“Global warming: is it just a scam?

“The IPCC’s 1990 First Assessment Report made wildly-exaggerated projections of how global temperature would rise. Yet for the past 15 years [now nigh on 18 years] there has been no statistically-significant “global warming” at all, as a leading IPCC scientist has now admitted. For nine years there has been a rapid cooling trend. None of the IPCC’s computer models predicted that.

“The 1995 Second Assessment Report, in the scientists’ final draft, said five times there was no discernible human influence on climate. Yet one man rewrote the report, replacing all five statements with a single statement saying precisely the opposite. He later said IPCC processes permitted this single-handed rewrite, which has been the official policy ever since.

“The 2001 Third Assessment Report contained a graph contradicting the First Report by falsely abolishing the medieval warm period, which, like the Roman, Minoan, and Holocene optima, and 7500 of the past 11,400 years, and each of the four previous interglacial warm periods, and most of the past 600 million years, was warmer than today. Some 800 scientists from more than 460 institutions in 42 countries over 25 years have written peer-reviewed, learned papers providing evidence that the Middle Ages were warmer than today.

“The 2007 Fourth Assessment Report’s key conclusion that, with 90% confidence, most of the warming since 1950 was manmade is disproven by measurements. A natural decline in global cloud cover from 1983-2001 (Pinker et al., 2005) caused most of that warming.

“The IPCC’s false “90% confidence” estimate was not reached by scientists: it was decided by a show of hands among political representatives who had few scientific qualifications.

“A lead author of the Fourth Assessment Report admits that, “to influence governments”, he knowingly inserted a falsehood to the effect that the Himalayas will be ice-free in 25 years.

“Many other false conclusions of the IPCC were authored not by scientists but by campaigning journalists, members of environmental propaganda groups or IPCC bureaucrats.

“The first table of figures in the IPCC’s 2007 Report did not add up. Bureaucrats had inserted it, overstating tenfold 40 years’ contributions of Greenland and Antarctic ice to sea-level rise.

“The IPCC’s conclusion that CO2 has a major warming effect is false. In the pre-Cambrian era 750 million years ago the Earth was an ice-planet, with glaciers at sea level at the Equator: yet atmospheric CO2 concentration was 300,000 ppmv – 700 times today’s 388 ppmv. If CO2 had the large warming effect the IPCC imagines, the glaciers could not have been there.

“In the Cambrian era 550 million years ago, CO2 concentration was 7000 ppmv (IPCC, 2001): yet that was when the first calcite corals achieved algal symbiosis. In the Jurassic era 175 million years ago, CO2 concentration was 6000 ppmv (IPCC, 2001): yet that was when the first aragonite corals came into existence. While the oceans continue to run over rocks, they must remain pronouncedly alkaline. Ocean “acidification” is a chemical impossibility.

“Many peer-reviewed papers (e.g. Douglass et al., 2004, 2008, 2009; Schwartz, 2007; Monckton, 2008; Lindzen & Choi, 2009) show that the IPCC has exaggerated the warming effect of greenhouse gases up to 7-fold. Without that exaggeration, there is no climate crisis.

“The economics of global warming

“Millions have died of starvation, or are menaced by it, because the world’s governments have unwisely trusted the UN’s climate panel (the IPCC) and the self-serving national scientific institutions that have profiteered by parroting its now-discredited findings.

“The World Bank has reported that three-quarters of the doubling of world food prices that occurred two years ago is directly attributable to the global dash for biofuels.

“Herr Ziegler, the UN’s Right-to-Food Rapporteur, has said that while millions are starving the diversion of farmland from food to biofuels is “a crime against humanity”.

“Lord Stern’s discredited report on climate economics unrealistically adopted a near-zero discount rate for appraisal of “investment” in carbon-dioxide mitigation and doubled the IPCC’s already-exaggerated high-end estimate of the warming to be expected from CO2. Without these grave economic and scientific errors, no case for spending any taxpayers’ money on mitigation of CO2 emissions can be made.

“A carbon-trading scheme that sets a low price for the right to emit a ton of carbon dioxide is merely a tax and does not affect the climate, while a high price drives our jobs and industries overseas to countries which emit more CO2 than us, raising mankind’s global CO2 footprint. The chief profiteers from carbon trading are banks.

“A steelworks at Redcar is closing with the loss of 1700 jobs, because the European carbon-trading scheme has made it uneconomic. Precisely the same steelworks will be re-erected in India. Net effect on the climate: nil. Net effect on British workers’ jobs: catastrophic.

“If we were to shut down the entire global carbon economy altogether, and go back to the Stone Age but without even the right to light a carbon-emitting fire in our caves, it would take 41 years to forestall just 1 C° of “global warming”. The cost is disproportionate.

“Even if the IPCC were right in imagining that a doubling of CO2 concentration will cause as much as 3.26 ± 0.69 C° of “global warming”, adaptation as and if necessary would be orders of magnitude cheaper and more cost-effective than attempting to limit CO2 emissions.

Quick qeustion who checks the accuracy of the BOM readings?

Please, do tell...

Well its meaningless drivel without a single reference to back anything up.

Basically manipulating science to justify an economic position.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on May 28^th, 2014 at 1:38pm:

It's not even manipulating science, though, is it: it is lobbying- read, bullying- the consuming voter with fear in order to retain the polluting status quo that profits off the back of Jevons Paraadox...

: it relies on endless environmental subsidies, in other words.

I see your debating skills and ability to succinctly support your point of view by proposing valid critique has managed to reach these heights.


I'm amazed you managed to even get that far.

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on May 28^th, 2014 at 1:51pm:

Nah, pure fascist fear mongering to maintain the polluting status quo for aslong as possible. Sure change will come but maximising retooling time to maintain status has to be the priority for any serious player in the business of making money: that is just the basics of KEEPING YOUR FINGER ON THE PULSE.

Everything is a weapon: the first rule of business is to stay in business so political voices must be used in some way and in some description and of various description.

Confusion, surprising angles, determination: until the people lead they are led!

ALL HUMAN RELATIONS IS POLITICS 

Dear Mx Horse/ DRAH

Please start your own thread and fill it with your incomprehensible nonsense or go back to Club Penguin where your grammatical skill can be appreciated.

Doctor Jolly wrote on May 28^th, 2014 at 2:01pm:

It is now your head is in it...seems like a natural position for you.

Looks like the last point any of you empty headed leftwing moonbats argued with was the end of a lobotomy needle

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on May 28^th, 2014 at 2:18pm:


...and still you have nothing.

Maybe you should try refuting something in the text, or is that beyond you?

IQSRLOW wrote on May 28^th, 2014 at 1:52pm:


Hillarious .... someone who puts up childish photos of kids poking out tongues wants to comment on others debating skills

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on May 28^th, 2014 at 2:47pm:

"protocol" : one suspects that that kind of stuff is above iqs station 

IQSRLOW wrote on May 29^th, 2014 at 7:16am:

Fascist protocol is so funny..  sure you aren't some kind of lezzo bulldyke offline  ?????

IQSRLOW wrote on May 28^th, 2014 at 2:44pm:


Won't happen he is a Denier along with the fact he can't.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 30^th, 2014 at 2:23am:



There ya go IQSRLOW, that's your best leftard denier rebuttal to date.

Lets see if another tops that one.

BatteriesNotIncluded wrote on May 30^th, 2014 at 2:33am:


Well circle away still no rebuttals from the peanuts gallery. Giddy up boy.