'The global-warmers were bound to attack, but why are they so feeble?'

'The global-warmers were bound to attack, but why are they so feeble?' Last Updated: 11:20pm GMT 17/03/2007

'The Great Global Warming Swindle', broadcast by Channel 4, put the case for scepticism about man-made climate change. The programme sparked a heated debate and charges of scientific inaccuracy. Here, its director, Martin Durkin, responds to the critics.

On March 8, Channel 4 broadcast my programme. Since then, supporters of the theory of man-made global warming have published frothing criticism. I am attacked for using an "old" graph depicting temperature over the past 1,000 years. They say I should have used a "new" graph - one used by Al Gore, known as the "hockey stick", because it looks like one.

But the hockey stick has been utterly discredited. The computer programme used to generate it was found to produce hockey-stick shapes even when fed random data (I refer readers to the work of McIntyre & McKitrick and to the Wegman Report, all available on the internet). Other than the discredited hockey stick, the graph used by us (and published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is the standard, accepted record of temperature in this period.

A critic claims that one of the graphs cited by us, illustrating the extraordinarily close correlation between solar variation and temperature change, has since been "corrected". It most certainly has not. The graph was produced by Prof Eigil Friis-Christensen, the head of the Danish National Space Centre, who says it still stands. But if the global-warmers don't like that graph, there are plenty of others that say the same thing.

No one any longer seriously disputes the link between solar activity and temperature in earth's climate history. I urge readers to look up on the net: Veizer, Geoscience Canada, 2005; and Soon, Geophysical Research Letters, 2005.

In the film, we used three graphs depicting temperature change in the 20th century. On one there was an error in the dates on the bottom. This was corrected for the second transmission of the programme, on More4, last Monday. It made no difference. Global-warmers can pick whichever graph they like. The problem for them remains the same. The temperature rise at the beginning of the century (prior to 1940, when human emissions of CO2 were relatively insignificant) was as great, most graphs show greater, than the temperature rise at the end of the century.

So what else do they hit me with? Prof Carl Wunsch, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who appeared in the film, later claimed he was duped into taking part. He was not.

The remarkable thing is not that I was attacked. But that the attacks have been so feeble. The ice-core data was the jewel in the global-warming crown, cited again and again as evidence that carbon dioxide 'drives' the earth's climate. In fact, as its advocates have been forced to admit, the ice-core data says the opposite. Temperature change always precedes changes in CO2 by several hundred years. Temperature drives CO2, not the other way round. The global-warmers do not deny this. They cannot.

During the post-war economic boom, while industrial emissions of CO2 went up, the temperature went down (hence the great global-cooling scare in the 1970s). Why? They say maybe the cooling was caused by SO2 (sulphur dioxide) produced by industry. But they say it mumbling under their breath, because they know it makes no sense. Thanks to China and the rest, SO2 levels are far, far higher now than they were back then. Why isn't it perishing cold?

Too many journalists and scientists have built their careers on the global-warming alarm. Certain newspapers have staked their reputation on it. The death of this theory will be painful and ugly. But it will die. Because it is wrong, wrong, wrong.

Here's MY quite EXTREME method to deal with the WOT problem.
It's a method I think Teddy Roosevelt would understand -- and implement:

NOTICE TO ALL FOREIGN CITIZENS and THEIR GOVERNMENTS!
(EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY)

1. As a sovereign nation, you have the same rights to govern your nation as we have. Whether freely elected or despotic tyranny, how you run your government and DOMESTIC affairs is between you and your leaders. If you people don't like how your government is behaving, we suggest you read some American history for the period between, say, 1774 and 1789. The world is awash in various sorts of small arms and other weapons. Getting enough to turn out your tyrant-du-jour ought not be a problem. Yes, many people will die (just as they did HERE in the late 1700s). It's the price of freedom. But -- and this is important to us -- our SOLDIERS will not be among them. But trust us when we tell you that the casualties of your revolution will pale compared to those you will suffer should we be forced to invoke Clause 3!

2. Please pay SPECIAL attention to the word "domestic" in number 1.

3. The MINUTE we become privy to firm, corroborated intelligence that you have plans to harm the United States or one of our recognized allies -- or, worst case -- DO, in fact carry out such an operation, the United States and any such allies who wish to assist will come to you and request that you cease and desist. If you refuse to do so, we will TURN MOST OF YOUR LAND INTO A SMOKING RUIN. We include in this list of threats AIDING, ABETTING, HARBORING, TRAINING OR SUPPLYING THOSE WHO, ALTHOUGH NOT CITIZENS OF YOUR NATION, MAKE PLANS TO HARM US OR AN ALLY.

We wish to live and trade in peace with all peoples -- BUT harm us or injure/kill American/allied citizens AND YOUR WORLD AS YOU HAVE KNOWN IT WILL SIMPLY GO AWAY -- FOREVER.

(If you have never seen it, slide on down to Blockbuster and rent "The Day the Earth Stood Still" with Arabic/Farsi subtitles, of course. REREAD 3 AND THINK "GORT.")

4. Once those smoking ruins have sufficiently cooled, we will put boots on the ground, clear any remaining resistance and seize your former property for the benefit of those who participated in the neutralization of the threat you posed. Casualties among our troops should be very limited because, as we think you have seen, the weapons possessed by the United States will leave very few to resist. REREAD 4 AND THINK 51st STATE!

QUESTIONS????

Thank you for your support in this vital matter.

The People of the United States of America

Super intelligent life may well have bypassed this planet long ago.

It has. Err, their technology advancement has surpassed Earthlings before the human species existed. They haven't surpassed us as such, as they are way out in the lead. They probably have a billion years or more on us. Earthlings are not intelligent, leastwise not by their civilizations' sans irrationality being the norm. Perhaps the only similarity between us is consciousness. Albeit, seemingly eons ago they successfully out-competed their own anti-civilization that was mired in irrationality. Which they have long forgotten.

Matter and energy being the two macro components of existence, what if consciousness is the third macro component? What if conscious beings are the supreme controllers of matter and energy -- the supreme controllers of existence; manipulating the laws of nature/physics?

We know that conscious Earthlings increasingly understand the laws of nature/physics to increasingly control nature. It's how we advance technology. Because knowledge begets new knowledge conscious beings are limitless -- within the laws of physics -- in their control of existence.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.