![truth-and-lies[1]](http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2014/04/truth-and-lies1.gif)
Essay by Tom Harris, originally published in PJMedia
Over the past twenty years, we’ve been subjected to a barrage of catastrophic climate change forecasts and prophecies that would put Moses to shame. Coastal communities will be submerged due to rapid sea-level rise caused by soaring temperatures and glacier melt. Record heat waves, droughts, floods, insect infestations, and wildfires will result in millions of climate change refugees fleeing their ruined homelands. Competition over increasingly scarce water resources will lead to armed conflict. About all that has been missing from these doom and gloom predictions is alien invasion.
Like Moses’ warnings to Pharaoh in the Bible, we are told there is a high price to pay if we are to avoid climate change-driven “death, injury, and disrupted livelihoods,” to quote from the March 31 report of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We must reduce our carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gas emissions by 40 to 70% by 2050 to keep so-called global temperature from exceeding 2° C above pre-industrial levels, the IPCC claims. This will require massive cuts in our use of coal, oil, and natural gas, the sources of 87% of world primary energy consumption. What’s also needed, according to yet another IPCC report, Climate Change 2014 – Mitigation of Climate Change, released on April 12, is nothing less than:
a tripling to nearly a quadrupling of the share of zero‐ and low‐carbon energy supply from renewables, nuclear energy and fossil energy with carbon dioxide capture and storage [CCS, a technology the IPCC admit is currently problematic], or bioenergy with CCS by the year 2050.
Former Vice President Al Gore tells us that “the survival of civilization as we know it” is at risk if we don’t take these kinds of actions.
While historical evidence increasingly suggests that cataclysm really did follow Moses’ prophesies, modern-day forecasts of climate Armageddon are not coming true. The reports of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) reveal that there is nothing extraordinary about late twentieth century warming, a temperature rise that stopped over 17 years ago. The NIPCC explains that ice cover “is not melting at an enhanced rate; sea-level rise is not accelerating; and no systematic changes have been documented in evaporation or rainfall or in the magnitude or intensity of extreme meteorological events.”
Contrary to the IPCC’s warnings, the NIPCC report released this month, Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts, shows that long-term warming and CO2 rise are benefitting nature and humanity, “causing a great greening of the Earth.”
Faced with such good news, what are global warming activists to do?
Read the entire analysis here: http://pjmedia.com/blog/telling-noble-lies-about-climate-change-will-backfire/
Yeah I know but I try to keep to the peer review in certain circumstances otherwise Warmists have an easy target. Claims about the greening of the globe requires peer review and nothing less. My references were up to papers published in 2013.
The latest IPCC reports demonstrate that many are following a strategy taught in law school: “if the facts are on your side, pound the facts. If the facts are not on your side, pound the table.”
The way I heard it is more apropos to the current situation: “If the facts are in your favor, argue the facts. If the facts are against you, argue the law. If all else fails, attack the plaintiff.’
I have a simple question but first these points.
• Co2 is a greenhouse gas.
• Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas.
• Water vapor is short-lived in the atmosphere.
• Water vapor is constantly being replenished.
What causes most of the increase or decrease in the most important greenhouse gas?
@Bob Tisdale – an empty victory that will not help in the end.
Some people want to be lied to. We see them in society all the time – the old woman in Zimbabwe that holds onto the $100 trillion Zimbabwe note because Mugabe promised it would be worth something.
But they are not the majority. Most hate lies as it is not only a betrayal of trust, but a violation of the person’s trust and personal ego.
The only reason CAGW retains the level of support that it does is due to those who desperately want to believe. The rest either don’t or are wary of ANY lie.
I agree with Tom Harris. The lie will backfire. The best way to alleviate the situation is to come clean now. But the “team” has too much invested – their very livelihood. They will not come clean.
No a bad job Tom I do take issue with you on one point:
” If the science is so certain, the public are bound to eventually ask, why should we fund climate research at all? We supposed know what the future holds in store for us, so public funding of climate research can be terminated. In reality, the science is so immature that we do not even know if warming or cooling lies ahead. So continuing climate research is important if we are to eventually develop the tools we need to predict climate change so as to prepare for whatever nature throws at us next.”
While I do agree we need to fund climate science, and not the climate religion we now have. I will take you to task on the last line, I feel that most of climate is chaotic and it may have a cycle component. If that is true we may be able to have broad guess where climate is going but they will alway remain guess. I personal believe the best we may be able to do is only predict trends not what the weather is going to be next week, next month, next year, or many years down the road. Climate and weather will alway have too large of a chaotic component to be able reliably predict if beyond a few hours.
