Global Warming Swindle

ViRedd

New Member
Global Warming Swindle

By Thomas Sowell

Thursday, March 15, 2007


Britain's Channel 4 has produced a devastating documentary titled "The Great Global Warming Swindle." It has apparently not been broadcast by any of the networks in the United States. But, fortunately, it is available on the Internet.

Distinguished scientists specializing in climate and climate-related fields talk in plain English and present readily understood graphs showing what a crock the current global warming hysteria is.

These include scientists from MIT and top-tier universities in a number of countries. Some of these are scientists whose names were paraded on some of the global warming publications that are being promoted in the media -- but who state plainly that they neither wrote those publications nor approved them.

One scientist threatened to sue unless his name was removed.

While the public has been led to believe that "all" the leading scientists buy the global warming hysteria and the political agenda that goes with it, in fact the official reports from the United Nations or the National Academy of Sciences are written by bureaucrats -- and then garnished with the names of leading scientists who were "consulted," but whose contrary conclusions have been ignored.

There is no question that the globe is warming but it has warmed and cooled before, and is not as warm today as it was some centuries ago, before there were any automobiles and before there was as much burning of fossil fuels as today.

None of the dire things predicted today happened then.

The British documentary goes into some of the many factors that have caused the earth to warm and cool for centuries, including changes in activities on the sun, 93 million miles away and wholly beyond the jurisdiction of the Kyoto treaty.

According to these climate scientists, human activities have very little effect on the climate, compared to many other factors, from volcanoes to clouds.
These climate scientists likewise debunk the mathematical models that have been used to hype global warming hysteria, even though hard evidence stretching back over centuries contradicts these models.

What is even scarier than seeing how easily the public, the media, and the politicians have been manipulated and stampeded, is discovering how much effort has been put into silencing scientists who dare to say that the emperor has no clothes.

Academics who jump on the global warming bandwagon are far more likely to get big research grants than those who express doubts -- and research is the lifeblood of an academic career at leading universities.

Environmental movements around the world are committed to global warming hysteria and nowhere more so than on college and university campuses, where they can harass those who say otherwise. One of the scientists interviewed on the British documentary reported getting death threats.

In politics, even conservative Republicans seem to have taken the view that, if you can't lick 'em, join 'em. So have big corporations, which have joined the stampede.

This only enables the green crusaders to declare at every opportunity that "everybody" believes the global warming scenario, except for a scattered few "deniers" who are likened to Holocaust deniers.

The difference is that we have the hardest and most painful evidence that there was a Holocaust. But, for the global warming scenario that is causing such hysteria, we have only a movie made by a politician and mathematical models whose results change drastically when you change a few of the arbitrarily selected variables.

No one denies that temperatures are about a degree warmer than they were a century ago.

What the climate scientists in the British documentary deny is that you can mindlessly extrapolate that, or that we are headed for a climate catastrophe if we don't take drastic steps that could cause an economic catastrophe.

"Global warming" is just the latest in a long line of hysterical crusades to which we seem to be increasingly susceptible.




Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
Be the first to read Thomas Sowell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.
©Creators Syndicate
 

skunkushybrid

New Member
I agree, but still believe that a cleaner earth will be a better, healthier one.

I also don't think it's much of a swindle. There will always be people that will worry more than others... but just because it's happened before does not mean that it isn't going to have catastrophic consequences for the human race. We have more populace, more built-up areas than we did 1500 years ago. Less trees to aid us in oxygen development, hardly any barrier reef left at all... We also have better ability at keeping records, and I believe that with each year the death toll due to climate is going to rise dramatically.
 

H3rod

Active Member
We modern humans thrive on crisis and seeing as we haven't had a major world war for a few years, the next major civilization killer is natural disasters. I believe there is some truth in Global Warming, but there are other factors involved let alone mans contribution.
 

Wavels

Well-Known Member
Hi H3 welcome aboard, I largely agree with your post...



Yes, skunky, I think we agree about wanting a cleaner planet.

Regardless of climate direction, it is highly debatable whether we humans can do anything about it...the earth does what it does with or without human consent or cooperation.
It is wise to try and conserve the environment, and I can see the results of the effort to do this here in my country.
The real problem with pollution is from the so called developing nations, many of which happen to be reckless polluters.

