April 11, 2026

Commentary by Dr.-Ing. Bernd Fleischmann on the blog post “The Warmth of March 2026 in the USA”

Symbol image, generated by Grok AI.

The cause of the high temperatures around March 20, 2026, was a heat dome, the likes of which occur in the Midwestern United States every few decades. Looking at the temperatures in Phoenix, Arizona, one finds:

• • The 105°F maximum temperature from March 19 to 21 is 5°F above previous maximums for this period, but only 1°F above the 104°F that occurred in early April 1989.

  • The highest temperature ever recorded in Phoenix was 122°F during the heat dome of late June 1990.

  • For some days, the record highs are over 100 years old (Jan 18; June 11 and 12; July 2, 3, 6, and 23; Aug 6; Sept 8 and 23). The highest May temperatures were recorded in 1910.

  • The warmest year in Phoenix was 1934, the first year of the Dust Bowl era. Some of the temperature records for several states that still stand today originate from this year and the following two.

  • The change in measurement methods—from the previously common Stevenson screens with sluggish thermometers to today’s electronic thermometers in smaller housings—makes a difference of up to 1°C for daily maximum temperatures on sunny days with little wind.

  • Finally, the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect: The population of Phoenix has increased nearly a hundredfold from the 1930s to today. This leads to a temperature increase of up to 5°C in the city center on low-wind days.

Conclusion

A heat dome is a weather phenomenon that has led to record temperatures in the Western USA multiple times before. Record temperatures in many U.S. states still date back to the period between 1934 and 1936, even though the urban heat island effect has increased significantly since then and amounts to up to 5°C for Phoenix, Arizona, for example. Media reporting on the heat in March 2026 is alarmist because it fails to mention these facts.

Dr.-Ing. Bernd Fleischmann
Klimanachrichten 

Donate - choose an amount
5101520501002505001000

Scientists (Park et al., 2026) have assessed that over the last four decades the patterns of air temperature, sea surface temperature, and glacier retreat near King George Island (just north of the northernmost tip of the Antarctic Peninsula) align with the negative to positive phases of the Southern Annual Mode (SAM) and natural ocean-atmosphere interconnections.

Phases of cooling and glacier advance are mixed with phases of warming and significant glacier retreat, but neither follow a linearly-rising pattern nor trends in greenhouse gas emissions.

The scientists identify an overall decline in glacier retreat rates from the mid-1990s until 2015, when “cooler phases slowed retreat.”

The study “demonstrates how coupled fjord geometry-ocean-atmosphere interactions govern retreat behavior.”

Human activity governs neither warming or glacier retreat.

Image Source: Park et al., 2026

Elephant Island is situated just 130 km northeast of King George Island. It is home to a large volume of penguins and seals.

A recent study (Atkinson et al., 2022) reported significant (approximately -0.75°C) surface cooling across Elephant Island (purple) since the 1990s, aligning with cooling along South Georgia, the Scotia Sea, and the overall West Antarctic Peninsula in recent decades.

Image Source: Atkinson et al., 2022

A recent video from the German language channel Report24news features Dr. Johannes Steiner, who discusses the discovery of ancient biological material (a large tree log) under retreating glaciers and its implications for the current climate narrative.

Image cropped from Report 24

In 2014, a massive Swiss stone pine (Zirbe) log weighing 1.7 tons was found in the retreat area of the Pasterze glacier at an altitude of 2,060 meters [03:16]. The tree from which the log originates is dated to be 6,000 years old.

Dr. Steiner points out that no trees of this size can grow at that altitude today because it is currently just too cold [03:27], suggesting that 6,000 years ago, temperatures in the Alps were significantly warmer than now [07:07]. That’s evidence that climate alarmists would prefer to censor.

Natural climate cycles

The presence of such biological material is undeniable evidence that glaciers have historically expanded and retreated in natural cycles long before industrial CO2 emissions [04:10].

Dr. Steiner argues against the “climate catastrophe” label for warming, asserting that historically, “cold periods” were the true catastrophes marked by famine, while “warm periods” (like the Medieval Warm Period) facilitated cultural and biological growth where scoieties flourished [05:40].

While acknowledging CO2 is a greenhouse gas, Dr. Steiner claims its contribution to global warming is minimal compared to water vapor, which is accepted by scienitsts as the dominant and necessary greenhouse gas for a habitable planet [10:41].

The video argues that the current focus on CO2 is mostly a “political-medial” construct used by the state to justify higher taxes and to “squeeze” citizens [22:08].

Over 50% believe climate change driven naturally

Moreover, Dr. Steiner references a February 2025 Special Eurobarometer (557), noting a shift in public perception. He claims that in several EU countries (e.g., Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland), over 50% of people now believe climate change is driven by natural causes rather than human activity [16:26].

