'Experts' claim Canada is warming rapidly, but what if the data is faulty?
Tom Harris, executive director of the International Climate Science Coalition Canada, joins The Gunn Show for a must-watch conversation about bad data, blind faith in authority, and why “trust the science” only works when the science can survive scrutiny.
BECOME A MEMBER
For years, Canadians have been told — confidently, repeatedly, and expensively — that our country is warming at twice the global average. That claim underpins carbon taxes, energy bans, bank stress tests, and hundreds of billions of dollars in so-called “climate action.”
But what if the data behind it is broken?
Physicist and data scientist Dr. Joseph Hickey uncovered a mysterious, nationwide temperature “step increase” that suddenly appears in Canadian climate records in 1998.
Not gradual warming. Not regional variation. A near-instant jump — across the country — embedded in the very dataset used by Environment and Climate Change Canada and relied on by politicians, regulators, and the media.
Even more troubling?
When the anomaly was flagged years ago by analysts inside the Bank of Canada, federal climate scientists brushed it off as “probably” natural variability.
Probably. That’s apparently good enough to justify punishing energy policies and skyrocketing costs of living.
On this episode of The Gunn Show, we sit down with Tom Harris, executive director of the International Climate Science Coalition Canada, to unpack a bombshell report that throws Canada’s climate narrative into serious doubt.
This is a must-watch conversation about bad data, blind faith in authority, and why “trust the science” only works when the science can survive scrutiny.
COMMENTS
-
Fran G commented 2026-01-08 16:32:09 -0500I believe most of the awake people have known for years that climate scare is b.s. We knew it was all lies. But now we know how they did it and have proof. ha ha -
Adam Clayson commented 2026-01-08 12:06:48 -0500WildFreedom 7 .. We have a scientist friend in the USA who has been collecting climate data for years. Even going to micofiche and compiling data from weather centres from around the USA. This data goes back to around 1920 or so from what I remember. What he has discovered is that we are absolutely being lied to and also the climate cabal are going back and trying to erase the data from the record. Fortunately he has saved some of this data. It clearly shows the climate cabal are wrong and they are systematically trying to erase real data proving them wrong.
-
Robin Dutton commented 2026-01-08 10:53:01 -0500These experts have made many climate gloom and doom predictions for years, none of which have come true. Maybe one day people will realize that the climate has always changed and will continue to do so regardless of what humans do or don’t do.
An industry has been created to promote,‘Climate Hysteria,’ any dissent has been dismissed as heresy. This has taken an almost religious fervor, naysayers branded as heretics. There is salvation however in tithing, pay your carbon taxes and if you must continue to sin there are indulgences in the form of carbon credits.
The only thing that has happened is the personal enrichment of a few at the expense of the many. -
Anthony Salotti commented 2026-01-08 06:07:03 -0500Good to see people calling out this climate change farce .
-
Silver Feet commented 2026-01-08 00:05:11 -0500A “friend” of mine used to work for environment and climate change Canada, they are all hacks and diversity hires. They exist to shred tax dollars and are the enemies of progress.
-
Bruce Atchison commented 2026-01-07 23:42:42 -0500I love the work Tom Harris does. And having him with Sheila Gunn Reid is even better.
I’m glad for the news that the data was altered by a data artifact. Like Michelle Sterling says, the planet isn’t burning up and we have time. And I say that the mark of a scam is urgency for a situation that’s intangible. -
Paul Mccullough commented 2026-01-07 22:18:00 -0500Always great to see Tom.
-
Paul Scofield commented 2026-01-07 21:31:05 -0500The main goal of any legitimate data interpretation, manual or digital, is to read said data correctly and write verifiable output based only on the data itself, without bias. This process assumes that the same data will produce identical results when it is tested by all and sundry at any time. When the source data itself is corrupt or corrupted? Bad-to-disastrous public policy. Excellent show.
