Dr. Tim Ball Crushes Climate Change: The Biggest Deception in History

Please Share This Story!

With a 50-year academic career focusing on Historical Climatology, Dr. Tim Ball is uniquely qualified to address man-made climate change, and he demonstrates that it is a flat-out hoax. Thinking people everywhere should get multiple copies of this book and hand them out to everyone they know.  TN Editor

President Trump was correct to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement. He could have explained that the science was premeditated and deliberately orchestrated to demonize CO2 for a political agenda. Wisely, he simply explained that it was a bad deal for the United States because it gave a competitive economic edge to other nations, especially China. A majority of Americans think he was wrong, but more would disagree if he got lost in the complexities of the science. I speak from experience having taught a Science credit course for 25 years for the student population that mirrors society with 80 percent of them being Arts students. Promoters of what is called anthropogenic global warming (AGW) knew most people do not understand the science and exploited it.

Dr. Tim BallThe plants need more atmospheric CO2 not less. Current levels of 400 parts per million (ppm) are close to the lowest levels in 600 million years. This contradicts what the world was told by people using the claim that human production of  CO2 was causing global warming. They don’t know the UN agency, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), established to examine human-caused global warming, were limited to only studying human causes by the definition they were given by Article 1 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). It is impossible to identify the human cause without understanding and including natural causes. Few know that CO2 is only 4 percent of the total greenhouse gases. They assume that a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase. It doesn’t, in every record the temperature increases before CO2. The only place where a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase is in the computer models of the IPCC. This partly explains why every single temperature forecast (they call them projections) the IPCC made since 1990 was wrong. If your forecast is wrong, your science is wrong.

I studied weather as aircrew with the Canadian Air Force, including five years of search and rescue in Arctic Canada. After the Air Force, I went to university to study weather and climate, culminating in a Ph.D., in Historical Climatology from the University of London, England. When I began in the late 1960s global cooling was the consensus. I was as opposed to the prediction that it would continue cooling to a mini-Ice Age, as I later was to the runaway AGW claim. I knew from creating and studying long-term records that climate changes all the time and are larger and more frequent than most know. I also knew changes in CO2 were not the cause.

[the_ad id=”11018″]

The Club of Rome (COR), formed in 1968, decided that the world was overpopulated and expanded the Malthusian idea that the population would outgrow the food supply to all resources, especially the developed nations. COR member Maurice Strong told Elaine Dewar in her book Cloak of Green that the problem for the planet were the industrialized nations and it was everybody’s duty to shut them down. Dewar asked Strong if he planned to seek political office. He effectively said you cannot do anything as a politician, so he was going to the UN because:

He could raise his own money from whomever he liked, appoint anyone he wanted, control the agenda.

After five days with him at the UN she concluded:

Strong was using the U.N. as a platform to sell a global environment crisis and the Global Governance Agenda.

He created the crisis that the by-product of industry was causing global warming. Even Obama claimed that 97 percent of scientists agree. If he checked the source of the information, he would find the research was completely concocted. It is more likely that 97 percent of scientists never read the IPCC Reports. Those who do express their concern in very blunt terms. Consider German meteorologist and physicist Klaus-Eckart Puls experience.

“Ten years ago, I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data – first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day, I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it.”

He discovered what I exposed publicly for years. My challenge to the government version of global warming became increasingly problematic. They couldn’t say I wasn’t qualified. Attacks include death threats, false information about my qualifications posted on the Internet, and three lawsuits from IPCC members. Most people can’t believe that such things occur about opinions in a democratic society. Test the idea by telling people that you don’t accept the human-caused global warming idea. The reaction from most, who know nothing about the science, will invariably be dismissive at best.

I documented what went on in a detailed, fully referenced, book titled The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science. A lawyer commented that it lays out and effectively supports the case, however, it was “a tough slog.” I recently published a brief ‘non-slog’ handbook (100 pages) for the majority of people, not to insult their intelligence, but to help them understand the science and its misuse for a political agenda.  Titled, Human Caused Global Warming: The Biggest Deception in History. Presented in the logical form of a criminal or journalistic investigation it answers the basic questions, Who, What, Where, When, Why, and How.

