I can’t believe I’m still writing about climate change. I’d have stopped long ago were it not for persistent calls to blow up the U.S. economy in order to save the planet.
The cult-like demand for action permeates every part of public life, government, media, academia, even K-12. Rep. Among the draconian policy solutions, Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal would have an enormous negative impact on our economy.
For the record, climate does vary — think ice ages. And a combination of natural climate variability and measurement problems make the likelihood of singling out a human fingerprint very low. I look here at how climate alarmism is being sold in a distinctly unscientific manner.
The term ‘science’ properly refers to the scientific method, which is a system of inference designed to weed out incorrect ideas in favor of those supported by experiment and observation.
The crux of the scientific method is the rejection of theory rather than proof of it. From Bacon to Hopper and Feinman, it has been well understood that scientific theory must be “falsifiable,” that is, subject to test and rejection.
Falsifiability depends on narrow and specific conditions imposed by theory. If the conditions fail, the theory is wrong.
On the other hand, we hear a lot these days about consensus, skepticism, and denial. Warmists often cite the “97-percent consensus” that man-made climate change is true and “settled.”
This claim stems from a single study of article abstracts dealing with climate. The study suffers from a number of serious method flaws and has been roundly debunked.
A more reasonable conclusion from the study is that 3% of the abstracts support man-made warming, not 97%. In reality, science is not at all settled.
What else is wrong with climate change alarm?
First, how did global warming get to be climate change? At least with warming, there is a scientific theory: increase CO2 levels and get two or three degrees of direct and indirect warming.
Why the switch to talking about too cold/too hot and other severe weather? Perhaps it’s because satellite and weather balloon data have failed to bear out GW theory for almost 20 years.
Well, says NASA, surface weather station data do show warming as expected. But this picture emerges only as a result of serial and unexplained fudging of the data.
Plus, NASA is from the government and has made such a mess of land and sea surface temperature data, making it useless as evidence for anything but data manipulation.
Second, there’s an awful lot of argument from authority going on in the alarmist camp. The researchers there call themselves climate scientists and make the ostentatious claim that only they can understand the atmosphere.
Did you get what I said about the scientific method? What in that description suggests that only experts can be critics? Not to mention, the most powerful cohort in the warmist universe is the computer modelers.
These guys design code that reflects theory, what they think is going on in the air. CO2 is in; solar is out. Then they run the models to get a whole bunch of curves and say, well then, that proves it. The models did just what we told them to do. Anything funny about this logic?
SEE ALSO: Climate Models Of Incompetence
The climate wonks have a receptive audience. A couple of generations of smart people who learned about science stuff in school say: if scientists say it’s going to be bad then by golly it will be bad.
One of these smart people, presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris, declares climate change to be existential and demanding of action, no matter the cost.
Existential? A couple of hypothetical degrees Celsius is existential? How do you think your petition to lighten up would fare in her office?
How about Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse calling for RICO prosecution of deniers. Or former President Obama implying that climate change deniers don’t believe in the moon or think it is made of green cheese. I’m pretty sure we did away with the green cheese theory a long time ago.
It kind of sorts out into curious folks who aren’t much impressed with the historical record of Malthusian doom-casting and smart people who just know that our evil species is bad for the planet.
The curious folks think about the evidence and the smart people just don’t understand why curious folks don’t like science. What? If I don’t believe in string theory I don’t like science?
But what if it isn’t about science in the first place?
The question of greenhouse gas warming has been around a bit more than 100 years, working its way through Fourier, Arrhenius, Callender, and Revelle.
But the political interest in CO2 is relatively recent. The global warming juggernaut began in the mid-70s as a crisis epiphany under the leadership of the late UN diplomat Maurice Strong.
Mr. Strong served as the first executive director of the United Nations Environment Program and recognized the potential value of CO2-induced warming theory as a tool to proselytize for globalization.
Strong was the driving force behind Agenda 21, a program to enforce sustainable energy development through public education and training.
The scientific arm of Agenda 21 is the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), which name telegraphs its staff of bureaucrats. IPCC has published Summaries for Policy Makers (SPM) based on existing refereed science papers.
One of IPCC’s noteworthy accomplishments has been to assure that its SPMs are unencumbered by underlying technical detail. Translation: the SPMs say whatever the bureaucrats want them to.
Mr. Strong believed that pending environmental disaster required a globalist solution. His thinking was bold and not necessarily restricted to scientific inference:
“… in order to save the planet, [a group of world leaders] decides: Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Later on, German economist Ottmar Edenhofer, Co-chair of the IPCC Working Group III Mitigation of Climate Change, opined:
“One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy, … We redistribute de facto the world’s wealth by climate policy.” (Philosophy and position on climate change)
And more recently, Christiana Figueres, a former Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and a leader of the 2015 Paris Accords said in an official UN press release:
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”
Wait a minute! You mean to tell us we’ve been pouring tens of billions down a climate-change rat hole for a couple of decades and what you really want to do is screw up the economy? We’ve been robbed!
