![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/
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
here is more Alarmst hysteria from people who understand neither climate nor (their comparison) the causes of World War One:
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/future_tense/2014/04/david_titley_climate_change_war_an_interview_with_the_retired_rear_admiral.html
Reblogged this on Public Secrets and commented:
The arrogance of the Warmists leads them to lie “for the greater good.” Trouble is, for them and their cause, Nature is not cooperating and people are seeing through the lies.
DirkH:
“What bankrupts Japan is their demographic decline and Keynesian economics; not Fukushima. 20 km from the reactor the radiation level is 3 times the normal background radiation. Nothing catastrophic.”
I agree with your point on demographics and economic policy. However, some time reading
http://enenews.com
might change your mind about “nothing catastrophic.”
Skyonic, meh. I wonder how many people who read this blog do not realize that rotting vegetation produces Gigatonnes of CO2 every year? Mother Nature puts in 97% and we put in a paltry 3%. Mother Nature is also extremely erratic, with her production and consumption annually varying more than our contribution.
The atmosphere is large, the oceans are far larger, and we are small…
“People from across the political spectrum are starting to realize the immorality of such an approach.”
Maybe there are such people, but unless they start speaking soon, and loudly, those that have been taxed and carbon credited into poverty just might get some thick staves and turn the offices of NGOs into warehouses.
I am surprised by the support for nuclear fission on this site.
This is from NHK, Japan’s state broadcaster, and subject to the country’s new and draconian state secrecy law:
The EPA would agree with DirkH’s “nothing catastrophic” comment. I do not trust the EPA.
Thank you, Onlooker! Your very generous, kind, compliment (at 7:36am) was such a welcome sight this morning. Hope all is happy or, at least, peaceful, in Troy.
Janice
*******************************
And….
GO, NUCLEAR POWER!! Heh, heh, heh.
For a little truth about nuclear power see:
1. http://www.cfact.org/2013/10/12/physicist-there-was-no-fukushima-nuclear-disaster/
2. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/14/nuclear-power-perspective/
(See especially the Comments)
Bob Bajini says:
April 18, 2014 at 4:42 pm
The NIPCC can make the IPCC look sober and moderate. That’s the problem: two groups of people with competing positions yelling over each other with red faces.
+1 for this.
The non-alarmist argument is best served by the facts.
Concerning what KenB says:
April 19, 2014 at 3:36 am
The liars have much to fear as they have fed a “liars line” to a carefully cossetted and guided by propaganda generation, that wil…
I hope that the liars would at the very least be embarrassed when the hoax is finally realized but I’m afraid that they will just shrug their shoulders like Lee Marvin did at the end of the movie Paint Your Wagon. Lee and his partners doug tunnels under most of their town looking for the gold dust that fell through the cracks of the floors of the saloons and adult playgrounds. They were shocked when the town collapsed. It is a great movie.
About all that has been missing from these doom and gloom predictions is alien invasion.
Ahem…
Aliens Could Attack Earth to End Global Warming, NASA Scientist Frets
A team of American researchers have produced a range of scenarios in which aliens could attack the earth, and curiously, one revolves around climate change.
They speculate that extraterrestrial environmentalists could be so appalled by our planet-polluting ways that they view us as a threat to the intergalactic ecosystem and decide to destroy us.
The thought-provoking scenario is one of many envisaged in a joint study by Penn State and the NASA Planetary Science Division, entitled “Would Contact with Extraterrestrials Benefit or Harm Humanity? A Scenario Analysis.”
http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/08/19/aliens-could-attack-earth-to-end-global-warming-nasa-scientist-claims/
It’s worse than we thought!
Curious to see if this post is allowed given that it expresses an opinion that is sceptical of those here ;-)…
I assume most readers follow general scientific opinion on a host of other issues, but am curious to know why not this one?
Take second hand smoke for example. As with AGW, there is strong scientific evidence for it being damaging, but a few scientists disagree and their views are loudly touted by those with financial interests in tobacco (NB the same scientists also often disagree with climate change, e.g. those involved in the NIPCC, e.g. Dr. S. Fred Singer Dr. Frederick Seitz). On that note, whilst the NIPCC is being positioned by the Heartland Institute as an alternative to the IPCC, it seems to have no scientific articles to its name.
