World Climate Declaration, signed by more than 2000 scientists and experts. Message: there is no climate emergency. Book: The Frozen Climate Views of the IPCC.
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Joined March 2020
- Tweets4.3K
- Following708
- Followers8.3K
- Likes2.4K
Pinned Tweet
You take climate change seriously, support cutting emissions and publish research consistent with IPCC assessments. Then you find yourself labelled a “climate denier”.
That happened to @RogerPielkeJr. He studied losses from hurricanes and other weather disasters. Those losses are rising—but how much comes from climate change, and how much from having more people and more valuable property in harm’s way?
His findings were not well received. In his lecture at Clintel, he describes the political attacks that followed, including from the Obama White House.
He also walks through what the science says about extreme weather. Heatwaves, floods, hurricanes and droughts each tell a different story. And he explains why he challenges the attribution studies behind so many headlines.
His full first lecture, recorded on 11 October in Driebergen, the Netherlands, is now online. Around 57 minutes, with clear explanations and plenty of personal experience. Worth making time for.
🎥 Watch via the link in the first reply.
Now even Halloween pumpkins get the climate scare treatment. Canada’s CBC links disappointing harvests to climate change, based on two very different summers.
@LinneaLueken explains why that doesn’t hold up:
• Two summers don’t establish a climate trend.
• Historical weather records show no increase in year-to-year variability.
• Harvest figures show no long-term decline.
The alarming headline reaches a mass audience and shapes public opinion. How many of those readers will ever see the rebuttal?
Linnea Lueken examined the weather records and harvest figures behind CBC’s pumpkin scare. Read her analysis:
clintel.org/climate-change-p…
Get more analysis from Clintel in your inbox. Sign up for our newsletter:
clintel.org/newsletter
“Cherry-picking isn’t science.”
@BjornLomborg puts it well. The fires in France, Spain and Canada were devastating. But they don’t tell the whole story about what is happening worldwide.
Lomborg shares the latest satellite data through October 28, 2026:
• Global burned area is 40% below the 2012–2025 average for the same period.
• Every continent is below its average.
• Africa, North America and South America are at their lowest levels within that comparison period.
Lomborg calls for better land management and fire prevention, including prescribed burns to reduce the buildup of combustible vegetation.
Physicist and science writer Ralph B. Alexander reaches similar conclusions in his review of historical fire records. He also highlights the importance of good forest management.
It’s good to see Lomborg and Alexander bringing these figures into the discussion. Watching footage of burning forests alone gives a very different impression of the global picture.
nitter.cf/BjornLomborg/status/21…
Alarmists: “World on fire!”
Reality: By Oct 28, global burned area likely never lower than 2026
Disasters in France, Spain & Canada are tragic—but climate is global. Cherry-picking isn’t science
Climate policy does near-nothing for fires
We need better fire policy (prescribed burns, let some burn) and better climate info
gwis.jrc.ec.europa.eu/apps/g…
How has burned area changed over time? Ralph B. Alexander examines historical records from Australia, the US, the Mediterranean and around the world, discussing land use, fire suppression and the buildup of combustible vegetation.
clintel.org/wildfire-trends-…
More on climate, energy and science. Subscribe to Clintel’s newsletter:
clintel.org/newsletter
Hay que abandonar los objetivos de temperatura de París, sostiene @RogerPielkeJr. No nos dicen qué medidas funcionan. La tecnología sí puede reducir las emisiones.
Mientras tanto, las familias pagan más por la energía y la industria se marcha. Los dirigentes europeos no deberían sorprenderse si vuelven los chalecos amarillos.
Su «ley de hierro de la política climática»: cuando el clima y la economía chocan, gana la economía.
En conversación con @marcelcrok, Pielke explica por qué hay que replantear la política climática. También aborda los problemas del IPCC y cómo la inteligencia artificial puede ayudar a comprobar si sus informes reflejan la investigación científica.
