The End of the Line for Climate Hysteria?
Following the release into the webworld of hacked emails, computer codes, and a raft of supplementary documents recording the antics of sundry paleoclimatolgists at the University of East Anglia’s influential Climate Research Unit, it has now become ice-crystal clear not only that the world has been cooling for the last decade, but that the global warming crusade is an environmental racket of historical proportions. Many “climate skeptics” and independent researchers have long known this to be the case and have understood that the motivating factor behind this massive and unprecedented fraud is the unsavory quest for power and profit on the part of governments, corporations, and ambitious individuals, scientists as well as entrepreneurs. The evidence for data tampering and all manner of hocus-pocus was available some time ago for anyone who cared to look.
There is a rapidly growing adversarial bibliography on the subject of climate change which anyone interested in the global warming controversy might do well to consult. A partial list would include: Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, by Fred Singer and Dennis Avery; An Appeal to Reason, by Nigel Lawson; Climate Confusion, by Roy Spencer; Meltdown, by Patrick Michaels; Taken by Storm, by Christopher Essex and Ross McKitrick; Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, the Missing Science, by Ian Plimer; Green Hell: How Environmentalists Plan to Control Your Life and What You Can Do to Stop Them, by Steven Milloy; and The Deniers, by Lawrence Solomon.
The authentic scientific expertise assembled in such books cannot honorably be ignored or discounted. The last chapter of William Gairdner’s Oh, Oh, Canada!, “Global Warming in a Nutshell,” should also be required reading. It is the most effective short account of the global warming swindle that I have yet come across. Global warmists, I might point out, are not known for playing fair. Lawrence Solomon, the subtitle of whose book is “The World-Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud,” refers to himself as “the most disinvited speaker in Canada.” In an article for the National Post, he provides a list of debates and conventions to which he was invited and subsequently disinvited once his convictions became clear. This is not surprising since in the few global warming debates that have thus far been arranged, “the skeptics have won convincingly, leading most in the doomsayer camp to boycott any debate in the future.”
The fact is, as these writers have amply demonstrated, we have become the willing dupes of a pervasive deception. To mention only a few of the red flags that have recently sprung up: Not long ago, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York perpetrated an embarrassing error — if error it was. The institute, on whose statistical data the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) depends heavily for its reports, “typed in” the September 2008 temperatures for its October assessment, concluding that global warming had risen vertiginously. The finding was accepted in the major sites and media around the world as confirmation of the global warming dogma. The institute itself admitted that it does not conduct independent verification of the data it logs, regrettably rendering some or even many of its prognostications all but useless.
Frank Tipler, professor of mathematical physics at Tulane University, had some more intriguing news for us. The Hadley Climate Research Unit in Britain “has begun to eliminate the daily temperature records from its public websites,” taking a page from the Goddard Institute, which has been deleting facts and figures unfavorable to the global warming hypothesis for some time now, as well as adding “corrections” to the data “to obtain global warming.” The big lie has reached the point where it must be maintained by the omission of details, the distortion of data, and the suspicious liability to error. And as we have seen, the plot thickened when the Climate Research Unit was hacked, releasing thousands of files suggesting a covert mega-operation to propagate an anthropogenic global warming myth. “Warmist scientists,” writes James Delingpole, may “have manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.” Tipler has recently posted yet another convincing exposé outing the CRU’s counterfeit science, concluding that “most of the evidence for global warming was simply made up.” What we are hopefully observing is the unfolding of a major Climategate scandal.
Such practices, however, even after disclosure, do not seem to operate as a deterrent to persistence, and embarrassment is easily forgotten when there is a theory to uphold. Just as the Goddard Institute continues to abide by its errors, so does the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado. This despite the fact that a faulty satellite sensor reading led it to estimate that the Arctic ice cap was receding dramatically — 500,000 square kilometers of lost ice covering an area considerably larger than California. While admitting its mistake, the NSIDC did not alter its view until April 2009, when it released a graph showing, in the words of Steven Goddard, that the Arctic ice cap had “actually increased by more than the size of Texas.” From the purported loss of California to the substantive acquisition of Texas represents a significant gain for the United Ice Fields of America.
When might we expect to see the emails of the David Suzuki Foundation (davidsuzuki.org) re climate change revealed? Are hackers working on it as we speak?