The real question that need to be study is can we predict climate accurately and what degree of accuracy, that is the question that does need to be answered, rather than if we don.t change X we are all going to die, as been the case the last few years. Since you and both know that statements about the climate and the direction it been going and would continue to go the last few years was not science. Since first science requires a far larger degree of proof than they ever had and one who makes such predictions need to be a lot humbler if they are to consider themselves as scientist.
Of course it is hard to blame them in a way, it a good con game while it lasts and if you are without conscience you just stand in line and collect the money and shovel out the male bovine fecal mater and watch the press and politicians eat it up.
From the post:
“Coastal communities will be submerged due to rapid sea-level rise caused by soaring temperatures and glacier melt. Record heat waves, droughts, floods, insect infestations, and wildfires will result in millions of climate change refugees fleeing their ruined homelands. Competition over increasingly scarce water resources will lead to armed conflict. About all that has been missing from these doom and gloom predictions is alien invasion.
http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore/275040/global-warming-may-cause-alien-invasion-updated-greg-pollowitz
Alien invasion has indeed been covered by the alarmists.
“I probably follow the online climate debate closer than most,…”
LOL! Writes for a publication that exists almost entirely as an alarmist mouthpiece. But never read WUWT or JoNova, and presumably never read any warmist blogs that spend half their time abusing “deni@l!st” blogs either. Or read Loonandowski, or any of the commentary on the well-named “Hoax” paper. It seems the only thing ever read is from the IPCC and Flannery. That might explain a few things.
Scientists and others who knew this but promoted the deception for what they considered good reasons will be disgraced. Then no one will believe them when wolves really are at our doors.
I disagree on the last point. Those who have promoted this are either enthralled with a political agenda (“social justice”, inequality, etc.), are too lazy to actually look at the data compared to the predictions and are thus poor scientists, or are simply incapable of understanding the science to begin with. In any of these cases they won’t be the ones to warn us about the real wolves.
And I wholeheartedly agree with you, Col. Mosby (4:29pm) and:
“disagree with the claim that we need to ‘find cheap sources of non-fossil fuel energy.’
We already have it. It’s called nuclear energy.”
GO, NUCLEAR POWER!!
Yeah!
Very good essay.
“About all that has been missing from these doom and gloom predictions is alien invasion.”
—
Oops! Somebody forgot to use Google. The alien invasion angle has been covered. From The Guardian in 2011 comes the following gem:
“Rising greenhouse emissions could tip off aliens that we are a rapidly expanding threat, warns a report…
Shawn Domagal-Goldman of Nasa’s Planetary Science Division and his colleagues compiled a list of plausible outcomes that could unfold in the aftermath of a close encounter, to help humanity “prepare for actual contact”. …
Watching from afar, extraterrestrial beings might view changes in Earth’s atmosphere as symptomatic of a civilisation growing out of control – and take drastic action to keep us from becoming a more serious threat, the researchers explain.”
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2011/aug/18/aliens-destroy-humanity-protect-civilisations
“While historical evidence increasingly suggests that cataclysm really did follow Moses’ prophesies . . . ” Uh . . . Pardon me? What?
Why in God’s name (a suitable epithet) toss this completely unforced error into a reasonable and middle-of-the-road argument that might have a broad appeal? Bizarre. Frankly, stupid.
Konrad says:
April 18, 2014 at 4:09 pm
“. . .TOB adjustment is one such concern. ‘
TOB might be unknown to some readers.
http://climateaudit101.wikispot.org/Time_of_Observation_Bias
the writer is not easy to pigeon-hole politically:
18 April: Discovery Institute: EvolutionNews: Wesley J. Smith: Global Warming Hysterics’ War on the Destitute
The Green misanthropes that are corrupting environmentalism want to keep the world’s destitute in squalor to “save the Earth.” It’s so cruel. Rather than electrifying Africa, for example, we are told that has to wait until it can be done by solar or other renewable sources — decades away, if ever. Meanwhile, people live in misery.
Then, as some kind of penance, the developed world is supposed to transfer hundreds of billions to the destitute, which would make us much poorer, while much of that wealth would go into private pockets, creating a culture of dependency that would be hard to escape. Like I said, it’s all very cruel.
Support for my disgusted view comes now from a scientist with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
From the BBC story:
But a lead author told BBC News that this focus on cutting CO2 was ignoring the development needs of the poor. “The narrative, the language, the views of the ‘IPCC still marginalises the developing country perspectives,” Dr Chukwumerije Okereke, from Reading University, told BBC News. Dr Okereke was a lead author on chapter four of the new report, dealing with sustainable development and equity. He believes that there has been a fundamental shift in the discussions because the issue of historical responsibility for carbon emissions has been watered down by richer nations who are more concerned with the future than the past.”‘…
‘In effect, this is shifting the burden onto the developing countries and is holding them down from developing; quite frankly this is reinforcing historical patterns of injustice and domination.’
