The Highly Touted Global Warming Consensus, Becomes Nonsensus
Posted: Tuesday, February 09, 2010
by Joel Hendon
http://hebronics.org/index.html
As far back as the turn of the millennium, sound and legitimate scientists have disputed the frantic screaming of the planet being destroyed by man made carbon dioxide. But the screamers have insisted there is a consensus of the scientific community who have evidence and are convinced that such is happening. Now, within the past few months, evidence has been mounting that none of them have had adequate evidence to cause such a ruckus and to cause the great expenditure on nations whose economies are already defunct.
One of their first willful deceptions was the now famous "hockey stick" chart, where the global temperature was shown to be relatively level from the beginning pf the eleventh century until the mid twentieth century when it made a sharp upturn. This was termed as being positive proof of our extra carbon dioxide emissions causing the temperature rise. But other scientists disproved the accuracy of that and showed decisively that global temperatures were as warm or warmer in the eleventh and twelfth centuries than they are now.
There are also evidences that Greenland was discovered during this warm period and was named Greenland because of the vast greenery there which is no longer green. But the IPCC whose ultimate goal is that of taxing all nations heavily to reduce the carbon emissions and thereby gain a global governance, would have none of that evidence. Neither would the huge number of scientists who were being supported by large grants from various international governments and other institutions. They all insisted there was a "consensus" among the scientific community proving these things true. WRONG! Thousands of notable and reputable scientists have signed petitions that they did not agree with those unproven theories.
Al Gore, seeing a fortune in the idea, jumped on the bandwagon and, indeed has made huge amounts of money for his efforts. He now flies in his private carbon dioxide puking jet, proclaiming that we all must insulate our homes, turn the temperature down and stop passing so much gas.
The illegally hacked emails which hit the internet recently, although in itself did not prove anything, except that the pushers of man made global warming had lied and stretched the truth in just about every endeavor. Many of their "proofs" turned out to be non-proofs. And since that time, the UK Telegraph has turned up numerous other damning factors where the IPCC made drastic positive statements based on information they found in press releases and newsletters.
They also made statements from students dissertations, two of which were not even published. They also made claims with no evidence except reports from environmental pressure groups.
Last month, they were forced to issue a humiliating retraction of their previous report that of the ice on the Himalayans would be gone by 1035. They admitted it was based only on anecdotal evidence in a student dissertation and from an article in a mountaineering magazine! Then a week ago, it was learned they had erroneously reported that the Netherlands were one-half under water. They had not even checked information available from the Dutch government.
There are many more errors that have been uncovered and yet, the IPCC continues to try and explain away those mistakes and still contend that they in no way change the fact of man-made global warming.
I would encourage all to read the rather lengthy article in the UK Telegraph. It is very interesting and fact filled.
Click Here
This Article has been viewed 326 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (3 total)There is still overwhelming consensus that human activity is contributing to global warming. This is based on overwhelming evidence, and has not been contradicted by anything in the recent "climate gate" scandal.The famous "hockey stick" graph by Michael Mann was based on some flawed statistical techniques (although not majorly flawed), the basic "hockey stick" shape has been confirmed by over a dozen other, independent studies . So there is consensus on that.... the disagreements are only about the flatness of the "shaft" and the sharpness of the "blade"... that is, there is no disagreement on the temperature hike, only about precisely how big and how rapid it was.It is true that the IPCC has made some extremely embarassing mistakes in some of its claims. It made claims without supporting them with evidence, and like most claims made without evidence, they turned out to be wrong. And it was scientists that showed that the claims were wrong - a wonderful demonstration of science's ability to self-correct.The IPCC's main claims, supported by and emergent from the evidence gathered in numerous independent studies, are not weakened.However, and unfortunately, the IPCC's credibility most certainly is.The Guardian newspaper's website gives a good in-depth review of the whole "climategate" scandal, titled "Climate wars: The story of the hacked emails", and also gives clear detail about what the mistakes made actually mean and what we can reasonably take from them with respect to the broader issue of human-influenced climate change.The Telegraph article linked demonstrates the numerous errors made by the IPCC, and shows that the scientific community has voiced concern about these errors - not because the scientific community rejects human-influenced global warming but because the scientific community is not happy with the specific,erroneous, scientifically unfounded claims made by the IPCC.The scientific consensus is alive and well, but the scientists are upset with the IPCC's unscientific claims muddying the waters and undermining the credibility of the genuine, scientifically supported claims.Hi Ben, I appreciate your input. You have fallen in with the group though that believes anything they put out. You keep using "consensus" which means (1) "an opinion or position reached by a group as a whole" (2) "General agreement or accord", which has never been the case. If you divide the scientific community into two groups, you'll have to agree there is a consensus that global warming is not man-made also. If the facts exist as you say, there would be no reason for the IPCC to build shams, which make them appear as idiots. Thanks for your comment.
This comment appeared twice, doh!
Appreciate the sane and factual look at this picture. I do not think the opposing teams will ever hit middle ground on this one and none of us will live long enough to find out what or who is correct. Statistics can be very misleading and wrong conclusions can be drawn...Thanks again for a breath of fresh air (not sure if it is warm or cold - the opponents would say it was weather as opposed to climate - ah. me....Thanks for the kind remarks Maricjo, I do appreciate them
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.