Read more at American Thinker
Trackback from your site.
Edwin Greening
| #
Three obvious problems that concern all of us “people kind” are two things :
1. Lack of integrity on the part of the environmentalists, news media, and the politicians, who are colluding in the deception of climate change,
2. Laws and governing policies that are clearly based on lies to promote the dubious climate agenda.
3. Being able to get back to the original lie that the carbon component in CO2 is the offending pollutant in the atmosphere and hence must be sequestered, stored, taxed, etc.
Reply
Jerry Kennedy
| #
The most serious problem with Climate Alarmism is this: They’ve brainwashed their adherents for decades to reject anyone or anything that asks for empirical proof, questions their methodology or repeatedly shows predictions made by Alarmists have miserably failed. It isn’t science. It’s a religion.
Reply
Joseph Olson
| #
“If all you fund is findings for danger….danger is all you will find”
US government has squandered +$100 billion on Carbon endangerment findings in the last 30 years, demonizing a harmless, mandatory for life gas molecule while turning a blind eye to genuine human caused catastrophe. ChemTrails are destroying the biosphere, see resent Dane Wiggington. Glysophate is everywhere and carcinogenic. Wind mills and solar farms are destroying bird life. Fukushima has caused collapse of Pacific salmon and mammal populations.
Enough with this Chicken Little science and their Jack in the Beanstalk solutions !
Reply
jerry krause
| #
Hi Joe,
During the last 30 years has funded the following projects.
NOAA’s SURFRAD (Surface Radiation) and USCRN (United State Climate Reference Network) Department of Agriculture’s SCAN (Soil Climate Analysis Network) RAWS (Remote Automated Weather Stations for a variety of agencies like the US Forest Service, US Park Service, US Wildlife Service who are responsible for controlling wild fires by various methods.
I cannot remember you or anyone else, beside myself, as having been referred here at PSI, to the valuable data by which we can begin to understand the actual workings (radiation balance and meteorology of which climate is a average) of the Earth-Sun-Atmosphere. And I seldom have read others referring to actual data of the atmospheric sounding which has been regularly been conducted twice a day for decades longer than 3 decades.
And when I finally have learned about all five of these projects and how to use Excel to compare the various data being measured in my recent essays, I cannot remember you providing any evidence that you have even considered my efforts to use the data for which as a taxpayer I paid a tiny portion of the cost of these projects
And I know it is not the fault of these projects that you and others have not taken advantage of this data which is free to you and anyone else in the world to better understand that which it seems you only argue about.
Do not find fault with others when you can be part of the solution.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Olga
| #
Manipulation has been present for centuries. Principally 2 distinct groups – that of so called royalty and religions in their various guises.
The first banks across europe were sanctioned by these 2 groups who were at once competing with each other but also working to a common end.
Investment in clever money changers and bullion dealers sealed the deal and the banking system sprung forth.
Very distinct descriptions are recorded in the Macmillan report if any can remember back that far, that reveal the nature of the fractional reserve banking system and its asset stripping nature if this information is comprehended fully.
The UN is possibly the most corrupt organisation in the known history of mankind.
People might be wise to consider that all authoritarian organisations are created from the top down – There very may be exceptions but these are insignificant overall.
Authoritarianism in itself creates a distinct and undeniable divide that is a book in itself but for those who care to cogitate over this idiom the implications are tremendous.
The very same mechanisms used by IPCC of fear are used across all branches of government authority and have been used for centuries for virtually everything. Hegelian dialectic, bait n switch – however you want to label it – it remains the same.
The economy has to fail or we will kill the planet or inject your child with themerisol and aluminum laced vaccinations or there will be an epidemic or overpopulation is depleting precious resources and killing the planet.
Hysterical religious fear ranting is projected 24/7 by all platforms of media.
The mechanism for all political volition is the same.
In England the bow street runners were the forerunners of our modern day policing system & designed to protect the very rich from the masses. This was arrived at by the very same mechanism and sold to us as for our own safety!
Fiat money creation, fractional reserve banking practice and central banking are mechanisms that asset strip us of value. Money is not the target for the “Pilgrim society”. They have plenty and create and manipulate its course at will. Most of the worlds gold is now held by these oligarchical organisations.
Confiscated is what gold is! Why? because it is a tangible standard! and quite unlike bitcoin which can be created virtually and is inherently fiat in nature and thus easily manipulated.
Economic shifts may be the observation that Christiana Figueres describes but this is merely the mechanism the outcome will be total control.
When they succeed – and they will since there is no tangible opposition – just apathy and ignorance (ironic in the information age). In another 1000 years they will have re-populated again and arrive at the same juncture they find themselves now.
