"Consensus": As Vast A Fraud As "Global Warming" Itself

Now Playing: There Is A Hot Lady In My Bedroom And I Need A Drink" from Terje Rypdal's "Singles Collection"

The purveyors of the concept of a "scientific consensus on global warming" continue to get slammed by, errm, cold reality. The last two weeks in particular saw the "consensus" unravel further as two new groups of prominent scientists directly refuted, on the record, the entire edifice of anthropogenic "global warming" and all proposed government force applied on its basis.

On December 13, 2007, one hundred prominent scientists, representing disciplines of climatology, meteorology, hydrogeology, physics, computer science, biology, remote sensing, oceanography, atmospheric physics, isotope geophysics, molecular genetics, paleoclimatology, chemical engineering, marine geology/sedimentology, etc., signed an open letter to U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon which reads as follows:

"Open Letter to the Secretary-General of the United Nations
Dec. 13, 2007

His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon
Secretary-General, United Nations
New York, N.Y.

Dear Mr. Secretary-General,

Re: UN climate conference taking the World in entirely the wrong direction

It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic growth and wealth generation.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC's conclusions are quite inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human greenhouse gas emissions. On top of which, because attempts to cut emissions will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease it.

The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the most widely read IPCC reports amongst politicians and non-scientists and are the basis for most climate change policy formulation. Yet these Summaries are prepared by a relatively small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by ­government ­representatives. The great ­majority of IPCC contributors and ­reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other scientists who are qualified to comment on these matters, are not involved in the preparation of these documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented as a consensus view among experts.

Contrary to the impression left by the IPCC Summary reports:

* Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability.

* The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years.

* Leading scientists, including some senior IPCC representatives, acknowledge that today's computer models cannot predict climate. Consistent with this, and despite computer projections of temperature rises, there has been no net global warming since 1998. That the current temperature plateau follows a late 20th-century period of warming is consistent with the continuation today of natural multi-decadal or millennial climate cycling.

In stark contrast to the often repeated assertion that the science of climate change is "settled," significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming. But because IPCC working groups were generally instructed (see http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/docs/wg1_timetable_2006-08-14.pdf) to consider work published only through May, 2005, these important findings are not included in their reports; i.e., the IPCC assessment reports are already materially outdated.

The UN climate conference in Bali has been planned to take the world along a path of severe CO2 restrictions, ignoring the lessons apparent from the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, the chaotic nature of the European CO2 trading market, and the ineffectiveness of other costly initiatives to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Balanced cost/benefit analyses provide no support for the introduction of global measures to cap and reduce energy consumption for the purpose of restricting CO2 emissions. Furthermore, it is irrational to apply the "precautionary principle" because many scientists recognize that both climatic coolings and warmings are realistic possibilities over the medium-term future.

The current UN focus on "fighting climate change," as illustrated in the Nov. 27 UN Development Programme's Human Development Report, is distracting governments from adapting to the threat of inevitable natural climate changes, whatever forms they may take. National and international planning for such changes is needed, with a focus on helping our most vulnerable citizens adapt to conditions that lie ahead. Attempts to prevent global climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity's real and pressing problems.

Yours faithfully,

[List of signatories]

Copy to: Heads of state of countries of the signatory persons."

Ouch, that's gotta hurt.

Yesterday, December 20, 2007, the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works issued a press release titled U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007, subtitled "Senate Report Debunks 'Consensus.'"

That's: Four hundred scientists.

That report is particularly damning in that it reproduces some of the creepy attempts, from Gore to a number of "nonbiased" media personnel, to quash dissent. This is an indication that the McCarthyism being employed against Climate Armageddon dissenters, described by MIT atmospheric scientist Richard Lindzen a year ago in Climate of Fear, is still in full force.

The Global Warming Petition, which has been on the books - and strenuously evaded by the Left and their media - for a number of years, is now well past the 19,000 mark in signatures from interdisciplinary scientists. The Global Warming Petition states:

"We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. 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."

That's: Nineteen thousand scientists.

From the Left...no comment.

To be fair, RINO Republicans in Congress and in the White House appear utterly oblivious to this as well. Enlighten them.

Reports on specific scientific findings are similarly confronting the eco-totalitarians with uncomfortably cold, hard facts. In summer of 2007 a loudly-trumpeted junket to Greenland was indulged in by a group of Senators, which trip conferred the status of Climate Science Expert upon each of the Senators, incidentally. Sen. Benjamin Cardin of Maryland summed up the emotions of all present: "Seeing the receding glaciers in Greenland showed us visible signs of global climate change. It helped me to understand our universal responsibility to reduce greenhouse gases, to protect our planet and our Maryland economy."

Unfortunately for the Good Senators, their instant expertise has hit a similarly-instant snag, for a new study shows evidence that Greenland's melting is in large part due to volcanic activity deep beneath that land mass:

From Ohio State University: Earth's Heat Adds to Climate Change to Melt Greenland Ice

And in a story from Agence France-Presse titled Extreme weather? Sure. Blame global warming? Not so fast", Barry Gromett of Britain's Met Office says "There's a danger in taking isolated incidents in any given year and attributing this to something like climate change. It's really important to look for trends over a longer period of time. More heat equals more moisture equals probably higher rains, so in that respect some of it ties in quite nicely (with climate change). But there are many different facets that appear to contradict each other."

French IPCC climatologist Jean Jouzel says "Several more years would be needed to establish a link, or to not establish a link, between these extremes and global warming."

Uh-huh.

Yes, "the science is settled." Definitely.

There is a reason behind this climate armageddon push - and it has nothing whatever to do with the environment, the climate, nor with concern for humanity. 'Care to take a guess?