I have to admit I’m getting tired of writing about the theory of global warming. What more can The Daily Plunge say about the subject? The burden of proof is not on the skeptics, it’s on the alarmists.
For ten years alarmists have warned that we were at the tipping point, the sea levels are rising, the Arctic is melting, and temperatures are rising. The press dedicates endless coverage to all these wildly false claims. Hours upon hours of brainwashing “science” programming is rammed down our throats. James Taylor at The Heartland Institute asks “where is the warming?”
The evidence is powerful, straightforward, and damning. NASA satellite instruments precisely measuring global temperatures show absolutely no warming during the past the past 10 years. This is the case for the Northern Hemisphere mid-latitudes, including the United States. This is the case for the Arctic, where the signs of human-caused global warming are supposed to be first and most powerfully felt. This is the case for global sea surface temperatures, which alarmists claim should be sucking up much of the predicted human-induced warming. This is the case for the planet as a whole.
If atmospheric carbon dioxide emissions are the sole or primary driver of global temperatures, then where is all the global warming? We’re talking 10 years of higher-than-expected increases in greenhouse gases, yet 10 years of absolutely no warming. That’s 10 years of nada, nunca, nein, zero, and zilch.
How can this be? How can “scientists” insist that the world is warming? They ignore the satellite data and use flawed stations scattered throughout the world. Global warming isn’t a problem. In a world full of war, famine, disease, and unclean water it doesn’t make sense to spend billions of dollars chasing an unproven theory. It does make sense, however, when you understand that climate alarm is a religion that seeks to impose its will on everyone.
I saw a bumper sticker a few days ago that read: “Socialism: trickle up poverty.” Nowhere is this better represented than among the ranks of climate change alarmists. World War II type rationing is the consensus of a new climate change summit in Cancun, Mexico. Obviously, being an alarmist has its advantages. While these “scientists” burn more carbon than the annual output of most nations to meet in tropical locations and fret over the weather their solution is to impose poverty on the developed world…
In one paper Professor Kevin Anderson, Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, said the only way to reduce global emissions enough, while allowing the poor nations to continue to grow, is to halt economic growth in the rich world over the next twenty years.
This would mean a drastic change in lifestyles for many people in countries like Britain as everyone will have to buy less ‘carbon intensive’ goods and services such as long haul flights and fuel hungry cars.
What about those long haul flights to Cancun, Mr. Anderson? This is the same kind of elite thinking that led to overpopulation controls in Britain during the 19th century. Let’s face it, the super rich can afford to limit economic growth on everyone else. The poor peasants who will be covering themselves in filth to stay warm during the winter can rest easier knowing some super-rich scientist saved us from the heat. Freezing to death to prevent climate change is the absolute highest sacrifice one can make in the fight against global warming.
The hubris of these people is astounding. We can’t predict the weather two weeks from now, but we’re supposed to believe the world is going to warm a full seven degrees before 2060? The only evidence the scientists can produce is a computer simulation that has proven to be wrong again and again. If these computers are so great why aren’t we harnessing them to predict the weather next week?
One of the fascinating aspects about the whole Global Warming debate is the fact that no one talks about adapting to change. The alarmists never tell anyone that, according to their models, the entire world would have to return to a pre-industrial stone age to un-change the climate.
How come progressives who believe wholeheartedly in evolution and adaptation don’t believe mankind can adapt to climate change? Have the earth’s species adapted to a constantly changing climate in past eras? Or, was that whole adaptation thing an illusion? Bjorn Lomborg has an op-ed in the Washington Post that discusses some common sense ideas to reduce the urban heat effect and how mankind has adapted to change in the past.
Since 1930, excessive groundwater withdrawal has caused Tokyo to subside by as much as 15 feet. Similar subsidence has occurred over the past century in numerous cities, including Tianjin, Shanghai, Osaka, Bangkok and Jakarta. And in each case, the city has managed to protect itself from such large relative sea-level rises without much difficulty.
The process is called adaptation, and it’s something we humans are very good at. That isn’t surprising, since we’ve been doing it for millennia.
Lomborg’s argument is reasonable, but no one in the Global Warmongering industry is interested in common sense reforms. The billion-dollar industry is all about taxing and controlling the public. That’s what the state wants and that’s the inevitable conclusion of every leftist organization. It’s also the goal of fascism, socialism, Islamic fundamentalism and any other ism that has produced great human suffering.
The NOAA will be making headlines with the “news” that the last three months have been the “hottest on record.” They’re kind of right. The only problem is the way they’re recording. The recording stations the NOAA uses scattered throughout the world are flawed. Watts Up With That? has documented how bad they are in the United States. Here’s another example where the station recorded a temperature five degrees warmer than it actually was… You see, any time a temperature station is put on a roof, a sidewalk or next to a parking lot, the data recorded is worthless. The satellite data is .8 degrees cooler than the NOAA data. I’m not sure how they’re getting away with such flawed data.
Hence, anytime you see a headline citing “extreme temperatures” and it’s based on the NOAA just ignore it. I know I will.
Recent Comments