To look more widely at how small a portion of scientific opinion the NIPCC represents, only 2 articles disagreeing with AGW were published in 2013, out of 10,885: http://www.jamespowell.org/index.html
I’d imagine for the most part, readers when when faced with the choice of who to believe on health matters follow the vast majority of scientists. In the case of AGW, as this article rightly notes there are important co-benefits (such as reducing fuel insecurity and wastefulness) to reducing our dependence on fossil fuels, and I don’t have a problem if they are talked about too.
Col Mosby: I support nuclear power in appropriate applications. However, the World Nuclear Association are making a critical mistake trying to boost nuclear as a “solution” to man-made climate change. Many people I know in the nuclear field are also uncomfortable with their highly unscientific, opportunistic approach, one that will come back to haunt them someday, I am convinced.
O/T This will interest you all, Brandis our Attorney General really fired a shot at alarmists (choke on your Easter Egg Flannery, I am out of time to give details but it is on ABC and news.com.au on line. He said, ‘The science is not settled!” And attacks and vilification of deniers (?) was not on, they (them) should engage intellectually with deniers. Oh I wonder if he will put that in his legislation. Hope so. Have a pleasant Easter folks.
Happy Easter to you, too, dear Bush Bunny (what a perfect name for the day, smile).
And to you Janice, actually a bush bunny in the context I use as a gravatar is actually usually with a photo of me, with a Akrubra hat and means I live in the bush, not a city. Well a regional town with two cathedrals and one university. Armidale is up high on the tablelands of Northern NSW. Very much like a county town in UK, and with lots of deciduous trees, rather than gums. And greener than most places that’s why it was named New England.
“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.”
If we take these kind of actions the Death of the Western civilization as we know it is certain?
If only you would believe our lies. Yeah right!!
A hard hitting but true analysis. And sad also.
ysupp says: April 19, 2014 at 2:34 pm
Curious to see if this post is allowed given that it expresses an opinion that is sceptical of those here ;-)…
I assume most readers follow general scientific opinion on a host of other issues, but am curious to know why not this one?
Take second hand smoke for example. As with AGW, there is strong scientific evidence for it being damaging, but a few scientists disagree and their views are loudly touted by those with financial interests in tobacco (NB the same scientists also often disagree with climate change, e.g. those involved in the NIPCC, e.g. Dr. S. Fred Singer Dr. Frederick Seitz). On that note, whilst the NIPCC is being positioned by the Heartland Institute as an alternative to the IPCC, it seems to have no scientific articles to its name.
You left off the ‘/sarc’ tag
1) If I used my ‘real name’ how would you know it is actually my real name?
2) You are wrong about the ‘threat’ – it was not a threat. How can I make a threat against someone I don’t know?
Next time please engage your brain before opening your back orifice. It stinks.
Roger Sowell is an attorney and he thinks I made a threat. Your clients should ask for their money back. You are not a good attorney. Please read what I said. Sheesh! You must be money mad!
Is this a threat?
Sowell is a mind reader I guess but not a good attorney. By the way my name is John Parfitt or James Hansen or Paul Jones or Michael Mann or Martin Greene. You see I can put any bloody name up and you cannot be the wiser. Please think before you attack me again. THIS IS NOT A THREAT. NO, NO, NO.
Finally, I don’t use my real name because I live in a country that stands to gain from the global warming con. We have secret police, detentions, disappearances without trial etc. So if that makes me a coward then yes I am as I don’t live in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Let’s swap places and see if some people would use their real names. Did I hear cowardice? Just do it.
In anticipation of a possible comment by Sowell
How do I know that the name you use is yours? Anyone can insert a name with a website and email. I don’t live in the USA so please sleep tight. I have more important things to do than to threaten a bald legal eagle.
I have been saying for years that hyping the AGW scare as they have been doing will discredit any decent green initiatives and in fact encourage the Big Polluters to have a field day after the AGW scare has found its way to the dustbin of history. I am glad that some others know this also