Naomi Oreskes, a Harvard University professor who flies around the world in pollutant-spewing jumbo jet airliners to proclaim that climate change is a terrible menace, has co-written another book warning about the planet’s dire environmental situation.
The book, called “The Collapse of Western Civilization: A View from the Future,” is a tale told with sound and fury by a historian living in the year 2393 who looks back on global collapse caused by global warming.
While The Daily Caller is not about to spoil it for you by giving away the role globetrotting Ivy League professors and their ilk play in Oreskes’s science fiction potboiler, The Guardian published an interview on Thursday in which she suggests that climate change “deniers” are diabolical marketing geniuses.
The professor describes “the denial industry” as a motley crew of “very cynical individuals” “with little or no regard to the consequences for others” as well as people who believe that environmentalists are “green on the outside, red on the inside — and that climate change is just an excuse to bring in socialism by another name.” Still others, she says, think climate change is a “fad” that will pass or have such a vested interest in “the fossil fuel industry” that they are willfully blind.
Someone has petitioned the UK Government's Home Office demanding that the term "denier" be classified as "hate speech."
We the undersigned request that the offensive terms, "climate denier", "denier", "denialist" and other variants being used to harass sceptical scientists or other people who do not ascribe to the hypothesis of man made climate change or man made global warming be classified as hate speech in accordance with the Public Order Act 1986. Scientists and others should not be subjected to hateful, offensive names in order to diminish their standing or to make them accept a consensus view.
I feel their pain but I'm certainly not going to be signing myself. Here are some reasons why:
The green lobby has finally come out and revealed its true intentions. No, a clean environment is not what it's working for. It's the death of capitalism.
For more than a quarter-century, extreme green has menaced the public with terrifying stories of apocalyptic man-made global warming.
It was all the movement had left. The environment in the developed world had been cleaned up after countries had gone through the growing pains of industrial development and economic maturity. So something else was needed to rage about.
The fright campaign culminated this month with a meeting hosted by Venezuela's government and attended by 130 green groups. The U.N.-sponsored conference, known as Social Pre-COP, produced a final version of the Margarita Declaration. All this "declaration" does is call for the death of capitalism.
America’s National Hockey League has become the latest organisation to claim that global warming threatens its future. Despite the fact that most of its rinks are indoors, it is maintaining that rising temperatures may melt frozen lakes, thus making it difficult for young people to start playing the sport.
A report on the League's environmental impact says:
"Perhaps more than any other sport, hockey is impacted by environmental issues, particularly climate change and freshwater scarcity. The ability to skate and play hockey outdoors is a critical component of the League’s history and culture. Many of the NHL's players, both past and present, learned to skate outside on frozen lakes, ponds and backyard rinks. The game of hockey is adversely affected if this opportunity becomes unavailable to future generations."
We’re reported previously (here and here, among others) about one of the leading explanations for the current lull in
global warming climate change, namely, that the heat is going into the oceans—particularly deep in the ocean, where, convenviently for the climatistas, we have very little data—instead of the atmosphere. It is a plausible hypothesis, and while there is some data to support ocean warming, it is very incomplete and over a short time scale.
There’s a new paper just out in the Journal of Physical Oceanography by Carl Wunsch of Harvard and Patrick Heimbach of MIT—both prominent figures in the field, neither known as a climate “skeptic”—that is likely to make waves (pun intended). You can find the abstract here (you can find a manuscript copy of the complete article on Wunsch’s website.) It is typically dense and difficult to follow, and appears to be written cautiously so as not to give direct aid and comfort to climate skeptics. But this sentence in particular appears significant:
The climate alarmists have found a new fluffy white creature with which to browbeat us about global warming.
Enter the white lemuroid ringtail possum - a species allegedly in imminent danger of being wiped out by man-made climate change. Only four have been found in the wild in its rainforest habitat in Queensland, Australia since a 2005 heatwave wiped out a population said to have been in the thousands. One more hot spell like that and the possum could cease to exist. Apparently.
"I think this really should be a wake-up call," tropical rainforests expert and James Cook University researcher Professor Bill Laurance told AAP."We're arguing this is a better icon for global warming than a polar bear because it typifies the type of biodiversity we will lose in the future."
The possum has at least two distinct advantages over its ferocious ursine rival. First, it doesn't kill and eat people. Second - unlike the polar bear - its population has NOT increased fivefold in the last fifty years, which gives it a greater claim to being "endangered."
People all around the world, responding to a survey by Ipsos MORI, have generally agreed with the ideas that scientists don't really know what they're talking about when it comes to the climate – and that governments are using environmental issues as an excuse to raise taxes.
These not-so-green views were transmitted as part of Ipsos MORI's new Global Trends 2014 survey, which can be seen here. Respondents were asked to respond "agree", "disagree" or "don't know" to various statements.
On balance the people of the world concurred with the statement "even the scientists don't really know what they're talking about on environmental issues", with only 42 per cent disagreeing and 48 per cent agreeing. Disbelief in scientific climate expertise was strongest in China, Japan and Germany. In Britain, the US and Australia, people were less sceptical, with those populations pretty much evenly split as to whether scientists know what they're on about regarding the environment.
The debate is over
That’s what liberals say about man causing global warming. They say there is scientific consensus our climate is warming the earth due to man emitting carbon (CO2) into the atmosphere.
I have written in the past that liberals live in a fantasy world. They do not function in the world of reality and their insistence on manmade GW, in spite of a preponderance of evidence to the contrary, is proof positive to what I just said.
Yup, the debate is over and not that man causes global warming, but that liberals don’t care the least about facts. The global warming issue proves liberals live in a fantasy world. This writing is about GW, but there are a multitude of issues that causes one to question what planet these people live on. Obviously, not planet earth.
Environmental Protection Agency chief Gina McCarthy denied Wednesday that environmental lobbyists played an outsized role in crafting the agency’s carbon dioxide regulations.
The claim comes from a New York Times article from July 6, outlining how a report authored by influential lobbyists with the Natural Resources Defense Council was used by the Obama administration “as its blueprint” for its recent regulations on power plant emissions.
McCarthy said the Times piece, by seasoned environmental reporter Coral Davenport, was given “surprising credibility” by Republicans, and denied that NRDC and other environmental groups had undue influence over the agency’s carbon rule.
Oh what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive. --Sir Walter ScottThis is the awkward result when reality confronts ideology.
According to Un-Skeptical Pseudo-Science, the Pause is just a myth:
Climate myth… It hasn’t warmed since 1998
“For the years 1998-2005, temperature did not increase. This period coincides with society’s continued pumping of more CO2 into the atmosphere.” (Bob Carter)
No, it hasn’t been cooling since 1998. Even if we ignore long term trends and just look at the record-breakers, that wasn’t the hottest year ever. Different reports show that, overall, 2005 was hotter than 1998. What’s more, globally, the hottest 12-month period ever recorded was from June 2009 to May 2010.“
If you haven't seen The Lego Movie, this won't be a spoiler to say it's about 'an ordinary construction worker recruited to join a quest to stop an evil tyrant' from destroying the Lego universe. It now seems ironic that Greenpeace, in its ongoing quest to squash the life and fun out of just about everything, has become a real-world Kragle in its ongoing mission to destroy the simplest of pleasures at every turn. From Energy Global:
Yesterday, six Greenpeace activists dressed as LEGO people attempted to deliver a 115 000 strong UK petition to LEGO HQ in Slough. The petition calls for LEGO to stop promoting Shell on its toys.