It provides the motive and method for the corruption of science to substantiate and bolster Trump’s decision.

About the Editor

Dr. Tim Ball
Dr. Tim Ball is a renowned environmental consultant and former professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg. He has served on many local and national committees and as Chair of Provincial boards on water management, environmental issues and sustainable development. Dr. Ball's extensive science background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition, made him the perfect choice as the Chief Science Adviser with the International Climate Science Coalition.
Notify of

Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Thomas Corbett

I am ordering this book. Unfortunately, the link in the article is to Amazon (run by the far left Bezos). Personally, I have given up on Amazon and found new copies on Abe books where the price is 15 cents more but comes with free shipping from the UK. Thanks for the great article and notice of the book.

Joey Virgo

I love you for giving up on Amazon as all customers with a good conscience and who value freedom ought to give up on Amazon. I cancelled my Prime subscription and Jeff Bezos actually gave me all my money back. The trouble with Abebooks is that it is owned by Amazon. Amazon is soon going to own Whole Foods, too. Amazon is anti-free speech, anti-intellectual freedom.


Amazon owns Abe books now. Try Alibris.

Marty Ball

If you send us your address, we will send you a book.

Rob Wager

I have been trying to no avail to find a copy of his book. Where might I find a place to purchase a copy?


Here is what is changing climate. and ever since december 21, 2018 when the tsunami hit and all of this crazy weather has been happening, the MIMIC MAP 1 has been down https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWXkZg5lUAU

Doug Allitt

Thank you for your work. Just purchased the Kindle edition.

Robyne d\'Ombrille

Professor Bob Carter was the head of Earth Sciences for James Cook university in Australia and was fired because he didn’t agree with the climate change mantra. He was the founding member of the New Zealand climate Science Coalition. This poor man was vilified until his recent death.

George Kolankowski

James Cook Univ. has kaakaa all over it’s face now .

Marty Ball

Tim for Marty:
I had the privilege of giving the first address at the Bob Carter Honorary Lectures Series in Australia at the end of last year. His widow could not attend but his son was in the audience and was very appreciative of my remarks. The opening one was that Bob and I discussed the challenges of speaking out and doing it whenever we had the opportunity. We agreed that our philosophy was that we did not want anyone to be able to say they weren’t told about the skeptics view.

Timothy Johnson

I don’t need a PHD in chemistry to understand that CO2 is good for plants. The United States produces more food than any other country in the world and CO2 is helping. Quit demonizing fossil fuels ! Fossil fuels have made our quality of life way better and will continue to make it better. Electric cars are not the answer. Where does the electric power come from to charge the Batteries? Coal fired power. Might as well burn gasoline and diesel. Show me an electric powered semi truck.


I didn’t see any discussion of fossil fuels at all in the article, much less any demonizing. So what are you referring to?
BTW, I’m pretty sure that Tesla is just about ready to launch their semi truck.


Fossil fuels are the major alleged source of those greenhouse gasses “causing” global warming —– context, context, context —


Carla are you from the stone age or do you think before you speak. What do you think they say manmade co2 is coming from, what are they attacking. IT IS FOSSIL FUELS, SO YES THEY ARE DEMONIZING FOSSIL FUELS.

Trevor Marr

Yes CO2 is not the Enemy! And fossil fuels are the cure to climate and not a curse at all!

Bob Armstrong

“BTW, I’m pretty sure that Tesla is just about ready to launch their semi truck.”

LoL !


Elon Musk is a fraud! Any businessman who supported the Paris climate accord is a crook. Then he leaves the Trump administration after Trump kills it. What a slimeball. If he stood for anything he wouldn’t have supported the Paris climate wealth transfer to begin with.


And if it wasn’t for taxpayers aiding and abetting the purchase of expensive Teslas by wealthy buyers, his company would cease to exist.


I’m surprised one even has to write an article about this, it’s that obvious. If it isn’t, one has no business whatsoever commenting on the subject.

What would be your instinct regarding the large-scale lithium-ion battery production/disposal to green up every car and smaller delivery truck?


Yes and the facts on Tesla is once the gov funding stops watch your tesla stocks drop to almost nothing like most of the big companies with the solar panels once the tax dollars were cut they cut and ran and claimed bankrupcy .

