Sunday, February 14, 2010


First there was Climategate.

Then there was the hoax of the Himalayan glaciers, predicted by the IPCC to be molten away to one fifth of their current level by 2035. It appeared that the IPCC had based that allegation on a study by a Russian hydrologist who had calculated the glaciers would be gone by... 2350.

Then there was the US version of Climategate: as The Telegraph's James Delingpole explains:

"... What it shows is that, just like in Britain at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) temperature data records have been grotesquely distorted by activist scientists in order to exaggerate the appearance of late 20th century global warming. They achieved this – with an insouciant disregard for scientific integrity which quite beggars belief – through the simple expedient of ignoring most of those weather station sited in higher, colder places and using mainly ones in warmer spots. Then, they averaged out the temperature readings given by the warmer stations to give a global average. Et voila: exactly the scary “climate change” they needed to persuade bodies like the IPCC that AGW was a clear and present danger requiring urgent pan-governmental action.

The man who spotted all this is a computer programmer called EM Smith – aka the Chiefio. You can read the full report at his excellent blog. In the 70s, the Chiefio discovered, GISS and NOAA took their temperature data from 6,000 weather stations around the world. By 1990, though, this figure had mysteriously dropped to 1500. Even more mysteriously this 75 per cent reduction in the number of stations used had a clear bias against those at higher latitudes and elevations...."

Then there has just been the revelation that of the 110-strong team of expert reviewers The Netherlands delegated to the UN to contribute to the 2007 IPCC report.... 109 came from the alarmist camp.

And now Phil Jones, who had to resign because of Climategate as Head of the CRU [the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, the prime institution that provided the IPCC with "scientific proof" of climate change - MFBB]... himself admits that there has been no global warming since... 1995. From The Daily Mail:

"...He [Phil Jones, ex-Director CRU - MFBB] also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.

He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend. And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.

Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer between about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high temperatures in northern countries.
But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only applying to the northern part of the world. Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: ‘There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.

‘For it to be global in extent, the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere. There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions. ‘Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented.’

Sceptics said this was the first time a senior scientist working with the IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming Period could have been global, and therefore the world could have been hotter then than now."

First off, I am not going to let myself go into a rant against the alarmists. Personally, given the fact that the winters my parents recount of were apparently far more severe than even the one we are currently experiencing, I would counsel ... I would simply counsel... serious, competent and steady research without interference from leftist scumbags wanting to politicize it all. Oh, and neither from fossil energy tycoons, for that matter. If, and that's a big IF, there would really be some kind of global warming, and if, and that's even a far bigger IF, man would somehow be somewhat responsible for this, then the most sensible thing to do would be rather to PREPARE for climate change rather than try to reverse the trend by going back to the Stone Age. In the meantime, it doesn't hurt to care for the environment.

But that's not all.

We should not make the same mistake as in 1990.

In 1990, the Wall came down. And we, evil rightwingers, greedy capitalists and backward conservatives, OUR worldview had won. The Left stood there with bleeding noses and...

... we let them get away with it.

We were rewarded for our fair play with anti racism laws, borderless immigration, indoctrination of our children, the brainwashing of the greater part of the population via the overwhelmingly leftist controlled news outlets, and mass abortion, gay marriages, gay adoption and active assistance of leftists in the islamization of our countries.

The whole climate change hoax is now blowing up in the Left's faces.



No comments: