Manmade Global Warming: How a Lie Died


Private industry and governments around the world have spent trillions of dollars in the name of saving our planet from manmade global warming. Academic institutions, think tanks and schools have altered their curricula and agenda to accommodate what was seen as the global warming “consensus.”

Mounting evidence suggests that claims of manmade global warming might turn out to be the greatest hoax in mankind’s history. Immune and hostile to the evidence, President Barack Obama’s administration and most of the U.S. Congress sides with Climate Czar Carol Browner, who says, “I’m sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real.”

The scientists whom Browner references are associated with the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Let’s look some of what they told us. The 2007 IPCC report, which won them a Nobel Peace Prize, said that the probability of Himalayan glaciers “disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high” as a result of manmade global warming. Recently, IPCC was forced to retract their glacier disappearance claim, which was made on the basis of a non-scientific magazine article. When critics initially questioned the prediction, Rajendra Pachauri, IPCC’s chairman, dismissed them as “voodoo scientists.”

The IPCC also had to retract its claim that up to 40 percent of the Amazonian forests were at risk from global warming and would likely be replaced by “tropical savannas” if temperatures continued to rise. The IPCC claim was based on a paper co-authored by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), two environmental activist groups.

England’s now-disgraced University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit (CRU) has been a leader in climate research data. Their data, collected and analyzed by them, have been used for years to bolster IPCC efforts to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions. Climatologists, including CRU’s disgraced former director Professor Phil Jones, have been accused of manipulating data and criminally withholding scientific information to prevent its disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

Professor Jones, considered to be the high priest of the manmade global warming movement, has been in the spotlight since he was forced to step down as CRU’s director after the leaking of e-mails that skeptics claim show scientists were manipulating data.

In a recent interview with the BBC, he admitted that he did not believe that “the debate on climate change is over” and that he didn’t “believe the vast majority of climate scientists think this.”

Long denied by the warmers, Professor Jones admitted that the Medieval Warm Period (800 A.D. to 1300 A.D.) might well had been as warm as the Current Warm Period (1975-present), or warmer, and that if it was, “then obviously the late-20th century warmth would not be unprecedented.” That suggests global warming may not be a manmade phenomenon. In any case, Professor Jones said that for the past 15 years, there has been no “statistically significant” global warming.

During the BBC interview, Professor Jones dodged several questions: why he had asked a colleague to delete e-mails relating to the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report and ask others to do likewise; whether some of his handling of data had crossed the line of acceptable scientific practice; and what about his letter saying that he had used a “trick” to “hide the decline” in tree-ring temperature data?

Given all the false claims and evidence pointing to scientific fraud, I don’t think it wise to continue spending billions of dollars and enacting economically crippling regulations in the name of fighting global warming. At the minimum, we should stop the Environmental Protection Agency from going on with their plans to regulate carbon emissions. Companies should resign from the United States Climate Action Partnership (USCAP), a lobbying group of businesses and radical environmentalists. Dr. Tom Borelli, who is director of the National Center for Public Policy Research’s Free Enterprise Project, says that BP, Caterpillar, Conoco Phillips, Marsh, Inc. and Xerox have the common sense to so already.

  • William Smart

    There's been a great deal of sloppiness by climatologists but the basic science is not affected. CO2 really will warm the globe and most of the best brains agree it's dangerous.

    • Wideband

      William,

      Which best brains? Isn't CO2 the stuff plants (you know, the living organisms that put the green in "green") need to live? Isn't 98% of greenhouse gas water vapor? You're right, the basic science is not affected – the implications and projections have been manipulated by dishonest people for their own political ends.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

        You can see what's actually happened in recent years on one graph by Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu, which can be found here.

    • Wideband

      As a matter of fact, if you want a bit a a tutoral on the "basic science" read this:

      http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/the_hidden

    • Jack

      You seem so sure of yourself. What are your credentials. Are you a scientist, academic or just another elitist who believes that he is one of a few who really understands the effect of CO2? Isn't it so annoying when the great unwashed question statements made by people who really know?

      • Peachey

        Jack, you do not need to have credentials behind your name or have a degree in an area of science to be able to analyze cause and effect. Basic science is taught at an elementary school level and even kids can gain an understanding of the scientific method. You would be surprised what you can learn in books (you know the paper pages between the covers) and through study. Afterall, the scientists that you hold in such high esteem aquired their knowledge in the same way. They let us have books now and even let us read them.(My humor)And I do have a degree in a science.

        • davarino

          "A science", what would that be peachey? Ooooh your a scientist. Do you also know there are many variables that need to be considered? Its not that easy, there is the sun, humidity, all of the noble gases, valcanoes, …..etc. So you and your band of brothers have figured it out aye?

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

            What do you tell the scientists observing changes to the climate? Because all the theories on climate change are simply trying to get a handle on what is happening in the real world.

            You guys can have a little circle jerk and decide you have uncovered a grand conspiracy…but changes continue.

            Do you believe in evolution Davarino? After all, it's only a theory…no one can possible know what actually happened….so?

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/71_911E 71_911E

      And you know, William, you can stop contributions to the dangerous CO2 levels by stopping breathing….

  • Mike

    William, please elaborate. What if everyone just turned their lightbulbs off more often, would that not offset the effect of CO2. What is the volume of 20th century emissions in terms of the percentage of total atmosphere? Is it not equivelant to saying beach goers pissing in the ocean will cause sea temperatures to soar.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

      Yes… it's that absurd !

      I've previously compared its significance to a mouse fart in a forest.

  • Mike

    Most of the better than best brains feel there is no proof that CO2 is the main driver of global warming. As measured in ice cores dated over many thousands of years, CO2 levels move up and down AFTER the temperature has done so, and thus are the RESULT OF, NOT THE CAUSE of warming. Geological field work in recent sediments confirms this causal relationship. There is solid evidence that, as temperatures move up and down naturally and cyclically through solar radiation, orbital and galactic influences, the warming surface layers of the earth's oceans expel more CO2 as a result.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

      Mike's correct, but misses one critical part of the CO2 puzzle, and that's how insignificant the actual quantity of man made CO2 (from the use of hydro-carbon based fuels) in the atmosphere really is.

      While the alarmists scream that the level of atmospheric CO2 has already reached the level of 387ppm of CO2 (1 molecule in 2,600), they fail to mention that only 4% of that CO2 comes from our use of hydro-carbon based fuels. That 4% equals 16ppm, or 1 molecule in 62,500. The very idea that such an infinitesimal amount of a beneficial gas is changing our climate is beyond ridiculous.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/kwg1 kwg1

        In addition CO2 is dissolved in the oceans of the world. When heated the water (ocean) cannot retain the dissolved gas and it is released . Since 2/3 of the surface is covered by oceans and 98% of green house gases are water vapor, how in the hell can these scientists reallistically claim anything until they understand how the sun affects the heating and oscillations we see from that heating in the climate process. The vast majority of computer models do not adequately reflect water vapors rolls.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

          Correct.

          There's actually 7 times as much CO2 in the oceans, than there is in the atmosphere. CO2 becomes less soluble as the water temperature rises and is therefore released into the atmosphere.

          These so called "scientists" are more full of crap than most people would believe. 35 years ago they were screaming about the coming ice age, The earth had been cooling from 1940 to 1975, so of course they raised the alarm.

          What I find most amusing is what they were saying about the effect of CO2 on climate change back then. See for yourself on page two of the following article from Time Magazine from 1974:

          http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,…

          Of course the AGW theory is a total farce once one understand's the single most obvious and overlooked fact about the entire scam:

          WARMING IS GOOD !

  • jlori

    Dateline December 12, 2010: This year has been an unremarkable actual climate year but a dumbfounding climate change cultist year. At the beginning of the year, Hansen made his usual forecast predicting possibly the hottest year ever, further proving that he has crossed the line form scientific rigor and objectivity to blind advocacy and intellectual rigor mortis. After a quite stunning increase in the lower troposphere temperature anomaly in January, temperatures dropped like a rock the next two months with the normal ups and downs the rest of the year. At years end, about half of the 20th century warming had just disappeared. An obvious cooling that could not be denied, continuing a 16 year trend, marked the end of the year. While weather is not climate, some are becoming concerned, after a third year of unusually bitter winters in most of the northern hemisphere, resulting is serious loss of life and property, that strategies for adaptation and mitigation to a cooling environment might be advisable. It is becoming clear to all that those ‘global warming’ experts and politicians, blinded by ideology and driven by a lust for power, will never admit that almost all of the climate change observed over the last 100 years was natural. It has cost politicians their cushy government jobs, scientists their professional credibility, the IPCC its very existence, and advocates their fragile sanity. What is worse, it has cost the taxpayer billions of dollars wasted on green jobs, green energy, and economic stagnation. We all enter 2011 with the hope that this year we will finally be rid of the warmist cult.

