5/31/13, "Science in the Service of Ideology: The National Climate Assessment," Norman Rogers, American Thinker
"The biggest junk science fraud of our time is the theory that the increase of CO2 and certain other "greenhouse gases" in the atmosphere will create dangerous global warming with disastrous results...
The fake "the sky is falling" climate science created a financial and professional windfall for numerous special interests: climate scientists, bureaucracies, politicians, green groups, ethanol producers, and windmill manufacturers, to name a few. The beneficiaries of this windfall are very protective of their empire. A climate mafia protects the windfall by suppressing dissent from the global warming party line. Very few scientists are brave enough and independent enough to publicly dissent.
The scientific organizations that are sensitive to government funding gleefully promote the scare story. Many climate scientists know full well that a fraud is in motion, but they have no desire to walk into a buzz saw by complaining....
The climate bureaucracy depends on the continuing global warming scare for its existence, and those familiar with the ways of government agencies know that a bureaucracy whose existence depends on a problem will always exaggerate the importance of the problem.
In this vein, a National Climate Assessment document has been released in draft form by the climate bureaucracy in Washington.
The document was vetted by a federal advisory committee stacked with global warming promoters; it is 1,100 pages long and mostly lacks serious justifications for its broad claims. The global warming bureaucrats have entangled critics in a mushy science blob, but the blob has been refuted in considerable scientific detail by a 133-page CATO institute document.
Global warming is global, not something concentrated in the 48 states. Yet the National Climate Assessment, for propaganda reasons, frames the problem as if it is an American problem. The Americanization of global warming is carried to the extreme of abandoning scientific convention and expressing temperatures in Fahrenheit rather than Celsius. In another dumbing-down move, the scientific name "greenhouse gases" is changed to "heat-trapping gases." Local climate forecasts for the 21st century are given for 6 different regions of the 48 states, a procedure relying on highly dubious manipulations of similarly dubious global climate model results....
The critical role of China and India in global warming theory is ignored....
The National Climate Assessment endorses the idea that CO2 increases extreme weather. There is little serious evidence to support the increasing extreme weather hypothesis. Given that climate has random variations as well as systematic natural variations, it is easy to mine the data to come up with evidence for increasing extreme weather in a particular zone, such as the continental U.S. or a smaller zone within the U.S. There are many types of extreme weather to choose from; thus, by picking over the weather record, one can always find something to support the extreme weather thesis.
However, a major problem with extreme weather theory is that weather is fundamentally driven by the equator-to-pole temperature difference. The computer models that the believers in global warming use predict that this temperature difference will decrease from global warming. Thus, logically, global warming should reduce extreme weather, not increase it.
(Incidentally, the phrase "extreme weather" did not begin to appear frequently in New York Times articles until around 2010, when it was starting to become clear that global warming had really stopped, at which point the global warming story was changed to the extreme weather story.)"...
.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment