by: Diane Benjamin
How many billions (trillions?) have been spent around the globe to supposedly fight global cooling in the 70’s, then global warming and now just climate change? When have you ever seen a debate among scientists or meteorologists? The answer is NEVER.
Anybody who questions the reality of climate change or opposes the massive taxpayer dollars being thrown at it, is demonized with names like “flat-earther”. Their supposed scientific proof has been shown to be contrived and falsified, and their weather models are far from correct.
Isn’t the basis of science first theory, then analysis, then debate, and finally a firm premise? How many times has the premise been shown to be wrong when additional information is gathered?
To prove the climate change propaganda is nothing more than an attempt to control you and deprive you of your money, take Al Gore. When he left office he was worth a couple million dollars. Now, with his gospel according Al speeches earning him $100,000 each and movies with not totally truthful content, he is worth $100 million. All this while he wants to deprive us of SUV’s, but he jets around the world and lives in at least one mansion that isn’t close to green. More “Do as I say, not as I do”.
This is going to be a multi-part post. You need to inform yourself, and then others. We are being destroyed from within, and just like good sheeple, we sit back and let it happen.
Steve Goreham, author of “The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism”, compiled data, quotes, and research form numerous sources. Much of the information I will present is from his book.
Consider the following:
1. Climate alarmists admit that for 4.5 billion years until about 50 years ago, natural events controlled Earth’s climate. But then they claim that, all of a sudden, human produced carbon dioxide (CO2) took over that control.
2. Climate alarmists predict that global temperatures will rise due to human use of fossil fuels, but they ignore the fact that temperatures have been rising naturally about one degree every century since the Little Ice Age began to wane 350 years ago.
3. Climate alarmists admit that strong correlations exist between variations in solar activity and variations in climate, but since they do not know the mechanism that would relate one to the other, they say that those correlations are meaningless.
4. Climate alarmists see a strong correlation in ice cores between increases in global temperature and increases in atmospheric CO2, but they find it unimportant that the increases in CO2 follow increases in temperature rather than proceed it.
5. Climate alarmist consider climate to be controlled by CO2 in the atmosphere, but they conveniently forgot the oceans’ capacity to absorb and release heat and CO2 dwarfs that of the atmosphere by factors of 1,100 and 50, respectively.
6. Climate alarmists see current increases in atmospheric CO2 as caused by the burning of fossil fuels, but they discount the fact that isotopic analysis shows that only four percent of the CO2 in the atmosphere has come from fossil fuels with the vast majority being released from other sources, particularly from the oceans.
7. Climate alarmists believe that global warming and increases in the atmospheric CO2 will sound the death knell for human civilization but find it convenient to forget that warming is better for human longevity, and that increase CO2 will significantly increase food supply.
8. Climate alarmists believe that global climate models can predict the Earth’s climate future but dismiss the fact that their predictions for atmospheric warming over the last 50 years have been proven wrong by direct measurement from satellites.
Nothing in the Constitution of the United States gives the Congress or the Executive Branch the power to attempt the task of regulating climate, as impossible as that would be under any realist scenarios. No national security emergency exists relative to climate that would warrant increased governmental control of energy production. Today’s Americans have an obligation to future Americans to elect leaders who do not believe in an omnipotent government but believe, as did the founders, in limited government and in the preservation of liberty and the natural rights of the people.
—-Harrison H. Schmitt, PhD,
former Us Senator and
Apollo 17 Astronaut
Stay tuned, barely getting stated.
Transfer of wealth. From our pockets to the scum global elite.
Diane, this is very good, except I disagree with you on how science is supposed to work. As a scientist and educator, I teach my students that science is a creative human endeavor that has as its goal the increase in knowledge. For something to be knowledge, it must be proven to be true. When scientists speak of “theory,” they mean a model that is the very best explanation we have for a given phenomena. Climate change is not a theory, but a model. Global warming is also a model. Neither is well understood and their is much to be learned. Those that think carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases are the primary factors determining climate are very mistaken. The climate models need to be much more sophisticated than they are today before we will begin to have understanding. The climate scientists are generally biased and need to drop their biased before substantial progress can be made. A key step in advancing our knowledge will be the removal of politics and bias from climate science.
A further comment on models and theories: they must be testable against the natural world and have natural explanations. Models compete against each other and make predictions that are testable. The model that passes all of our tests, defeating all other explanations, becomes the theory.
Keep watching – much more to come!