I’m a US citizen, received an Associate Degree in Civil Engineering at Vermont Technical College and a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Arizona in Tucson. Now I live in Europe and help my wife, the owner, run a small business that provides communication services for business and industry who deliver cutting-edge products, technology and services to market and thus make our lives immensely better.

I’ve always been a skeptic of the AGW hypothesis, and view myself as a critical spectator in the climate change debate and arena.

As a boy I had a strong interest in meteorology and even dreamed of becoming one for a time. I often read weather charts and was intrigued by extreme weather events. I can recall many extreme weather events occurring back in the 60s and 70s. That’s why I think what’s happening today is nothing unusual. In fact, if the media stopped hyping it up, most people wouldn’t even notice “climate change”.

I believe that the activities of man have a modest impact on the climate and environment, but more through landuse and poor waste management practices. But for the most part, I believe the forces of nature overwhelm anything man puts out.

The focus of public policy and resources ought to be on solving real problems that exist today like water pollution, poverty, mal-nutrition, urban squalor, education, tyranny and so on, and not on computer-generated catastrophe scenarios that might or might not occur 100 years from now. Too many governments use AGW as an excuse for their policy failures – claiming all problems are due to AGW, and not their own often stupid policies.

I’m not funded by anyone except by my own modest means, and I do not take any donations. This is strictly for fun, learning and free speech.


111 responses to “About”

  1. R J

    Popular Science is just reporting, but really. Conservative media makes people distrust scientists, and in turn, doubt the existence of climate change. Includes a link showing a research report funded by who, you guessed it we did with grants from the National Science Foundation.


  2. C Howard Diaz (Chuck)

    I am not a scientist, in fact I don have a degree in anything, but I did graduate high school in 1955 which is probably equal to a BS in something today. I have been fairly successful in life and have studied environmental issues since 1991.

    I have even talked to Richard Lidzen by phone about twenty years ago, and a few other highly respected in science. I’ a devout Constitutionalist and a pretty good businessman.

    I’ always had one complaint about the true scientists of the world not being willing to make short statements that would explain the truth about AGW, then GW and now Climate Change. I understand it’s difficult to make an honest a evaluation without talking for an hour or writing papers that only another scientist can understand.

    Using a theme of Steven Schneider, we must make short general statements that will allow people the ability to understand the truth even if we have to push the truth to an extreme. Scientists, who will usually never say anything is certain must start being certain when they know the other side is basically lieing.

    I am a talk show host in Tucson, AZ and I need short clips from creditable sources or at least some information that I can turn in to a PSA.

    Check my first PSA out at http://www.suanews.com/uncategorized/new-radio-psa-global-warming.html

    You might give me an opinion on the rest of the site, especially the info under the “Environment” tab.

    I really appreciate your site and what you are doing. I use it as a source for a lot of what I talk about.

  3. Casper

    Very bad news for AGW fans
    No hurricanes were reported over Atlantic last month!


  4. Oliver K. Manuel

    Thanks, Pierre, for having the courage to question consensus science, aka standard models of reality.

    Those who lived under the old USSR or those who have read George Orwell’s book, “1984”, are better able to grasp the danger of consensus science and standard models of reality:


    My graduate research mentor was a Japanese nuclear geo-chemist at the Imperial University of Tokyo during the Second World War. The conclusions from his career and my own offer insight into Climategate:


  5. Paul

    “I’ve always been a skeptic of the AGW hypothesis, and view myself as a mere spectator in the climate change debate and arena.” Pierre L. Gosselin
    That is understandable, life connections and conditions do have an effect on our baseline of thought. The culture we both grew up is still is in denial about the effect it has on world consumption. The centre of gravity on a different level to us both as a highly evolved and intelligent individuals. From your present altitude any deviation or evolution of values is not an easy transition. It generally causes chaos and is the most difficult option during our prime years, one of reasons people go through midlife crisis when they delay it. But that discussion is a digression.
    The stance on skepticism to the AGW hypothesis is a healthy one and growing through levels of thought is not easy. We all should be skeptical about all data, it is the weight of effort we give to it that needs balance or equilibrium.
    On this one point alone I challenge your focus and lens used in AGW hypothesis skepticism.