But Okereke is wrong too. His approach would require us to stifle our already shaky economies, which would be as foolish as throttling growth and preventing the exploitation of resources in the developing world. Both proposals are a radical call to self-flagellation in the name of a neo-Earth religion or imposition of “nature rights.”
Even if one believes global warming is a crisis — count me as dubious, given virtually no warming in 18 years — Bjorn Lomborg’s approach is best. Prosperity is required to develop the technology to make the transition the warming believers claim we need.
“De-growth,” Draconian Malthusianism, humans depicted as “maggots” or “cancer” on the Earth, throttling growth, etc., will just generate more misery and promote increased conflict. That’s known as a war on humans coming and going.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/04/global_warming084611.html
After posting about The Guardian article on aliens attacking us over our CO2 emissions, I read some of the comments at the end. Someone implied that if the aliens read the article, their heads would explode. But my favorite comment was this one:
“If I were an alien reading this article I would not effing bother attacking.”
Well done everyone.
Moses had an amazing sequence of prophecies that were fulfilled.
See God’s Track Record of Fulfilled Prophecy By Don W. Olson 2005 pp 9-12
David. The Israelis (Jews) have a problem with Moses. Especially the 40 years in the wilderness.
“While historical evidence increasingly suggests that cataclysm really did follow Moses’ prophesies, modern-day forecasts of climate Armageddon are not coming true.”
I’m always a little skeptical of people who accept biblical literalism and reject modern science. But, you all believe as you like.
(QUOTE) What we’ve got to do in energy conservation is try to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, to have approached global warming as if it is real means energy conservation, so we will be doing the XXright thingXX anyway in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.(END QUOTE)
————————
NO!!!!! IF THE CAP FITS, WEAR IT!! ALL YOU AL GORE and AGW ALARMISTS
YES! Expensive Energy Kills Poor People
Artificially increasing energy prices for any reason harms, impoverishes, and kills the poor.
Yes, kills. People die from the cold. If the women of Maseru have to pay more for coal, they have less money to pay for food. So they will buy a bit less coal and a bit less food, and somewhere in there, in the hidden part that far too many people don’t want to think about, kids are dying. It’s already happening. The World Bank and the US are currently refusing to fund coal-fired power plants around the world … rich people refusing cheap energy to poor people, on my planet that is disgusting and criminal behavior.
Expensive Energy Kills Poor People
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/27/expensive-energy-kills-poor-people/
Posted on September 27, 2013 by Willis Eschenbach
Mike Smith says:
April 18, 2014 at 4:30 pm
I think the “Noble Cause” issue drives a lot of warmist followers. However, it’s not really in play with the warmest leaders. They’re just in this for a quick buck!
—
To some people, making a quick buck IS a “Noble Cause.” Besides, it may be hypocritical to seek to impoverish the world for a cause you believe in while at the same time using that cause to enrich yourself, but those activities are not mutually exclusive. Just ask Al Gore. He gave up spreading the word about climate change on his cable channel to pocket a few hundred million dollars of “dirty” oil money. But he still preaches the cause on other outlets.
Dirty gore, eh? Well he has a reputation to fulfill as a messiah of sorts. Well you know what happened to them? I suspect that Gore is feeling isolated and me thinks ‘The lady she complainith toooo much’. Oil generator, well that is polluting too.
Hey Felix.
I believe the government of my country lies to me.
They are working an agenda contrary to the benefit of their constituents.
They violate their oaths of office.
I suppose you believe the government is truthful.
I’d like to know how much the COP conferences cost. There have been, what, 19 of them so far? Who’s paying for those? How much has been spent on the salaries and expenses of the participants? Who’s paying for them?
How much has already been spent on mitigation of a non-problem? How much for pointless “carbon-capture” projects? How much has been squandered on the IPCC? How much paid for climate scientists to meet several times a year?
How much money has gone to subsidies for solar and wind farms that merely parasitize the productive economy? How much in tax money has gone to subsidize the Teslas that are just toys for rich people?
Someone should total up how much money has been squandered on the idiocy of anthropogenic global warming.
mandrake9 says:
April 18, 2014 at 6:20 pm
“While historical evidence increasingly suggests that cataclysm really did follow Moses’ prophesies . . . ” Uh . . . Pardon me? What?
—
There’s a big difference between “evidence” and “proof.” Both the Bible and the Koran document the Ten Plagues. Such ancient documents don’t “prove” an event happened, but they do provide historical evidence for it. (The fact that the Passover is still being commemorated after more than 3000 years is also evidence.) People can be open to such evidence, or they can close their minds to it. But they ought to have honest reasons for doing so, not just naked bias against the Bible or against religion in general.