Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Global Warming Honcho Finally Fesses Up


The disgraced former head of a U.N. backed climate research center admits

1.  No global warming in the last 15 years.

2.  It might have been warmer in medieval times than now.

Rocky most of what you say is true. What I like about the video is it takes the extreme- Hitler and Goebbels- and uses them to signify the AGW propagandists. Obviously not everyone in the AGW movement is this way- many are the victims of the propaganda and are too proud to admit they are wrong and were had- and a lot of other people have actually invested their lives into products and businesses or degrees in school concerning this exaggerated myth. But I agree that of those who are trying to just make a living out of something that is showing itself to not exist there are others who see this as a way to hurt the US and benefit other kinds of governments and powers. There has been an international ganging up on the US for a long time and it is not necessarily for the greatest benefit of the planet as it is for the fit of their own interests- some of which go beyond money. Of course sadly, in reality the Hitler comedy is probably closer to the reality of the AGW movement than New York being underwater is. Once again if these AGW alarmists were truly concerned about CO2 they would be focusing their efforts on producing and financing the development of new alternative energy technologies first and foremost. But other interests like the BIG Arab money do not want competition with oil prices- and socialists like Chavez see this as an opportunity to weaken the US power from the inside out- industrially- which may lead to more socialsm- his ideaology. In many ways the US recession- that came out of nowhere- was a very mysterious benefit because it made the US people realize that a global carbon tax scheme was untenable given the weakened state of things. If we actually allowed through with the Kyoto and Copenhagen treaties and then got his with a recession it could have been much worse actually... The problem with government is that once it gets going it takes control of people's lives- so that those who are involved in it cannot afford to let their job go even if it is for the good of the country. It can be like a cancer that way- and that goes for all sectors, health care, ilitary, education, politicians etc... Frost122585
Frost, Cabal, When issues get too complex and too convoluted and are tied into a Gordian knot on purpose, it is precisely short pithy pieces like this mock video that put things into a normal human perspective, focusing on what really matters. Actually, I think it has been documented beyond anybody's doubt that what is behind this climate change fraud is a rather dark and sinister power. It is not so much about science any more, as about finding who these dark powers and principalities behind the scam are, and why would many billionaires suddenly turn green and make it their goal in life to save the planet from the people themselves. As this interview with the foremost Canadian climate scientist reveals, there are indeed such powers behind this dark scheme. The UN IPCC scheme was concocted and implemented by a Canadian turned internationalist, the head of the Chicago Climate exchange, who now lives in China of all places, and it is only to the credit of Canadian scientists like Dr. Ball, McIntyre, McKitrick, and others who have managed to hack the emails and exposed the climate fraud. BTW, if you understand how these carbon credits really work, it is not about real science at all, it is all a pseudo-science scam designed to enrich the rich even more, as even Strong himself admitted, while perhaps spreading some of the prosperous western world wealth around to some less fortunate in say India. But India has just withdrawn from this scam and from such social justice or charity, so go figure that out! As far the as the United States and the world economy — so much for democracy and for the ideas United States founders stood for! http://blackkettle.wordpress.com/2010/02/02/michael-coren-with-dr-tim-ball-part-1/ rockyr
Cabal, I certainly agree that mock videos don not do the science- or tangibles of the issue any good- but humor like this- which is fairly well done- does put it in a certain perspective that is valuable to show- that is the slant on AGW -like the reality of the scam of carbon taxes and its beneficiaries. People who are not willing to look at the issue seriously and understand all of the angles get to see some of the underlying concerns without having to get too close. And while the public is constantly indoctrinated by picture of dead polar bears and New York city underwater- it is good to have the other extreme presented as well- to add some pause. I basically just thought it was a funny video and a good analogy- not certainly not scientifically useful- in the tangible sense. As far as your claim that no one is arguing that co2 is a green house gas- and that it is indeed raising and having at least "some" impact (regardless of how small) on temperature- I think this is basically true but the question is whether man kind can realistically do anything about it right now- that is "worth" doing- and makes ethical sense. Taxing a world trying to survive on its current technologies does not make sense. Obviously the motives and