California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger makes his case for climate change in the following video. The only evidence presented is a temperature graph, displayed for no more than 4 seconds, which is said to show a 2 degree rise in California’s temperature. You’ll probably have to stop the video, like I did, to learn that the graph covers 125 years and ignores the recent cooling trend over the last decade. Arnold then claims the state will warm another 7 degrees by 2100, leading to severe water shortages. Last, he makes a pitch for green technology including battery powered cars. In the bright light of Climategate, our state leader sounds like a fool. But, what’s new?
With the revelation that scientists have been manipulating data to prove man-made climate change is a threat to the planet, one would think global warming advocates would would lay low for awhile. However, in this age of green religion, nothing will stop the environmental left from propagating their lies. No surprise. The chance to ruin America’s economy and transfer enormous sums of money to PC scientists and green activists comes along only every 30 years or so. So, the attempted deceptions will continue.
As I perused the DrudgeReport this morning I wondered whether I was observing parallel universes. Leading the headlines was a story about Houston receiving “the earliest snowfall ever.” Today’s Houston Chronicle website reported, “A steady snowfall, the earliest in Houston’s history, continues this afternoon after flakes began falling shortly after dawn this morning… So far snow wasn’t accumulating widely, but once the ground gets cool enough amounts of two inches or more are still considered possible.” I dutifully copied the report to my Word documents, adding yet another story to dozens over the past year that detail record cold and/or snow around the world. That was one universe.
The second universe revealed itself just a few inches from Houston’s frigid story. The banner read, ”Schwarzenegger unveils dramatic climate change map which shows flooded San Francisco of the future.” Uh? California’s fearless leader is all a twitter over what scientists claim could be a 7 degree rise in California’s temperature over the next 100 years. After watching the accompanying propaganda video several times, I couldn’t help but think the Terminator was in the twilight zone. Scientists have trouble foretelling next week’s weather, yet they’ll tell us to bet our economic future on how life will be in the 22nd century. Go figure.
I have a few questions. First, where’s the data to back up Arnold’s claim? Oh, that’s right, there is no data because the future hasn’t happened yet. The comical claims are based on computer projections, and guess who massaged the abstracts? Arnold has devolved into a sideshow huckster.
Second, what’s so bad about losing San Fransisco? Ummm…
Major media outlets have been remarkably slow to report on Climategate. Those of you read the Los Angeles Times may still be in the dark about this bombshell. So, here’s a column by Debra Saunders, published by The Press-Enterprise on December 3, 2009, that will get you up to speed:
“This just in from the Times of London: After the leak of highly embarrassing e-mail messages from the University of East Anglia’s influential Climatic Research Unit, CRU has been forced to admit that it dumped ‘the original raw’ climate data used to bolster the case for human-caused global warming, while retaining only the ‘value-added’ – read: massaged – data.
In short, the CRU dumped the scientific data, but archived information that supports its conclusions. “It means that other academics are not able to check basic calculations said to show a long-term rise in temperature over the past 150 years,” wrote Times environment editor Jonathan Leake.
Of course global warming skeptics see Climategate as vindication. For years, global warming activists have maintained that they alone could claim the mantle of dispassionate science, while skeptics were venal, nutty or both.
The publication of these e-mails puts an end to that happy conceit, as they reveal a small cabal of scientists obsessed with obliterating dissenting scholarship and destroying the reputations of any who stood in their way.
For years, I’ve read global warming activists cite the work of UC San Diego science historian Naomi Oreskes, who looked at 928 abstracts of peer-reviewed articles from 1993 and 2003 and found, ‘Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position’ in favor of man-made global warming.
No surprise, her unbelievable claim was wrong. In a leaked e-mail, CRU Director Phil Jones complained of a 2003 peer-reviewed article that departed from global warming orthodoxy. Jones went so far as to boast, ‘I will be e-mailing the journal (Climate Research) to tell them I’m having nothing to do with it until they rid themselves of this troublesome editor,’ who approved printing the piece.
In 2004, Jones said he would keep two troublesome papers out of a U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report ‘somehow – even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!’
In another e-mail, Pennsylvania State University environmental sciences Professor Michael Mann proposed considering a boycott of Climate Research. But that’s nothing compared with Benjamin D. Santer, a climate scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, who, the Washington Post reported, said he was tempted to beat up skeptic Pat Michaels.
Polls show that Americans are cooling on the notion of man-made global warming. I must credit the bully mentality of activists, whose claims often defy common sense – and at times simple decency.
The defying-common-sense part: They claim that no credible scientist departs from the IPCC orthodoxy. Counter with some names – Richard Lindzen, Fred Singer, William Gray, John Christy, Don Easterbrook, Piers Corbyn, Roy Spencer, Pat Michaels, James O’Brien – and they impugn their scientific credentials.
If they have to redefine peer review, they’ll do that, too. And then they ask you to trust them on the dumped CRU data. After all, they’re scientists.”
Posted by Jerry Pomeroy in Fraud Watch, Global Warming, Video