See other Science/Tech Articles
Title: Facts conveniently brushed over by the global warming fanatics
Source:
SMH.com
URL Source: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit ... ng-fanatics-20100131-n6fr.html
Published: Feb 1, 2010
Author: staff
Post Date: 2010-01-31 12:23:41 by buckeroo
Keywords: None
Views: 3261
Comments: 115
Here are 10 anti-commandments, 10 selected facts about global warming which have been largely ignored amid the orthodoxies to which we are subjected every day. All these anti-commandments are either true or backed by scientific opinion. All can also be hotly contested. 1. The pin-up species of global warming, the polar bear, is increasing in number, not decreasing. 2. The US President, Barack Obama, supports building nuclear power plants. Last week, in his State of the Union address, he said: ''To create more of these clean energy jobs, we need more production, more efficiency, more incentives. And that means building a new generation of safe, clean nuclear power plants in this country.'' 3. The Copenhagen climate conference descended into farce. The low point of the gridlock and posturing at Copenhagen came with the appearance by the socialist dictator of Venezuela, President Hugo Chavez, whose anti-capitalist diatribe drew a cheering ovation from thousands of left-wing ideologues. 4. The reputation of the chief United Nations scientist on global warming is in disrepair. Dr Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), is being investigated for financial irregularities, conflicts of interest and scientific distortion. He has already admitted publishing false data. 5. The supposed scientific consensus of the IPCC has been challenged by numerous distinguished scientists. 6. The politicisation of science leads to a heavy price being paid in poor countries. After Western environmentalists succeeded in banning or suppressing the use of the pesticide DDT, the rate of death by malaria rose into the millions. Some scholars estimate the death toll at 20 million or more, most of them children. 7. The biofuels industry has exacerbated world hunger. Diverting huge amounts of grain crops (as distinct from sugar cane) to biofuels has contributed to a rise in world food prices, felt acutely in the poorest nations. 8. The Kyoto Protocol has proved meaningless. Global carbon emissions are significantly higher today than they were when the Kyoto Protocol was introduced. 9. The United Nations global carbon emissions reduction target is a massively costly mirage. 10. Kevin Rudd's political bluff on emissions trading has been exposed. The Prime Minister intimated he would go to the people in an early election if his carbon emissions trading legislation was rejected. He won't. The electorate has shifted. None of these anti-commandments question the salient negative link between humanity and the environment: that we are an omnivorous, rapacious species which has done enormous damage to the world's environment. Nor do they question the warming of the planet. What they do question is the morphing of science with ideology, the most pernicious byproduct of the global warming debate. All these anti-commandments were brought into focus this past week by the visit of the Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, better known as Lord Christopher Monckton, journalist by trade, mathematician by training, provocateur by inclination. Last Wednesday a conference room at the Sheraton on the Park was filled to overflowing, all 800 seats sold with a standing-room only crowd at the back, to see the Sydney public appearance of Monckton, a former science adviser to Margaret Thatcher. At the end of his presentation he received a sustained standing ovation. Monckton is the embodiment of English aristocratic eccentricity. His presentations are a combination of stand-up comedy, evangelical preaching and fierce debating. Almost every argument he makes can be contested, but given the enormity of the multi-trillion-dollars that governments expect taxpayers to expend on combating global warming, the process needs to be subject to brutal interrogation, scrutiny and scepticism. And Monckton was brutal, especially about the media, referring to ''all this bed-wetting stuff on the ABC and the BBC''. There has also been a monumental political failure surrounding the global warming debate. Those who would have to pay for most of the massive government expenditures proposed, the taxpayers of the West, are beginning to go into open revolt at the prospect. Last week the Herald reported that Monckton told a large lie while in Sydney. On Tuesday it reported: ''He said with a straight face on the Alan Jones radio program that he had been awarded the Nobel, a claim Jones did not question.'' The Herald repeated the accusation on Thursday. It was repeated a third time in a commentary in Saturday's Herald. In 2007 the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change shared the Nobel Peace Prize with the former US vice-president Al Gore. The prize committee, in citing its selection of the IPCC, said: ''Through the IPCC … thousands of scientists and officials from over 100 countries have collaborated to achieve greater certainty as to the scale of [global] warming.'' Thousands of people were thus collectively and anonymously part of the prize process. So what lie did Monckton tell about the prize? Despite the gravity of the accusation, the Herald never published the offending remark. Here, for the record, is what he actually said: Monckton: ''I found out on the day of publication of the 2007 [IPCC report] that they'd multiplied, by 10, the observed contribution to sea-level rise of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheet. By 10! I got in touch with them and said, 'You will correct this.' And two days later, furtively, on the website, no publicity, they simply relabelled, recalculated and corrected the table they'd got wrong.'' Alan Jones: ''But this report won a Nobel Prize!'' Monckton: ''Yes. Exactly. And I am also a Nobel Prize winner because I made a correction. I'm part of the process that got the Nobel Prize. Do I deserve it? No. Do they deserve it? No. The thing is a joke.'' Poster Comment: Still global warming phenomena is an undeniable FACT!