🎬 La entrevista completa ya tiene subtítulos en español. Audio en inglés; selecciona «Español» en los subtítulos de YouTube.
youtu.be/QFrAGK_OEXk
Lo llamaron «negacionista» por presentar conclusiones que coincidían con las del IPCC.
@RogerPielkeJr lleva más de treinta años investigando los fenómenos meteorológicos extremos. En esta conferencia para Clintel explica por qué más daños no significan necesariamente un clima más extremo y por qué los titulares sobre huracanes, inundaciones y sequías no siempre reflejan lo que dicen los datos.
También relata las presiones políticas que sufrió tras cuestionar afirmaciones sobre el clima, incluso desde la Casa Blanca de Obama.
Su postura es clara: el cambio climático es real y merece atención seria. Precisamente por eso, las pruebas importan y el desacuerdo científico debe poder expresarse.
🎬 La conferencia completa ya está disponible con subtítulos en español. Audio en inglés; selecciona «Español» en los subtítulos de YouTube.
youtu.be/VeELhhtzzqY
«No acepten tan fácilmente la etiqueta de escéptico climático».
Pielke sostiene que muchas afirmaciones presentadas como «escépticas» están más cerca de las conclusiones del IPCC de lo que suele reconocerse.
Lee el artículo en español sobre su conferencia:
clintel.org/roger-pielke-esc…
“50,000 heat deaths.” Headlines everywhere. By the time anyone examines the assumptions, the public has already absorbed the message.
Clintel director @marcelcrok looked behind the headlines: no mortality data from the summer in question. Instead, historical temperature–mortality relationships were used, with those for nearly three quarters of the cities inferred from other cities.
That distinction matters. A model estimate deserves scrutiny, especially when headlines make it sound like a confirmed death toll.
@BjornLomborg also highlights the missing context: cold causes far more deaths than heat, and warming can save lives by reducing cold-related mortality.
The headlines travel far. Getting the caveats heard is harder.
Where did the 50,000 figure come from? Marcel Crok examines the calculations, the assumptions and the context missing from the headlines:
clintel.org/heat-related-dea…
There’s more to the climate debate than the headlines. Get Clintel’s articles and analyses in your inbox.
Subscribe to our newsletter:
clintel.org/newsletter/
CLINTEL FOUNDATION retweeted
I sat down with @marcelcrok @ClintelOrg for a wide-ranging discussion and debate over climate science and policy. I enjoyed our conversation.
Now available . . .
Scrap the Paris temperature targets, says @RogerPielkeJr. They don’t tell us which policies work.
Yet households and businesses pay the price of those policies. And their patience has limits.
Ever-higher energy bills. Industry moving abroad. European leaders should not be surprised when the yellow vests return. Pielke also sees expensive energy as a driver of the political upheaval across many countries.
His “iron law”: when climate policy collides with the economy, the economy wins.
A temperature target or a deadline for “net zero” won’t change that. His alternative: technological progress that cuts emissions AND increases prosperity.
In conversation with @marcelcrok, Pielke explains why climate policy needs a rethink — and why he is finally optimistic.
Watch the full interview:
youtu.be/QFrAGK_OEXk
Scrap the Paris temperature targets, says @RogerPielkeJr. They don’t tell us which policies work.
Yet households and businesses pay the price of those policies. And their patience has limits.
Ever-higher energy bills. Industry moving abroad. European leaders should not be surprised when the yellow vests return. Pielke also sees expensive energy as a driver of the political upheaval across many countries.
His “iron law”: when climate policy collides with the economy, the economy wins.
A temperature target or a deadline for “net zero” won’t change that. His alternative: technological progress that cuts emissions AND increases prosperity.
In conversation with @marcelcrok, Pielke explains why climate policy needs a rethink — and why he is finally optimistic.
Watch the full interview:
youtu.be/QFrAGK_OEXk
“Targets don’t do that. Technologies do.”
