Tags
AGW, French claim 500 days to stop global warming, Global Warming Scandal, History of Global Warming, Penguin colony, Research suppressed, Scientist Threatened
Massive melt-offs, rising seas and only 500 days left to prevent climatic catastrophe. These are the headlines being posted across the world as the public once again is subjected to an intelligence insulting onslaught of climate change alarmism. As if on que, the alarmist reacted to the announcement that Antarctic sea ice had reached a 35 year pinnacle with Antarctica story of their own. A massive ice shelf was breaking up, a sure sign the world was facing a cataclysmic flood worthy of Noah.
That the ice shelf in question had been predicted to breakup for years was somehow never mentioned. The Pine Island glacier, a lynch pin of that section of Antarctic ice, has been in trouble for some time. The problem lies not with the weather though, the region still receives ample days below -40 Celsius weather to prevent glaciers from melting, instead the problem is coming from below. Setting on top of a subglacial volcano that has become more active, the bottom side of the glacier has been melting for a long time. The resulting water not only contributes to un-anchoring the ice from the rock, it also lubricates the surfaces which has the combined effect of greatly increasing flow rates. The result was a destabilization of the ice shelf.
Does this mean Antarctica will soon be ice free? The answer is of course a resounding NO! The breakup of parts of the western ice sheet is the result of natural non-climatic forces over which man has no control. It is not a precursor to a larger cataclysm and only affects a small section of the continent. This is not to say it is without effect, some sea rise is likely but not the meters being predicted by some but measured in millimeters instead. An amount that, unless you live in Venice or some other place where millimeters make a difference, will not even be noticed.
The real news is the increasing shrillness of the shrieks coming from the left. Their plan for socialism by the back door is continuing to come off the tracks and they know it. Like The Boy Who Cried Wolf, they have been signaling impending doom for far too long to be taken seriously. The fact that the climate has steadfastly refused to cooperate for the last seventeen years has only added to their panic. The only recourse they seem to have is to make ever more fantastical claims in hopes shear fear will drive the public to demand action.
Despite spending millions of dollars and trying hundreds of times, the alarmist have been unable to create a single computer model that correctly predicts climatic change. A fact that is contributing to the unraveling of their plans to use the weather to grab power. The strategy was doomed to fail like it has before. Just after the turn of the twentieth century Global Warming was being introduced to the public who responded with a collective yawn. In 1939 a G.S Gallagher told the Royal Meteorological society that “man is now changing the composition of the atmosphere at a rate which must be very exceptional on the geological time scale…. the principal result of increasing atmospheric carbon dioxide, would be a gradual increase in the mean temperature of the colder regions of the earth.” Once the cooling of the 1960’s and 1970’s set in, the new claim was catastrophic global cooling was upon us. Wild schemes like painting the arctic regions black were hatched and questions on how the government should allocate food supplies were asked. The key element these climatic doomsday scenarios has been the need for massive government intervention to avoid impending doom, an intervention that conveniently put all power in the hands of an elitist few.
Now facing an increasingly skeptical public, the alarmist are pulling out all the stops. The claims are becoming ever more fantastical and the science used to back them ever more flimsy. AGW researchers trying to advance the alarmist agenda have repeatedly been caught leaving out data and fudging results. Scientist who balk at being pawns and speak the truth are ostracized and find their research goes unfunded. Some have been subjected to such harassment and threats as to fear for their very lives. When research is presented, that the Global Warming community does not find helpful to their cause, no effort is spared to suppress it.
The loftiness of their claims and the desperate measures employed are likely to reach new levels of absurdity in the coming months. Like a cornered liar who is unable to come clean, the alarmist are desperate to find someway to move the public in their direction. With the educational community in tow and a mostly complicit press, some inroads in the area of public opinion may be made, but such success is likely to be fleeting. Facts, it is said, are stubborn things and lies fragile structures who need to be reinforced by more of the same. As their lies are exposed and the absurdity of their claims laid bare, their credibility will continue to erode. It is only a matter of time until those who hopped on the Global Warming bandwagon will find the support they gave an embarrassment best forgotten; at least until the next scheme to grab power is hatched.
“The Conservative Mind”
If you like this Pass this on
The Conservative Mind 
It is not based on science “The science used to back them ever more flimsy.” The first rule of science is to accurately report the data, something AGW prophets have never done.
Thanks for the info about the volcano and Gallagher. I had not read about either.
I say ever more flimsy due to the fact that the mixture of fact and fantasy is moving ever more towards the latter. Even Al Gore’s propaganda piece mixed in truth with its lies and distortions. Today though the propagandist are starting to make Gore look like an Eagle Scout in comparison.
