“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what
people believe is true.”
-
Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace
Another co-founder of
Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, a Canadian ecologist who was a member from
1971-1986, told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, “After 15
years in the top committee I had to leave as Greenpeace took a sharp turn to
the political left, and began to adopt policies that I could not accept from my
scientific perspective. Climate change was not an issue when I abandoned
Greenpeace, but it certainly is now.” He said that environmental groups use “faulty
computer models and scare tactics in promoting claims man-made gases are
heating up the planet.”
“There is no scientific
proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of
the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years.” (Patrick
Moore)
A UN report in September
2013 said that global surface temperatures have not increased for the past 15
years. http://www.thegwpf.org/global-temperature-standstill-30-years-climate-scientist-predicts/
David Frame, climate
modeler at Oxford University once said, “The [computer] models are convenient
fictions that provide something very useful.” What do these often faulty computer
models provide? They provide power, control, and a whole lot of cash, Green
cash, via the fear constantly drilled in people’s minds that anthropogenic
global warming and climate change are something that we humans are responsible
for and, if we pay a lot of carbon taxes, engage in carbon swaps, and line the
pockets of crony capitalists with grants for expensive and job-killing
renewable energy projects, Mother Earth will be safe, the planet will be clean,
humans will suffer, and animals will reign supreme.
Reality does not seem to
fit the environmentalist dogma. Princeton physics professor William Happer
said, “It is important to distinguish between what the climate is actually
doing and what computer models predict.” It is also important to make the
distinction between climate and weather.
During the 20th
century, Sir James Lovelock, in his “Revenge of Gaia,” said, “By the end of
this century climate change will reduce the human population to a few breeding
pairs surviving near the Arctic.” This Malthusian prediction is laughable
except for the fact that people like him have cost humanity trillions of wasted
money, unnecessary suffering, fear, delusion, and forced redistribution of
wealth. Millionaires and billionaires were created by this hoax and they are still
reaping the benefits of an irrational fear created by irresponsible lies and
indoctrination from academia and the MSM.
Those who promote the
Science of the Green Scam are engaging in social science paraded as “consensus”
science deemed “settled” by government bureaucrats and opinionated Hollywood
stars. “Consensus” means that you and I agree on a particular issue and it is
not necessarily a fact. Real scientists know that real science is not static,
it is constantly revised, rigorously tested, retested to disprove the theory, and
outside criticism is welcomed in order to augment the theory.
Dr. Charles Krauthammer
calls the white-coated scientists who claim to know exactly what will happen 50
years from now “white-coated propagandists.” (The Myth of Settled Science,
Washington Post, February 20, 2014)
People like Kari Norgaard
who compared global warming skepticism to “racism,” believes that “cultural
resistance” to man-made caused global warming “must be recognized and treated
as an aberrant sociological behavior.” Dictators treated their critics in very
gruesome ways.
Sandra Korn, a Harvard
University student in Women’s Studies wrote that free speech threatens
liberalism and must be destroyed, and professors with dissenting views fired.
(Robby Soave, Daily Caller, February 23, 2014) “Let’s give up on academic freedom in favor of
justice,” Korn wrote.
What are some of the
results of the inflexible global warming/climate change dogma established by
political advocacy? For starters, there is a deliberate corruption of climate
science and of good research in general. Researchers/professors tailor their studies
and grant-writing based on the expected results of those who are awarding the grants,
and to ensure that the results confirm global warming.
Government establishments of
Green environmental programs at every level, an outrageous display of power
through regulatory agencies, have resulted in man-made disasters such as the
drought caused by the water use policy in California’s Central Valley where
saving a bait fish called the Delta smelt was more important than giving water
to thousands of farmers that have produced $45 billion worth of food annually. House
Bill 3964 that would have restored water to the area is still held in the
Senate by Democrats who have no intention of passing it.
 |
| Folsom Lake Dam Photo credit: KTVU, Channel 2 |
NASA released images of
Folsom lake, north of Sacramento, showing the water level dropping 80% over the
past two and half years. Can the unwise release of water in order to make room
for potential flooding rain be a possible reason? How can the passing of a $687
million drought plan for immediate relief to drought-stricken communities redress
the long-term Democrat water use policy? http://www.ktvu.com/s/californiadrought/
The federal government’s
solution in California’s Central Valley is a “relief” package of $2 billion,
including an insulting “summer meal plan” for those farmers put out of business
by environmental activists. Adding to the potential food shortage, a real
drought in South America has forced 142 Brazilian cities to ration water.
Brazil is a leading exporter in a number of food categories thus affecting
global food supply. The potential fear of starvation will certainly make people
“behave.”
Science Czar Dr. John
Holdren told reporters that “virtually all weather is being impacted by climate
change and that droughts were getting more frequent, they’re getting longer and
they’re getting dryer.”
Dr. Roy Spencer, former
NASA scientist calls Dr. Holdren’s statement “pseudo-science.” Dr. Spencer
said, “The idea that any of the weather we are seeing is in any significant way
due to humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions verges on irrationality.”
Even the United Nations
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “the repository of the global
warming hoax,” said Rush Limbaugh, found that “there is not enough evidence at
present to suggest more than low confidence in a global-scale observed trend in
drought.”
The journal Nature
published a paper in 2012, Vol. 491, pp. 435-438 by J. Sheffield that found “little
change in global drought over the past 60 years.” http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v491/n7424/full/nature11575.html
Dr. Spencer believes that
weather is affected by energy imbalances “between the solar heated surface of
the Earth and the atmosphere above it, and between different geographic
regions. On a local basis, those imbalances can be tens or even hundreds of watts
per square meter.”
The ocean and the
atmosphere tend to reduce these imbalances of energy. The climate is affected by such energy
imbalances. Dr. Spencer continued, “Our best estimate of how much the climate
system has been perturbed from energy imbalance comes from the slow warming of
the oceans, which, since the 1950s equates to a 1 part in 1,000 energy
imbalance. Now, how exactly can a 1 part in 1,000 energy imbalance lead Holdren
to state, ‘Weather practically everywhere is being caused by climate change?’
Well, all I can think of is that his statement is not based on science.”
EPA’s Director Gina
McCarthy says that all U.S. goals on climate change “will not have an impact
globally. You don’t make good, sustainable laws when you make them on unproven
sciences.”
Dams release waters to
flow “naturally” as demanded by environmental NGOs (non-governmental
organizations) and the courts, even though such dam-emptying can cause severe
water shortages and droughts in the process.
In spite of claims to the
contrary, the Dust Bowl was not created by global warming, it was created by a
combination of natural drought and agricultural practices.
No matter how we look at
issues, global warming is a very profitable enterprise driven by environmental
political advocacy. Some droughts in the U.S. are man-made, caused by Democrat-controlled
water use policies. “No matter if the
science of global warming is all phony… climate change provides the greatest
opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.” (Christine
Stewart, former Canadian Minister of the Environment)
Bamiyan Buddhas