Frank Heitzer

Tesla made billions by understanding how to play the climate change fear strings, all by the way, is public funds, taxpayers money.
Yes, the article doesn’t specifically talk about cars, fossil fuels etc., but nonetheless it always ends up being a discussion about it, and to this point, no real alternative for fossil fuels has been established.
Climate change has been around long before we were around and the 150 years of data available to us are less than a wink in our world’s history.

Trevor Marr

We must continue to expose the Lying climate cult! In 2017 and beyond, AGW = Al Gore’s Wrong!!!


Are you aware of the pollution associated with so-called ‘clean cars’ such as Tesla? Any understanding of the water required, CO2 generated, or particulates released into the atmosphere to get 1 pound of Lithium, or any of the rare-earth metals? And then you still have to charge the thing, and where do you think THAT power comes from?

Doug Stevens

A coal fired plant runs over 90 percent efficiency. Reciprocating engines run at less than thirty percent efficiency.
Electric vehicles can return braking energy where combustion engines just throw it away.
Currently power pants are generally running at a loss during off peak hours – exactly the time that most electric cars would be on charge.
Solar charging systems are also gaining and that will be very low in pollution and virtually free in long term costing

Trevor Marr

Yes we need to remind GREEN that none of their hardware would even exist without oil and fossil fuels!

Doug Stevens

All the “hardware” would have existed without oil and “fossil fuels” albeit in a slightly different form.
It was not oil and its derived fuel that drives the economy. It is ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit.
It was just a great pity that oil was enforced onto society as the industrial age became established.

Patrick Wood

You are wrong, Doug. Without abundant available energy, there would have been ZERO ingenuity and/or entrepreneurial spirits. It takes ENERGY to perform all work, and oil/gas/coal is what caused the industrial revolution to take off. At that time, there was no other source of such energy available.

Doug Stevens

The industrial revolution came about when more people began to understand how systems can be configured for increased productivity and efficiency. There is no doubt that oil is a wonderful resource and it did give an added boost to accelerate technological advance. By the early 20th century the oil impact should have leveled out as ingenuity and engineering adventure became a new frontier accessible to more people. Corbett has shown how the oil industry has ruthlessly monopolised the resource and then enforced specific configurations exclusively for their own and corporate benefit. Understandably Corbett does not even attempt to delve into… Read more »

Godfrey Blaque

Timothy Johnson, or airplane, or train, or ship…

Michael Chebo

we’ve had electric trains for over 100 years


electric trains for over 100 years?

Are you being serious?


Well, ‘diesel-electric.’ A diesel engine produces electricity to run a motor, which then powers the train.


Pacific Electric Railway, started 1901, by 1910 heavy use, not diesel, but it reverted to gas / diesel, some folks thought it was Standard Oil conspiracy, but other reasons were the aging vehicles and rails not easy to keep up with rapidly growing city needs. I haven’t seen the move Who Framed Roger Rabbit but supposedly is to this electric-vs-fuel transportation conspiracy, as Chinatown or Rango was for the L.A. water. http://www.latimes.com/me-2003-los-angeles-streetcar-history-story.html


In 1949 a wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors was convicted of a conspiracy to destroy the mass transit system of the USA. They were fined something like $25,000 or so – and then did it. Bought all the street cars and scrapped them and the rails – then put in GM diesel busses…


brad is that GM diesel “kisses” or GM Diesel buses.
Oh. A buss is a kiss.


The first fully electric trains (not diesel electric) were rolled out in London and Liverpool the UK in the late 19th century – overground and underground. There were various systems, such as a third and fourth electrified rail and overhead lines running at up to 1500v. So yes, we’ve had them for well over 100 years. And electric planes and ships are also in production.


What BS. I am a scientist with an ivy league Ph.D. and a long career conducting research and teaching at a university. Of course plants and algae use CO2 in photosynthesis. On the other hand CO2 is a greenhouse gas that is warming our planet with serious consequences.

Patrick Wood

Wow, doc. Then I guess you must also really hate other Ph.D. ‘deniers’ like Dr. Willie Soon, Dr. Will Happer (Princeton), Dr. Ivar Giaever (Nobel/Physics 1973) and the late Dr. Istvan Marko. Too bad they wasted all that money on higher-educations, eh? Sorry, Doc, but you are exposing yourself as one of the self-appointed high-priests of the global warming religion. Whatever you are practicing, it isn’t science.


I’m curious- do you also understand statistics? How accurate are the measurements taken in the study? What does an estimate for missing data in certain geographical areas and changing measurements from the original noon time to adjust to mornings do to accuracy of the data? What is the confidence level of that change being due to man made warming?


This ignores the “Heat Islands” of the EPA definition. These cities are heat islands and have greater CO2 and much greater heat. The rural areas are not getting that increase. The cities, by the way, average 5 degrees warmer than the countryside during the day, and 22 degrees at night.
Since the temperature sensors are almost all in the northern hemisphere and almost all in the temperate zone within cities – their data is flawed.

Marty Ball

Tim for Marty

Could you provide proof that human produced CO2 is warming the planet with serious consequences. By proof I mean empirical evidence, not the computer model generated evidence of the IPCC. Every prediction (projection) these models made since 1990 was wrong. In science, if your prediction is wrong your science is wrong.

Doug Stevens

Timothy Johnson – “Fossil fuel”….(combustion of subterranean hydrocarbon)……was FORCED on society through corrupt criminality and bribery! “Fossil fuel” and it’s required reciprocating engine is incredibly foul, expensive and grossly inefficient! “Our quality of life” does not depend on “fossil fuel” at all. In fact, a case can be made that the inefficiency of this energy source is mostly responsible for this ridiculous rat race that we’re all subjected to. A fantastic mass transport system was undermined and obliterated by rapacious corporate criminals and their weak, greedy little political side kicks to force us into this dysfunctional car culture jammed up… Read more »


To be low pollution, we will need to build more Nuclear Power Plants. Due to Solar bring useless at night, and wind nor far behind. So you are left with fossil or nuclear to power or charge electric vehicles.

Scott Wallace

Not one mass transit system in America is profitable they are all tax subsidized and not practical for people. Instead of wasting money on these ridiculous scams that are making politicians and their friends and families rich. Make the traffic on freeways flow better so everyone can get to their jobs faster and pollute less. Liberals always cut off their nose to spite their face. Hundreds of thousands of square miles scarred by solar panels and wind generators in California alone? Really you care about the environment? Hypocrites! C’mon! Carpool lanes have been proven to do nothing but congest traffic… Read more »

Jim Matsunaga

CO2 is not 4% … do the MATH! 400ppm equals.04%


Less than 4 percent of total greenhouse gases vs 400 ppm of the total atmosphere. They are two different references.


4 % – 40,000 ppm


4% of greenhouses gasses, not 4% of ‘air’

Heywood Jablome

4% of total greenhouse gases, not atmosphere, read it again, your comeprehension is suspect

Ian Butler

The author states that “CO2 is only 4 percent of the total greenhouse gases”, so is not talking about 4% of the atmosphere…


4% of greenhouse gases,.04% of atmosphere.


I think he meant 4% of greenhouse gases. Not “air” in total? I think.

Carl Hartmann Jr

(4% of the total greenhouse gases, not 4% of the atmosphere.)

Ray Schneider

4% of the green house gases, not 4% of the atmosphere.

Malcolm Shykles

Learn English: “CO2 is only 4 percent of the total greenhouse gases”. The Greenhouse gases are; Water vapor,Carbon dioxide, Methane, Nitrous oxide, Ozone,Chlorofluorocarbons and Hydrofluorocarbons (incl. HCFCs and HFCs)


This scam was only possible, because there are more stupid people on this planet than any other time in history.


Objective achieved !!! the objective of the Minuscule Elite Global Power Masters is to STUPIDIFY THE MASSES.



Michael Ferguson

I read a few sentences of this article until he said something was at its lowest level in 600 million years. Seriously, anyone who believes this earth has been around for that long cannot and should not be trusted as offering any factual evidence whatsoever. The fact that I was directed here for a Christian is even more hilarious.


