Posted on 05/25/2008 11:54:39 AM PDT by RogerFGay
The end of civilization as we know it, is not at hand. Dire warnings on climate change issued by Al Gore, based on an extreme set of computer predictions, are a dead issue. So is the credibility of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); the UN committee that tried to bring credibility to the predictions with claims that its views represent a consensus among scientists on global warming.
The problem with the alleged scientific consensus is that it has always been a half-truth; or less than half, depending on how you calculate. We are in a natural warm period. That's true, but Gore, and other activists – including the IPCC – stepped over the boundary when giving the impression that scientific consensus supported a list of scary predictions intended to promote political action, as well as the claim that the primary cause of global warming is human pollution, especially in the form of carbon dioxide – CO2. Ice has been melting; but since a warm period is pretty much opposite an ice-age, that is what one would expect. Polar bears are still killing and eating seals, happily I suppose.
In the scientific debate, the straw that broke the camel's back was the last decade of real temperature data. Reality just hasn't held with the IPCC predictions. Not only has it not gotten hotter at an increasing rate, as Al Gore's presentations with absolute certainty predicted, it just hasn't gotten hotter. CO2 has been increasing but there's nothing to suggest that it's a dangerous substance. The evidence actually contradicts the idea that it is a major contributor to warming. There's more CO2 but it's not getting hotter. You don't have cause and effect if you don't get the predicted effect. The so-called “global warming skeptics” have won. Al Gore and the IPCC are wrong.
Data over the past decade is not in fact, the first to be out of sync with the IPCC models. Scientists have been pointing to cooling periods as well as data inaccuracies, poor analysis, and misrepresentations for years. These scientists simply weren't counted in Al Gore's idea of scientific consensus. It's been understood for decades; in order to matter in the politics of global warming, you had to get on-board. That of course, created a conspiracy rather than getting to the truth.
The IPCC's credibility has been shattered. The debate can no longer be thought of as involving two groups of well-intentioned scientists with different data, theories, and predictions. If that were so, the IPCC would be admitting the significance of new data and assuring the public that they have no real evidence that the climate future will be as scary as they had previously claimed. That is exactly what scientists have asked them to do (see related article) The IPCC instead claims their predictions have not been proven wrong; they have just not yet been proven right. Nature's expected behavior has been delayed, according to the IPCC. Why it has been delayed is another scientific mystery awaiting billions more in funding to solve. They've given reality another ten years to catch up with their predictions. If we have a very hot summer or two during the next decade – the sort of thing not unknown to human history – one might expect they'll claim vindication.
And what of Al Gore – self-appointed soothsayer and modern leader of the environmental movement, winner of a Nobel Peace Prize, an Emmy, and other awards for frightening school children with tales of doom? Publicly, he struggles to explain why there are so many determined detractors in discussions of his far-reaching and expensive vision for political action. But, reportedly making millions from his environmental activism, he should be able to contemplate this and other questions in luxury after this swan song of his political career has finally ended.
Global Warming as a credible issue is over. That is why the politicians are all finally leaping on board. It is their las chance to nail down control of the economy and power and wealth for themselves. Nominal conservatives, even, are falling all over themselves jumping on that bandwagon. About the time that Discover and Scientific American announce that the problem turns out not to be Global Warming but (newest left catastrophe) global warming will be locked into our economic and legal system forever.
It will be over when the politicians that run it say it is over.
It’s
Left caret, IMG SRC=’url’,right caret
Yeah, I had to start slow, with italics and bold, etc. Images and links were confusing.
Hang in there.
Big Investors Seek Stricter Climate Laws
By Rachelle Younglai, Reuters
Investors managing more than $2.3 trillion urged the government on Tuesday to enact strict laws to cut greenhouse gas emissions, saying lax regulation could hurt the competitiveness of U.S. companies. The group of some 50 investors, including the world’s biggest listed hedge fund firm, Man Group Plc and influential venture capitalist John Doerr, want U.S. lawmakers to pass laws to reduce climate-warming emissions by at least 60 to 90 percent by 2050.