Gore’s appearance today on the hill exemplifies his lack of ability to say anything other than “the debate is over”. It’s settled…etc. etc. it is like a silly mantra.
Rules were changed for this charlatan….seems like a political pep rally was what the chicken littles were interested in conducting...
The need for open public debate about all of the angles of this issue is necessary to expose the scientific lapses in Gore’s huckster spiel!

We’ll see!



:joint:
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
I watched the whole thing on Cspan, and he did not say anything that is credible.... Kind of funny how things turn out when you can't read a script.

 

skunkushybrid

New Member
I think it's a shame that a politician is using global warming as a leverage to get more votes, of course he might actually believe that global warming could actually be stopped, or slowed down.

Also, this warming is happening quicker than ever before. I'm not sure if we are responsible for this, maybe Al Gore isn't either. Is he aware of what he is doing? Meaning, did he realise from the beginning that this will be a vote winner?

The greens have won a major victory with this. Fear is an excellent way of getting people under control.
 

7xstall

Well-Known Member
did he realise from the beginning that this will be a vote winner?


Gore is using this issue to worm more government control into our lives. that's all he wants to do. to him, and others like him, government is the biggest, best, most lucrative industry in the world and he wants to be on the "board of directors".
 

Indie

Well-Known Member
Just another way to tax, regulate, and control a (for the most part) free people. .....................................................Indie.
 

pauliojr

Well-Known Member
Excellent post VI. Yes it is true that Al Gore's now claim to fame is bull shit. You have to see who profits from it at the end of the day. Why is it that his views are so main stream, while the people who deny are basically silenced. I read an article about a college professor who was told by his university that he could not express his views on global warming because the government gave the college grants. Meaning he could not say that global warming was NOT caused by humans, but by naturally occurring events.

You can not trust a globalist who will most definitely in the future try and create a tax to "help rid global warming" when in fact will help the globalists gain more power and have more money in their pockets. They can not accept the fact that the temperature on Mars has raised as well meaning that there is something going on with the sun, not because humans are creating it. In fact, humans only produce about 10% (if less) of the entire world's CO2 exhaust. It is really sad to see such an asshole manipulate the entire world.....well almost the entire world.
 

silk

Well-Known Member
I saw the documentary. It's really not news that there is no scientific proof that human made CO2 emissions are causing the warming trend which sits about 2 degrees higher since 1950 or so. Overall environmental damage such as holes in the ozone layer or slash and burning rain forest or other ecosystem destruction have much more concrete findings.

However the trend of biased documentaries seems to be growing equally as fast as side industries. While global warming is not proven it is an accepted theory. What happens when we prove it's real? Will it be too late then?

I believe that's what is the foundation of environmental protectionism on the global scale. People don't want to risk the chance that the theory is correct, because change does not happen over night.

The marauding political and capitalist efforts will always exist where there is an opportunity. In other words Global Warming isn't a swindle but people are exploiting ignorance for personal gain.
 

ViRedd

New Member
Gore's film is being shown in our middle and high schools now and is being presented as the absoulte truth. Students are graded down if they disagree or raise anti-global warming points. Its nothing but propaganda. If you have children in school, be sure to examine their text books and classroom agendas for socialistic/Marxist leanings ... then take appropriate actions.

Vi
 

skunkushybrid

New Member
Just to make this point. GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL AND PROVEN. What is in dispute is whether man has played a part in this accelerated warming we are witnessing today.
 

Wavels

Well-Known Member
Just to make this point. GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL AND PROVEN.

Indeed, we agree completely skunky, but there is loads of evidence which suggests that this warming trend, so eagerly described as "Global Warming", is, from a historical perspective, wimpy!
Grapes were grown in Greenland not too long ago (geologically speaking)....can't grow grapes there now.... (Yet)?
:joint:
:peace::smile:
 

skunkushybrid

New Member
Indeed, we agree completely skunky, but there is loads of evidence which suggests that this warming trend, so eagerly described as "Global Warming", is, from a historical perspective, wimpy!
Grapes were grown in Greenland not too long ago (geologically speaking)....can't grow grapes there now.... (Yet)?
:joint:
:peace::smile:
1500 years ago the south of England was famous for it's wine and vineyards. Global Warming will not have that much of an impact for us living in a mild climate.

