A Tsunami of Governmental Global Warming Lies

Written by Alan Caruba, Warning Signs.

snow global warmingThe writing's in the snowIt’s bad enough when major environmental organizations continue to lie about a “global warming” that does not exist in lieu of a planetary cooling cycle now entering its 17th year, but when those allied with the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are also in charge of producing a government report on it, the public is being lied to in ways that obscure their bias and agenda.

This is the case of the recently released draft report of the National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee (NCADAC) titled “Climate Changeand the American People.” The majority of the thirteen senior scientists responsible for it are closely allied with the IPCC. No doubt, the final report will be cited by the IPCC as further “proof” that global warming is real.

The Liar-in-Chief about global warming—AKA climate change—is President Obama who, during his second inaugural speech managed to ignore any mention of the nation’s catastrophic debt in favor of warning that climate change is causing forest fires, drought, and powerful storms. Excuse me, but the climate has always included these natural events. They are not the result of a warming that is not occurring.

Some believe that an effort is afoot  to revive cap-and-trade legislation that would tax so-called greenhouse gas emissions despite the fact that they play no role in either climate change or the bogus global warming. Others think that the EPA will be used as the blunt instrument to restrict emissions.

It is troubling enough that a January 24 edition of The Wall Street Journal included a commentary by Bjorn Lomborg, author and director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center in Washington, D.C., that criticized the President’s speech at the same time saying “This does not mean that climate change isn’t an issue. In the long run, the world needs to cut carbon dioxide because it causes global warming.”

No, carbon dioxide (CO2) doesn’t cause something that isn’t happening. It causes all the vegetation on Earth to thrive and that is why greenhouses increase it in order to stimulate growth. Reducing it via government regulation threatens the entire economy.

According to the NCADAC report, rising temperatures pose a health threat. They are not rising and countless retirees head to warmer states for the simple reason that warmer weather extends life while colder weather kills people. People who live in Florida and the Southwest are not moving to Minnesota or Alaska.

As Steve Gorham, the author of “The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania”, has pointed out regarding the NCADAC report, “The document uses the word ‘extreme’ more than 600 times to create an alarming picture of the future. It predicts ‘extreme weather events…extreme weather…extreme snowstorms…extreme winds…extreme drought…extreme floods…extreme rainfall’ and many other ‘extremes’, all claimed to be due to mankind’s relatively small emissions of CO2, a trace gas in the atmosphere. The report’s conclusions are based on computer model projections.”

Environmental studies professor, Roger Pielke Jr., notes that among those in charge of the latest government report are its chairman, biologist Jerry Melillo whose online bio cites his “long association with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” One of its vice chairmen, economics professor Gary Yohe has the same credential. Others affiliated with the IPCC are James Buizer, Sharon Hayes, Thomas Karl, Susanne Moser, Richard Moss, and Donald Wuebbles whose academic bio says he “shares in the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for his work with the international Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

The connections between these folks and environmental organizations include the fact that vice-chair Gary Yohe is part of a World Wildlife Fund panel and Richard Moss used to be employed as a WWF vice president. The WWF is one of the leading advocates of global warming. James Buizer is on the board of directors of Second Nature a group whose mission is to create a sustainable society by transforming higher education. In other words, ensuring that yet another generation passing through our universities absorb the global warming hoax.

The federal government has been funding these bogus reports and “research” about global warming to the tune of billions of dollars for years. The entire purpose is to keep the hoax alive and it has ensured that agencies such as NOAA and NASA have participated. Other than Al Gore, the leading proponent of global warming has been James Hansen who continues to head NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

It is so bad at NASA that, in February 2012, a group of twenty former NASA scientists formed a group called The Right Climate Stuff to dispute and debunk the many lies associated with global warming.

Fundamentally, you cannot trust anything the federal government, nor its lackeys in the mainstream media, regarding anything you read or hear about global warming or climate change. It is a tsunami of lies.

Source

Comments  

 
Gator
# Gator 01-29-2013 19:28
Mafia... Greenpeace... IPCC... Obama... peas in a pod.

"What difference does it make!?" ;-)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
anne
# anne 01-29-2013 13:51
www.washingtonpost.com/.../67388504-5f39-11e2-9dc9-bca76dd777b8_story.html Too good of an opportunity for the mafia and other fraudsters to miss!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
Judy Cross
# Judy Cross 01-29-2013 22:43
This article on Davos is my favorite.

"A $14 Trillion Extortion for a Global Warming Scam

"The latest megalomaniacal threat from the financial globalists wants to saddle the world economy with a cost of trillions of dollars that benefits favorite corporatists. The phony global warming cult has a core purpose. Their objective is to drive down the standard of living for non-elites and prevent the use of fossil fuel energy. The fallacious science used to create a disinformation scare for politically unsophisticated "True Believers" is a direct result of transnational money manipulators. The Davos crowd sponsors the educational and media institutions that trump up junk research and manufacture idealistic solutions."
batr.org/autonomy/012713.html
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
flux capacitor
# flux capacitor 04-18-2013 11:01
If global warming isnt real, why do so many investigations in many different fields show the same signal?

Also, wouldnt it be better for corporations to pretend it wasnt real, like you are on this page?

As far as i can see, climate change skeptics are at best ignorant of the many different bricks that build the wall of evidence from anthropogenic climate change, and worst lying pawns working for big business.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
amirlach
# amirlach 04-18-2013 19:14
Sorry Comrade but the different bricks of "Evidence" in no way support the CAGW "Theory".

It is in fact you who is ignorant of the evidence and are pretending CAGW is Real when it is not.

All the Models have failed to predict reality. Quote:
Professor Richard Feynman, Nobel Laureate in Physics said,


“It does not matter who you are, or how smart you are, or what title you have, or how many of you there are, and certainly not how many papers your side has published, if your prediction is wrong then your hypothesis is wrong. Period.”

Climate predictions are consistently wrong, so the hypothesis is wrong and the computer models built on it are wrong and produce meaingless results.
Want to see what "Real" Empirical based models can do Comrade?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
amirlach
# amirlach 04-18-2013 19:24
Quote:
The two models, IPCC model and atmospheric system model, use two very different modeling approaches: theory-driven vs data-driven modeling. The IPCC model is based essentially on AGW theory by emission of greenhouse gases, namely CO2, the presented atmospheric system model on the other hand is a CO2-free prediction model. It is described by 5 other variables. The IPCC model shows a prediction accuracy of 7% and the atmospheric system model an accuracy of 75% for the same most recent 21 months of time…
Now Comrade Flux. Are you going to continue to pretend that your "Wall of Evidence" is "Real" or will you accept the empirical evidence presented?

Let's do a recount. 44 Co2 Models vs Reality. Models 0, Reality 1.

IPCC "State of the Art" Climate Models 7% vs a Model based upon Empirical observations 77%.

Don't be a Denier Comrade Flux.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 
 
Robert
# Robert 04-19-2013 00:34
Amazing how they have this "wall of evidence" yet can never provide any. It must be on the other side of the wall where they can't get to it...
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote | Report to administrator
 

Add comment

Before posting a comment, please read the Terms of Service (click here). Long links are shortened but still work.

PLEASE report all spam/inappropriate comments using the 'Report to administrator' link. If you find your post gone, it's because you violated the TOS.


Security code
Refresh