conflicts of interests- highlighted in the mock video- show that there are small powerful group out- pulling together political support from other interests- who want to corner the AGW related markets- and are willing to say almost anything- some ridiculous claims- in order to scare the ignorant general laymen into signing their freedoms away through legislation. All this so that fat cats can in turn cash in yet again. And all of this is relevant. To put it in like terms- water can and indeed does downed human beings from time to time- but pouring a small cup of watter on some one's head certainly will not. The question concerning Co2 at the most relevant level is how much is too much? I think the human signal is barely detectable right now- according to the current data at least- and thus it is probably not something we need to worry about at all in the short run (500 years or so). Also limiting the human production of co2 at great economic costs- will not solve the problem (if there is one) over the long run but may make it worse slowing economic growth and hence possibly the free market development of cleaner technologies etc. Unless we are able to replace fossil fuels with cleaner ones- and people like myself actually would admit that doing something about Co2 release is worth while in produce at this level- will continue to SMELL A RAT- when the focus of leaders and legislation is primarily on ridiculous taxes and carbon credit based businesses when 95% of it should be government funded science and development of new means of producing cleaner energy- and indeed cooperation with the privet sector. Marxists may not like that but too bad for it is truth the best way to go about looking after the planet's health - 500 years or so down the road.. That is where the meat of the discussion should be- how to speed up the exploration and development of alternative energies- and make them more efficient and cost effective. This is ALL you should hear about. Instead all you hear about is a political and business swindle. Everywhere you look it is all kinds of disgraceful nonsense about polar bears- and tidal waves and new york city underwater etc. When people are willing to own up to what the science actually shows- which is a very small impact over a long period of time at best- and that the most likely solution is government supported technological exploration of cleaner energies- then you will find that I, and many other conservatives will join along side and agree with the green peace- climate movement- that it is useful to pursue the issue with some aggressiveness. In the meantime people like myself will continue to go by what is outside the window- what the water level is like down at the beaches and the nearby bay- and all of the tangible barometers. If Al Gore and all these people really care about this possible issue of concern, AGW, they need to stop riding around in their jets expelling vastly more co2 than the average man does- and stop being lazy crooks trying to use legislation to make money but sitting at a table and trading carbon credits- and START doing real science looking for ways to develop better energy alternatives. In the end real solutions worth pursuing take real effort and need not involve Goebbels like propaganda campaigns. There are plenty of young engineers and businesses out there that would love more government grants and things to finance technology development. We need to reward people who are doing real science and looking for real solutions- that is where the main focus should be- NOT on cap and trade etc. And certainly not in paying opportunists like Gore and Soros to sit at their desks and trade stocks and credits and collect fees- while producing more Co2 themselves each year than any other person in the world. The video was funny because it exaggerates the real issue concerning agw- which is the ludicrous tactics being used by the Gores, Soros type and the good honest scientists over at places like East Anglia. Carbon credits and taxes are so short sighted- while focusing our energy and money on pursuing new energy would not only greatly change the CO2 picture but might save the world from a future oil shortage- or allow us to travel further into space- etc Lastly, I would like to touch on a very interesting case of Freudian projection by Al Gore himself. When the republicans (and many democrats too) agreed that Iraq was a threat and needed to be invaded- and then afterwards no WMDs were found- Gore criticised the Republicans lead by Bush by saying "The played on our fears!" Whether or not Bush and neo-cons new Iraq did not have vast WMD capabilities is still yet to be clearly shewn- but with that Gore quote in mind, and looking at what he and his kind have done over the years- inferring and implying dooms day scenarios from barely existing supporting data- it is certainly more than ironic. The problem that skeptics have with Darwinism and AGW is not concerning their theories but the ideology that supports them. You cannot use propaganda to force others to ACCEPT views which espouse either a chance and materialistic view of reality- nor cataclysmic views of the biosphere- when the evidence for both is next to nil. I have never been totally close minded concerning De or AGW and I will gladly embrace an alarmist perspective (with no shame of my prior descent) when the evidence warrents it. If the bays near my home begin to rise over their pre-industrial revolution ports etc I will admit there is cause for alarm. But when you cannot even detect a serious impact- it is just not sceintific at all to do what the climate alarmists have been doing. Frost122585