In Austria, the percentage of people attributing climate change to natural causes has reportedly risen by 13% since 2021, reaching 43% [16:44].

The discussion concludes with a critique of rising energy costs and taxes. They argue that climate-related taxes disproportionately hurt the financially weak, while politicians remain unaffected by high fuel prices [23:03].

Donate - choose an amount
5101520501002505001000

Image Source: Nilsson and Gardner, 2026

An article from the German climate science critical Report24 reports on a major disaster involving a solar farm in Indiana that was destroyed by a tornado, underlying the fragility of PV systems as a source of energy.

Tornadoes can tear PV farms apart with little ease. Symbol image generated by Grok AI. 

On March 10, an EF-1 tornado (a relatively low-intensity storm) struck Wheatfield, Indiana. It directly hit the “Dunns Bridge I & II” solar projects, destroying a significant portion of the facility. According to Report 24, approximately 2.4 million solar modules were damaged or destroyed. Aerial footage showed rows of panels ripped from the ground and twisted metal frame.

The facility is valued at approximately $1 billion. According to sources, manufacturer warranties often exclude tornado damage, potentially leaving the operator (NIPSCO) or customers with a massive bill for reconstruction, unless the government steps in with a bailout plan.

Report24 highlights the “toxic risks” of the sdestruction, suggesting that broken panels could leak heavy metals or other hazardous substances into the soil and groundwater.

The central point of the article is a critique of “green” infrastructure, pointing out that a nearby coal power plant remained unscathed by the storm, showing that traditional energy sources are more resilient and reliable than solar energy.

Report 24 is highly critical of “climate fanatics” and “green ideology,” framing the event as proof that renewable energy infrastructure is too fragile and expensive for practical long-term use. But Germany’s leaders refuse to acknowledge this reality, insisting that green energies are plentiful, cheap, reliable and that the real problem is that not enough has been invested in them.

Donate - choose an amount
5101520501002505001000

A new study indicates that from 2000 to 2020 there were 6,129 annual deaths attributable to excess summer heat across 1,514 US counties (representing 91% of the United States’ adult population).

Heat-related deaths receive the vast majority of media attention due primarily to the assumption that humans can control the temperature of the ocean and surface air by emitting more or less CO2.

However, the real health risk – even in wealthy countries like the US – is not “global warming,” but exposure to cold temperatures in winter.

This same study reveals there were 72,361 deaths per year attributable to exposure to 21st century cold temperatures in the US.

In other words, cold winter temperatures are associated with 12 times more deaths (40.1 deaths per 100,000 person-years) than deaths linked to excessive heat (3.4 deaths per 100,000 person-years).

Because the US has continued to have “extreme winter events” in the 21st century and “unusually cold winter snaps” in the South, the “cold related deaths in the US have increased by 9% per year over the past two decades.”

Non-optimal temperature-related deaths have been increasing, with cold non-optimal temperatures far more deadly.

Image Source: de Oliveira Salerno et al., 2026

Interestingly, a Google search using the data from this study and a hypothetical 0.5°C increase in mean annual US temperature indicates, per AI, that this modest warming could potentially save “several thousand to over 10,000 lives” per year.

Image Source: AI via Google

Image created by Grok AI 

The central thesis of the Klimanachrichten article is that the PIK (and specifically certain high-profile scientists associated with it) is interpreting natural fluctuations in climate data—what the Klimanachrichten calls “data noise”—as evidence of a permanent and accelerating climate catastrophe. Klimanachrichten argues that these “accelerations” are statistically insignificant or within the realm of historical natural variability.

Klimanachrichten writes that the PIK uses selective data periods (“cherry-picking”) to create the illusion of a sudden tip in the climate system. By focusing on short-term trends or specific regional anomalies, the blog argues that the PIK ignores longer-term contexts that might show a more stable or cyclical pattern.

The “tipping point” narrative

A significant portion of the Klimanachrichten post is dedicated to debunking the concept of “tipping points” (Kipppunkte). The PIK misuses these concepts as a psychological tool to instill fear and influence policy than as a strictly proven scientific reality. Klimanachrichten describes these tipping points as theoretical constructs that lack robust empirical backing in the current observational data.

Ideological bias and “science-policy” blurring

The blog post concludes the PIK has moved away from objective science and toward political activism. It argues that the institute’s primary goal is to provide scientific-sounding justifications for radical economic and social transformations (the “Great Transformation”), and little else.

Media amplification

Klimanachrichten also criticizes the mainstream media for uncritically adopting the PIK’s “alarmist” narratives, often as settled science. Journalists fail to ask critical questions about the underlying data, leading to a public perception of a climate “emergency” that Klimnachrichten believes is not supported by the raw evidence.

