Why I’m a Global Warming Skeptic

Pages: 1 2

Another of the alarmists’ ad hominem attacks – that anyone who questions their conclusions has been bought off by “big oil” (as Al Gore proclaimed in his testimony before Congress) – is not only a lie but a completely illogical claim.  Whatever grant money a scientist may receive from the “evil” folks at Exxon/Mobil, etc. is nothing next to the tens of millions of dollars pocketed by folks like Al Gore.  If one believes that all questions can be answered by “following the money,” then the scientist with a fifty-thousand dollar research grant from “big oil” (who must then weather the hate-mongering of the global warming establishment, put his job at risk and condemn both himself and everyone he knows and loves to a global catastrophe unequaled in human history) is not the guy to be questioning.  If the “denier” is lying, he dies.  If Al Gore is lying he gets to live into a ripe old age spending millions, jet-setting around the globe and showing off his Oscar and his Nobel Prize to the beautiful people in Hollywood and Cannes.  If science is to be determined by who has the more obvious motive, it’s pretty clear that the Al Gores are the ones who are lying.

And it sure doesn’t do much to bring me to the alarmist’s side to witness Mr. Gore (and his fellow “scientists”) flying all over the world in private jets, caravanning with his entourage in gas-guzzling SUVs (leaving the motors running so that when they return the temperature will be in their “comfort zone”) and spewing pollution from his mansion at rates many times that  of the average citizen he and his ilk so disparage for their “consumption.”  If Mr. Gore (et al) truly believed that catastrophe was imminent, one would suspect he would attempt to lead by example, not luxuriate in his newly-gained and fabulous riches while screaming “the world will end tomnorrow!!!”

I also recognize as unscientific the creation of and adoration for Mr. Gore’s movie An Inconvenient Truth.  This film, produced by Laurie David (ex-wife of Seinfeld creator Larry David), is filled with “facts” well-known to be (and acknowledged as such even by scientists employed in the making of the movie) hyperbolic at best and often out-and-out lies. That this is “documentary” – created by a D student in earth science and a Hollywood leftist whose greatest prior accomplishment was marrying a very funny man – is the “educational” tool being used to promote hysteria speaks volumes about how little there is to be truthfully said.  The fact that those who continue to promote this propaganda effort, fully aware of the half-truths and out-right lies, makes clear that science (i.e. truth) is not, to them, sacrosanct.  When scientists recognize that they cannot use the science to prove their science then, well, it’s probably not science.

Nor does the campaign to brainwash small children – frighten them – with a propaganda film do much to earn my confidence.  Leave the children alone.  When scientists recognize that they can’t win the day with adults so they attack small children with fear-mongering, chances are good the science isn’t.

And just as their “science” fills me with doubts and their methods increase my skepticism, so too does their proposed remedy. Under the Kyoto Protocol the most egregious polluters get to continue to pollute unabated while some of the most ecologically advanced nations face draconian punishment.  If we were really as close to doom as the hysterics attempt to convince our children, everyone would be asked to sacrifice.  Instead, it seems that the “remedy” being proposed is really nothing more than your usual Leftist efforts to redistribute wealth along the lines of an affirmative action program.  Successful nations will be shackled, failed nations will be rewarded and, well, think global socialism and suddenly the Kyoto Protocols make sense.

And lo and behold, the very same folks who are screaming “the world will end tomorrow” and then destroying the evidence, pocketing millions, flying around the globe to pick up their rewards and honors are exactly the same people who support every other leftist, socialist, punish-the-successful/reward-the-failure policy.

No matter how you look at the issue – which is why the alarmists are so determined to never allow you to actually look at the issue – anyone who thinks must be skeptical of the claims of the hysterics.  The science is new, its models based on utterly unverifiable numbers (i.e. the temperature in Guam in the year 8), the accuracy of its long term predictions obviously impossible to know, its short-term predictions having utterly failed to come to be (e.g. that decade-and-a-half long hiatus in global warming.)  The behaviors of the hysterical scientists are unscientific, the behavior of the hysteric’s favorite celebrities contradictory to those someone who truly believed would be engaging in.  If you follow the money it is almost entirely into the pockets of the hysterics while the proposed “remedy” does not seem to be those that would be proposed by people who believed the end is near.  In fact, what the remedy does suggest – what the entire industry of the hysterics suggests – is that “manmade global warming” is a leftist farce being perpetrated by cynics who recognize there’s riches to be had, along with power and fame.

Pages: 1 2

  • Amused

    Before climate change became a political football , filled with the agendas of religionists and big buisiness, ergo -politicians and ideologues , way back in the early 70's scientists observed and predicted widening holes in the Ozone layer over the poles .This too was scoffed at due to special interests and the resulting ignorance .Well the predictions came about , people in Australia noted more cases of ultraviolet related skin cancers , and in younger people .Satellite measurements confirmed this .Core samples confirm this . Mean temperatures also have been rising . This too was predicted by observation , then confirmed by observation …SKEPTICISM as to the causes IS ALSO science , so long as it is based in science and not some biased religious or political view , as is found in this blog .

  • Amused

    Unfortunately , in the Republican echo chamber , healthy scientific skepticism has morphed into an illogically unrecognizable mantra , filled with the usual mindlessness found in 'conspiracy theories ' , where science has been determined to be part of a plot to destroy christianity , the USA , and as one poor misguided individula put it " the end of society as we know it " ….what was skepticism based in reality, becomes DENIAL based in political /religious paranoia .Another post here suggests " Study both sides of the argument with an open mind " …really ! Yea riiiight ! When most of you here now reject science out of hand with the accusations of leftist plots , claiming Science as merely a tool of the opposition , an enemy of christianity ,part of a dastardly and dark conspiracy to destroy Mom and Aplle pie , and all we hold dear .
    WHAT UTTER TRIPE ! .

    • Grayzel

      "I love how some of you wanna be 'scientists " parrot the words of your demagogues ." Amused

      This is an interesting statement to make and then follow up with parroted words of your own demagogues. I would ask you to calm yourself, look in the mirror and breath deep. Forget your science fiction and get a grip on reality. Study both sides not just the wacky world of progressives.

      • Amused

        I see "repetition " is a way of life for you grayzel . Go back and come up with something you actually THOUGHT of .

  • RAP

    Yo Amused, does that mean the debate is over or not? …. LOL

    • Amused

      No , it means I'm not glued to my computer screen . Climate change has been a scientific issue since the early 70's . Back then there were numerous science publications , Science News a weekly and Scientific American a monthly . This is not a new argument , just a bunch of new Know -Nothings repeating the rhetoric of their poiltics and religious views . I have no political idealogues , the inarticulate and basically ignorant Al Gore , who like most politicians eventually trips over his tongue , which is then siezed by the mindless morons on the other side of the political coin , as a phony bolster for their arguments .The points I brought up are not part of anyones echo chamber , they are scientific facts , and if anyone wants to argue the cause , that's fine . But most here are in denial of the already documented effects . That's where your arguments depart from logic and science .Yours is no longer a scientific debate , but one of pure politics . So who are you trying to kid ? Take your irrational arguments to your irrational mirror images on the left . Science has no favor towards either .

  • krisdekock

    the author is correct in his analysis. global warming is a farce created by elitists that only sheeple will follow. thank goodness for free thinking people who don't buy into the notion of global warming, along with many, many scientist!

    • Amused

      Yea , damn those elitists who actually have a knowledge of the scientific disciplines they argue .

    • krisdekock

      and damn those many, many scientists who disagree that global warming is a hoax…but you are more than welcome to throw your $$ downt the toliet for carbon offsets…

  • Kender

    to understand why gore pushes AGW look into the carbon credit exchange, who owns it, who gets the royalties from it…..it's all one big power and money grab….

  • Amused

    That is correct , skepticism , not denial based in political ideology , or some psuedo-religious conspiracy theory .

  • dumb

    Isn't there anybody else out there who thinks maybe global warming is real but would rather just deal with the consequences than with the misanthropic left's solutions?

    Haven't we seen the way that plays out before?

