__________________
Posted on 04/09/2019 7:54:59 AM PDT by Kaslin
Myths usually sound fascinating. Myths are things that never happened, stories that aren’t true, though often we wish they were, for various reasons.
As a young boy, I wanted to know if Big Foot was an actual animal. I saw almost every documentary that claimed to show evidence of Big Foot’s existence. And don’t get me started on flying saucers.
Despite its place in popular Internet theory, most people—including me—consider Big Foot continue a myth. No hiker walks out into the woods looking for Big Foot.
Unfortunately, some myths come camouflaged as truths. They do so for many reasons and aided by the mainstream media’s obsession with gaining more subscriptions and the explosion of fake news in the Internet era. More recently there has been increase in the use of strategic campaigns with false claims to malign the character of political opposites.
Almost all of my Democrat friends wished the findings of Mueller's report would conclude that President Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. But Mueller found that there was no collusion with Russia by President Trump, his family members, or his campaign. One more myth slain.
The pattern for the origin and end of fake claims seems similar: Claims are made without objective empirical proof, then, propelled by mainstream news media and internet sensation, sustained among the masses. They continue until irrefutable data finally contradict them. Only then are they put to rest.
The controversy over climate change follows this pattern. It is now more political than scientific. Since the 1970s, outlandish claims regarding our climate have been made repeatedly, only to be found untrue.
How exactly do we identify true and false claims in the climate sciences? It is simple.
Warnings of dramatic, possibly dangerous elements of climate change—like rapid global warming, sea-level rise, and extreme weather patterns—can be checked against actual observations. The credibility of the claims is then judged by their coherence or mismatch with the observed data.
We particularly need to separate truth from myth in the climate sciences because they determine key policy decisions on our use of fossil fuels, the pace of our economic development, and our scientific understanding of the climate system.
You’ll be shocked by the magnitude of myths promoted in the name of climate change.
In the 70s, scientists claimed the earth was headed into a cooling phase that would usher in an Ice Age. The news was widely circulated in newspapers, and the masses were told to believe in it. It never came to pass.
Instead, global temperature levels rose significantly in the following decades. Upon observing this upward trend, a section of scientists made a U-turn and claimed that our globe was warming. Hence the name “global warming.”
Yes, our world was warming, and it may be continuing to warm. But scientists disagree on the magnitude of warming and the underlying causes.
In addition to interpreting the observed climate patterns, some scientists and political institutions began predicting future climate based on immature results from highly flawed computer climate models.
How do we know these models were flawed?
By comparing observed temperature data with model predictions. The magnitude of warming predicted by the models was nowhere near the observed increase in temperature levels. The models consistently predicted more warming than observed.
During the past 18 years, the earth’s atmosphere showed no significant increase in temperature, contrary to the projections of the climate models, and the minimal warming that did occur was considerably lower than the rate of increase in the preceding decades.
Yet, key political institutions like the United Nations, leaders of many countries, and the academicians funded by vested interests continue to claim that the model projections actually represent our future climate state.
In the early 2000s, this led them to declare that global warming was a real threat to our planet. In the late 2000s, politicians like Al Gore embarked on a climate mission to make the world believe we are doomed.
They said polar bears would be extinct soon and polar regions would be ice free by 2015. As of March 2019, the polar bear populations were healthier than before, and neither polar region has shown alarming reduction in ice mass.
With the expansion of the multi-billion dollar global renewable energy industry, fake claims regarding our climate system have only increased.
Consider the promoter of the Green New Deal (GND), Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY). Before unveiling the GND, she claimed that humanity has less than “12 years to save the world from climate doomsday.”
Seriously? The GND definitely needed some compelling reasons before it could ask us to forgo all the fossil fuels, embrace highly unreliable renewables, shut down airports, and grow plants without carbon dioxide. The 12-year claim, laughably false as it is, certainly proffers the required alarm.
The GND is really the Black New Deal. When the sun sets and the wind goes still, all American homes will be blacked out without any electricity as the GND proposes a complete shutdown of coal and nuclear energy sources.
For climate scientists like me, it is not new to encounter false climate claims like these. Many know that Cortez is the new Al Gore in the making.
However, the mainstream media are largely dominated by the doomsday perspective. Anyone who disagrees with the popular theory is quickly branded “anti-science” and categorically targeted.
It is high time we separate truth from myth in climate science. If 18 years (2000—2018) have revealed the climate model failure and the bankruptcy of the climate doomsday movement, the next two decades will likely reveal more discrepancies about misinformation being sold as truth.
Until then, the Big Foots of the Climate Empire will be walking with swag in our mainstream media.
Millenials don’t think. They merely consume what is streamed to them on their smart phones.
“...In the 70s, scientists claimed the earth was headed into a cooling phase that would usher in an Ice Age. The news was widely circulated in newspapers, and the masses were told to believe in it. It never came to pass. ...”
This has turned out to be sort of true, just off by 20-30 years. The magnitude of the cooling trend has yet to be seen. Hopefully it will be less then the “Little Ice Age 1300 (some say it really started in the 1500s) to about 1850” which was bad enough on people. The modern world can weather it better (Irony intended!). If its worse it depends on how much!
Its important to remember that technically we are still in a geologic time period of transcontinental glaciation (Ice Age) - the Quaternary. The Quaternary is characterized by cyclic transcontinental glaciations (Ice Ages). We are experiencing one of the many warming lulls between glaciation events. (Lulls can last for 10s if not 100s of thousands of years! or longer!) It could be the end of the Quaternary but there’s little to no real physical evidence for it. At least none that I know of! (Computer simulations are not physical evidence!)
I keep a copy of a November 1976 National Geographic on my desk. There is an article in it explaining how we are headed into a new ice age and how the planet is cooling down.
I have had more fun with that than you can imagine.
“By comparing observed temperature data with model predictions. The magnitude of warming predicted by the models was nowhere near the observed increase in temperature levels. The models consistently predicted more warming than observed.” That is a very deceptive statement. Its phrasing almost makes it say the computer models were accurate, until you read the modifying sentence after it. It should have said, “The observed temps were nowhere near those predicted by the computer models.” I’ll bet the writer actually has a college diploma!
FRom the article, “Since the 1970s, outlandish claims regarding our climate have been made repeatedly, only to be found untrue.”
There are scores of archived articles from long before the 1970s about North Pole melting or getting colder, glaciers growing and retreating. Even the underlying reason behind the Salem witch trials were about crops failing from poor weather. And what about all the human sacrifices by the Aztecs and others who “believed that without the sustenance of human life-blood, the sun would fail and the world would end.”
Fear of the weather and the desire to control it is almost a primal instinct with people. Charlatans from every era have exploited this, so should we be surprised that it is still something being used to manipulate people? Every major figure in the global warming scam is a charlatan; its all about power and money and they could not care less about what damage they do to the credibility of actual science.
Damn...... this was a just garden variety anti global warming screed.
I thought it was going to be about Bigfoot
p
__________________
[Millenials don’t think. They merely consume what is streamed to them on their smart phones.]
True. I seriously doubt whether the United Nations (or even Al Gore) actually believes in this stuff. But they DO know that millions, tens of millions will hang on their every word and do what they’re told.
“Global Warming” is, IMHO, a very large secular “religious” cult.
I say this while I’m aboard a UFO that Bigfoot is piloting.
I am not about to touch his beef jerky. We’re near Roswell and we don’t want a repeat of THAT.
I remember the Ice Age. I’ll bet that is a lot of fun to keep around.
Now, in “The Day After Tomorrow” that darn Global Warming caused the Polar Vortex or something and a big ship with wolves sailed through New York.
The liberals were burning books.......maybe that was accidentally prophetic.
listen, big foot is real- Here’s video proof of bigfoot caught on tape:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpXDxBT3evo
There is plenty of Bigfoot evidence.
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/LatePlaintiveBushbaby-size_restricted.gif
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.