Conclusion

The Klimnachricten post summarizes its position by stating that the perceived “acceleration” of climate change is a result of flawed statistical modeling and institutional bias. It calls for a return to a more “sober” analysis of climate data that accounts for natural cycles and acknowledges the limitations of current climate models. The author’s ultimate conclusion is that the “climate catastrophe” is a narrative construction rather than a data-driven inevitability.

Donate - choose an amount
5101520501002505001000

The former Pfizer Europe toxicologist confirms that the standard safety protocols for a medical product intended for the general population were bypassed or ignored.

Also read here: Toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz Tells Bundestag Hearing Vaccine Should Have Never Been Approved

In the following Sven Böttcher Youtube video (German), Dr. Helmut Sterz, a toxicologist with 35 years of experience in the pharmaceutical industry (including at Pfizer), makes several shocking claims regarding the development and safety of the Comirnaty (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine.

The list of safety failures is long and potentially tragic on a massive scale:

1. Failure to Conduct Essential Safety Studies

Dr. Sterz claims that the pre-clinical (animal) testing phase was “completely incomplete” and that the manufacturer skipped studies that are legally and ethically required for vaccines not targeting life-threatening diseases like Ebola:

Genotoxicity and mutagenicity

In the interview, Dr. Sterz asserts that no mutagenicity studies were ever conducted to check for changes to genes or chromosomes. He emphasizes that these tests are typically required even before Phase 1 human trials to protect volunteers. This stepped was skipped. [05:31].

Carcinogenicity

He notes that no 3-year carcinogenicity studies (to check for cancer risks) were performed. While he acknowledges the time pressure, he argues that alternative short-term tests should have been done instead. [05:01].

I can also state—and it’s not just a claim, it’s a finding—that carcinogenicity studies were not carried out. I can understand that a carcinogenicity study in rats takes three years, and they didn’t have that time. But they could have conducted alternative trials instead. The simplest and shortest would have been a series of mutagenicity studies… to get the first indications of whether such a risk exists.” [00:04:51]

Reproductive toxicity

In rat studies, Dr. Sterz points to signs of increased abortion rates that he claims were “brushed aside”. [42:04]

2. The “Human Experiment” and Control Group Destruction

Next, Sterz describes the mass vaccination campaign as a “large human experiment” and criticizes the handling of clinical data:

Elimination of the control group

He highlights that Pfizer allowed the placebo group to be vaccinated shortly after authorization. This effectively “neutralized” the control group, making it impossible to distinguish long-term vaccine side effects from other conditions. [20:42]

Inadequate monitoring

He also notes that the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI) was overwhelmed by the volume of reported side effects and suggests that internal experts may have been pressured to remain silent about the rising numbers. [25:49]

The safety [of the vaccine]—there were already signals just a few months after the authorization. The side effects increased to such an extent that the individual pharmacovigilance centers—the PEI—couldn’t even keep up with registering them. And it should have been obvious to the employees of the Paul Ehrlich Institute that something was running differently here than with normal vaccinations.” [00:25:07]

3. Inherent Risks of the mRNA Technology

Moreover, Dr. Sterz argues that the specific technology used in the mass-produced vaccine is “inherently dangerous”:

Process change (DNA contamination)

He claims that while the initial clinical material was “clean,” the production process was changed for mass manufacturing to save costs. This involved using bacteria (E. coli) to produce the mRNA, which he claims leads to bacterial DNA fragments being packaged into the lipid nanoparticles and injected into humans. [58:38]

Cellular damage

He warns that if this foreign DNA enters a human cell nucleus during cell division, it can cause “massive devastation”. [59:43]

The lipid nanoparticles take up the bacterial DNA in exactly the same way, and thus the DNA is injected into the person. And that can lead to massive devastation in the cell nucleus when the cell divides and this bacterial DNA enters the cell nucleus. People should be told that this technology is to blame for these risks arising.” [00:59:24]

4. Specific Health Risks and “Turbo Cancer”

He discusses several severe health outcomes he associates with the vaccine:

Myocarditis and permanent scarring

He mentions that even “mild” cases of myocarditis in young people result in permanent heart muscle scarring, which can lead to sudden death during physical exertion. [46:18]

Turbo cancer

He suggests there is evidence of a rapid increase in aggressive cancers and the recurrence of previously stable cancers, which he attributes to the vaccine’s impact on the immune system’s ability to suppress tumor cells. [30:00], [52:09]

The observations of really good people are frightening: patients who had survived a cancer suddenly have a relapse. Such things were not observed before.” [00:52:09]

Impact on fertility

He claims that reported menstrual cycle disturbances and a significant drop in birth rates across Europe (averaging 17%) are signals of an impact on fertility that was not properly investigated. [41:34], [50:49]

On the influence on fertility—one could have guessed that without even being a specialist. There were already indications in the study on pregnant rats that it led to an increased rate of abortions. That was simply brushed aside… They said, ‘Well, we’ve seen that in control groups before,’ even though it wasn’t seen in this specific control group.” [00:41:57]”

Dr. Sterz concludes by stating that the rapid approval was a “massive oversight” (or “shambles”) and warns against the continued use of this specific mRNA platform for other vaccines in the pipeline.