So, Michael, I presume you also believe the earth is actually 4000 or so years old? I won’t bother you with the science behind the evidence for earth’s age since you seem not to care for evidence or established facts borne out by science. The author is correct in his statement as shown by numerous and recent studies of ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica.

Chip Hall

The Earth is 4.5 Billion years old and has had oxygen in its atmosphere on it for around half of that. At the time each day was roughly 16 hours long. You are hilarious.


Chip where are you getting your BS from. The earth is not or even close to being that old. Further more time doesn’t actually exist is is an illusion man made up. I like what someone posted earlier this scam is only possible cause their are more stupid ppl. I think you fall I to this?

Tim Boddington

Perhaps Michael Ferguson you also believe in the flat earth!
The spherical earth has been dated at 4.8 billion years and has had many atmospheres of different composition in that time.


You must be one of those Christians who have absolutely no idea about the assorted calendars that have existed (some still do), their history. Nor the development/ history of the Bible sources and translations.

I suspect you have been “taught” by many passages quoted out of context also.

Once you grasp the concept of context, I believe you will find there is seldom any solid conflict between faith and science — short of a combination of scripture out of context and those laughable “science is settled” statements


I don’t know hold old the earth is nor does it really matter to me but in order to know hold old something is there must be something known to be that old to test it against. That crashes scientific theories. Rock formed from Mt St Helens eruption in 1986 was tested in 1992 when it was known to be a fact that it was 6 years old. It showed to be anywhere from 350,000 – 2.8 million years old. Yet us stupid foolish people who don’t accept everything we are told!

Josep Mª Esteve

Good way to sell your book. 40ºC in Barcelona in spring is part of this conspiration? Dying coral reefs are fake too? Antropocene is real and you know it.

Josep Mª Esteve

Hi! I’m not sure WHY our planet is increasing its mid-temp., but most of scientists agree on the fact that reducing CO2 emissions can help, and modifying human activities is capable of doing so. Is there any secret agenda (mostly a greedy corporation) behind that? For sure! Even when you buy your toothpaste there is one Procter, but we should give a chance to that Gamble (Foster?) that can make change happen.


The Club of Rome is a globalist/bankster organization that exists solely for the financial profit and power accumulation of the Rockefeller/Rothschild axis. You clearly read in the above article that there is zero scientific basis for man-caused climate change. Please wake up.

Rog H

Well, he didn’t say man wasn’t killing his ecosystem, he just points out that over geological time there has been larger changes in climate and temperature, oh yeah, we weren’t around for most of it. Really, the heart of the problem is pollution, not CO2. Over the years the media has equated these two concepts because pollution is complicated,messy and everyone’s problem whereas CO2 production is simple and can be blamed on factors that the average viewer does not feel responsible for. This make a better “sound byte”, I mean “sound bite”. The true seldom tastes as sweet as a… Read more »


I would say that he is a sell out the vested interest. First of all – his claim that CO2 is at the lowest level since 600 million years ago do not stand up to scrutiny. Last time it so high was millions of years ago .. with different climate AND sea level .. which we do not want to return so. Moreover, the speed of increase is way beyond the typical speed of the climate cycle — which is measured in thousands and tens of thousands of years, not decades as is in our case. And no, IPCC do… Read more »

Rhetorical Answers

Please provide significant recordings of climate change from before the 80s. One cannot assume climate change is ramping at faster rates than ever, when one cannot accurately determine climate cycles over 100s of years.


the only way to test that is through earth science. You know the layers of earth as you dig deeper. Or trees to record their data. But with trees only a couple of species are that old and only what 150 years. No way to truly test it. Other than the residues left in the layers and using technology that is only a few decades old made by men who are not perfect using mathematical equations they developed. Still best guess thats all science is. And remember most scientists operate under gov grantsand such. They wouldnt want to lose their… Read more »


Global Warming Scientist have long disagreed with what causes Global Warming. Some say the Earth has a natural cycle that causes Global warming still humanity needs to clean up its mess and steer away from profiteering corporations agendas.

