2. The science isn’t real and climate change is not man-made. And you can’t spell worth a damn….

  3. Exactly,
    All shall be their servants, nations, traditions, religion, art, and yes science, all will suffer corruption or will be destroyed in the pursuit of power of these people. I do agree with the commentator above in that “science” or if you may “reality” will get them. You can’t beat 1+1=2, in the end it will prevail.

  4. The models CAN be tested. Take the known climate inputs of 50 years, or whatever interval you choose, ago, and run them through the climate models to see if they “predict” the observable climate of today. I have noted that no one is doing this. If they can not pass this test, what reason is there to trust that they can predict the unknown climate of the future?

    I have been following this issue since the mid-’60s, and there have always been two constants: Those predicting the kaleidoscope of disasters have been always wrong, and have never been uncertain.

  5. A few years ago I was doing some work for the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, CO. I asked “How many variables are there in predicting atmospheric changes?” The response was “Tens of thousands”. My followup question was “How many are you tracking?” The answer – “2”.

    There are several things you should know:
    1) The NCAR models are incapable of predicting the known past.
    2) The background level of CO2 is believed to be 300ppm
    3) The current level of CO2 is 415ppm

    If we do the math, we find that 300ppm is an atmospheric concentration of 0.03% CO2 and the “horrific” CO2 concentration of 415ppm is 0.04%. So, since the beginning of the industrial revolution the earth has seen a CO2 increase of 0.01%. Yes, you read that correctly. The amount of atmospheric CO2 has risen from very, very, very little to just slightly more than very, very, very little.

    Don’t believe me? Do the math yourself… Here’s the wiki where you’ll find the information:


  6. The main reason for my disbelief is that I had a bumper sticker on my car in the early 70’s which proclaimed “stop global cooling”. It was going to kill us all and cause a massive ice age resulting in disease, pestilence and mass starvation. Articles promoting this were in all the major science journals at the time (I am a marine biologist by education). Apparently they seemed to have miscalculated. Onto global warming then?! I dont think so; and do not need to be a scientist to realize this.

  7. In a way you guys are kinda lucky. The powers that be are sort of not paying attention to your area, leaving business instead to people you’ve talked about. Make hay while the sun shines. I believe it’s a sign they have lost the initiative and are desperately fighting to hold their gains, in a sense the tide has changed and is running against them.

  8. I’m an electrical engineer who designs solar and combined-source power systems for off-grid applications, where that tech is currently the best way to meet the real needs of real people; i.e. where there is no reliable electrical-power grid available to them. I depend upon sound science to make my living and serve my customers, so I have to be discerning about what is presented as “science”.

    It would be real easy for me to jump on the bandwagon of the Climate Change Cult, because it might expand the demand for my services and therefore my income potential. You don’t need shadowy figures in a smoke-filled room driving a con, to become part of one … all it takes is human nature and its desire to get ahead.

    But the science is not sufficiently sound, from what I see … trends drawn between wide error bars … extrapolations of computer modeling that are only as good as the accuracy of the finite number of inputs to a model, when the full range of inputs to the system being modeled is not clearly understood … a basis in historical data that could best be described as snapshots and small blips in time.

    We have an insufficient understanding of the history of this planet, and all the other NATURAL phenomena it has experienced that can also cause warming. For all we know, what we are seeing is just part of a natural planetary cycle and has nothing to do with our CO2 production.

    Yet AGW alarmists demand we set policy – policy that directly impacts the unalienable rights of individuals – as though our understanding is complete and exact.

    Add to that the fact that the support for the “remedies” is politically driven – solar-power and EV subsidies, as well as restrictions on energy supplies (such as the artificial War on Coal) that can drive us into the arms of central planners and their “superior” wisdom, to deal with those limits as they Stick It to Icky Brown Energy.

    Show me CONCLUSIVE proof of a CLEAR-AND-PRESENT threat to life and liberty from AGW … QUANTIFIED as to how much of the threat is posed by AGW … and I will support policies to interdict it.

    Just as I did with smog, acid rain, strip-mining damage, Love Canal, and Times Beach.

    Simply stating “the science is settled” is not enough … especially when the “remedies” have the smell of Progressive top-down socio-economic engineering that diminishes our liberty and prosperity. And that prosperity gives us the breathing space to actually care about keeping the environment safe from real threats.

    Because, when people are questioning where their next meal is coming from, their human nature makes them more likely to filet Willy, than free him.

  9. John Campbell:

    “They have always been wrong, and have never been uncertain.”

    Not even Oscar Wilde or Ambrose Bierce could have phrased that better.

    In fact I liked it so much I did a blog post and linked back to your comment just to applaud. Well played!!

    You do realize, I hope, that I will be shamelessly stealing this sentence for, you know, the rest of my life.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s