Those of us who already have some mileage on their climate skepticism feel vindicated, but that does not change the general perception much. Anyone has seen anything about climate fraud on CNN? CBS? Where is the story? We seem to live in some kind of post-rational era when even scientists are allowing themselves to be influenced by peer pressure more than respecting the discipline of peer review.
Is there really a good reason to have thousands and thousands of climate scientists as we have now? How do you get squirrel overpopulation? By feeding the squirrels to amuse the children! Right now, money falling from the sky on the climate studies is the most interesting climatic phenomenon. Why is there so much money going into climate science? My best hope is that the whole planet fever madness will cool off in the most natural way when whomever invested so heavily in climate science realize that there are better bets around.
Another bubble poised to burst! The sooner, the better.
Mr. Solway – your writing on this subject is profound. It is not enough that you described the treachery that continues but from the paragraph which begins “Like the generation before WWI…” it is positively riveting. You have nailed this big time. You get it. First the cultural warriors stripped the populace of its traditional character by any means necessary. Then it was supplanted by what you have described. All the ingedients are there for we in the West to have become supine and stupid victims of this fraud. In many ways we are living the moral decadence of the Weimar Republic and look what happened then. How is the Climate Cabal/Fascist World Government Plan any different than the mania which followed Germany in the early 1930′s?
Another indispensable book is “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism” by Christopher C. Horner. Horner was a member of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) until he found that the panel’s reports were deliberately distorting the data to “support” the AGW “hypothesis”, solely for the purpose of increasing governmental controls over the economies of First World nations.
It’s a book that’s hard to find in public libraries- my own copy came from my local library’s “Friends Of” bookstore, because it was donated to the library for the library’s collection- and promptly shuffled off because the library board didn’t want it available for checkout. (Books by Sean Hannity, Bill O’Reilly, etc., invariably meet similar fates, but Michael Bellesisles’ “Arming America” is still on the shelf in non-fiction, believe it or not.)
The best part of Horner’s book (besides his inside account of the ongoing fraud at IPCC) is the collection of damning quotes from AGW gurus in the sidebars. One of the best is on page 133;
“We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?”
Said quote being from “Hockey Stick” co-creator and recently-”reassigned” CRU head, Phil Jones, in a letter to Warwick Hughes.
Apparently, Dr. Jones never heard of the idea of having somebody else check the work. Either that, or he wanted to make sure it would only be “checked” by someone who shared the AGW (i.e., Utopian/nihilistically anti-humanity) agenda.
Well, the Spanish Inquisition wasn’t noted for welcoming contrarian views on who was or wasn’t an apostate, either.
clear ether
eon
I am hoping that the current batch of warmist radicals get their just desserts. But I also hope that climate research continues in the best nonjudgemental methods we are capable of producing. We do need the information for future inquiry.
David – spot on. I would just add to your list the recent paper by Lord Monckton which can be found attached at the following link: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/01/lord-moncktons-summary-of-climategate-and-its-issues/
From his paper, it would seem that all the data sets are contaminated. Hence, we can say nothing about “climate change” other than the tautological: It is changing. The whole empirical aspect of climate science has to begin from scratch with the unprocessed data. Until then, let’s hope our representatives emulate Australia’s Parliament and kill any cap-and-trade scheme that comes up for a vote.
David, the only thing I can find to disagree with is your opinion of, fellow Canadian, David Suzuki. He may indeed be a true believer but he is deeply guilty of the same vile hypocrisy as Al Gore and others. It’s just that he craves high esteem and personal honours more than the money. He needs to be St. David of the Environment. To hell with him and his holier than thou act!
The only climate trends unraveling are those of deception, manipulation and a gross miscarriage of Scientific method and pursuit. Denial is of epic proportions, gag orders are in action everywhere and shredders, disk wipers are working overtime. There are scientists who are frantically destroying as much incriminating evidence of their malpractice as they can. A whistle-blower(s) will soon disclose the extent of NASA’s collusion not only with East Anglia, but also with UN bodies of this global farce and is ready to publish sensitive content gathered over many years concerning numerous senators both existing and retired. CRU was just the tip of this floating iceberg of GW/CC corruption, much more evidence will be leaked soon that will make the ACORN busts look amateurish. Those implicated be prepared to be disgraced and humiliated internationally; your careers all but in tatters and for eons. No one individual, group, political party or ideology is bigger than science – make no mistake, generations to come will know who you all are.
