I keep telling people I will post something on climate change, excuse me, global warming. Okay, if you are still back in the 90s they called it global warming, or Anthropogenic Global Warming, which is a fancy way of pointing from your private jet and saying “he did it”. However some time back as it became clear that the climate was cooling they decided to call it climate change. The beauty of that is no matter what happens you blame it on humans and then ask for global government and wealth transfers to right the wrongs of climate.
From the onset several things strike me. If we are affecting climate how come we can’t affect a hurricane or even agree if seeding clouds really worked. In fact rain making is as close as we might get, but only if the right clouds are there. When prognosticators tell us what the next century will bring why can’t they predict the weather more than a week or two out. It looks to me like climate predictions are best done by statisticians. The farmers almanac may be a better start. Climate modelers meet annually to compare their one year model and in years of attempts none of them has even gotten close once. You’d think that would damp their confidence prognosticating, but then those research grants don’t jump ten fold with sunshine and lollipops.
After enough indoctrination from the Discovery channel which has practically ruined my love of science with their incessant condescending warnings about my consumption turning the planet into a smoldering gasbag I started to believe it. Then in 2008 when we had the coldest spring since 1918 I started doing research to see if I could figure out what was going on. I do farm you know. I locked myself in my office for two weeks only coming out to eat and mutter. By the end I was furious! I started going to through pages and pages of scientific documentation apparently designed to make your eyes glass over and just agree that these people were smarter than you so you would have to trust them. The problem was I began to get the feeling the entire argument was that these people were sure they were smarter than me and the way they won was getting me to feel stupid and give in. Just one problem… Being arrogant and educated doesn’t make them smarter than me.
I like to operate by axioms. I have learned to navigate the complex by identifying the core points. It’s like looking at lots of points of data where it means nothing, then taking a mean average and spotting the trend. There is an old saying that genius is making the complicated simple. Being a genius I arrived at a corollary that irritates me… Who made it complicated in the first place? If in an entire movement there is nobody who can define the basic relationships so smart people can understand then it had better be as amazing as advanced quantum physics. If an argument can be made so convoluted others can’t follow it and the person advocating can assume the mantle of being really smart and ready to save them from disaster I guess they can ask for you wallet or tell you to get naked. I just don’t like being manipulated, unless I’m getting drinks and dancing out of it.
So I was going to argue the technical points and I was going to start out with just how extreme reality is. For instance how much CO2 is in the air and how much air is over the planet. How much CO2 does man produce, what is the irradiative bandwidth and what temperature must it reach to heat a vastly larger mass. Even more amazing, why does the greenhouse theory operate on the assumption of thermal energy increasing at lower altitudes based on theoretical (and disproved) higher temperatures at some mystical theoretical boundary layer? In fact why is this observed temperature difference at altitude there and why is it simply an assumption in a theory that rationalizes violating several laws of physics? These questions and answers will not only blow your mind, but they will make it clear that if the same scientific thinking were applied in other areas we’d be lucky to have a sundial.
There is of course more. The entire alarm is based on what these scientists suppose would happen if these absurd violations of physics were true. Rather than looking at paleo-climate data which suggests that prior to the ice ages the planet was a tropical paradise they speculate heat leads to disaster. Interestingly the Sahara desert is instructive here. Scientists estimate 10,000 years ago the earth shifted up 1 degree which shortened the day slightly. The Sahara was rain forest but with less daylight to photosynthesize there was less condensation and the water cycle slowly failed. Note that Panama is not a desert. I could go on but the most fantastic assumption is that if man does it then it breaks nature, where as it works fine if nature does it. Insert a new conditional factor into all physics equations for man caused or not.
However there really is no longer any need to make people’s eyes glaze over. Trust me, global warming is over. Okay, don’t trust me. Let me give you the information to verify. First of all let’s start with three simple ideas. The first idea is that you don’t stand up in a crowded theater and yell fire then insist others prove you wrong. Liberal guilt be damned! How arrogant do I have to be to think my puny fart just killed a polar bear? Prove it. The second premise is that if you have the goods you will deliver your smoking gun proof. Further more you would never in a million years give up the moral high ground just for giggles. Finally if you assert there is something wrong with the climate then what pray tell is the correct baseline we have deviated from, assuming there is any indication we caused it. The initial assumption was no change which is insane. Now we acknowledge climate changes but this is absurd to arrive here before establishing basic patterns. Pardon me for saying, what kind of moron thinks that the climate has never changed for how long?
We are not having any measurable effect outside of urban heat islands. So it’s warmer in the city on a sunny day, but other than that nada. The reason I can say this is because we now know they don’t have the goods. If you still believe that smarter people than you put this forward and even if there are some doubts they must have known something then think again. Take an hour or two and look into it for yourself. Don’t just read some talking head protecting his job and millions of dollars in grant money. Think. Things started to turn dramatically when one of three main sources for the UN IPCC was exposed. Let’s not get wrapped up in whether the court of public opinion should dismiss the atrocities exposed in the emails from the East Anglia Climate Research Unit. What is important is that nobody denies their authenticity. Dr Phil Jones who headed up the CRU stepped down for the investigation. The UK has found they violated their Freedom Of Information Act, but as it took over six months since the last request no charges will be pressed.