    Prove to yourself the culture you grew up in does not weigh everything around transnational corporations and their primary premise of exponential profit. In turn affects every part of the cultural meritocracy and has shaped your skepticism.

    Consider one other important fact surrounding this consumption culture. That within it there is an abhorrence of government spending on social capital e.g. Obama’s healthcare plans. This is not the only trust issue on social investment, currently just a topical one. I am certain you will agree, as it is very transparent.

    Just why is capital spent by government of US taxpayer money is disproportionately weighted to military spending. One clear reality is there is no serious questioning of this expenditure. Military capital spending is coming out of the same place as capital spent on e.g. AGW strategies.

    As I said my premise is transnational corporations have shaped the centre of gravity in the US. While crafting and projecting focus of discontent onto social capital investment. Conditioning people not to be skeptical about capital spending on the military block.

    The interior question for you is; Why am I spending a disproportionate amount of my skepticism on AGW hypothesis and not questioning the military spending by the US government on social capital?

    My question for my interior reading your focus is obvious; Are transnational corporations of benefit to your life condition or are you hopeful they will be?

    These are my first questions in hard critical thinking on any subject. As it is better to establish where the altitude is and focus on information with a clearly elevated worldview.

    We are here to evolve our understanding of our world and this includes our value system. Wishing you well with yours.

    My scan of your worldview is SDi orange, with an altitude of values in first tier.
    Can only recommend a personal scan on spending and here is a rudimentary starting point;

    1. DirkH

      a) The American Empire is more or less finished due to overconsumption
      b) Military spending is not the root cause. Expressed in percent of GDP/capita it is at its lowest level since end of WW 2.

      Why the overconsumption, the deficits? Simple: Triffin’s paradox. You can’t be the word reserve currency without exporting said currency; i.e. running a trade deficit, thereby hollowing out your own industries.

  6. C Howard Diaz

    I’ve read what you’ve written three times and still don’t get what you are trying to say.

    I will however ask you, what does being skeptical about the Man Made Global Warming theory have to do with what we free Americans decide to do with our money to maintain a military we decide we want?

    I would also ask, why do you bring transnational corporation, miltary and social spending questions to a site dedicated to distributing information for a better understanding of the science involved with true climate change?

    What’s your point?

    If you believe my response is off the mark, don’t post it.

  7. Jeremy Shiers

    Hi Pierre

    Having got my copy of The Neglected Sun I now know you translated it.

    I guess this means you have machine readable copies of the text.

    How would you feel about producing a unique list of all the papers referenced and unique list of the scientists. Should be easy enough to do especially on linux.

    It seems these lists would go a long way to answer those who prattle on about the worlds top scientists in IPCC (eg Polly Tonynbee and Ed Davey)



  8. Casper

    Hi Pierre,

    there is a nice summary of EEG costs for German customers written by Rudolf Kipp on science-skeptical.de. There will be a good article on increasing costs of the German Renewable Energy Act for a single German family. Finally, you’ve been living in Germany for years. I think you should get in touch with Mr Kipp.

    Article is here:


  9. C Howard Diaz

    I have just posted two documentary videos that explain the advantages of increased CO2 in our atmosphere. The one that everyone should watch is the one I posted as ” The War on CO2,” using the sequel of the original “The a Greening of Planet Earth.”
    They can both be seen at http://www.suanews.com.
    Check it out and maybe we can figure out how we could subtitle it in German and other languages so you and others could post it.
    Please let me know what you think.
    C Howard Diaz

  10. Richard Evans

    From Australia I have followed your blog for some time now, recognising it as an excellent guide to the European views on ‘climate change’. Today I was prompted to seek out a version of Die Kalte Sonne and was delighted to find an eBook version in English (The Neglected Sun) available in the Kobo library of titles. I look forward to reading, marking and inwardly digesting its contents.