Just so you know, the whole “global cooling scare,” although widely circulated by the press, never had the support of the scientific community like the theory of global warming does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
The claim that scientists used to believe in global cooling but now believe in global warming is a popular myth among conservatives, but unfortunately it’s not true. While the press and the media have gone back and forth on the issue over the decades, actual scientists have not, and it’s common for many people in the general public to fail to distinguish between the actual findings of scientific studies and the skewed reports that journalists write about those studies. Sometimes journalists will even take a scientific study and then write a report claiming that the study found the exact opposite of what the study actually claimed to have found.
I remember an incident recently where a scientific study was conducted on internet usage, and the study found that excessive online multi-tasking impairs concentration and reduces productivity because people are trying to do too much at once, and don’t focus on one task at a time. But then Google happened to get ahold of the study, and they published a report on it claiming that the study showed using the internet more made people smarter because they’re using more of their brain at once, which was the exact opposite of what the study actually said. The truth of what the study showed was that when you’re zeroed in and focused on one specific task, you’re using only the portion of your brain which is necessary for that task, which means all of your mental resources can be exclusively dedicated to it, thus enhancing your effectiveness at that task. Multi-tasking, on the other hand, tends to split your mental resources apart and distribute them over a wider area of your brain, meaning you’re using more of your brain at once, but you’re using it less effectively and less efficiently. But Google took the part about using more of your brain at once, and ran a report saying that using the internet more makes you smarter because you’re using more of your brain. Google had a conflict of interest in the matter (they make more money when people use the internet more), which caused them to misinterpret and misrepresent the data in a way that favored their agenda.
This is the same thing that happened with the so-called “global cooling scare.” Scientists never endorsed global cooling, but certain media outlets had an agenda to push, and so they skewed the data and made false claims about how scientists supposedly were saying the earth was cooling, even though scientists were actually saying no such thing. So it’s important to remember to distinguish between what scientists actually say and what journalists claim scientists are saying, because it’s an unfortunate fact of our culture that journalists on both the right and the left often cannot be trusted to provide truthful and accurate information about scientific findings.
Gross exaggerations are a tool used by which those wishing to advance an agenda that the facts do not support. To say that “scientist” did not support global cooling is a prime example (as is the 97% support figure bandied about regarding AGW). Many scientist were convinced of the coming menace of Global Cooling and spent much time deliberating how to deal with it. The fact that it was entertained by a large enough part of the scientific community to gain wide spread media attention just goes to show science can be and often is wrong.
The amount of support the current AGW scare has is indeterminable due to the hijinks used by its supporters. The Australian study that concluded there was 97% support included people who believed CO2 had a some inconsequential amount of impact on global temperatures. A far from honest assessment since most skeptics of the current hysteria also believe CO2 might contribute to temperature on a small scale. Of course such dishonesty is not new but par for the current course.
I was a mild AGW supporter back when “The Greenhouse Effect” was the term of the hour. Never accepted it as the only driver but believed it could be a significant modifier of climate fluctuations. That changed when “The Inconvenient Truth” came out, a bigger pile of scientific trash I had never seen. Filled with inaccurate statements, exaggerations and out and out lies, it would of had a hard time passing muster as a high school term paper. Yet, this garbage gained its author an Oscar and a Nobel Prize. After that I took a long hard look at what was going on and it turned my stomach. Hockey stick graphs, denial of the Medieval and Roman warm periods and suspect data was what I found.
Today we see gross exaggerations, routine data manipulation, suppression of contrary studies, harassment of scientist who dare to not tow the line and regularly attributing independent phenomenon to global warming. None of this is scientific or even science for that matter. When I hear the latest hurricane was a global warming event it is sad but when a river in Australia goes dry on its normal multi-year cycle and it is attributed to climate change or a ice shelf collapses due to a volcano and is attributed to the same, it is nothing more than sickening propaganda. AGW is a religion, a movement, a socialist dream and many other things but science it is not.
Global warming is our eco-fanatics’ wet dream — the fantasy that always excites but will never happen.
Well, if all the people who have de-forested would be required to re-plant as some do here in the States, we would have a balance between oxygen & carbon dixide. That is where the UN should step in otherwise, what are they good for.
Kal
I am not sure what this has to do with the post, but I will bite. CO2 actually increases plant growth, accelerating plant metabolism and increasing plant efficiency in regards to water. In essence, increasing CO2 helps offset the harm done by reckless forest management.
The truth is U.S. has more forest today than during the Revolution, not due to government intervention but economic forces and education. That is not to say there is not room for regulation, there are always those whose desire for short term profits exceeds their common sense or even common decency. That is the case in much of the developing world. Slash and burn done by the poor and rogue, here today gone tomorrow, outfits are driving much of the deforestation. Even so, U.N. direct interference in the internal affairs of independent states is no more the answer than their interference in the politics of the United States. Country to country agreements and interstate assistance would be more effective without the infringement on territorial rights U.N. actions would entail.