sorry, the paragraph got quite garbled above, this is what I meant to say: Time will show who’s right, in the meantime nobody says that atmospheric CO2 levels are not still rising or that that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas and making a positive contribution to the greenhouse effect. Cabal
It is the fess up or look like a climate imbecile, or alternatively take the cyanide pill and disappear, like in this rather profound mock video that nicely summarizes this whole climate debacle:
I really believe mock videos are of little value in complex issues like global warming. Time will show who's right, in the meantime nobody says that atmospheric CO2 levels still are rising and that CO2 is indeed a greenhouse gas and making a positive contribution to the greenhouse effect. We need to understand that short term climate data says little or nothing about long term climate changes. Cabal
Re editors comment on #2. Please read my comment #4. Barry - it appears you don't understand the implications of statistical significance. There is a world of difference between "not significant at the 5% level" and "no global warming". This worries me because the right wing press has repeatedly made the same error - by failing to take the time to understand what Jones' is saying they will push him and his colleagues back into the kind of bunker mentality which led to this mess. Mark Frank
Rockyr, That video you posted http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGdbHW9Nlds Was absolutely hilarious. I think the intensity of it- and a couple line I liked People in the hall: Don't cry little girl, Dr. Goebbels will come up with something good... Goebbels: If Copenhagen fails, sea will rise and sharks will eat you! Lol. Thanks for sharing. Frost122585
I'm glad to read that the release of data has reached 80%, and I hope it will continue. AGW critics should then be able to prove their case on its merits. Data transparency is a good thing. Nakashima
With the Copengahen fiasco, Jones fessing up, and India now pulling out of IPCC— Dr Pachauri calling this “voodoo science”, and environment minister Ramesh admitting that “There is a fine line between climate science and climate evangelism" — using billionaire Soros' own words, the whole nasty conspiracy is coming apart at the seams rather quickly. It is the fess up or look like a climate imbecile, or alternatively take the cyanide pill and disappear, like in this rather profound mock video that nicely summarizes this whole climate debacle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGdbHW9Nlds rockyr
Jones did not say there has been no global warming in the last 15 years. He said: This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for shorter periods. This means there if there was no warming trend then there is a just over 5% chance that the same similar or more extreme warming data would be observed. The interpretation of statistical significance is much more sophisticated and difficult than many people realise - including, apparently, Barry. It is very different from saying that there is a >5% chance there was no global warming trend. What is happening here is that Jones has been chastised with presenting scientific results in an over-simple and hyped fashion. So he has tried to be very precise and understated. The result - sceptics misunderstand what he says and bill it is as an admission that there is no evidence of warming. It is the classic conundrum of trying to present complex science with uncertain but important consequences. Mark Frank
I have read the BBC report and agree with Barry. How bad a weasel is when Jones said we do not know the southern hemisphere temperatures for a thousand years ago. That is pathetic. That is his fallback to try to save the hockey stick. Without that data, one should assume what you do have is relevant. And what we do have indicates no unusual warming and the hockey stick is a fraud. The whole thing should be started over and everything made transparent. Jones should be sent to some place where he wears an orange jump suit for the rest of his life for the damage he has done to science and the money that has been misallocated because of his activities. He is one of the biggest charlatans in history. jerry
This is completely false. I would suggest everyone read the actual interview as usual and do not rely on Fox News or Uncommon Descent for information. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm Editor: Yes by all means follow the link. You will see in black and white that he admits there has been no statistically significant global warming in the last 15 years. I can understand that hdx's faith is hanging by a thread and he does what he can to keep it from shattering, even splitting hairs like the one he is trying to split here. Poor man. hdx
I have read a scholarly book on the bubonic plague, which probably killed about one third of the population of Europe. The author explicitly argued that one of the factors in the high death rate was a long warm period which encouraged high population growth. That meant crowding, of course. O'Leary

Leave a Reply