Environment
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Francis & Climate Change - II
Lack of Scientific Evidence for Climate Change
John Coleman, meteorologist and the founder of the Weather Channel, says openly and forcefully that the notion of man-made global warming is “the greatest scam in history.”
Coleman notes that the entire global warming argument is supposed to be about science. “The science of meteorology is my lifelong expertise, “ he says, “and I am telling you global warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis, a total scam.”
“I have learned since the ‘Ice-Age-is-coming-scare’ in the 1970s to always be a skeptic about research,” continues Coleman. “In the case of the global warming scam, I didn’t accept media accounts. Instead I read dozens of the scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct when I assure you there is no runaway climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. It is all a scam, the result of bad science.” (1)
Coleman is not alone. More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.Ds in various disciplines such as such as climatology, atmospheric science, Earth science, environment and various other specialties – signed a petition called the “Global Warming Petition Project” rejecting the idea that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth’s climate. (2)
The Petition says, “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”
The Petition continues, “Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.” (3)
Scientists challenge global warming propaganda
There are numerous other competent scientists who challenge the modern view concerning man-made global warming.
Reid Bryson, founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at the University of Wisconsin, believes that the temperature of the earth is increasing, but it has nothing do to with what man is doing. He said, “You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.” (4)
Joseph D’Alea, Director of Meteorology at The Weather Channel and former chief of the American Meteorological Society’s Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecast, said, “Carbon dioxide is 0.000383 of our atmosphere by volume. Only 2.75 % of atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic [generated by man] in origin. The amount we emit is said to be up from 1 % a decade ago.”
He continued, “Despite the increase in emissions, the rate of change of atmospheric carbon dioxide at Mauna Loa remains the same as the long term average (plus 0.45 % per year).”
“We are responsible for just 0.001 % of this atmosphere,” insists D’Alea. “If the atmosphere was a 100-story building, our anthropogenic CO2 contribution today would be equivalent to the linoleum on the first floor.” (5)
On June 26, 2009 the Wall Street Journal ran a revealing piece titled “The Climate Change Climate Change,”(6) documenting that the notion of man-made global warming is being rejected by a rising tide of honest scientists:
• Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe recently noted that there are more than 700 scientists who disagree with the United Nations official assessments of man-made global warming;
• Joanne Simpson, the first woman ever to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, recently retired. After she retired, she expressed her relief that she can finally speak openly about her non-belief in the whole concept of man-made global warming. While she was working – prior to her retirement – it was dangerous for her professionally to speak out against man-made global warming; (7)
• Dr. Kiminori Ith, a Japanese environmental physical chemist – who contributed to a UN committee report – says that the notion of ‘man-made warming’ is “the worst scientific scandal in history;
• A group of 54 noted physicists, which is led by Will Happer from Princeton University, demanded that the American Physical Society revise its position that “the debate is over,” that the “science” is all settled. Predictably, both Nature and Science magazines refused to run the Open Letter from these 54 physicists.
More government control
Who, then, benefits? Why is this agenda being forwarded?
The entire environmental, global warming alarmist movement is really a kind of stealth Socialism. It is a means of increasing government control over the smallest aspects of our lives. We should not be surprised that Christopher Hohner – author of Red Hot Lies – points to the fact that “throughout Europe the fallen communists found refuges in the ‘Green’ parties.” (8)
Communist Mikhail Gorbachev, who after the alleged fall of Communism openly stated that he was still a Marxist-Leninist, founded the Gorbachev Foundation, and became a globetrotting environmentalist.
Likewise Father Leonardo Boff, who was the radical advocate of the Marxist Liberation Theology is now also a proponent of ecology and the new environmentalism. Connections such as this, along with the leftist mindset of most Green leaders, is the reason why we call many environmentalists “watermelons”: green on the outside, red on the inside.
In fact, environmentalism was one of the first positions espoused by German Nazis. Author Jonah Goldberg writes. “The Nazi’s were among the first to make fighting air pollution, creating nature preserves, and pushing for sustainable forestry central planks in their platform.” (9)
Certainly in today’s context, Climate Change alarmists are using the specter of man-made global warming to exert greater control over the details of our lives. Columnist Richard Littlejohn, writing in the London Daily Mail, said, “I doubt there is a single country on earth where the entire political class has so completely taken leave of its senses over alleged global warming. Here in Britain, it has been seized upon as an exciting new weapon with which to inflict more taxes, fines and regulations on us.” (10)
The common objective of many of these anti-global warming initiatives is a vast expansion of government power. Most amazing: by keeping up the scare of global warming, government officials, left-wing academics, media commentator and green activists may be able to achieve a kind of totalitarianism that communist dictators Tito and Stalin could only dream about. Vast numbers of indoctrinated population may willingly accept these strictures on their lives, all in the name of allegedly saving our planet from frying to a crisp.
British columnist Mark Steyn noted “It’s fascinating to observe how almost any old totalitarian racket becomes respectable once it’s cloaked in enviro-hooey. For example, restrictions on freedom of movement were previously the mark of the Soviet Union. But in Britain, they’re proposing limits on your right to take airline flights to other countries – all in the name of environmental responsibility, and fighting Climate Change -- and everyone thinks it’s a great idea.”. (11)
To those who think this an exaggeration, here is what the Carbon Sense Coalition of Australia, a group that warns against Climate alarmists, lists the following measures environmentalists wish to take to fight so-called man-made global warming:
• ban open fires and pot-bellied stoves;
• ban incandescent light bulbs;
• ban bottle water;
• ban private cars from some areas;
• ban plasma TVs;
• ban new airports;
• ban extensions on existing airports;
• ban coal fired power generation;
• ban electric hot-water systems;
• ban ‘standby mode’ on appliances;
• ban vacationing by car;
• ban three day weekends;
• tax babies;
• tax big cars;
• tax supermarket parking areas;
• tax rubbish;
• tax second cars;
• tax holiday plane flights;
• tax showrooms for big cars;
• Eco-tax for cars entering cities;
• Require Permits to drive your car beyond city limits;
• Limit your choice of appliances;
• Issue carbon credits for every person;
• Dictate fuel-effeciency standards. (12)
Of course, one of the main reasons the Greens want to control your life is to force you to reduce your so-called “carbon footprint,” which is the amount of carbon dioxide you allegedly produce by driving cars, using electricity, consuming any sort of fossil-fuel product, etc.
If you use too much, and your carbon footprint is too big, the Greens want the government to punish you – or at least ration the amount of energy you are allowed to receive. The goal: your energy consumption should be closely watched.
Continued
John Vennari is editor of Catholic Family News
where this article was first published on January 16, 2015
Coleman notes that the entire global warming argument is supposed to be about science. “The science of meteorology is my lifelong expertise, “ he says, “and I am telling you global warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis, a total scam.”
Francis is touted by leftist journals for his stance
on climate change
Coleman is not alone. More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.Ds in various disciplines such as such as climatology, atmospheric science, Earth science, environment and various other specialties – signed a petition called the “Global Warming Petition Project” rejecting the idea that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth’s climate. (2)
The Petition says, “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”
The Petition continues, “Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.” (3)
Scientists challenge global warming propaganda
There are numerous other competent scientists who challenge the modern view concerning man-made global warming.
Reid Bryson, founding chairman of the Department of Meteorology at the University of Wisconsin, believes that the temperature of the earth is increasing, but it has nothing do to with what man is doing. He said, “You can go outside and spit and have the same effect as doubling carbon dioxide.” (4)
Joseph D’Alea, Director of Meteorology at The Weather Channel and former chief of the American Meteorological Society’s Committee on Weather Analysis and Forecast, said, “Carbon dioxide is 0.000383 of our atmosphere by volume. Only 2.75 % of atmospheric CO2 is anthropogenic [generated by man] in origin. The amount we emit is said to be up from 1 % a decade ago.”
He continued, “Despite the increase in emissions, the rate of change of atmospheric carbon dioxide at Mauna Loa remains the same as the long term average (plus 0.45 % per year).”
“We are responsible for just 0.001 % of this atmosphere,” insists D’Alea. “If the atmosphere was a 100-story building, our anthropogenic CO2 contribution today would be equivalent to the linoleum on the first floor.” (5)
Rejection of the global warming propaganda is reaching all classes of society
• Oklahoma Senator Jim Inhofe recently noted that there are more than 700 scientists who disagree with the United Nations official assessments of man-made global warming;
• Joanne Simpson, the first woman ever to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, recently retired. After she retired, she expressed her relief that she can finally speak openly about her non-belief in the whole concept of man-made global warming. While she was working – prior to her retirement – it was dangerous for her professionally to speak out against man-made global warming; (7)
• Dr. Kiminori Ith, a Japanese environmental physical chemist – who contributed to a UN committee report – says that the notion of ‘man-made warming’ is “the worst scientific scandal in history;
• A group of 54 noted physicists, which is led by Will Happer from Princeton University, demanded that the American Physical Society revise its position that “the debate is over,” that the “science” is all settled. Predictably, both Nature and Science magazines refused to run the Open Letter from these 54 physicists.
More government control
Who, then, benefits? Why is this agenda being forwarded?