  11. Pope Frank

    Hot or cold,please stop the heedless and indecent destruction of OUR one and only home,Planet Earth.

  12. Emmanuel

    Pierre, you have to read this “peer reviewed” publication by Drexel University environmental sociologist Robert J. Brulle, PhD, explaining how the “climate counter-movement” is funded by dark money.

    “The climate change countermovement has had a real political and ecological impact on the failure of the world to act on the issue of global warming,” said Brulle. “Like a play on Broadway, the countermovement has stars in the spotlight — often prominent contrarian scientists or conservative politicians — but behind the stars is an organizational structure of directors, script writers and producers, in the form of conservative foundations. If you want to understand what’s driving this movement, you have to look at what’s going on behind the scenes.”

    Again, this is not an op-ed in a left-leaning downtown weekly, it is not from The Onion, this is a peer-reviewed article in the December issue of Climate Change, a Springer publication.


  13. John Zentner

    Instead of talking about dark money, the media should be looking into the vast sums of money going to research into climate change studies. It is a common theme called “follow the money.” Those folks receiving the money have a strong incentive to keep the money flowing. Their objectivity and focus can obviously be skewed by their source of income. If they don’t report on the issues and slant that the government wants to hear, their funding will likely dry up. It is not that they are a bunch of hypocrites; they are just human. I am an engineer with a Masters degree and 42 years of experience. I have been trained to be objective. I have been skeptical of the impact of humans on climate from the beginning. It appears from all that I have read is that the sun is probably the biggest influence
    on temperature swings.

    Keep up the good work.

  14. PhilW

    Brilliant website – thanks for all your hard work. Please keep it up; without it we in UK would never hear of all these interesting and enlightening “items” from Germany.

  15. DirkH

    Pierre; as you and your wife are parents in Germany, you might be interested in this petition against the introduction of genderized education in Baden-Württembergs schools and kindergardens. Link to petition website is in the article.
    People outside Baden-Württemberg but within Germany can sign it.

  16. Graeme No.3

    where is the donate button or similar on your site?
    My ageing eyes see nought.

    Can you reply via my e-mail? (unless you wish to draw everyone’s attention to it).

  17. James Marusek

    Today I released the 7th edition of A Chronological Listing of Early Weather Events. It is available at http://www.breadandbutterscience.com/Weather.htm

  18. Ove E. Lilljequist

    Hello Pierre – Why do I get the reply that your website is now closed down, when friends of mine send me links to you that work perfectly?

    Keep up the good work!

    Ove E. Lilljequist

  19. Tony Thomas

    Hi Pierre,
    Some novel stuff this week specifically about Australian climate fyi

    re mismatch between recent modelled forecasts for temp vs actuals


    re Joelle Gergis et al resurrect the hockey stick, bury the global medieval warming.

    Cheers Tony

  20. Viveka Bergstrom

    Hi Pierre, I just discovered your webpages today. I am glad to see this little spot of oxygene in a world full of believers of tons of things like climate and other. I am like you, curious and sceptical. My both parents were scientists so I foollow in their sceptical state of mind. By the way, one if them was an aerodynamic engineer so I also like meterology like you.

    By the way, is there information how the climate believers get their fundings? I have a bird that sings to me that the word “warming” or “global” or “melting icecaps” makes it easier to get funding for research from lots of organisations like EU or UN. It makes the wheels go around and keeps up myths.

    Keep going on!


  21. Dr Tim Ball-Climatologist

    Dear Pierre
    I want to let you know of my new book for your perusal.
    ‘The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science’
    I have been silenced for 40 years by the MSM.
    Thank you.
    Historical Climatologist

    PS My website is

  22. Baart

    “In fact, if the media stopped hyping it up, most people wouldn’t even notice “climate change”.

    You can`t miss this unusual extra hot summer in Poland, Japan, Norway, Sweden.

    What you can tell about that ?

    1. Kurt in Switzerland


      2014 summer here has been particularly cold and wet.


      July avg. temp. about 0.9 deg. C < 1981-2010 norm. August hasn't been much better.

