Since 2004 we have striven to explore the science of global warming, publish it freely and expose deceptions.

For five years we stood neutral on the hypothesis of dangerous man-made global warming, neither accepting it nor rejecting it, but we can do this no longer. The weight of evidence is against the IPCC and the warmsters.

The belief in man-made global warming can incite fervent emotions akin to religious zealotry and questioning it can invoke scorn and hatred. At the CCG we strive to conduct discussions in an atmosphere of unperturbed but rapt curiosity.

We conclude, as Vincent Gray told us, that global warming is what the earth does when it’s not cooling. It must be mostly natural, not man-made, since, though it seems reasonable to surmise that we have some effect on the climate, sign of a human influence is so far undetected.

Carbon dioxide is vital to life and entirely benign, save only that it’s not the only gas one’s breathing. The facts are that CO2 levels have been 17 times higher than today for many millions of years, but run-away global warming has never occurred. It’s seems unlikely to start now; the late 20th-century warming has been within normal limits. We know from laboratory tests that almost all the warming you could get from CO2 has already occurred and the only sign that warming will be dangerous in future comes from computer models that so far cannot match the climate we’ve had.

Many of the facts we’ve unearthed and most of the topics we discuss here are not to be found in the mainstream media, yet they ought to be known throughout the land, because there is evidence that casts strong doubt on the theory of dangerous man-made global warming.

It’s difficult wading through the science, it’s tough keeping your head in the hothouse of activism and one must be especially careful to know what sources can be trusted. So we aim to be a credible voice in the global warming wilderness. We bring a simple message: listen, find evidence and avoid conclusions slanted by bias.

We hope you enjoy our discussions and that perhaps you learn something from them. Either way, let us know.

Richard Treadgold
Climate Conversation Group

August 2009 February 2019

Leave a Reply

4 Comment threads
1 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
4 Comment authors
Brett KeaneKillerBeanRichard TreadgoldT J McConnell Recent comment authors
Notify of
T J McConnell
T J McConnell

Hi Richard. I have been told of your group and your thoughts and opinions on what is happening on the planet at this time. Now I won’t beat about the bush and say that I am researching to make sense of why your group has such strong apprehensions to these events. ( I am trying to be polite here Richard) I would as a man with feet in both psychology and physics and regarded as reasonable intelligent to understand why you and your associates have taken on this monumental task of pushing water uphill against all that is now known and evidential on a daily basis. Now dont get me wrong I dont want to argue your point of view it’s just for my research I would be very interested in, not what you think but why are so so vehemently opposed to the point of views held by others and over 90% of scientists and academics. Would you mind if I ask how old your average subscribers are and their average I.Q. and scientific training. Its so I can get a certain amount of knowledge as to what gives your group such… Read more »


TJ McConnell.

“Would you mind if I ask how old your average subscribers are and their average I.Q. and scientific training.”

That to me shows you are nothing but a troll. How would Richard know this, and why would it matter.

Brett Keane
Brett Keane

Hmmmm. TJMc writes like Simon under yet another guise. Brett