No amount of spin including by the media can save your hides. The public backlash will be intense and exponential. If Obama follows through in C’hagen, it, will be political suicide.
I’m no scientist, but I am familiar with how to run a con. By 1991 I was certain that AGW was a con. The whole something has to be done now, or we will all die, was the dead giveaway. The entire enviro industry behaves like a religion/con game. If it quacks and waddles, you have a duck. Al Gore playing the part of Elmer Gantry. P. T. Barnum underestimated people’s gullibility by whole orders of magnitude.
So, is it just the right wing or Republicans in general who have decided that all of modern science is no more than a liberal conspiracy? If so, when are you going to decide that quantum physics is too much like witchcraft?
Well written and concise. Please, may the masses make a minor effort to enlighten themselves.
I disagree with this.
“The global warming movement most likely did not begin as a deliberate, well-organized scam, but as an expression of genuine concern by people of good intentions.”
I believe, (rightly or wrongly) that history will show the genesis of this fabricated crisis leads to Maurice Strong and his belief in a one world government.
An ends to a means.
BC:
So, is it just the right wing or Republicans in general who have decided that all of modern science is no more than a liberal conspiracy? If so, when are you going to decide that quantum physics is too much like witchcraft?
That’s a really weak strawman argument, BC. Who is claiming that all science is no more than a liberal conspiracy? No one but you. Pitiful lack of reasoning on your part.
Now, there is an easy way to distinguish real science from politics and religion.
Quantum Theory is still a theory despite decades of practical application. Relativity is still a theory despite almost a century of tests and validation. No one calls Quantum Theory or the Theory of Relativity “settled science.” That’s reserved for bunk like AGW or “Climate Science.”
Now, admittedly I’m not a scientist, climate or otherwise. However, I am a professional computer programmer with over 20 years of experience. If anything, I’m more qualified to discuss that computer code than most scientists. That released CRU computer code is of such poor quality that nothing that comes from it can be considered reliable. There’s an old computer saying, “Garbage in, garbage out.” In this case, the “garbage in” is the tampered with data. Even if the computer code were golden, you’d still have garbage out. In this case, we have “garbage in” compounded with garbage processing. That leads to “garbage out” squared.
10. BC.
“If so, when are you going to decide that quantum physics is too much like witchcraft?”
What do you have against witchcraft? Nearly all of the witches and warlocks that I have come across are… Modern Liberals.
BC, that is your weakest arguments yet. Indeed it is no argument at all. If you can refute this article point by point with verifiable proof then do so, otherwise retreat with whatever grace you can.
Really your post was embarassing.
BC – #10.
“So, is it just the right wing or Republicans in general who have decided that all of modern science is no more than a liberal conspiracy? If so, when are you going to decide that quantum physics is too much like witchcraft?”
Have you always been the monkey of the class? Your post says a lot about you. But I was hoping you would refrain from usual “STUPID” for a change. Do you have anything “On the subject” to say? If yes, please, do, otherwise – maybe I’m wishing for too much. My apologies in that case.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe that. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic, and or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
–Josef Goebbels
We are being duped! Read Ian Wishart’s great book, “Air Con.” The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is .03 percent. That’s 385 parts per million parts of atmosphere. Who contributes this carbon dioxide? Human activity contributes 1.7 percent of the .03 percent. Forests, volcanoes, and oceans contribute 98.3 percent. The eco-nuts want us to believe that it is only OUR 1.7 percent contribution to the .03 percent that is putting the carbon dioxide into the atmosphere! By the way, carbon dioxide is necessary for life on earth. It is the food for plant life. If these scientists start messing around with the biosphere (for example, seeding the atmosphere with dust to block the sun’s rays), they may do something that will not be reversible and will result in real destruction to life and the planet. Also, the big culprit in greenhouse gas is water vapor, not carbon dioxide. As Wishart states in his book, you can’t tax water vapor, but you can track and monitor and TAX carbon doixide users. This entire movement (the new religion) is a scheme to impoverish Western nations and beef up the bank accounts of scoundrels like dishonest scientists, politicians, and third-world dictators. People better wake up and reject this phony science before it’s too late.