Al Gore used the hockey stick graph very convincingly. It was what fooled me into believing him for a time. It was a FRAUD! It was particularly interesting when a couple guys from Canada exposed it and there were even congressional hearings. I read thousands of words as the chart was meticulously proven to be plain and simple fraud. In fact it’s rarely mentioned that in Al Gore’s movie part of the line was a projection that hadn’t been updated for years, thus appearing to be real data! In the UK they took Al Gore’s movie to court and now schools are required to tell students about 9 errors. The man who brought the case lists 38 errors on his web site, but didn’t want the trial to drag on forever. Al Gore has not debated for years.
Things really fell apart at the climate conference in 2009. Talk about relief! In 2008 the term “global governance” was being dropped suggesting national sovereignty needed to be ceded to the UN to resolve this issue. It wasn’t just the huge snow storm and the arguments over how much money rich countries would give small countries or how the head of the IPCC was set to become one of the richest men in the world from his green investments. it was the beginning of the unraveling of the 2007 IPCC report. People like to imagine this is a group of scientists, but the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is a political group as many scientists formerly associated with it will tell you.
First it came out that the dire warning that the glaciers in the Himalayas were not actually going to be gone in 35 years. Turns out that was somebody speculating in a magazine article. Worse yet the IPCC head knew before the conference and dismissed it. Next we found out the climate change wiping out the Amazon rain forest was bogus, but then anyone who knew science would understand that more photosynthesis and warmth is going to do the opposite. Next we found out they lied about deserts in Africa. Then we found out that it seems every part of the report under scrutiny was being done by advocates, students and the World Wildlife Federation… who by the way will get a lot more money out of you if the planet and those poor over crowded polar bears need help.
Here’s a great note. The current head of the IPCC has been asked to step down by no less than the head of Greenpeace in the UK. However India has taken a different course as they had been investing to find a solution for losing the water from the Himalayas. They are pulling out of the IPCC as they say it is a political body and can’t be trusted. Oh, did I mention the current head of the IPCC is from India? Russia and China have both said the CRU in the UK modified the data they sent them. Oh, did I mention that the CRU “climategate” emails had Phil Jones saying he would destroy the original data before giving it over. Recently the CRU said they somehow lost 100 years of climate data… conveniently…
If you don’t believe that man is causing the planet to heat up and cook all the little baby animals who deserve to live so much more than us for doing this evil you are called names. At the top of the list is denier, as in holocaust denier. Al Gore refuses to debate any of a number of challenges, and I am as bad as denying the Nazis killed six million Jews? Worse yet the watermelon saying that could be wearing a Che T-Shirt unaware he personally murdered thousands, but I digress. The other name is “flat earther”. Michael Mann produced the now discredited hockey stick graph which wiped out the little ice age that was in the prior IPCC report. The assumption was that climate was static until the industrial age. The assumption is that the greenhouse theory posited in 1824, which is technically disproved by various measurements, has this mysterious downward energy transfer… to me these are a lot closer to flat earth thinking.
The bottom line is simple. It doesn’t matter if I can go toe to toe with your science guy or not. It doesn’t matter you can. No smart and sane person is going to utterly destroy their credibility, call people names and make up lies while asking for trillions of dollars and control of our lives… unless of course they think you are all too freaking stupid and sheep like and they think it will be funny to really push the envelope on how deep they can pile the BS because they believe you will never see through it to the truth. Come to think of it… if you are still calling me a denier they could be right about you. However I’d like to give you a lot more credit.
Go dig around yourself. Tell your friends. Our president wants a clean energy bill. That’s code speak for regulating carbon and selling authorization to emit… which is going to make anything that consumes energy cost more… which is everything. The UK pays an extra $3,600 a year per household for this. I’ll tell you what I think needs saving. The planet is fine, it’s us who need saving and it’s greedy cronies of Al Gore and the Washington elite we need saving from. In fairness that means most of one political party and a lot of the other.
Climate change hysteria doesn’t deserve deep thought, it deserves to be treated like the comical thing it is. And so I let the late George Carlin close with his thoughts on saving the planet.
Wow! I love the way you think, and, man, you DO think. Great summation of what’s taken place over the years in this climate science scandal.
And I love this: ” I just don’t like being manipulated, unless I’m getting drinks and dancing out of it.”
Thanks Michele. This demonstrates why I don’t fit in a box. I mean how many fiscally conservative traditionalist libertarian hedonists are there? There is really only one time we all like being lied to and it seems a shame to throw penalty flags on the oldest game around. It’s an important distinction to be absolutely certain you haven’t unknowing died and kept walking. Put another way, that which takes us outside ourselves to touch another in even the smallest moment of the tiniest flirtation is the same energy that brings joy to our dearest relationships. If we don’t seek our joys the reservoir may run dry in the time to share them.