  • Aussie

    regardless of whether or not using fossile fuels are ruining the planet. lets look at the simple fact that the earth is fast running out of coal, oil, etc. next its not really the co2 thats the problem, its the petrochemicals which are poisoning the water earth and atmosphere.

    Lets get off fossile fuels, and onto renewable energy sourses. lets stop giving money to islamic nations who use the money to blow the crap outta us. and I do believe the more trees and plants you have, the better things are.

    As far as global warming, what a load of cosmic kaka, the earths temp goes up and down like a yo yo, the rain patterns go up and down like a trampolinist. just look at the ancient tree rings.

    I am not sure which side this will put me on (lefty or righty) but I am sure someone will take me to task over my humble view.

    • Wideband

      Nah, your point of view regarding the finite nature of fossil fuels is ultimately correct, of course. The point of the debate is when will they run out, and should we as a civilization allow ourselves to be bullied into abandoning the advantages that science has afforded us in the name of "saving" a planet that doesn't need saving. Indeed only the most arrogant among us conclude that we pose a real threat at all.

      As for your petrochemicals statement, pollution control has come a long way in the last 40 years and continues to improve. The answer is not to immediately cease use of fossil fuels, but to use them efficiently and cleanly. The answer is certainly not to tax their use to the detriment of all except for the taxers.

      • trickyblain

        In the words of George Carlin:
        We're so self-important. So arrogant. Everybody's going to save something now. Save the trees, save the bees, save the whales, save the snails. And the supreme arrogance? Save the planet! Are these people kidding? Save the planet? We don't even know how to take care of ourselves; we haven't learned how to care for one another. We're gonna save the fuckin' planet? . . . And, by the way, there's nothing wrong with the planet in the first place. The planet is fine. The people are fucked! Compared with the people, the planet is doin' great. It's been here over four billion years . . . The planet isn't goin' anywhere, folks. We are! We're goin' away. Pack your shit, we're goin' away. And we won't leave much of a trace. Thank God for that. Nothing left. Maybe a little Styrofoam. The planet will be here, and we'll be gone. Another failed mutation; another closed-end biological mistake."

    • davarino

      Renewable energy isnt going to do it. Solar panels and wind mills are not going to supply enough energy. We need nuclear energy and drill for oil in our own back yard.

  • DOn

    Global Warming legislation is the new fascism

  • USMCSniper

    Dr Walter Williams has their number. He says: "Private industry and governments around the world have spent trillions of dollars in the name of saving our planet from manmade global warming. Academic institutions, think tanks and schools have altered their curricula and agenda to accommodate what was seen as the global warming "consensus."

    Mounting evidence suggests that claims of manmade global warming might turn out to be the greatest hoax in mankind's history. Immune and hostile to the evidence, President Barack Obama's administration and most of the U.S. Congress sides with Climate Czar Carol Browner, who says, "I'm sticking with the 2,500 scientists. These people have been studying this issue for a very long time and agree this problem is real."

    The scientists whom Browner references are associated with the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)."

    • Peachey

      Are these the clowns that gleened their documentation from student papers?

  • Carole

    God`s got their number!
    He must be very amused after the weather we`ve been having in the Northern hemisphere the last couple of months or so!
    What a sense of humour !

    • trickyblain

      Melting Ice = more water vapor = storms, big ones! These record storms are somthing scientists have been predicting for decades.

  • trickyblain

    For a more sober, informed take on this, check out the following:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mckibben/the-a

    • davarino

      I actuallly read it and it gave me a headache thinking that people are that infantile.

    • SouthParkCon

      LOL. Huffington Post sober? Informed? You _must_ be joking. Some of the most hyperbole-filled tripe is printed there and everyone on the Left praises it and affords it credibility, when it has no more credibility than any other far left newsrag out there.

      If you're going to quote something to support your position, please quote something from a reputable source. Not a partisan hack site full of people already in the tank hook, line and sinker for this pseudo-religious/pseudo-scientific claptrap.