R richards

As opposed to power hungry governments? The problem in the last 150 or so years has not been Ford Motor Co. or Walmart or other big corps but with Hitler and Stalin and Mao and PolPot and all the rest of them who convinced the masses that the people were not smart enough to live their own lives and should surrender their freedom. The problem here is that you and many others believe that our lives should be in the hands of our ‘betters’, those people who have the intelligence, the scientific knowledge and the “good intentions” to rule us.

John Doran

I have read enough to know that Dr. Tim Ball is 100% correct. I have read his previous book, & also Professor Ian Plimer’s magnificent book: Heaven and Earth global warming: the missing science, a great read. Easy to read plain English, it contains over 2,000 references to science papers for those interested. CO2 (Carbon Dioxide) is about 4% of the Greenhouse Effect. H2O (Water) is about 95% of the Greenhouse Effect. Burning Fossil Fuels & increasing the CO2 content is helping to Green the Planet. Youtube & Matt Ridley on how Fossil Fuels are Greening the Planet. 19 mins.… Read more »

Matt Mattingly

I’m not a scientist nor do I play one on TV. I simply looked at the data files on the NOAA web site and in particular, the Vostec Ice Core Sample data and from my attempt to grasp the obvious it was clear that much of the Global Warming Scare is a hoax.


THIS is propagandist garbage meant to dissuade from the idea of man-made climate factors that we scientists have known for decades will contribute greatly to substantial rapid warming of our atmosphere. This alternative science, though may sound convincing to a non-scientist, is produced for the purpose of the right wing agenda to go on catering to fossil fuel interests and continue to make their own gains from the corporations that really do control us and is meant to discredit honest science for the sake of warding off global cooperation that these nation first politicians fear. If only we could prevent… Read more »

Sean O\'neal

You want to hear from a real scientist watch this video! If you believe the power of CO2 is for the salvation of our plants and humans you are the nut! And you are also a scientist among the others being paid for your lies. https://youtu.be/jJqUaHqaQYo


The corporations are largely on board for the Warmist Hypothesis, so it leaves us wondering what organization is paying you to spew the standard end of the world talking points on this forum.


Mary, you jump so quickly to “your” side’s conclusions that you forget to present a sound argument of any kind that would lead to those conclusions. Your answer to “CO2 does not cause global warming” is “we need to stop it before it kills us.” You present nothing that counters the stated point. You don’t even really pause long enough for a simple, “yes it does. So nah, nah.” And that’s how it goes. A scientist (a climate-change “denier”) says, “This data shows that global warming is not anthropogenic,” and asks for a logical, reasoned response. A climate-change activist says,… Read more »


Having been a Federal employee and a state academician for over 30 years, I have studied this issue extensively. I have seen ZERO evidence that humankind or CO2 have had any effect on climate. The hypothesis, and that is all it is, is based on weak correlations and innuendo. It is not science-based at all. NOBODY versed in the Scientific Method could give it any credence whatsoever.

Joe Seeholzer

Yeah – go to the cities where all the manufacturing has been exported to in the last 40+ year (or simply recall – if you are as old as I am – how it was in US industrial cities 40+ years ago) and see the people with masks to allow hem to breath – the GREAT increase in pulmonary diseases and deaths – and the great issues with fresh water supply – and simply a good quality of life – (which does mean having more things) and you will simply say “I don’t care what the “reasons” are for cleaning… Read more »


That is not the “worse case scenario”. Worst case scenario is we do EVERYTHING the IPCC says and our planet still develops an average mean temp that is too low or too high for comfortable human habitation because of the inputs which direct temperature change, human activity is near the bottom of the list.

Garth Gilligan

Dr Ball’s book is a “must read”.

Malcolm Shykles

There is no such thing as a “greenhouse gas” because unlike water or solids, atmospheric gas is not contained and loses its heat through the continual reflux of the water it contains. This is otherwise called the weather. The Western world has had about 25 years of Climate change Bullshit, fostered by Al Gore and Ken Lay CEO of ENRON. Any real warming is due to the fact that we are still coming out of the last ice age.


I would love to have a ‘double like’ and a ‘love’ button to use for this comment :o)


Are there any honest Warmist rebuttals of this book, that we can read?