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 34.
#2. To: buckeroo, farmfriend, James Deffenbach (#0)
And the FACT that Global average temperatures have declined for the last ten years proves that we have Glowbull Warming.
That isn't true. 1998 is the hottest year recorded since 1850 with mean temperature distributions around the globe; 2005 is the second. And out of this excessive heat, the Arctic is breaking up and glaciers are receding at rates that can be witnessed everywhere. You have to be careful in blinding yourself to truth about contemporary geophysics phenomena because of political parlay "double-speak." As opposed to denying scientific truth you should beg your Congress to disassociate with the UN because of their shenanigans.
Buck, that is such an insignificant amount of time in the scope of the life of this planet. Conveniently discounts ice ages and major temperature fluxations that occurred LONG BEFORE humans became industrialized. Volcanic eruptions have created much hotter time spans than this insignificant blip you are using as evidence to support your warming theory. Does the SUN have any impact on warming?
Exactly! That is the very point that I am addressing. Here is why:
Is your worry global warming or over population? You do realize that one worry will take care of the other worry in time........if your theory is right. If over population is your biggest worry, then you should be happy about global warming and the pending doom and gloom for humankind. Do tell, how will a carbon tax and outlawing CO2 fix either problem? How will more idiotic gooberint regulation fix either problem? When has the goobermint EVER fixed anything? These are serious questions posed for your consideration. Oh, and I would still like to know what your plan is IF that big ball of fire in the sky is to blame for this global warming that has you so concerned.
Government, on any level, can not contain the ramifications already being witnessed. Do you place "hope" about government intervention? I don't. I believe the free markets shall decide our capabilities to overcome the problems the world faces. It is undeniable that the tremendous climb in human population growth has exacerbated current issues; famine, thirst, disease and government overthrow shall be the order of the day. And there isn't much that can be done about it.
Then why beat us up over it?
You think a political game is in motion as you take one side of the argument.
Actually, we KNOW there is a political game in motion. A game that is lining Al Gore's pockets. Where does the SUN fit into this argument Buck?
#35. To: abraxas (#34)
Something tells me the real polluters and "unsustainable" consuming corporations are going to win either way. Now who's playing that game on us?
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestStill global warming phenomena is an undeniable FACT!
#4. To: Original_Intent (#2)
#5. To: buckeroo (#4)
since 1850
#6. To: abraxas (#5)
that is such an insignificant amount of time in the scope of the life of this planet.
#9. To: buckeroo (#6)
#18. To: abraxas (#9)
Do tell, how will a carbon tax and outlawing CO2 fix either problem? How will more idiotic gooberint regulation fix either problem? When has the goobermint EVER fixed anything?
#19. To: buckeroo, abraxas, Original_Intent (#18)
And there isn't much that can be done about it.
#21. To: farmfriend (#19)
Then why beat us up over it?
#34. To: buckeroo, farmfriend (#21)
You think a political game is in motion as you take one side of the argument
Replies to Comment # 34.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 34.