We may not be able to do anything about it, but this doesn't mean it isn't going to be devestating for the human race. Heat waves, floods, tornadoes etc. All are killers and all are going to escalate in respect to damage caused and lives lost. If anything this global warming debate should at least make people aware that the future holds a climate that, for all we know, could be spiralling out of control for good. There is a larger danger ahead, and we have virtually no defenses against it. Our old ways are no good, sea defences need to be reconstructed in many parts of the world. I have a favourite saying that I always say when I have to spend money... you have to speculate to accumulate. In other words (when I say it) you need to spend money to make money. We need to spend money on defences now to save spending however many times the amount on repairing the damage caused should we choose to ignore the threat.
 

iblazethatkush

Well-Known Member
Here's my take on it: we can all agree that we're polluting mother earth at a faster rate than ever b4 in her history. Even if u don't think global warming is real, can u at least agree that all of this man-made pollution can't help the planet? There's no doubt we're fucking up the planet, even if global warming isn't happening now something bad will happen eventually if society doesn't change. The ppl backing global warming r just pushing for a healthier way of living and a healthier environment, what's wrong with that?
 

Wavels

Well-Known Member
1500 years ago the south of England was famous for it's wine and vineyards. Global Warming will not have that much of an impact for us living in a mild climate....
but this doesn't mean it isn't going to be devestating for the human race. Heat waves, floods, tornadoes
So we agree that there have been warming periods in the planets past which were more severe than the relatively small temperature increases leading to the dire scenario depicted above.

I do not follow your logic, because if the warming cycles in the past DID NOT precipitate the severe and destructive storms you refer to, and if the planet has undergone dozens of such cycles of warming and cooling, why and how do you insist that this is the "killer" warm cycle?
It seems to me that these cycles are the natural order of the planet, and I fail to see why this particular cycle is the one that will “devastate” the human population.





This is interesting:

Global warming on trial
Sixth-graders decide that humans aren’t to blame
LongmontFYI - Global warming on trial
 

silk

Well-Known Member
Sure, I doubt anybody would disagree that humans are polluting the earth iblazethatkush.

"The ppl backing global warming r just pushing for a healthier way of living and a healthier environment, what's wrong with that?"

What's wrong with that is it's not true. Some people are looking for a healthier environment and some people are looking for $$$$.

I'll give you an example. There are NO readily available alternative fuel motor vehicles available in the commercial markets. High fuel economy technology has been available sense the 1950s ( see Tucker). In a 2006 documentary called "Who killed the electric car?" Who Killed the Electric Car? (2006), the film discusses at length the successful pilot of an electric car, this program was implemented over 10 years ago.

what could be more easy to regulate than higher fuel economy cars or selling more electric cars? Both things have been squashed by industry and politicians in lew of some other snake oil with smoke and mirrors.
 

skunkushybrid

New Member
So we agree that there have been warming periods in the planets past which were more severe than the relatively small temperature increases leading to the dire scenario depicted above.

I do not follow your logic, because if the warming cycles in the past DID NOT precipitate the severe and destructive storms you refer to, and if the planet has undergone dozens of such cycles of warming and cooling, why and how do you insist that this is the "killer" warm cycle?
It seems to me that these cycles are the natural order of the planet, and I fail to see why this particular cycle is the one that will “devastate” the human population.

Not so devestating for cooler climate countries... Also 1500 years ago at the peak of the last warming there was not the populace there is today. No cities, at least not what we'd think of as cities today. More people equals more deaths, whereas a village may have been wiped out before this time it could be a small city. This is my logic..................
 

Wavels

Well-Known Member
That is an excellent response which I can understand quite clearly....and I am wicked stoned at the moment...
Thanks, Skunky, although I suspect you are overly pessimistic, I can't deny that I read somewhere years ago that all successful ancient civilizations learned NOT to locate major important cities too close to coastlines...
And our "modern" culture allows a New Orleans to exist and flourish below sea level!
 
Top