The entire environmental, global warming alarmist movement is really a kind of stealth Socialism. It is a means of increasing government control over the smallest aspects of our lives. We should not be surprised that Christopher Hohner – author of Red Hot Lies – points to the fact that “throughout Europe the fallen communists found refuges in the ‘Green’ parties.” (8)
Communist Mikhail Gorbachev, who after the alleged fall of Communism openly stated that he was still a Marxist-Leninist, founded the Gorbachev Foundation, and became a globetrotting environmentalist.
Likewise Father Leonardo Boff, who was the radical advocate of the Marxist Liberation Theology is now also a proponent of ecology and the new environmentalism. Connections such as this, along with the leftist mindset of most Green leaders, is the reason why we call many environmentalists “watermelons”: green on the outside, red on the inside.
The Green Movement is promoting the socialist agenda
Certainly in today’s context, Climate Change alarmists are using the specter of man-made global warming to exert greater control over the details of our lives. Columnist Richard Littlejohn, writing in the London Daily Mail, said, “I doubt there is a single country on earth where the entire political class has so completely taken leave of its senses over alleged global warming. Here in Britain, it has been seized upon as an exciting new weapon with which to inflict more taxes, fines and regulations on us.” (10)
The common objective of many of these anti-global warming initiatives is a vast expansion of government power. Most amazing: by keeping up the scare of global warming, government officials, left-wing academics, media commentator and green activists may be able to achieve a kind of totalitarianism that communist dictators Tito and Stalin could only dream about. Vast numbers of indoctrinated population may willingly accept these strictures on their lives, all in the name of allegedly saving our planet from frying to a crisp.
British columnist Mark Steyn noted “It’s fascinating to observe how almost any old totalitarian racket becomes respectable once it’s cloaked in enviro-hooey. For example, restrictions on freedom of movement were previously the mark of the Soviet Union. But in Britain, they’re proposing limits on your right to take airline flights to other countries – all in the name of environmental responsibility, and fighting Climate Change -- and everyone thinks it’s a great idea.”. (11)
To those who think this an exaggeration, here is what the Carbon Sense Coalition of Australia, a group that warns against Climate alarmists, lists the following measures environmentalists wish to take to fight so-called man-made global warming:
• ban open fires and pot-bellied stoves;
• ban incandescent light bulbs;
• ban bottle water;
• ban private cars from some areas;
• ban plasma TVs;
• ban new airports;
• ban extensions on existing airports;
• ban coal fired power generation;
• ban electric hot-water systems;
• ban ‘standby mode’ on appliances;
• ban vacationing by car;
• ban three day weekends;
• tax babies;
• tax big cars;
• tax supermarket parking areas;
• tax rubbish;
• tax second cars;
• tax holiday plane flights;
• tax showrooms for big cars;
• Eco-tax for cars entering cities;
• Require Permits to drive your car beyond city limits;
• Limit your choice of appliances;
• Issue carbon credits for every person;
• Dictate fuel-effeciency standards. (12)
Of course, one of the main reasons the Greens want to control your life is to force you to reduce your so-called “carbon footprint,” which is the amount of carbon dioxide you allegedly produce by driving cars, using electricity, consuming any sort of fossil-fuel product, etc.
If you use too much, and your carbon footprint is too big, the Greens want the government to punish you – or at least ration the amount of energy you are allowed to receive. The goal: your energy consumption should be closely watched.
Continued
- John Coleman, “Global Warming is a Total Scam”
- See www.petitionproject.org
- Ibid.
- Bob Unruh, "31,000 Scientists Reject ‘Global Warming’ Agenda,” WorldNewDaily, May 19, 2008.
- Ibid.
- Kimberly A. Strassel, “The Climate Change Climate Change”, Wall Street Journal, June 26, 2009.
- Those who deny man-made Global warming are often ridiculed, called a member of the “Flat Earth Society” or called a “Climate Terrorist”. We who have been opposing Evolution over the years – that other scientific fraud – are used to this. There is little or no scientific evidence, but it’s accepted as a scientific dogma that may not be questioned.
- Chrisopher C. Hohner, Red Hot Lies: How Global Warming Alarmists Use Threats, Fraud, and Deception to Keep You Misinformed, [Washington: Regnery, 2008], p. 217.
- Jonah Goldberg, Liberal Facism: The Secret History of the American Left from Mussolini to the Politics of Meaning, [New York: Doubleday, 2007], p. 384.
- Red Hot Lies, p. 209.
- Mark Steyn, “People Who Don’t Need People”, National Review Online’s The Corner, Sept. 7, 2007 [emphasis added].
- Red Hot Lies, pp. 212-213.
where this article was first published on January 16, 2015
Posted January 21, 2015
______________________
______________________