You can deny climate change all you want. The reality is that sea levels will still rise, arctic sea ice volume will continue on it’s downward trend, and fossil fuels will become more difficult to mine till it’s gone. I’m still lost on what climate deniers gain by not addressing the very serious issue?

Patrick Wood

You don’t have the evidence to back up your assertion of rising sea levels, arctic ice declining and fossil fuels drying up. If you think you have defensible facts, bring them on and maybe someone will debate with you.


Look at some of the pacific islands disappearing beneath the sea each year. Fact.

Patrick Wood

Suzanne, you need to use your head. Small atols come and go all the time for a number of reasons. Let’s say one of them is 5 feet in elevation before it disappears. If the sea rises 6 feet to submerge it one foot underwater, wouldn’t the rest of the ocean rise 6 feet as well? Doesn’t water seek its own level? Well, there has been no corresponding rise in the sea level in the pacific ocean, period. The premise is faulty. Also, fill a bowl with ice and pour water over it to the brim; then let it melt.… Read more »

Stu Mugford

Readers should try Patrick’s experiment for themselves. Here is the procedure I used: fill a 1000 ml pyrex measuring cup with ice, add water to the top, then pour out some water and ice. In my test I left the water level close to the top, at 825 ml. Floating ice cubes protruded above the surface peaking at about the 900 ml mark; ice extended beneath the surface to about the 300 ml mark. I photographed the apparatus from a few angles to permit post-test comparison. I then microwaved the mixture of ice and water (~ 3 minutes) until most… Read more »


Arctic sea ice melting has zero impact on sea level. Ice displaces exactly the same volume of water it becomes when it melts.


Sydney Harbour Tidal Measuring Station at Fort Denison records Sydney Harbour levels are rising & predicted to rise at — ” in the region of approximately 0.92mm per year ” — yes those are the very words.
So over the next 100 years the grand total of less than 4″ rise.
Pacific Atolls are eroding & sinking. If the Pacific Ocean rose at any of those Atol locations, it would also be rising in Sydney Harbour, extreme low atmospheric event withstanding.


WOW! This guys an idiot! Co2 fertilization of plants doesnt matter over the past 600 million years. Humans have only been around for just over 10,000 and thats the atmosphere we need. CO2 might make up 4%GHG but this moron doesnt get it makes up .04% of air, we need 19-20% oxygen to breath and shifting that even 1% either way will kill us, at the rate we are removing the sinks of CO2 our sources will kill us. Then, he fails to awknoledge the impact of intensity Different GHG molecules have at different stratifications in our atmosphere. CO2 higher… Read more »

Patrick Wood

Jeanette, I wonder if you ever pulled the sheet over your head on a cold night, as millions of people do every year. You breathe out C02 and quickly change the ratio of Oxygen to C02. Or, have you ever heard of greenhouse farming where C02 is pumped into the greenhouse so that the crop will grow faster? Well, have you ever heard reported people dying from such activities? How many kids have died from sleeping under the sheet? None. How many greenhouse workers? None. How many people have ever hyperventilated, with the standard remedy being to breathe in and… Read more »

Tom Davidson

What happens to the energy that CO2 absorbs? It warms the air. What happens to the energy that CO2 DOESN’T absorb? It warms the ground – which warms the air. All the energy ends up in the same place – in the air. A greenhouse needs a ROOF. You can’t get ‘hot car syndrome’ if the windows are rolled down, if the convertible top is down, or with a motorcycle – convection takes the greenhouse-heated air upwards – where it cools. ‘Greenhouse gases’ are a myth.

Daniel L

Hi Everyone, there is lots of discussion on what is fact and what should be or should not be included to make an accurate evaluation on fossil fuel burning effects. One fact that is true is we add 1 billion people to this planet every 13 yrs ( = or – a year or so ) With this population growth how are we expected to control energy use when all these people need materials, food, water, transportation, energy, etc. This alone must have a significant effect on the earth which needs to be discussed and dealt with ASAP. We are… Read more »


Bring on the addition of birth control to all our drinking water……….. lol


Liberals have stated the recent hurricanes were caused by climate change, yet insurance companies have refused to pay homeowner claims effected by hurricanes claiming it is an “Act of God”!
Climate change is a an “Act of Man” and should not prevent insurance companies from paying claims.
When insurance companies believe in climate change, so will I.


