The pattern here, is all too familiar. First we had Al Gore preaching to elementary kids his “An Inconvenient Truth,” based, he claimed, on solid, accepted, scientific evidence. The “truth,” as he put it forth had to do with the relationship of CO2 and global warming, among other things. It didn’t take long for “truth” to be revealed as a fairy tale, having little if any scientific basis. But his book and film are still quoted by environmentalists, and accepted by many as scientific truth.
Then we had the “hacker revelations” from the U.K.'s East Anglia University, which revealed that data was doctored, altered and made to appear more dire, presumably to influence political decisions relating to environmental policy.
Now, we have yet another revelation regarding the IPCC and bogus data. Rajendra Pachauri of the IPCC, “faces fresh controversy for wrongly linking global warming to an increase in the number and severity of natural disasters, including hurricanes and floods, and for a separate section of the report that warned that the world had "suffered rapidly rising costs due to extreme weather-related events since the 1970s." And now yet another, an oft-cited "fact" in his panel's 2008 climate change report -- that the Himalayas were on track to melt by 2035 -- was sloppily copied from a magazine interview with a single glaciologist in 1999.” Not only is the data wrong, it’s rather old as well.
“The IPCC based its claims on an unpublished report that had not been subjected to routine scientific scrutiny -- and ignored warnings from scientific advisers that the evidence supporting the link was weak, The Sunday Times of London reported. The newspaper has since found that the scientific paper on which the IPCC based that claim had neither been peer reviewed nor published at the time the U.N. panel issued its report.” (FoxNews.com) The long standing practice of having research reviewed by your peers was beginning to be ignored in the 1970s, then became significantly ignored by environmentalists who did not want their research to be reviewed because, well, it would be exposed. Now, today, the practice of having scientific research reviewed by peers is virtually ignored–especially by so called environmental scientists.
In 2008, when the report was eventually published, it had a new caveat. It said: "We find insufficient evidence to claim a statistical relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe losses." But despite this change, the IPCC did not issue a clarification ahead of the Copenhagen climate summit last month. One would have to be blind not to see the intent here of influencing climate policy at the Copenhagen conference.
Patrick J. Michaels, a senior fellow in environmental policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, said in an interview. "The absurdity was obvious to anyone who had studied the scientific literature. This was not an honest mistake. IPCC had been warned about it for a year by many scientists." It may have been absurd, but not to the environmentally religious faithful, who eat this stuff up and proclaim in loudly, truthful or not.
It’s becoming increasingly clear that none of the wild, extremist environmental and climate change claims are true. They are so far out there, you’d have to be really dumb, or really brainwashed to even tolerate such nonsense. The pattern here, of pumping out extreme “scientific” conclusions, avoiding peer review, and of slipping in little “mistakes” to draw attention to the environmental position of global warming/climate change, draws into question the entire body of environmental and climate change conclusions.
Just as President Obama wants all his policies and legislation approved in a big hurry, before people have time to fully consider the legislation, Al Gore also campaigned for urgent action, immediate action, screaming “the debate is over,” so action could be taken before people figured out how bogus this whole global warming thing is. The science is not there, the facts are not there, and the implications here are very disturbing. We have been duped, and the brain washing continues. And, no, Mr. Gore, the debate is not over, but only begun.
No comments:
Post a Comment