Skip to comments.Germans have given up on their religion of green
Posted on 04/05/2010 9:44:52 AM PDT by Clint Williams
Germans have given up on their religion of the environment. Even prominent newspaper Der Spiegel says so. Telegraph UK
No people on earth are more righteously Green than the Germans. They built the foundations and set the tone of the modern Green movement in, ahem, the 1930s. They invented the phrase Atomkraft Nein Danke. They were the first country to allow nasty, dangerous Sixties eco-radicals to reinvent themselves as respectable politicians. They were the first place to buy, wholesale, into the solar power con, which is why so many of their rooves - especially on churches - shimmer and glow like reflective-coated crusties at a mid-Nineties rave, while the German taxpayer is ruing the day his government ever chose to subsidise (Achtung Herr Cameron!) this fantastically pointless scheme... (Hat tip: Robert Groezinger, et al)Leading newspaper Der Spiegel has done a number on AGW and it could hardly be more damning. They start with the ruined reputation of climate researcher Phil Jones:
So when the Germans say "Auf Wiedersehn AGW" it really is time for the rest of the world to sit up and take notice. And that's exactly what they just have said.
Plagued by reports of sloppy work, falsifications and exaggerations, climate research is facing a crisis of confidence. How reliable are the predictions about global warming and its consequences? And would it really be the end of the world if temperatures rose by more than the much-quoted limit of two degrees Celsius?This is a skeptical report. They cover the "urban heat island effect:"
Life has become "awful" for Phil Jones. Just a few months ago, he was a man with an enviable reputation: the head of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, an expert in his field and the father of an alarming global temperature curve that apparently showed how the Earth was heating up as a result of anthropogenic global warming.
Those days are now gone.
Nowadays, Jones, who is at the center of the "Climategate" affair involving hacked CRU emails, needs medication to fall sleep. He feels a constant tightness in his chest. He takes beta-blockers to help him get through the day. He is gaunt and his skin is pallid. He is 57, but he looks much older. He was at the center of a research scandal that hit him as unexpectedly as a rear-end collision on the highway.
His days are now shaped by investigative commissions at the university and in the British Parliament. He sits on his chair at the hearings, looking miserable, sometimes even trembling. The Internet is full of derisive remarks about him, as well as insults and death threats. "We know where you live," his detractors taunt.
Jones is finished: emotionally, physically and professionally. He has contemplated suicide several times recently, and he says that one of the only things that have kept him from doing it is the desire to watch his five-year-old granddaughter grow up.
'100 Percent Confident'
One of the conclusions of his famous statistical analysis of the world's climate is that the average temperature on Earth rose by 0.166 degrees Celsius per decade between 1975 and 1998. This, according to Jones, was the clear result of his research and that of many other scientists.
"I am 100 percent confident that the climate has warmed," Jones says imploringly. "I did not manipulate or fabricate any data."
His problem is that the public doesn't trust him anymore. Since unknown hackers secretly copied 1,073 private emails between members of his research team and published them on the Internet, his credibility has been destroyed -- and so has that of an entire profession that had based much of its work on his research until now.
Those who have always viewed global warming as a global conspiracy now feel a sense of satisfaction. The so-called climate skeptics feel vindicated, because Jones, in his written correspondence with colleagues, all of them leading members of the climate research community, does not come across as an objective scientist, but rather as an activist or missionary who views "his" data as his personal shrine and is intent on protecting it from the critical eyes of his detractors.
Critics reproach Jones for not taking one factor, in particular, sufficiently into account: the growth of urban areas. Stations that used to be rural are now in cities. And because it is always warmer in cities than outside, the temperatures measured at these stations are bound to rise.The myth of monster storms:
Environmental economist Ross McKitrick, one of McIntyre's associates, examined all rapidly growing countries, in which this urban heat effect was to be expected, and found a correlation between economic growth and temperature rise. He submitted his study in time for the last IPCC report.
Jones did everything he could to suppress the publication, which was critical of him. It proved advantageous to him that he had been one of the two main authors of the temperature chapter. In one of the hacked emails, he openly admitted that he wanted to keep this interfering publication out of the IPCC report at all costs, "even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!"
The all-clear signal on the hurricane front is another setback for the IPCC. In keeping with lead author Kevin Trenberth's predictions, the IPCC report warned that there would be more hurricanes in a greenhouse climate. One of the graphs in the IPCC report is particularly mysterious. Without specifying a source, the graph suggestively illustrates how damage caused by extreme weather increases with rising average temperatures.Der Spiegel's skepticism speaks a volume for the mind of the Germans.
When hurricane expert Roger Pielke, Jr. of the University of Colorado at Boulder saw the graph, he was appalled. "I would like to discover this sort of relationship myself," he says, "but it simply isn't supported by the facts at the moment."
Pielke tried to find out where the graph had come from. He traced it to the chief scientist at a London firm that performs risk calculations for major insurance companies. The insurance scientist claims that the graph was never meant for publication. How the phantom graph found its way into the IPCC report is still a mystery.
False gods suck, don’t they?
If the Germans have given up, somebody needs to tell the dude that hosts the Thomas Jefferson Hour on national socialist radio. He was all over how the U.S. needs to be more like Germany and other Euroweenies on his radio show this past weekend.
Germans always make good stuff!...............
>>Jones is finished: emotionally, physically and professionally. He has contemplated suicide several times recently, and he says that one of the only things that have kept him from doing it is the desire to watch his five-year-old granddaughter grow up.<<
She’s probably better off without you, ya lying cheater (Jones of course). Your life can’t get bad enough to come within 1/10000% of the evil and damage your lies have caused the world. I am glad you didn’t do it, since the idea you are miserable every day and will be until the day you become an underground carbon footprint pleases me greatly.
We all need to be like the Germans:
Must be the german plural for roofs!
Considering the state of Christianity in Germany, if they no longer worship Mother Earth, that means that they do not worship anything at the moment. Nothing remains in a vacuum for long. Who knows what or who the new German god will be? Will it be Mohamed, a Hitler, or a new movement?
Must be the german plural for roofs!”
I’ve wondered about this, so I did a search on it. Apparently in some areas the normal pronunciation of the plural of “roof” is “rooves”, although the spelling is “roofs” (which really doesn’t make any sense). “rooves” has also been considered a valid spelling, which does make sense if it’s going to be pronounced that way. Certainly the very similar word “hoof” has “hooves” as a common spelling and pronunciation of the plural, although “hoofs” is also used for some (and pronounced that way). English really is a confusing mess at times. I still think the plural of “moose” should be “meese”, based on the “goose/geese” spellings. No, really, why not?
What I find very telling about the global warmist “scientists” is that they regard skeptics with derision, when in fact skepticism is the hallmark of a truly great scientist.
And a truly great scientist would himself be skeptical of HIS OWN theories and would encourage others to find holes in them, because he knows that that’s what creates a lasting contribution to the understanding of nature.
“English really is a confusing mess at times.”
As someone who learned English in his teens, and especially having grown up with a very phonetic language (Italian), I would have to go one step further and say that English is a mess most of the time. I amuse myself sometimes thinking of all the “messy” stuff in it.
Here’s a quick few - how many different ways can you spell the word that sound like “to”?
How on earth does “one” get pronounced “won”?
You could write a real thick book with all these idiosyncrasies.
A Møøse once bit my sister
And how many ways can "ough" be pronounced? You may be surprised. Trying cut a trough through a bough, though, is tough.
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.