  23. Hans vw

    Pierre- I follow your blog for a while now and I must say I’m impressed by the by the amount and the quality of your posts. It will be thanks to the Internet and dedicated people like you that some day the truth will be revealed and this collective psychosis comes to and end. Until that day, keep up the good work.

  24. Rick W

    I have been compiling my own links to data sources then stumbled across this site. You have all the key sources neatly listed so I now only need one link.

    I will be a regular visitor to this site to watch the evolution of the climate change debate. There is one certainty – time will tell.

  25. Oliver K. Manuel

    Thank you, Pierre, for using your talents to benefit mankind. All of us on the third ball of dirt orbiting the Sun share a common interest in understanding the source of energy that sustains our lives:

    “Solar energy,” Advances in Astronomy (submitted 1 Sept 2014) https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/10640850/Solar_Energy.pdf

  26. Aime'

    Mr Gosselin,

    A correspondent in Facebook requested me to consider your page http://notrickszone.com/2013/10/11/gross-scientific-negligence-ipcc-ignored-huge-body-of-peer-reviewed-literature-showing-suns-clear-impact/. Since you appear to be sincere, and potentially open to criticism and revising your ideas, I offer you my responses quoted from my response to him in Facebook, as follows.

    1. Consider “The Earth’s sole supplier of energy, the sun, and all its dynamism, in fact gets only a couple of pages in a 2200-page report, about 0.1%. That alone is a monumental scandal. It’s incompetence and negligence on the grandest of scales.” Actually solar effects were considered in detail in earlier IPCC reports in past decades so the question should be if anything new has been discovered about solar effects. More importantly, does the writer really expect us to believe that scientists are ignoring the sun in studying global warming? It’s incredible to me how non-scientists think they have a “gotcha!” insight into what scientists are doing. Much of it is we scientists’ fault for not communicating better and more often.

    2. The author of your “NoTricksZone” post, Pierre L. Gosselin, seems sincere, if not technically expert. He is careful to distinguish just research allegedly ignored by the IPCC that was published after their previous reports to this one… However he doesn’t seem to understand what is relevant e.g., “comprehensive climate model studies require a middle atmosphere as well as a coupled ocean to investigate and understand natural climate variability” —all climate scientists know this and there have been such coupled models for years now.
    3. E.g., “results cast some doubts in the use of homogenization procedures”; this is actually an important technical issue, but the reference is not “Peer-Reviewed Literature” as the writer Gosselin claimed IPCC was ignoring. Probably Gosselin is not qualified to know that Geophysical Research Abstracts is not peer reviewed; then he should refrain from attributing “incompetence and negligence on the grandest of scales” to people who are technically qualified.



  27. Harold Faulkner

    The information below came from either books or downloaded from the Internet
    Please pass this information around to friends. Take Care, Harold

    People in the USA, are being told by the U.S. government and media that global warming is man-made. If that is true, how can the government and media explain the high temperatures the earth has experienced in past years when there were far fewer people? Let us look back in the world’s history: for example, between roughly 900AD and 1350AD the temperatures were much higher than now. And, back then there were fewer people, no cars, no electric utilities, and no factories, etc. So what caused the earth’s heat? Could it be a natural occurrence? The temperature graph at the bottom of this article shows the temperatures of the earth before Christ to 2040.

    In the book THE DISCOVERERS published in February 1985 by Daniel J. Boorstin, beginning in chapter 28, it goes into detail about Eric the Red, the father of Lief Ericsson, and how he discovered an island covered in green grass.

    In approximately 983AD, Eric the Red committed murder, and was banished from Iceland for three years. Eric the Red sailed 500 miles west from Iceland and discovered an island covered in GREEN grass, which he named Greenland. Greenland reminded Eric the Red of his native Norway because of the grass, game animals, and a sea full of fish. Even the air provided a harvest of birds. Eric the Red and his crew started laying out sites for farms and homesteads, as there was no sign of earlier human habitation.