“The Revolt of the Masses”
by Jose Ortega Y Gosset
A cogent analysis of the effects
of the arrival of the prosperity
produced by the Industrial Revolution
on the “Masses” of Spain; The word
is used, not in the Marxist sense,
but to describe the unfortunately
large fraction of the population
who, in this instance, are AGW
Believers, and more generally,
are always looking for someone
to validate their delusional
belief system, and reassure
them that reality does not exist.
I keep hearing the same tired lines from the pro-warming talking heads on FOX. They say these emails prove nothing and that the science has been indisputable for decades. The e-mails say they have been cooking the data but the zealots don’t seem to get it.
12. Larry J:
. In this case, we have “garbage in” compounded with garbage processing. That leads to “garbage out” squared.
http://www.texify.com/img/%5CHuge%5C%21%28G_i%29G_p%3DG_o%5E2.gif
Brilliant Larry! Such a simple equation is always a mark of truth. Even the dim liberal bulbs should get it.
Well done.
very simply, they won’t produce any fact based reporting on what they believe in their conditioned minds to be “settled” science.
What this whole episode has proven is that this is in fact not science at all.
It is merely more agenda driven opinion dressed up as science.
The so called scientist involved should all be cast out of the scientific community, that is if real scientist want to have any further claim to credibility.
It is very simple, do we want made up “science” or do we want fact based conclusions to win the day.
Follow the money. It very seldom lies.
Mr. Solway,
Every piece I come across with your byline is comprehensive and succinct, all at once.
With that last thought in mind take the Reverend Al Gore as an example.
Upon his exit from public service as V.P. he had a net worth of a few million dollars. ( I want to say it was like 3 mil or something, I forgot the exact number)
Today the Rev. Gore (remember his “He Played On Our FEARS” sermon) is worth in excess of 100,000,000.00 (100 million) sawbucks.
Yes global warming has been very very good to the Reverend Al Gore…
“If so, when are you going to decide that quantum physics is too much like witchcraft?”
When Niels Bohr starts telling me I can’t drive my car because if I do it will cause the universe to collapse into a singularity, without having experimental data to back up his hypothesis.
Any other dopey questions?
BC @ #10: The reason the science at this point is suspect, irrespective of the scientist, is that all four data sets used to study climatology are irreparably contaminated. Once again, I provide a link to Lord Monckton’s masterful review of the problem: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/01/lord-moncktons-summary-of-climategate-and-its-issues/
I also would direct you to the following site to see how local climate data have been distorted as well: http://icecap.us/images/uploads/global_warming_nz_pdf.pdf
And there is the following by Steve McIntyre:
“Central Park: Will the real Slim Shady please stand up?” which can be found at: climate.org/?p=1798
The problem here is not at all akin to denying quantum theory. What it is akin to is Rachel Carson’s getting DDT banned on the basis of no data, and the subsequent resurgence of malaria when it could have been wiped out.
Larry J @ #12: Just a quibble. In science, a hypothesis move to the stage of being a theory it is testable and after being tested cannot be disproven. Hypotheses in climatology have to get over the hurdle of testability even if the data were correct, and that’s because of how chaotic the climate is. But now we know that the data themselves are contaminated. So, at this moment, all we have are untested hypotheses in climatology. There is no theory out there anymore.
I am not a scientist, but for the 20 years I have been smarter than one.
Dear B.C.
I don’t recall anyone in the Quantum Physics field trying to lay taxes upon me, establishing rules for selling my house, and in general trying to control my life in any way.
In fact, those particular scientists have provided me benefits over the years with many of the improvements in life provided by the Space Program et al.
Further, I don’t recall any of them shouting down anyone who has submited papers disputing the mainstream view on their expressed theories.
Finally, Quantum Physisists aren’t getting Rich by putting forth “end of the world” scenerios tied to specific results of thier field of science.
So, I’d say, it is pretty well directed at Climate Science!
Perhaps you should bring your mind into A.D. thinking!
jd
“23. Dave Surls:
“If so, when are you going to decide that quantum physics is too much like witchcraft?”
When Niels Bohr starts telling me I can’t drive my car because if I do it will cause the universe to collapse into a singularity, without having experimental data to back up his hypothesis.
Any other dopey questions?”
Ouch that’s gonna’ leave a mark! ROTFLMAO.
Larry J @ #12: Just a quibble. In science, a hypothesis move to the stage of being a theory it is testable and after being tested cannot be disproven. Hypotheses in climatology have to get over the hurdle of testability even if the data were correct, and that’s because of how chaotic the climate is. But now we know that the data themselves are contaminated. So, at this moment, all we have are untested hypotheses in climatology. There is no theory out there anymore.