If human and industrial actions are not the cause of global warming- the WHAT THE HELL IS Causing it?
Surely no one denies that it is taking place; why? and What?Please make a clear case for an alternative cause(s) so we can all understand 1 Is there anything we should do?
What should we be doing
What should we NOT be doing
Can we do something/anything to reverse the obvious changes taking place.?

Patrick Wood

No, you cannot do anything that will offset weather change, because it not human deterministic in the first place. The two largest determinants are the sun and ocean. There are hundreds of minor elements that factor in.

Fra Ka

Has anyone considered the fact that islands are disappearing because big companies are depleting the sand in the seas around them? They have mo more defence against tides and storm surges.


I agree with Dr Tim Ball in his assertion that CO2 is not the major cause of global warming. Our sun is the single most influencing factor to look for when asking why our earth is warming or cooling. There is strong evidence to support that there are stellar cores(brown dwarf stars) near our Sun’s corona provided by NASA’s CORE 2 STEREO images of the Suns corona. These stellar cores are very dense, highly magnetic objects that are interacting with our sun producing large Coronal mass ejections thus effecting changes in our magnetosphere and the subsequent radiation and charged particles… Read more »


Non of the modeling sees the sun as anything but a static , yet NASA noticed that the .6 deg rise in temperature from 1900 to 1957 also happened on mars , I read this a while ago can’t remember the source , would like it verified if anyone knows

Ron Ashman

The figures produced are all formed from pro man made global warming geeks. It take guts to admit they’re exaggerated. Time the Snowflake Liberals had the guts to condemn these fake results, or is the job security comes first before the truth.

Trevor Marr

Thank you Tim Ball! Yes we need ALL forms of energy and the best we can do is optimize each form of every and use the best one to suit the given need!

When I want to power my Garden Gnomes, I choose Solar!
When I want to fly to Mexico, O choose Fossil Fuels!
When I want to kill millions of birds and bats in the hypocritical name of a temporary, intermittent power that requires 100% backup and costs 3x as much as conventional, I choose Wind!

Trevor Marr

Yes fossil fuels and oil are used by everyone, everywhere, for EVERYTHING! Even GREEN Energy requires them in order to exits! Do yes we need to stop demonizing them in a weak attempt to increase market share!

As always, we need to optimize the Capables, not just Subsidize the Incapables!

John Doran

I’ve read both of Dr. Tim’s books. Both are excellent & true: the whole thing’s a political con job to grab extra taxes & control over peoples’ lives.

They want a Totalitarian World Govt & vast depopulation.

Tim Ball is a hero.

Geology Prof Ian Plimer’s book is also a great read: Heaven and Earth, global warming: the missing science
Over 2,000 refs to peer-reviewed papers etc & a great History chapter.

John Doran.


Hi, thank you for your work.
I found this article especially interesting and wanted to share it with my friends on Facebook. Im affraid, Facebook has banned your article with the message:
“Your message couldn’t be sent because it includes content that other people on Facebook have reported as abusive.”
I thought you might want to know….

James W Bradleyr8p

Instagram and Facebook are blocking the posting of this information


I tried sharing this article on FaceBook. it was blocked saying that “other people had reported it contained material that was abusive” If anyone can find anything abusive in the above, they have different kind of eyes to mine.

[…] [8] Human Caused Global Warming Paperback, Tim Ball PhD, https://www.technocracy.news/dr-tim-ball-crushes-climate-change-the-biggest-deception-in-history/ […]

ken heilbrunn

I am currently reading two books on the earth’s climate, written by real scientists. The data they present are in agreement. Their presentations are factual and straightforward. They all substantiate the work of Tim Ball. So there goes just one more thing I used to think was fact. Seems that the whole thing is falling like a stack of cards. Some have a problem with being wrong. For me, it is an enlightening pleasure. If only the world would recognise Al Gore for what he really is and tell Greta Thunberg to do some serious research.

Justin Vest

In Nevada, sixty three Lithuim mines (using fossil-fueled vehicles and machinary) are sucking up scare water resources and toxifying soil, water and air – so people can drive “clean” electric vehicles.