  • cjk

    The N*zi site administrator has finally published my original comments and marked them as if they were published days ago which is false.
    This can be easily seen by the fact that they have far fewer negative checks by all his brownoser snuggle-up buddies out there than my other comments.
    BAD DECEPTIVE BEHAVIOR by someone with the power to censor.
    All you out there that can think for yourselves keep that in mind because I'm just one commenter, but this goon has possible control over every comment.

  • Amused

    Everyone claims that Skepticism is "a good thing " in Science . And they are correct , it is essential . So when the actual number of scientists who are qualified to enter the argument of man made global warming ,and /or its confirmed effects , that number of "skeptics " is only 0.3 percent . Why is it that 97 % of qualified and credentialed scientist concurr that global warming IS in fact occurring and it is in fact being caused by rising levels of man made co2 ?
    You guys are all wet , so buried in your political propaganda and rhetoric , that Science has now become your enemy . No wonder .

    • Chris Nichols

      How many of that 97% are getting government grants? Care to answer that Mr. Skeptical?

  • Solinkaa

    CO2 is rising (but still remains a trace gas in the atmosphere), the temperatures are falling. Check your data.

  • Amused

    Funny how anyone who does not "sing-a-long " with the republican/conservative ignorant despising of science , anyone who actually understands the issue of co2 emissions and Hardfacts that are confirmed , is ridiculed or accused of being a "leftist " . And the number of thumb down simply confirms the pervasive presence of totally brainwashed imbeciles who will deny the facts until the water is up to their ears , or until such a time when it becomes politically expedient for the Republican party to admit to the truth . What a bunch of LOSERS .

    • Paul

      Can you explain why the Ice on the Poles is melting. The computer models are man made and do not accurately track past climate. By excluding data that does not fit the models can be made to work. Why was Greenland so named?

  • Chris Nichols

    Why don't you answer his question coward. If there is anyone that believes a load of BS and "parrots" what they are told, it's you. You haven't answered my earlier reply to one of your posts about the Archimedes principle. This is why the fake science of AGW gains so much traction, there are plenty of idiots out there like you who wouldn't know real science from a row boat.

  • http://www.realclimate.org/ James

    Continued Denier PWNage….

    It's kind of funny how 2005 and 2010 are tied for the hottest year on record! http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110112

    As for the Medieval Warm Period,you are absolutely wrong. It was warmer in some parts of the world (for example, Greenland which you conveniently cite) but it was much cooler in other parts of the world, like the tropical pacific (which you conveniently ignore). Global temperatures were far LOWER during this brief warming period.
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/Moberg_Hocke

    As for your list of "over 31,000 of the leading American scientists" can you show me this list? Who are these leading scientists? How many of them are in fields that actually study climate? How many of them have published any peer-reviewed papers? To my knowledge this list has never been revealed.

    As for your comments on sea level rising, you clearly don't understand the effects of thermal expansion of water. And your continual focus on Al Gore reminds of creationist obession with hating Charles Darwin. The IPCC's estimates of sea levels rising ranges are below, and the average range within the more certain predictions are about half a meter of sea level rising. The "larger values" in the graph contain the potential but uncertain increase from ice sheets melting.
    http://www.cmar.csiro.au/sealevel/images/ipcc_pro

    I'm not surprised to see you run off onto your and anti-Al Gore rant and global elitist conspiracy theories. Your views on climate change are dictated by your pre-conceived notion and your confirmation bias which cause you to do nothing but regurgitate garden variety straw man arguments, and repeat them again without bothering to address my rebuttals. It reminds me of creationists who repeat their fallacious straw man version of evolution which they 'refute' and pretend to understand the science. Much in the same way, your 'knowledge' is little more than the templated denier arguments floating around the internet.

    This debate may be 'over' as far as you're concerned, but I'll find other deniers who use the same templated straw man arguments and press them with the truth.

    • http://www.algore.com/ James

      F. Swemson = PWNed

  • http://www.gogreen4power.info/ Go Green Energy, Use Green Energy, Global Warming Solution

    Great post. I was checking constantly this blog and I am inspired! Very useful info particularly the ultimate part :) I take care of such info a lot. I used to be looking for this certain information for a very long time. Thank you and best of luck.