No disagreement from me, I was just trying to keep it simple so the BCs of the world could understand.
For “climate science”, the problems are enormous. First, they only have sparse data to go by. Temperature records only go back so far and there are issues with calibration. Beyond that, you have to look for indirect indicators like tree rings to determine what the climate was. One of the problems is that there are multiple factors that can influence tree growth: temperature is only one factor but others include rainfall and soil fertility.
Now, supposing you do manage to piece together reliable climate data over wide areas. You then have to analyze other factors to determine what caused the climate to change. In addition to CO2 levels over time (assuming you have accurate data on that), you also need to consider things like El Nino, El Nina, solar variability, cloud cover, etc. to try to find the driving factors. A “climate scientist” can hypothesize that CO2 is the driving factor of temperature over time and perform statistical analysis to test the hypothesis. Even then, he/she must be always be aware of the fact that correlation does not imply causation. Multiple hypotheses must be tested including combinations of factors such solar activity and CO2 concentrations. All of that depends on the best available data as inputs.
Finally, once the statistical analysis is performed and the most accurate correlations are determined, you’re ready to develop computer models based on these correlations. Developing good computer models requires skilled programmers and a good understanding of the physics of the problem. The model needs rigorous testing at multiple levels to test for mathematical accuracy in the calculations and proper functioning. Once these tests are completed, the model must be validated against reality. You start at some known point in the past, plug in the starting conditions, and run the model to see how well the outputs match reality. If the model disagrees with reality, the fault is with the model, not reality. Only when the model can accurately model what has happened in the past can you begin to have any confidence in what it predicts for the future. Even that is based on assumptions of the future state of the driving factors such as solar activity.
From what I’ve gathered, none of these things are happening with “climate science,” at least not to professional scientific and programming standards. The leaked emails indicate the raw input data was modified in undocumented ways and then apparently discarded. The computer code was junk, the kind of mess that’d get a freshman computer science student a failing grade. They refused to release their data and processes as required by Freedom of Information laws in the UK and US. Then, to top it off, they did everything they could to block peer review and publication of people who disagreed with them which is itself a perversion of science.
There is a long-standing scientific humor magazine/website called The Journal of Irreproducible Results. Unfortunately, it appears that most if not all “climate science” is irreproducible. That makes it junk science on par with “Women’s Studies.”
Thomas #7:
“David, the only thing I can find to disagree with is your opinion of, fellow Canadian, David Suzuki. He may indeed be a true believer but he is deeply guilty of the same vile hypocrisy as Al Gore and others. It’s just that he craves high esteem and personal honours more than the money. He needs to be St. David of the Environment.”
Spot on. While there is plenty of greed driving this, the greatest scientific fraud of the modern era, we must not underestimate the fact that AGW and the environmental movement in general has become a powerful secular religion with followers just as zealous as any fundamentalist Christian, Jew or Muslim. Pulling that dog out of this fight will be much harder than we think. It has become Meaning for those who previously had none.
#22
It should be widely known that A. Gore made his $100,000,000+ growing tobacco, on the hills of Southern Tennesse, in just a few short years. He really knows how to plant and grow money making crops, but unfortunately it all goes up in smoke.
I hope no one expects the members of the Church of Unsound Reasoning to allow a few little things like facts to get in the way of a good cause. Emotions, not facts, are the driving forces behind the majority of what those currently in control of our government consider important. It’s not enough that human lemmings everywhere are following images of polar bears, baby seals, and flooded cities over cliffs of idiocy; these flocks of fools consider it their duty to drag the rest of us along with them.
This planet was here long before our arrival, and it will continue to thrive long after the last of us is gone.
Before you praise the Associated Press: Know that the latest article by Seth Borenstein is a complete load of BS.
They interviewed NOT ONE Scientist who questions Global Warming, perpetuating the notion that none do…
Why does the AP have any cred left?
# 30 Bobby g.
Humm… I would have to look into that. and I will.. I would think that a business that has been in his family for generations to suddenly become that much more lucrative would be suspect as being the source of his sudden new found wealth. (was your comment meant as a joke?? just checking)
The Rev. Gore has very deep ties with Goldman Sachs and various Law firms that have benefited tremendously from the Global Warming push.