Donate - choose an amount
5101520501002505001000

Dai Ato, an independent researcher from Japan, has completed a comprehensive regression analysis (Ato, 2026) using key climate variables and published the results in the Science of Climate Change journal.

Using widely accepted global temperature, specific humidity, solar activity, and albedo (cloud) datasets, Ato has reaffirmed the now-common conclusion (Koutsoyiannis, 2024, Berry, 2023, Nikolov and Zeller, 2024, Grabyan, 2025, Soon et al., 2023, Ato, 2024) that absorbed shortwave radiation forcing (via cloud albedo changes) and variations in solar activity are driving modern global warming.

Anthropogenic CO2, amplified by positive water vapor feedbacks, is not a primary climate change factor.

Similar to the dependence of water vapor or specific humidity on temperature, multivariate analysis supports the conclusion that changes in CO2 are a consequence or a “byproduct” of global sea surface temperature (G-SST).

CO2 thus has almost no explanatory power as a causal factor in 21st century climate change.

“CO2 is not needed as an explanatory factor. Therefore, these results demonstrate that CO2, a byproduct of preceding SST, has virtually no explanatory power for G-SST, even secondarily.”

“[W]ater vapor, the primary contributor to the greenhouse effect on Earth, has been a dependent variable of global SST at least since the year 2000.”

In contrast to CO2’s “negative explanatory factor” climate sensitivity, ASW [absorbed shortwave radiation] and TSI [total solar irradiance] have a “positive explanatory power” with far better sequencing and correlational alignment as causal agents in modern global warming trends, or climate change.

Comprehensive data analysis can thus be shown to undermine key tenets of the anthropogenic global warming theory.

“Furthermore, multivariate analysis confirmed that the combination of leading  ASW and TSI most effectively predicts G-SST  since 2000.”

“The sequence of influence on Earth’s climate is as follows: solar activity and albedo determine Earth’s SST and air temperature, and SST then exclusively determines G-SpHm [global specific humidity/water vapor concentrations]. Compared to these two indicators (ASW and TSI), the influence of atmospheric CO2 was confirmed to be effectively negligible.”

“These results indicate that from 2000 to the present, the dominant factors driving climate change have been solar activity and cloud variations by reducing albedo in the sky during the period. Consequently, the anthropogenic theory of global warming and the positive feedback theory are denied, according to the data of worldwide prominent climate research institutes. Furthermore, since human influence remains negligible even in the 21st century, the same holds true for the past.”

Image Source: Ato, 2026

In a hearing of the Corona Inquiry Commission in the German Bundestag in March 2026, former Pfizer toxicologist Dr. Helmut Sterz voiced sharp criticism regarding the approval of the mRNA vaccine Comirnaty (Pfizer).

The clip of Sterz’s statements were posted by Dr. Stefan Homburg here: https://x.com/SHomburg/status/2034870860658454694

Irresponsibly approved

As to why the vaccine should never have been authorized, Dr. Sterz argued that the speed and nature of the studies conducted would only have been justified for an extremely lethal virus (using Ebola as a comparison). For a virus with effects he compared to the flu, he considered the chosen procedure irresponsible.

Sterz also used terms like “simulated” or “faked” studies in this context and described the entire process as a “vaccination tragedy” with millions of victims worldwide.

Testing “insufficient”

From his perspective as a toxicologist, Sterz claimed that long-term safety testing and toxicological assessments were insufficient before the Comirnaty product was administered to billions of people.

Dr. Sterz told the panel that the number of deaths due to the vaccine in Germany alone is estimated to be near 60,000, using the under-reporting factor of 30 used in USA. Sterz says that the Pfizer Comirnaty vaccine should have never been approved.

Sterz’s statements were made during an expert hearing in the Bundestag in March 2026.

However, the European Medicines Agency and Germany’s Paul-Ehrlich-Institute continue to  insist that the vaccine was tested according to strict safety standards applicable at the time and that its benefits significantly outweighed the risks of “rare” side effects.

Donate - choose an amount
5101520501002505001000