    When his banishment expired, Eric the Red returned to congested Iceland to gather Viking settlers. In 986, Eric the Red set sail with an emigrant fleet of twenty-five ships carrying men, women, and domestic animals. Unfortunately, only fourteen ships survived the stormy passage, which carried about four-hundred-fifty immigrants plus the farm animals. The immigrants settled on the southern-west tip and up the western coast of Greenland.

    After the year 1200AD, the Earth’s and Greenland’s climate grew colder; ice started building up on the southern tip of Greenland. Before the end of 1300AD, the Viking settlements were just a memory. You can find the above by searching Google. One link is:


    The following quote you can also read about why there is global warming. This is from the book EINSTEIN’S UNIVERSE, Page 63, written by Nigel Calder in 1972, and updated in 1982.

    “The reckoning of planetary motions is a venerable science. Nowadays it tells us, for example, how gravity causes the ice to advance or retreat on the Earth during the ice ages. The gravity of the Moon and (to a lesser extent) of the Sun makes the Earth’s axis swivel around like a tilted spinning top. Other planets of the Solar System, especially Jupiter, Mars and Venus, influence the Earth’s tilt and the shape of its orbit, in a more-or-less cyclic fashion, with significant effects on the intensity of sunshine falling on different regions of the Earth during the various seasons. Every so often a fortunate attitude and orbit of the Earth combine to drench the ice sheets in sunshine as at the end of the most recent ice age, about ten thousand years ago. But now our relatively benign interglacial is coming to an end, as gravity continues to toy with our planet.”

    The above points out that the universe is too huge and the earth is too small for the earth’s population to have any effect on the earth’s temperature. The earth’s temperature is a function of the sun’s temperature and the effects from the many massive planets in the universe, i.e., “The gravity of the Moon and (to a lesser extent) of the Sun makes the Earth’s axis swivel around like a tilted spinning top. Other planets of the Solar System, especially Jupiter, Mars and Venus, influence the Earth’s tilt and the shape of its orbit, in a more-or-less cyclic fashion, with significant effects on the intensity of sunshine falling on different regions of the Earth during the various seasons.”
    Read below about carbon dioxide, which we need in order to exist. You can find the article below at:


    Of the 186 billion tons of carbon from CO2 that enter earth’s atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth’s oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.

    At 380 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth’s atmosphere–less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, earth’s current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished.

    CO2 is odorless, colorless, and tasteless. Plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen as a waste product. Humans and animals breathe oxygen and emit CO2 as a waste product. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a pollutant, and all life– plants and animals alike– benefit from more of it. All life on earth is carbon-based and CO2 is an essential ingredient. When plant-growers want to stimulate plant growth, they introduce more carbon dioxide.

    CO2 that goes into the atmosphere does not stay there, but continuously recycled by terrestrial plant life and earth’s oceans– the great retirement home for most terrestrial carbon dioxide.

    If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions and all other government proposals and taxes would have a negligible effect on global climate!

    The government is lying, trying to use global warming to limit, and tax its citizens through “cap and trade” and other tax schemes for the government’s benefit. We, the people cannot allow this to happen.

    A temperature graph normally goes here that shows the Earth’s Temperature from -2400 to guesses in +2400.

    If the Earth’s temperature graph is not shown above, you can see this temperature graph at the link:

  28. Annie

    Hello Pierre.

    I’ve been meaning to visit your site for some time; I am a frequent visitor to Jo Nova and Anthony Watts and have learnt much from them. I have one basic question; how do you pronounce your surname? Is it French or German; I would prefer to get it correctly.


    1. DirkH

      Gosselin has French roots, not German.

      1. DirkH

        ..and, pronounciation in Germany of Hugenot names (who escaped from France to Prussia back in the day) varies: “Brunotte” for instance is spoken in a German way with an audible “e” at the end; “de Maizière” is still spoken in the French way in Germany, as it would sound too silly when applying German phonetic rules.

  29. Annie

    I rather thought it had French origins but have no clue as to media pronunciation as I have never heard of Kate G!

    I look forward to reading more on your site.

    All best wishes from another former RC.

Leave a Reply