Alan Caruba's blog is a daily look at events, personalities, and issues from an independent point of view. Copyright, Alan Caruba, 2015. With attribution, posts may be shared. A permission request is welcome. Email acaruba@aol.com.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Green Global Warming Editorial Gets it Wrong
By Alan Caruba
It’s rare to come across a newspaper editorial in which virtually every assertion is false, but is absurdly titled “Face Facts.”
Since 1988 the movement behind the global warming fraud has labored long and hard to mislead the citizens of the world to believe what is surely the greatest "science" hoax ever perpetrated.
However, when the leak of emails between the handful of climate scientists who conjured up the deliberately misleading data the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) used hit the Internet, the November 2009 event was quickly dubbed “Climategate.” In one exchange, they worried over the fact that, since the late 1990s, the Earth was demonstrably getting cooler.
It is hard to believe that any journalist could not know about Climategate or the subsequent failure of the IPCC’s Copenhagen climate conference that even the President attended as the entire hoax came unraveled.
“The wildfires in Russia, the floods in Pakistan and the record heat this summer in New Jersey have one thing in common: They are exactly the kind of symptoms scientists predicted we’d experience as global warming occurs.”
Only there is no global warming. The Earth has been in a decade-old cooling cycle.
Which scientists are being cited? What kind of scientists? The current IPCC Chairman, Rajendra Pachauri began his career in an Indian diesel-locomotive factory. The Wall Street Journal pointed out that, “As an academic, he staunchly defended his country’s right to burn coal.”
And what do isolated natural events that occur in a brief time span have to do with alleged climate trends that can only be measured in centuries? Did the editorial writer ever hear of the Medieval Warm Period or of the Little Ice Age that followed it? Both were spread over centuries, not a single summer.
“Glaciers that have been stable for centuries are now melting at an alarming rate.” No, they’re not. Indeed, many are melting less as the result of the current cooling cycle. The cooling is due to lower solar activity; the result of a significant reduction in solar storms that are commonly called sunspots. This is the stuff they teach in Meteorology 101.
“Hurricanes are becoming more severe as ocean temperatures rise.” You mean like the Category 4 Hurricane named Earl that in a matter of two or three days became a Category 1 and then fizzled out as a tropical storm? The hurricane named Katrina was an anomaly, a category 5, and they don’t occur that often. Consider the relatively tame hurricane seasons we’ve had since then.
“A rational person would look at this evidence and listen to the scientists who are warning of catastrophic impacts over the next few decades, such as coastal flooding and the collapse of rain-fed agriculture in many regions, especially Africa.”
It’s too bad the writer of this editorial didn’t display enough rationality to even question what the unnamed “scientists” were saying; much in the same way Al Gore has been telling everyone the same thing only to be revealed as a charlatan seeking to enrich himself from hoped-for climate legislation. The Chicago Exchange that sells “carbon credits” is close to failure as this bogus “market” collapses from the revelation that there is no global warming.
Scientists constantly challenge one another’s work. That is part of the scientific method. Journalists are supposed to exercise a healthy skepticism, but in the case of the scientists who did express skepticism, they were labeled “deniers” until the truth could no longer be hidden from the public.
“Republicans in Washington have killed any chance for climate change legislation, for now. Polls show that while most Americans believe climate change is occurring, most Republicans do not.” So, apparently, the climate is determined by one’s political affiliation. The polls show increasing doubt about global warming along with the trend that most Americans disapprove of the job President Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress have done.
“The Environmental Protection Agency under Lisa Jackson is preparing to impose regulations on carbon emissions, as the Clean Air Act requires.”
Wrong again. The Clean Air Act does not include carbon dioxide, even though the Supreme Court mistakenly called it a “pollutant.” Carbon dioxide does not need to be regulated because it plays no role whatever as regards the planet’s climate and because it is a gas that is vital to all vegetation on Earth in the same fashion oxygen is vital to animal life. The editorial writer is a complete moron.
“As the world dawdles, this problem will grow worse, and the solution will have to be more drastic, more expensive and disruptive. For that, we will have climate-change skeptics to thank.” This editorial reeks of the same eco-lunacy that could be found in the Unabomber’s manifesto or the Internet declaration posted by the lunatic who took hostages in Maryland a week ago, threatening to kill them unless the Discovery channel gave him a show of his own.
The newspaper was completely within its rights to publish the repetition of the kind of alarmism contained in the editorial, but it also has an obligation to get its facts right.
It reminded me of a comment by my friend, Dr. Richard Lindzen. He is one of the world’s most respected climatologists, a Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor of Atmospheric Science.
"Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century's developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age."
The journalist H.L. Mencken had it right, "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule."
© Alan Caruba, 2010
There's a very good reason so many of us call it *GloBULL Warming*...
ReplyDeleteIt would be really nice if any of those PhDs in science took the time to learn the fundamentals of chemistry and physics (thermodynamics AND electrical) AND use proper scientific terms AND read a bit of real history. With only 180 random pieces or so of a 1,000 piece picture jigsaw picture, it is impossible to see the big picture.
ReplyDeleteBefore the advent of the petroleum age (The world's first commercial oil well was drilled in Poland in 1853), less than 15% of the present population of the world COULD even survive, and life was quite miserable for even the wealthy, compared to the present standard of living of poor people in the USA.
There is no such thing as "global" climate (all climates are local, and weather is greatly variable within any temperate climate zone), there is no way to determine the "average" temperature of the atmosphere of this planet, and no way to predict the future.
These "climate scientists" are making their temperature data up, present and historical, and robbing and helping wealthy no more than criminals rob us blind.
Blind Men and the Elephant
(by John Godfrey Saxe)
http://wordinfo.info//words/index/info/view_unit/1/?letter=B&spage=3
Last stanzas:
And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!
So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!
I doubt whether the writer of the editorial is concerned about the veracity of the content, but more with sowing the seeds of panic about 'climate change'.
ReplyDeleteThe ultimate aim is global control through regulation and taxation. It is so much easier to do if the people are willingly servile.
Another great article, Alan. I loved Dr. Lindzen's quote; I shared it on my Facebook page.
ReplyDelete