Legislation that promotes new and existing clean technologies on the scale needed to dramatically cut down pollution is needed, they said. The same group of investors are also pushing the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to force publicly-traded companies to disclose climate-related risks along with other factors that affect their business. “Establishing a strong national climate policy for emissions reductions will help investors manage the enormous risks and opportunities posed by global warming,” Anne Stausboll, Calpers’ interim chief investment officer, said in a statement.
If you think that bio-fuel cause price increases, wait until they pass a co2 cap and trade. Time for lawsuits against any type of CO2 regulation.
This has certainly been my opinion.... As an engineer, CO2 as an effect rather than a cause makes sense.
What I love is, the convoluted logic they use to explain the 800 year off-set: That CO2 is the trigger that starts an increase in water-vapor (a much stronger greenhouse gas)... then, the increase in water-vapor heats the world so much, it then causes massive releases of CO2.
Uh.... yea, right.
I fear that the political train is already coming down the tracks. I’ve been to several conferences recently where attorney groups gave summary presentations of pending climate change legislation.
There are dozens of bills pending... so, no one is sure which ones will make it through. But, ALL are bad. The leading bill is the McCain-Leiberman, which calls for a 70% reduction in GHG by 2020. What a joke. It calls for cap & trade and carbon taxes.
The sad part is.... this bill has broad, bi-partisan support and would be signed by ANY of the three potential Presidents. So, unless we can get the public to rise up in the next 9 months, it’s coming. Frank Luntz (the FoxNews pollster) told me plainly that current public opinion is strongly believing The Lie, because... “no one will stand up and say, this is bullshit”. (That’s a direct quote.. made to me in person).
Who’s going to do it?
Globally, the problem is even worse. I work for a German company. EVERYONE over there is completely convinced that CO2 is killing the world. They’re very angry with the US (and Bush, of course) for not doing more to ‘Save the Planet’. They bristle when you tell them that the US has actually cut CO2 emmissions since 2000... as much as Germany has.... this true bit of news doesn’t fit their “Bush sucks” narrative.
Bottom line is.. we’ve got a LONG WAY to go to change global public opinion.
“Politicians and activists will claim that winning the lawsuits as vindication for their views and the final hurdle to getting the laws enacted and enforced the way they want. Then the world will change suddenly and dramatically.”
‘the final hurdle to getting the laws enacted and enforced the way they want. Then the world will change suddenly and dramatically.’
We are already there. If you have a better idea’ I’m all ears.
It’s about the money not science. So you attack CO2 drives the climate theory in court.
yeah but NASA has shown that this was wrong very recently. Water vapor cools it doesn't heat.
The only bills that get broad bipartisan support are the ones whose only purpose is to rip off the public.
It IS sad thus I can only agree GB.
Regards,
EG
George W. Bush has done more to save the planet AND humanity than any other president since Ronald W. Reagan.
He has shown himself to be a leader with political common sense.
How quickly most forget in this "real time" and hectic world...
I predict half the globe will receive no sunlight whatsoever. And it’s headed our way....
Long about sun down every day.Holy light bulb Batman! Barney! Get yer bullet out!!
"The sun’s surface flows have slowed dramatically as NASA has indicated. This process of surface movement, what NASA calls the “conveyor belt” essentially sweeps up old sunspots and deposits new ones. NASA’s studies have found that when the surface movement slows down, sunspot counts drop significantly. All records of sunspot counts and other proxies of solar activity going back 6,000 years clearly validates our own findings that when we have sunspot counts lower then 50 it means only one thing - an intense cold climate, globally" [emphasis added].
Seems like you and I are the only 2 FReepers who actually realize this at this time. Kinda depressing considering this is a conservative site.
Any man made creation can be promoted as a concern worthy of wealth redistribution can't it? (obviously it can)
Thus, yes blame can be placed by some.
Next step, a highly ranked and powerful panel of non-elected elitists to determine as to how we as a society cope with such a demise.
New books soon to be on the top ten list..
Some of us see the fallacy created via political and promotional directive after understanding the facts that should be so well understood by all capable in understanding. ; )
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.