Hyperventilating again last week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, former Vice President Al Gore claimed that climate conditions are even direr than previously imagined, with manmade greenhouse gases responsible for the worst climate disasters the world has seen in recent years.

Photograph: Fabrice Coffrini/AFP/Getty Images

Nothing short of a nuclear holocaust, purveyor of planetary peril Gore said the current output of greenhouse gases is sending heat into the atmosphere that is equivalent to “600,000 Hiroshima bombs every day.”

“That’s what’s boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers and the rain bombs and sucking the moisture out of the land and creating the droughts and melting the ice and raising the sea level and causing these waves of climate refugees predicted to reach 1 billion in this century,” he ranted.

“Look at the xenophobia and political authoritarian trends that have come from just a few million refugees. What about a billion? We would lose our capacity for self-governance on this world,” Gore intoned.

But didn’t Al Gore also warn us in a Dec. 14, 2009 speech at the Copenhagen Climate Conference that “some models suggest” a 75% possibility that the entire north polar Arctic ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years due to man-made global warming?

Nevertheless, based upon reliable reports, that ice cap is still there.

And remember that prediction in his 2006 book, An Inconvenient Truth, that within a decade, snow would also disappear on Mt. Kilimanjaro, located just 205 miles from the equator in Tanzania?

Nope, that didn’t happen, either.

Add to that, dramatic images in his 2006 movie of the same title portraying melting ice releasing enough water to raise sea levels 20 feet “in the near future” to flood sea-bordering cities and leave millions of people homeless.

However, as climatologist David Legates of the University of Delaware testified at a 2019 hearing on “Coastal Hazards” before the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee’s Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife, global sea levels have risen naturally at a rate of only about 7 to 8 inches per century for at least several hundred years.

Local coastal measurements may change to be higher or lower due to such human activities as the construction of reef barriers, channelization of rivers, conversion of coastal wetlands to densely populated metropolitan areas, and the draining of coastal aquifers for irrigation and other consumption.

As a matter of fact, NONE of the dire apocalyptic doomsayer predictions have come true, including claims that extreme U.S. weather conditions would become either more severe or frequent.

Former Obama Undersecretary for Science at the U.S. Department of Energy Steve Koonin positively summarized the records across the contiguous United States:

“The annual number of high-temperature records set shows no significant trend over the past century nor over the past forty years, but the annual number of record cold nights has declined since 1895, somewhat more rapidly in the past thirty years.”

More legitimately terrifying, we are experiencing disastrous economic and social consequences of unwarranted draconian energy policies premised upon precautionary “worst case” climate model projections that even leading scientific contributors to the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) now admit are running far too hot.

As reported in the prestigious journal Nature, the latest round of more than 50 of the newest simulations assessed by the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project, phase 6 (CMIP6) are based upon myriad complex, poorly understood influences, interrelationships, and rough statistical “garbage in-garbage out” assumptions.

Titled “Climate simulations: recognize the ‘hot model’ problem,” the May article emphasizes: “Earth is a complicated system of interconnected oceans, land, ice and atmosphere, and no computer model could ever simulate every aspect of it exactly.”

Since different models vary in their complexity, “each makes different assumptions about and approximations of processes that happen on small scales, such as cloud formation.”

As NASA’s current Goddard Institute for Space Studies Director Gavin Schmidt told the renowned journal Science, “It’s become clear over the last year or so that we can’t avoid this admission” that the models can’t be trusted as a policy instrument because “You end up with numbers for even the near‐term that are insanely scary — and wrong.”

Which brings us back to the return of climate alarm cult Grand Geezer Gore whose doom and gloom scaremongering of impressionable young minds — think Greta Thornburg — has made him insanely rich.

Take heed that In 2007, following an investigation of factual misrepresentations, Sir Michael Burton, a judge in London’s High Court, ruled that Gore’s inconvenient movie can be shown in secondary schools only if accompanied by guidance notes for teachers to balance his “one-sided” views.

Judge Barton pointed out that its “apocalyptical vision” was politically partisan, and not an impartial analysis. He stated:

“It is built around the charismatic presence of the ex-vice president Al Gore, whose crusade is to persuade the world of the dangers of climate change caused by global warming…It is now common ground that this is not simply a science film — although it is based substantially on science research and opinion, but it is [clearly] a political film.”

More than that, it is a science fiction horror show.

This piece originally appeared at Newsmax.com and has been republished here with permission.