Marcel Crok explores Pielke’s alternative: cutting emissions through better technology while preserving prosperity. Also discussed: nuclear power, the IPCC’s shortcomings and the political backlash against expensive energy.
clintel.org/paris-temperatur…
Climate policy reaches into your energy bills, our industries and ultimately the ballot box. Clintel follows the evidence — and the consequences.
Get our latest articles, interviews and videos through our newsletter:
clintel.org/newsletter
CLINTEL FOUNDATION retweeted
Excellente présentation principalement centrée sur la détection et l'attribution causale des événements climatiques extrêmes par @RogerPielkeJr devant le public de @ClintelOrg, avec sous-titres, respectivement doublage par IA en français.
On y apprend aussi beaucoup sur la dérive idéologique du monde académique.
CLINTEL FOUNDATION retweeted
De premier knipt het lintje door, de ‘groene’ toekomst lonkt. Maar 27 dagen na de eerste leveringen vraagt batterijfabrikant Morrow faillissement aan.
Honderden miljoenen erin. Politieke wensdromen maken een fabriek nog niet rendabel.
🎥 @Electroversenet
CLINTEL FOUNDATION retweeted
Warum investiert Audi Milliarden in Georgia, USA, während es in Ingolstadt und Neckarsulm über 7000 Stellen abbauen will?
Grund sind die fünf apokalyptischen Reiter der deutschen Geschäftswelt: Energiekosten, Lohnnebenkosten, Steuern, Bürokratie und Regulierungen.
Obendrauf kommt eine vollkommen unberechenbare Politik, die jeden Tag einfach nur so zum Spaß komplette Technologien verbieten oder fordern kann.
In Deutschland sind durch die Regierung schon viele Technologiezweige fast vollständig ausgerottet worden, in denen wir oft Weltspitze waren, bis die Politik diese absichtlich zerstört hat. Kernenergie, Fracking, Magnetschwebetechnik, Gentechnik, chemische Industrie, Pharma, Biotech usw.
Die Autoindustrie ist nur die nächste einer langen Reihe.
Was in der Diskussion gerne vergessen wird: Die Autoindustrie, das ist nicht das Audiwerk in Ingolstadt. Das sind auch die unzähligen deutschen Zuliefererbetriebe, von denen viele bereits pleite sind! Und jeder von denen ist oft Herz- und Wohlstandbringer einer Kleinstadt, die ohne diesen langsam verarmt.
Das ist nicht „der Globalismus“ oder die Chinesen oder sonst eine unkontrollierbare Kraft, gegen die wir kaum etwas tun können.
All diese Technologielinien wurden mit voller Absicht und mit aller Kraft von unserer eigenen Regierung zerstört und aus dem Land gejagt mit 100%iger Unterstützung der MSM-Presse, die das Ganze vorantreibt.
Have policymakers in the EU, the UK and US states never heard of El Hierro?
A small island with 11,000 residents and plenty of wind. An ideal testing ground for the promise of 100% renewable electricity, before making millions of people depend on it.
They installed wind turbines with more than twice the island’s average electricity demand in capacity, plus pumped hydro storage. Yet in 2025, this system supplied just 44% of its electricity. Diesel supplied the rest.
@mhtncontrarian explains why: during prolonged periods of low wind, the upper reservoir empties. Then the diesel generators have to take over.
If this setup cannot deliver on its promise on a small, windy island, why are politicians so confident it will work on a vastly larger scale?
They keep pushing ahead, with millions of people’s electricity supply at stake.
El Hierro was supposed to demonstrate how wind power and storage could replace fossil fuels. Years later, diesel still supplies most of its electricity.
Francis Menton examines what went wrong—and the lessons policymakers keep ignoring:
clintel.org/el-hierro-renewa…
Follow the evidence behind the climate and energy headlines. Subscribe to the Clintel newsletter:
clintel.org/newsletter/