Gore himself has numerous investments in Global Warming related companies.investments.
see numerous links in the NYT article below.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/business/energy-environment/03gore.html
More good news:
The moonbats who worship at the altar of Al Gore are still neutering themselves to save the world . . .
Can anyone remember, during the gulf war when “Baghdad Ali”, being interviewed on the street in Baghdad, denied that the Americans were in Baghdad, while the television showed american tanks, in the background, only a few hundred yards away. The AGW claimants, when confronted with the scientific evidence that CO2 levels lag temperature, the temperatures in excess of today during the middle ages, as well as the very incriminating correspondence, indicates that for some people, public oration and assertions need have no basis in objective reality. “Baghdad Ali” would make a good spokesman for the AGW camp. He can stare reality in the face and still nonchalently deny what everyone else can see.
35. John McLachlan:
I think you mean Bagdad Bob
aka Muhammad Saeed al-Sahhaf
Larry J
Well said. As a mathematician, it was always the numbers (see 16. Joan) combined with the uncertainties you describe that bothered me. When the raw data, tweaks and computer code are examined (both here and across the pond), the global warming house-of-cards will fall. The uncertainty swamps the data, the tweaks are all one direction and the code is a monstrosity. Climate science is an oxymoron.
Truth will out.
The real problem is that the AGW isn’t about science at all…it’s a bout the
First Church of the Global Warming Appocolyps
We must all tythe this church generously. All proceeds will benefit the priests and priestesses of the church. Please donate accordingly
The Global Warming cult will double down & insist “climate change” happens, despite the facts; they have been doing this for years. Now with the e-mails to show their corruption of science, they will want to protect their precious Harpy Egg until it hatches to eat them…
This may take a while. For the most part the MSM is in conspiratorial denial about this issue. And tonight on CNN Campbell Brown acknowledged the controversy but then–wait for it–interviewed a true expert about the issue. And the expert was Tom Friedman, columnist of the NYT!!!!! He presents himself as an expert on global politics and the Middle East but this is the first time I have heard him invoked as an authority on climate science and the climate scandal. Clearly, from the shallow understanding comments displayed, he should not give up his day job. And CNN wonders why FOX is kicking their butt down the street, around the block and in all of the ratings. Amazing! Simply amazing!
If anyone wants to see how deeply the left has its psychic energy invested in AGW because a “solution” to this “problem” happens to fit their leftist, statist worldview, one should visit the lefty academic blog “Crooked Timber.” Inhabited mainly by economists, sociologists and anthropologists in Oz, the UK , Canada and the US, they outright ban anyone insistent upon challenging AGW as deluded fools. Currently they are discussing Copenhagen without nary a word about Climategate or the CRU at UEA in Norwich. Their silence is scary….
Hey Larry J. What’s your hang up with Womens’ Studies. Not gtting much action lately. P.S. Get your punctuation right
David, this is one of your best. To #’s 1, 7 and 29 I’m with you. Suzuki is a national embarrassment. The AGW people developed a story and then tortured data to fit the story. That’s politics, or religion or any number of things. But it isn’t science.
Although commonsense – like the comment #16 – tells us that human emissions of CO2 very likely have no effect global warming, it remains possible that they do.
Yet we have only junk science available to us and that tells us nothing about AGW. Nothing. For instance we know that a cold period ended in 1850 and, guess what?, the earth has been warming until about ten years ago. Warm periods follow cold periods and vice versa. An obvious question to ask would be “is the current warming unprecedented?” If it isn’t then – end of story – time to watch the hockey game. But climategate shows us that the miserable alarmist “research” can’t even answer that question.
Too many people, governments and companies have too many green vested interests in scaring people to stop now. They will keep going full bore until the climate equivalent of those US tanks behind Baghdad Bob come up the street. Except, this time they’ll be right up the ass of the sibilant Suzukis and the gabbling Gores. Let’s hope climategate is one of those tanks.
More evidence of climate groupthink:
Some guys wrote up a paper showing a correlation between historical climate data and war casualties in Africa, and claiming this proved that many more war deaths in Africa would follow from Global Warming. And… this got published in PNAS. Yup, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Details here:
http://spinstrangenesscharm.wordpress.com/2009/12/04/the-elephant-and-global-warming/
Coming next in PNAS: a paper proving that storks bring babies in Holland!