Throughout history the oligarchs have never been so out-numbered as they are now. If not for their sociopathic tendencies they would indeed be living in fear by virtue of this fact, but their irrationality begets confidence as does the control afforded their respective positions.
I do not believe there is any negotiating with these people. Clearly revolution in its old format is not the solution. Again look to the past for the inevitable results.
Knowledge is the only way we can balance equitably but in an age where information manipulation, gatekeepering, censorship, false-flags, corruption and other authoritarian blocking mechanisms are commonplace, how do the ignorant find, let alone follow the yellow brick road?
Reply
Olga T
| #
Manipulation has been present for centuries. Principally 2 distinct groups – that of so called royalty and religions in their various guises.
The first banks across europe were sanctioned by these 2 groups who were at once competing with each other but also working to a common end.
Investment in clever money changers and bullion dealers sealed the deal and the banking system sprung forth.
Very distinct descriptions are recorded in the Macmillan report if any can remember back that far, that reveal the nature of the fractional reserve banking system and its asset stripping nature if this information is comprehended fully.
The UN is possibly the most corrupt organisation in the known history of mankind.
People might be wise to consider that all authoritarian organisations are created from the top down – There very may be exceptions but these are insignificant overall.
Authoritarianism in itself creates a distinct and undeniable divide that is a book in itself but for those who care to cogitate over this idiom the implications are tremendous.
The very same mechanisms used by IPCC of fear are used across all branches of government authority and have been used for centuries for virtually everything. Hegelian dialectic, bait n switch – however you want to label it – it remains the same.
The economy has to fail or we will kill the planet or inject your child with themerisol and aluminum laced vaccinations or there will be an epidemic or overpopulation is depleting precious resources and killing the planet.
Hysterical religious fear ranting is projected 24/7 by all platforms of media.
The mechanism for all political volition is the same.
In England the bow street runners were the forerunners of our modern day policing system & designed to protect the very rich from the masses. This was arrived at by the very same mechanism and sold to us as for our own safety!
Fiat money creation, fractional reserve banking practice and central banking are mechanisms that asset strip us of value. Money is not the target for the “Pilgrim society”. They have plenty and create and manipulate its course at will. Most of the worlds gold is now held by these oligarchical organisations.
Confiscated is what gold is! Why? because it is a tangible standard! and quite unlike bitcoin which can be created virtually and is inherently fiat in nature and thus easily manipulated.
Economic shifts may be the observation that Christiana Figueres describes but this is merely the mechanism the outcome will be total control.
When they succeed – and they will since there is no tangible opposition – just apathy and ignorance (ironic in the information age). In another 1000 years they will have re-populated again and arrive at the same juncture they find themselves now.
Throughout history the oligarchs have never been so out-numbered as they are now. If not for their sociopathic tendencies they would indeed be living in fear by virtue of this fact, but their irrationality begets confidence as does the control afforded their respective positions.
I do not believe there is any negotiating with these people. Clearly revolution in its old format is not the solution. Again look to the past for the inevitable results.
Knowledge is the only way we can balance equitably but in an age where information manipulation, gatekeepering, censorship, false-flags, corruption and other authoritarian blocking mechanisms are commonplace, how do the ignorant find, let alone follow the yellow brick road?
Reply
tom0mason
| #
If the UN-IPCC’s version of ‘Catastrophic Climate Change™’ (aka Anthropogenic Global Warming) were so evident to all then such propagandizing would be unnecessary. After 40 years the doom and gloom prognostications of atmospheric CO2 level rise has not happened, but instead has been beneficial for plant life, so the rabid propaganda campaigns continue. Thus far the evidence for atmospheric CO2 levels causing any harmful effects are yet to be found, and certainly the human component appears to do very little to exacerbate this nonevent.
It’s all unnecessary fear-mongering and alarmism. Alarm and fear that causes a useful split in the generations, a split between inexperienced ignorant and the knowledgeable. A split that usefully allows the powerful to make money from the scam schemes they’re selling.
NATURE and not humans controls the weather and the climate, we are just bit part players.
Reply
Judy
| #
Don’t forget the Global cooling scare in the early 1970’s all caused by our flagrant emissions of C02. Type bit.ly/tgm-j into your browser and word search on cooling then click on the link to the newspapers of the day. pls let me know if that idea worked. I’m still learning how to best use the PSI site. Cheers Judy
PS some people find that the bit.ly no longer works. It used to be top hit on first page. But, I think that alarmists probably paid some trolls to spend countless hours clicking on other sites to knock my bitly link off first page. Anyway, this post is not about me. It is about how we can work together to expose the alarmists hysterical antics re the null hypothesis in the oxymoronic non-testable climate-change saga.
Reply