by Tom Harris

Mary-Jean Harris, BSc, MSc (physics), contributed to this article.
July 09, 2026
from AmericaOutloud Website

Religion has been a force throughout history that has helped societies flourish and given people meaning, but it has also been a vehicle for fundamentalism and intolerance.

A religion can be characterized by a common set of beliefs about the truth of existence, ritual practices, moral codes, and a community of those who share the same beliefs.

From this standpoint, climate alarmism has become nothing short of a religion, one that has been taking over societies around the world.

The newly released book, Canary in a Climate World - Climate Realism vs. the Net Zero Myth, is an eye-opening compilation of essays from 38 experts about,

the science of climate change, the fallacies of Net Zero, and the story we are not being told by the government and media...!

Margaret Anna Alice, a writer focusing on propaganda and psychology, writes in her Canaries essay about how she lost her "religion" of climate alarmism, which for her had been an "inviolable belief."

Pope Leo

blesses a block of Arctic ice

in bizarre green ritual.

X/screencap

She writes that,

"In this religion, gods such as the United Nations carve out the Ten Commandments in the form of,

• Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

• Agenda 21

• Agenda 2030

• the SDG7 Global Roadmap for achieving Net Zero emissions by 2050."

Additionally, "sermons" cite the "sacred texts" of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), shaming everyday citizens into believing that they are contributing to a devastating environmental catastrophe.

It is only by aligning themselves with the religion of climate alarmism that they will be redeemed from their sins, namely, by giving up their standards of living and putting their hard-earned money toward expensive projects to reduce carbon dioxide (CO²) or subsidize intermittent and expensive renewable power such as wind and solar.

Just like the church in Medieval Europe,

the climate doctrine is widespread and encroaches into our daily lives.

Yet data corruption abounds at the IPCC and other official institutions, and for decades, few scientists have had the courage to speak out against it with their livelihoods on the line.

These "heretics" are ostracized, lose their jobs, or are refused funding. But the tide is shifting.

With the serious consequences of climate policies being enacted, now is the time to reveal that the climate scare is based on corruption and flawed ideology.

Governments will spend trillions of dollars and drive their citizens into poverty if we continue down the route to Net Zero.

IPCC contributor Mike Hulme admitted that,

"The debate around climate change is fundamentally about power and politics rather than the environment."

And the scientists and experts writing in Canary in a Climate World: Climate Realism vs. the Net Zero Myth are also disseminating crucial information to help us better understand the climate and the policies that have stifled our society's growth for decades.

In physicist Dr. William Happer's essay "Canaries," he explains how,

"climate science" has corrupted true scientific disciplines and become a cult.

 

That cult's fundamental tenet is that "carbon dioxide (CO²) is the control knob of Earth's climate."

Climate alarmist forecasts

are not scientific theories

because NONE of their predictions

have come true...

Yet true science is about how well a theory's predictions agree with observations and how well it can predict previously unobserved phenomena.

Climate alarmism has failed this crucial test, and so it,

"is not a scientific theory, since it has made many alarming predictions and none have turned out to be true."

Dr. Happer compares climate alarmism to the geocentric view of the universe in the 1600s during the time of the scientist Giordano Bruno.

Bruno was burned alive by Pope Clement VIII for promoting the idea that,

the Earth revolves around the Sun...!,

...and later that century, Galileo Galilei was nearly subjected to the same fate for similar views.

But the church did not want to look at the evidence:

dogma is what ruled, and scientists today are facing ostracism, threats, and "cancellation" due to their views on climate change, even if they are well supported scientifically.

For another inside view, astrophysicist Dr. Willie Soon writes in his Canaries essay that,

"Climate research today is overwhelmingly dependent on government funding... research that reinforces existing frameworks is rewarded with continued funding... while research that challenges foundational assumptions becomes increasingly difficult to pursue."

Researchers are trained to ask "safe" questions that align with the current dogma, and reviewers censor any research papers that question the status quo.

"The result is a form of scientific monoculture," Dr. Soon writes. Indeed, it has become an orthodoxy that parallels a religious sect.

But science is antithetical to dogma:

at its core, the scientist's goal is to question assumptions and probe the inner workings of the world.

And so most research into climate change is running counter to science entirely.

Science is always evolving, and when evidence arises that contradicts a scientist's previous theories, they must question their previous assumptions and adjust their theories accordingly.

Climate scientist Dr. John Christy, also a Canaries essay writer, has been a lead author and contributor for multiple IPCC reports.

His inside view of the scientific process of publication has led him to conclude that,

"the IPCC and other similar Assessments do not represent for me a consensus of much more than the consensus of those selected to agree with a particular consensus.

 

The content of these climate reports is actually under the control of a relatively small number of individuals... the voices of those of us who object to various statements and emphases in these assessments are, by and large, dismissed."

Dr. Christy suggests forming a "Red Team" report from experts with alternative views on climate change.

They should address topics such as the sensitivity of the climate to increasing greenhouse gases, the role of natural climate variability, and the uncertainty in climate measurements.

 

They should also conduct an independent assessment of climate model output, the risks and benefits of increased CO², and the importance of affordable and accessible energy.

But the truth will eventually win out: with any luck, sooner rather than later.

Dr. Happer gives us hope, saying that,

"climate nonsense will eventually end and will be dumped onto the ash heap of history, where it belongs. But the longer the cult goes on, the more damage is done.

 

We should all do what we can to stop the madness as soon as possible."

The torch is in your hands:

Will you light up the darkness of lies and faulty science, exposing the climate alarmist religion for what it is?

 

Or will you fall in line with the climate cult, worshipping the gods of alarmism and closing your mind to any alternative views?

The choice is yours...!