Hey Larry J. What’s your hang up with Womens’ Studies. Not gtting much action lately. P.S. Get your punctuation right
Women’s Studies is junk academics just as climate science is proving to be junk science. If all you have to complain about is my punctuation, then you really don’t contribute much to the conversation.
Anyone remember when the Inuit reported Robins in their villages. It was a big deal a few years ago. Seems that the Inuit had no words in their language for the birds, so the world must be warming. And warming dangerously fast if these warm weather songbirds are so far North for the first time in history. This meme lasted until someone(s) reported all the Inuit poems, letters and diaries from the early 1900′s with Robins in them. Not only was their a word for these songbirds, there were several.
Sigh, darn fingers.
There, their, they’re.
I hate spelling mistakes. Especially mine.
#9; Paden Cash: I’m no scientist, but I am familiar with how to run a con. By 1991 I was certain that AGW was a con. The whole something has to be done now, or we will all die, was the dead giveaway.===============
Amen. This is the same technique that Obambi is using for Health Care ‘reform’.
Gawd…. here’s the bottom line to all of this: *all* of the evidence, both old and new, when gathered up, fitted together, plotted, checked with known science, shows unmistakeably that human activity is easily the primary cause for the current round of global warming. And any genuinely scientific literate person who bothers to check into matters knows this, nevermind climate researchers. It’s *not* solar activity or it’s *not* the orbital cycle — it’s human friggin activity. Our biosphere is a comparatively vanishingly thin layer of air and water coating the planet — *that* is the thing we’re affecting in our massive growth in both population and activities like farming and industry.
All this “climategate” BS is like some sore loser at “Clue” who claims that the solution can’t possibly be Colonel Mustard in the Library with the candlestick because there was a typo in the game’s copyright notice or that Hasbro donated $1000 to Obama’s presidential campaign — all that has nothing to do at all with the actual game itself and the results. The politics of a Gore or a Soros has nothing to do with the results of climate research, and neither do those emails. As I wrote elsewhere, those emails only show some climate researchers getting frustrated and fe-up with with all the political and science-ignorant BS they’ve been increasingly having to deal with. And all this numbnutted “Climategate” stuff has only served to show that not only they were right to be frustrated, but they should be concerned as well since this idiotic anti-science rubbish has support by amoral, pandering politicians.
That’s faith. Very impressive. Obviously nothing will change the ‘mind’ of BC.
By definition, “never mind climate researchers”, if you don’t know it, you are not a genuinely scientifically literate person. No sense talking to somebody who can say that.
Regarding the obligation of citizens to inform themselves, I agree. The difficulties are huge, though. With an obstructive MSM, the vagaries of the web, and about 7 thousand topics to keep up with, I spend hours every day trying, and can’t stay on top of everything.
The article has some interesting generalities about our culture and where it has gone since WWI, that point cuts in all directions, since so much of the comfort, luxury, and pursuit of happiness that we are afraid that carbon taxes will take away from us are also part of the “problem” here, aren’t they?
The shenanigans of the AGW camp are exposed here, but it’s not as if the deniers don’t have their whole separate set of misstatements, mistakes, and agendas.
I don’t claim to know the truth here, but I do know that a headline writer has wide discretion (based on his or her agenda) whether to go with the “fact” that the climate has been cooling since the anomalously hot year of 1998. OR that the last ten years have contained several (check Monbiat’s piece I posted in another thread; I can’t remember the exact number) of the hottest years since temperature recordings became concrete around 1850.
Hell, I am far from an expert, but I am trying to be objective. At this point it seems to me that:
1. It is an inescapable fact that we are adding far more CO2 to the atmosphere per year than we ever have and that does have some warming effect.
2. There are many other “natural” processes at work, some warming, some cooling, some of which are vaguely predictable but many aren’t.
So, I am not worried about a tipping point happening in my lifetime (even though one could, because I live away from the coast in New England and could survive a 3-6 degree warming), but if we are in or went into a “natural” warming period like the one in the Middle Ages ON TOP OF OUR CURRENT CO2 contributions, things very conducive to plants, but not so conducive to humans would happen.
Don’t worry. Be happy. That will not solve the cultural ills inferred by our writer on his second page, but what’s wrong with having fun?
The short answer is no.
