Long before Beto O’Rourke claimed the world only had 10 years left for humans to act against climate change, alarmists had spent decades predicting one doomsday scenario after another, each of which stubbornly failed to materialize. It seems climate armageddon has taken a permanent sabbatical.
Many of those doomsday predictions specifically mentioned the annus horribilus of 2020. Those predictions also failed, some rather spectacularly.
Steve Milloy, a former Trump/Pence EPA transition team member and founder of JunkScience.com, compiled ten climate predictions for 2020 that fell far off the mark.
You know that old song line? “Seemed like a good idea, at the time.” Well, Mark Mills has a very interesting video presentation on the economic and environmental costs of solar and wind versus existing fuel sources.
There are no obvious correlations between rising carbon dioxide levels, the decreasing trend in the Artic pack ice and the gradual, almost linear, increase of the Antarctiv pack ice to record levels over the last 40 years. – Dr Howard Brady
Dr Sherri Tenpenny says of the author of this article: Ethan Siegel is clearly deranged. This is one of the most alarming pieces of propaganda I’ve seen in a LONG time.
Tom: The most blatant promotion of authoritarian tyrrany I have ever read. Every example he uses of unchallengable certainties, from fluoride and vaccines being safe to global warming being anthropomorphic is a blatant lie and disprovable falsehood.
Albert Eistein said “Unthinking respect for authority is the greatest enemy of truth.”
I will go with Albert over Ethan any day of the week and twice on Sunday!
Here’s a list of 32 subjects where if you had trusted the scientific advice it could have been [and was for many] deadly:
In the Forbes article Ethan says we cannot form accurate opinions on areas outside our own fields of expertise, we must take the word of authority. Here is what the curators of the medical authority publications have to say about that:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)”
“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”
“The apparent endemicity of bad research behaviour is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt data to fit their preferred theory of the world. Or they retrofit hypotheses to fit their data. Journal editors deserve their fair share of criticism too. We aid and abet the worst behaviours.
“Our acquiescence to the impact factor fuels an unhealthy competition to win a place in a select few journals. Our love of ‘significance’ pollutes the literature with many a statistical fairy-tale… …Journals are not the only miscreants. Universities are in a perpetual struggle for money and talent…” (Dr. Richard Horton, editor-in-chief, The Lancet, in The Lancet, 11 April, 2015, Vol 385, “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 sigma?”)
Here is the link to the article. WARNING: It could be severely assaulting to your sensibilities and your opinion of your thinking ability if you believe this claptrap.
He says, “On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I’d like to formally apologise for the climate scare we created.”
(Tom: I’m calling barely half truth on this one.
He does not have the right to speak on vehalf of the rest of the criminally fraudulent cartel and
Some of his recommendations are not much better than those of the leftist loonies!
If you want to get a bunch of valid data without spending a penny to buy his book, go to my blog (tomgrimshaw.com/tomsblog) and do a search for climate change. You’ll find plenty of articles to bring you up to speed on the lies told by the global warming/climate change hoaxers!)
(Tom: This is oh so wrong for many reasons! It is a human right to express an opinion (Human Rights Articles 18 an 19), the suppression of which is the tool of dictators, tyrants, liars and criminals all of whom are cowards and cannot face being challenged. So they should be!)
“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer.
Naomi Seibt, the 19 year old from Germany who has been making a name as the anti-Greta lately. Her common sense messages about global warming have not gone down well with the climate establishment, who prefer the hysterical outpourings of Greta.
But the campaign against her took a disturbing turn last month. She faces jail time for her YouTube posts. Read more of her story here:
Today I released my report in response to CSIROs climate science claims, that were presented at the meeting held with CSIRO senior scientists on Monday 26 September 2016 in Sydney. The key findings of Senator Roberts’ report shows that CSIRO:
Refuses to state that carbon dioxide from human activity is a danger
Does not have empirical evidence proving that carbon dioxide from human activity effects climate
Have used evidence in their presentation that contradicts the empirical climate evidence.
Uses climate computer models that are neither appropriate nor recommended to be used to inform government policy
There is a new study out that actually is starting to understand cycles. Climate experts have discovered that there is a natural feedback loop that creates the basis of a cycle. It is like the words your mother told you, “Too much of anything is bad.” Many kids would love to just eat chocolate bars for dinner.
There is a cycle to everything and the light has gone off that even if we accept that global warming is caused by the increase in CO2, the greenhouse effect is not something that would EVER be a linear projection for that is impossible for anything.
What they have discovered is the as CO2 has increased, temperatures have actually decreased by 0.2C to 0.25C degrees (0.36F to 0.45F) since the 1980s. This shocking unexpected trend has shown the obvious flaw in the whole climate change argument. As carbon dioxide emissions increase, it feeds a surge in plant life growth, which low and behold, consumes the CO2. The study was published in Nature.