    • davarino

      huffingtonpost? snicker

      Thats where I get my scientific info.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

    Do you know where you are numbskull? You think FPM is a paragon of journalistic integrity? You cultist have the whole world cordone off and FPM is a the trustworthy "news" source….holy christmas! Good luck with your delusions.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

    What do you tell a scientist who is observing alarming changes in the environment? Do you give them this tired "lefty's coming to get me" meme?

    You paranoid morons….you go ten steps too far down the road to crazy town and then you take a couple more steps just for good measure.

    "Re-primitivization" of Western civilization? Please

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

    If that's what you think, what are you doing here ?

    Go troll elsewhere !

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

    I don't troll mr. new guy, but you apparently do…so let the poster answer for himself. If you can't take challenges to your delicate sensibilities even when you're not being addressed, maybe you shouldn't post anywhere. Stick that in your swollen eye.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

    You really need to find another form of exercise besides jumping to conclusions….

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

    Either back up your opinions with some facts, or shut up…

    You're really beginning to bore the hell out of me !

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

    You bet…

    Read about it yourself putz:

    http://www.sweetliberty.org/issues/rewilding/miss

    Then Google "Agenda 21"

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/johncarens johncarens

    If it's not Global Warming, or Global Cooling, or Ozone Depletion, or Acid Rain, extreme left-wing Stalinists will forever concoct reasons to deprive individual, freeborn citizens their natural rights to pursue happiness. It is that simple. They've done it before ("Eugenics", anyone?), and these dangerous, pathetic, authoritarians will continue to do it far into the future. Why?

    Because they are, to a person, atheistic, and believe in the perfectibility of man on earth by coercive force. They will stop at nothing, they will never rest, they will never be slaked until every human being is, to some degree, enslaved to their megalomaniacal vapors. Which, of course, means freeborn peoples are REQUIRED to enjoin them, in perpetuity, in cultural battle. Facts will not deter them, science will not deter them. Sadly, Walter Williams will not deter them.

    In the early decades of the twentieth century, just as there are "climate scientists" today, there were "racial scientists". These "scientists" had the same cool detachment and intellectual imprimatur as the "climate scientists" have today. You could, in fact, receive graduate degrees in "racial sciences" at leading universities here in the US and abroad. Margaret Sanger and the proto-abortionist were adherents of "racial science". These are the same cultural liberals we have today–, they wanted to radically alter the society around them to perfect it to their whims (-for whims they are).

    The whims of "Racial Science" were the sterilization of "negroids", and "jewesses", and other "genetic inferior people". They were inferior because the "scientists" SAID they were inferior, which is why, in the 1930's, world-wide scientific chic didn't put up much of a stink when word leaked out that Hitler was revving up a monstrous extermination regime. "Racial Science" had acculturated the world to the possibility of such hideousness. As I have said, Hitler didn't happen in a vacuum, and he had like-minded leaders in capitals throughout the world.

    Now, the world is edging closer to the acculturation of the re-primitivization of Western progressive civilization. Already, these grotesque malcontents have eluded to eliminating carbon-based fuels (which would also eliminates modern life); outlawing the use of plastics, and eliminating from 10% to 80% of the world's LIVING human population in order to achieve their aim, (which nominally is to reduce "greenhouse gasses", but which is nothing more than concentration camp-stuff polished up for a 21st century audience). This is not fringe thinking: References to reducing living populations can be easily found in heretofore mainstream publications.

    Thank God, though, that the lies, distortions and fraudulent record-keeping is out of the bag now on "Global Climate Change". We've dodged the latest utopian bullet. Now we just have to get ready for the next one.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

      John;

      Are you aware of how closely related the climate alarmists and the so called "racial scientists" actually are?

      The most evil of Obama's czars, John Holdren is the perfect example. Read all about him here.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Swemson Swemson

      John;

      Are you aware of how closely related the climate alarmists and the so called "racial scientists" actually are?

      The most evil of Obama's czars, John Holdren is the perfect example. Read all about him here.

    • myofba

      It will always be an easy task to dodge a bullet so poorly aimed. The global fascists always make the mistake of believing that the other 99.99999% of the world's population is just as ignorant and gullible as they.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/bubba4 bubba4

    He's already living under the irrational fear of being shuffled off to a concentration camp….are you actually helping him with more tin foil hat nonsense?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/kwg1 kwg1

    Sweemson, e-mail David Swindle and use this as his authorization to give you my e-mail if that is what was keeping you from replying to my inquiry (not wanting any part of your location disclosed) as to what part of AZ you were in.

    kwg1