Once a conspiracy takes hold, there is a small cadre of believers that never go away. Whether they are birthers (Obama) or truthers (Bush), once they have it in their head, there are some people who can’t be unconvinced, and they will always form a core for conspiracy theories to keep them alive and working to convince the rest of us that they were right all along.
This whole Climategate affair is priceless. Suppose the culprit was Exxon or Dupont, suppose it was Merck cooking the books in on a drug efficacy study, maybe someone from the Bush Defense Department tinkering up some Iraq data? I’ll tell you suppose what, it would be the main story on every TV network and in every newspaper. The media and Congress would be launching six separate investigations. Where are Anderson Cooper 360, Wolf Blitzer, the New Yorker and the holy N.Y. Times? Where is their outrage? Priceless.
re#10, BC. Sounds like you are a lib Dem that got caught with your hand in the cookie jar. Must be hard to defend the phrases, uttered in secret, “hide the decline” (of temperature) and the nice little Michael Mann Hockey Stick “trick”. It’s Wizard of Oz time; pay no attention to that man behind the curtain, I AM THE GREAT OZ. LOL.
“hide the decline” a parody of climategate set to the 1968 Tommy James and the shondells song “walking the line”
“making up data along the way
fudging the numbers day by day
hiding the cold and the snow in downward line
hide the decline(repeat)
Michael Mann thinks he so smart
with his phony hockey stick chart
ignoring the cold and the snow with a downward line
hide the decline(repeat)hide the decline(repeat)
Climate change, Youve seen your day
Its about the time
to pay for your crime
hide the decline(repeat)hide the decline(repeat)
Yes, and I suppose the disappearance of the Arctic ice cap is just some bogus stunt too.
Yes Carl (56), it is. Check out the info I’ve mentioned in the article, and go to the actual sources.
$10 Billion Dollars & More per Year For a Fraud?
Canadians are interested in results of what is going on about Climategate in Canada! As it has to do with our lives,lifestyle whether or not we are going to be living in a Democracy or under a Dictatorship?
Jim prentice has stated & PM Harper advocates this as well otherwise Prentice wouldn’t be uttering it”Canada will be paying it’s fair share of Carbon Emmissions! To the tune of $10 Billion per year!” Really, we are already $70 Billion in debt thanks to Michael Ignatieff & the Liberals who up’ed the anti to the Canadian debt load on stimulus!
This begs the question where Jim Prentice plans to dig the $10 Billion per year out of? Did somebody say more Tax?
What is so disheartening about that is the fact that now it’s been found that the whole Climate Emission scam has been proven to be Fraudulent as credible Scientests around the world who were previously locked out of putting their work and findings forth by Jones of East Anglia University and the CRU,were pushed out of the picture with thier observations and experiment results on Climate Change found that not only is the earth not heating up in reality it has been cooling since the 1960’s!
How much more fraudulent can this Scientific Data be? The United Nations and the Globalists are using this false Data at Copenhagen, to transfer our wealth to third world countries? Yet Environment Minister Jim Prentice and Prime Minister Stephen Harper feel so generous with Canadian Tax payer dollars that they are willing to toss in $10 Billion per year on the “hot air” that Ban Kai Moon and Pompus PM Gordon Brown and the rest of the Criminal Rogues that are involved in this bogus Carbon Emission Treaty! As the Bible says,”A Fool and his money are soon parted”! To request that PM Harper doesn’t sign the Copenhagen Treaty, causing Canadians to lose their Sovereignty and Freedom email the PM at: pm@pm.gc.ca,Protest Copenhagen Treaty http://www.gopetition.com/online/32485.html
There are four reasons the UN and IMF, Global Elitist Members Re: Ban Kai Moon ( Who has openly expressed his stong desire for Global Governance ), PM Gordon Brown, Bilderberg Member Henry Kissinger, Senior Bilderberg Member David Rockefeller as well as an unprecedented number of Dictators that run various countries who are members of the United Nations this Copenhagen Treaty that was designed to acquire four goals, the least of them being climate improvment or protection as Lord Moncton has stated!
(1.) To de-industrialize Sovereign Countries ( No Jobs keep you dependant on State ) ( 2.) Take your money and assets – Hence, Fraudulent Carbon Emmissions and Carbon Gases for Carbon Credits and Carbon Taxes! (3.) Take away your property (4.) Take away your Sovereignty and Freedom!
Check out what Government is doing behind your back at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VebOTc-7shU