UN's Global Warming group: "You gonna believe us, or your lying eyes?"

Breitbart (among others) writes that the United Nations climate panel's report may not be as objective as they want us to believe.

"An exhaustive United Nations report that claimed with 95% certainty that humans are responsible for global warming left out data that found the planet has stopped warming over the last 15 years, because it did not fit with the climate change agenda it wanted to advance." 

An earlier draft of the United Nations report, which was not used, acknowledged its climate models “do not generally reproduce the observed reduction in surface warming trend over the last 10–15 years.” In other words, reality slapped their predictions in the face and took its lunch money.

As the UK's Sun News says, "The issue is important because if the Earth is not warming as greenhouse gas emissions rise, it strikes at the heart of the theory of man-made global warming and suggests natural factors may be the greatest influence on climate."

Many Uncertainties

"Climate scientists struggle to explain warming slowdown" was the headline for a recent Reuters story. It turns out that almost none of the climate scientists predicted the lack of warming that has occurred in recent years.

Climate science has something in common with horoscopes and fortune tellers. Confidence in their predictions is higher when the results are either so vague, or so far in the future, that accuracy can't be measured. For example, we had predictions of arctic ice melting, raising the sea level by anywhere from three to twenty feet, flooding coastlines and destroying cities. When this didn't happen, predictions got fuzzy. It turns out that "global warming" can manifest itself by extremely hot weather, or by extremely cold weather. Extreme precipitation or extreme drought. More violent hurricanes, or fewer violent hurricanes. Climate scientists making predictions covered all their bases. Except now they're struggling to come up with an explanation for the lack of global warming. And, the article says, "some experts say their trust in climate science has declined because of the many uncertainties." 

"The climate system is not quite so simple as people thought," said Danish statistician Bjorn Lomborg.  

"My own confidence in the data has gone down in the past five years, said Richard Tol, an expert in climate change and professor of economics at the University of Sussex in England.

Hello Racists!

High Priest (and major profiteer) of global warming Al Gore says that global warming skeptics "are this generation's racists" and must be marginalized just as racists were during the civil rights movement. "My generation asked old people 'Explain to me again why it is okay to discriminate against people because their skin color is different?' And when they really couldn't answer that question with integrity, the change really started."

"Answer the question with integrity." This lies at the heart of the matter.  PRO-manmade (anthropogenic) global warming (AGW) activists such as Gore have been caught time after time cheating, misrepresenting, and deceiving in order to score points in the "conversation."

• Gore admitted pushing subsidies for corn-based ethanol, despite evidence showing lack of results, simply to score political points in Iowa.
• The Climategate e-mails show that scientists privately conspired to punish editors of peer-reviewed journals for publishing studies that disputed AGW, while publicly deriding any research that was not published in those same journals.
• Hysterical claims -- inevitably followed by calls for more government funding --  have been shown to be based on a single author's words, discredited data, or sloppy research.
• Claims of horrendous consequences have been "adjusted" when reality fails to match earlier predictions.  

The lack of integrity in the methods shown by the pro-AGW side, combined with their religious fervor in attacking anyone who dares to even question them -- Gore's "marginalization" process -- is enough to make a reasonable person question their conclusions.

Just How Serious Is Climate Change?

Well, you could say "it depends."

This video by Americans for Prosperity shows what attendees at the Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen are doing to save the planet from manmade global warmng.

The Perfect Problem

In America, trends tend to start in California. Both good and bad ideas often originate there, and the rest of the country tries to catch up.

Now Los Angeles Country transit officials, to fight global warming, want to add a new tax onto the fees and taxes that motorists already pay.

From the "Desert Dispatch" opinion piece: "Billed as a "climate change mitigation and adaptation fee," the measure would cost motorists either an additional 3 percent motor fuel tax, or up to a $90 annual flat fee, based on vehicle emissions." The bill was introduced by Assemblyman Mike Feuer, a Los Angeles Democrat (surprise!) and author of Assembly Bill 2558.

Again, from the piece: "Los Angeles County motorists should ask Mr. Feuer what global temperature would persuade him that a new tax is unneeded. Global warming, now conveniently rechristened "climate change," is perfect for demagoguery. Those advancing the cause won't explain how they will know we have won the global warming fight, let alone what the ideal temperature is supposed to be."

Some points to take away from the story: 1) All the hubbub is over computer models. The supposed disasters have not been confirmed with real-world applications at all. I previously wrote about the failure of computer modeling here and here. Real world examples? Al Gore's photo of the "stranded" polar bears in his movie was deceptive at best, and the Arctic ice cap is pretty much normal.




2) What's the ideal temperature? At what temperature would the global warming alarmists stop their hysteria? It's the perfect Liberal problem: one without a solution.

Other People Say Smart Stuff IV

Dr. Thomas Sowell is the smartest man in America. Among other accomplishments, he holds a Ph.D in economics and is currently a Senior Fellow with the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.

He has written a series of articles entitled "Global Hot Air." In these articles he has so far pointed out that

• The list of so-called "consensus of scientists" includes everything from "nuclear physicists to people who study insects, volcanoes, and endocrine glands -- none of whom is an expert on weather or climate, but all of whom can be listed as scientists, to impress people who don't scrutinize the list any further."
• Many distinguished climatologists who have real credentials oppose the concept of "manmade global warming."
• "There has been a full court press to convince the public that 'everybody knows' that a catastrophic global warming looms over us, that human beings are the cause of it, and that the only solution is to turn more money and power over to the government to stop us from our dangerous ways of living."
• The media present sensational and inaccurate headlines and stories to promote the idea of "manmade global warming."
• The big hurricane season in 2005 was touted in the media as caused by, and proof of, global warming. Predictions were that 2006 would be even worse. The fact that there was practically no hurricane season in 2006 went unmentioned.

Read Sowell's columns. He's smart and articulate.