Slowly, Inexorably, Crumbling

Uncategorized 28 Comments

From science … to bad science … to fraud:

The real story in this Fakegate scandal is how the global warming movement is desperate, delusional, and collapsing as global warming fails to live up to alarmist predictions. People with sound science on their side do not need to forge documents to validate their arguments or make the other side look bad. Also, people who are so desperate as to forge documents in an attempt to frame their rivals are clearly not above forging scientific data, studies, and facts to similarly further their cause. It is both striking and telling how global warming activists have failed to condemn the acts of forgery in the Fakegate scandal.

While a growing number of American politicians take the side of the skeptics or in the least remain neutral, in Canada virtually every single politician from every party mouths Global Warming platitudes.
Cjunk asks, when will it end?
* For those unfamiliar with Fakegate.

28 Replies to “Slowly, Inexorably, Crumbling”

  1. I still think that the biggest item exposed is the relative size of the difference “sides”. $7 million annually for Heartland, versus $350 million for Greenpeace, $240 for the World Wildlife Fund, $100 million for the Sierra Club, $95 million for Natural Resources Defense Council. I knew that Big Green was big money, but it’s hilarious to see how David and Goliath the “battle” actually is. And, as we all know, David wound up confounding all of the knowledgeable folks of his time by winning….

  4. Just because our side thinks that we are right is not “winning” in the political sense. We have reversed the trend which was definitely a losing trend in the political arena before 2007. Gains have been made in Europe and Canada but so far the political establishment remain largely unaffected by the shifts in public opinion (which are not massive, let’s be realistic, just a solid trend away from near-unanimity to a 50-50 split or perhaps a slight majority of skeptics).
    The next phase will be a battle of attrition, in my estimation, because by its very nature this scientific controversy has no “smoking gun” for skeptics — there is nothing that can happen to prove a negative, especially in this climate regime of slight overall increases or steady state global climate (which is the reality, our side tends to accentuate counter-examples which have been telling, but not trend-setting to the extent of reversing previous upward temperature trends).
    Therefore, we need to be very realistic, and accept that we almost lost this battle before it was joined in the internet decade, since very few people were “on line” before 1998 when a lot of the ground was broken for the AGW half-myth and quasi-religion. We still face a massive challenge in the form of an education system and mainstream media not even mildly questioning the AGW thesis or climate change as they now call it (to cover more options).
    I think this concept will die out slowly and very gradually over the next twenty-five to fifty years, assisted as much by economic reality and possible technological change that will make the theory irrelevant by 2040. However, the climate change lobby needs to be kept on the defensive. There is also a battle going on within the science, but that is even more David and Goliath in scope, because many of the “David” figures (like myself) are operating from an excluded position in the classic irony of the wrong science defining the right science to be non-science (more religious behaviour). The strongest asset we have in that part of the battle is the large contingent of private meteorologists in the U.S.A., the only group of active professionals not either blacklisted to the sidelines, or dependent on research money to continue employment. Since they have less at stake than their fellow professionals, they can call it as they see it, and from what I can tell, two-thirds or more are skeptical.
    It needs to be understood that a spectrum of positions has developed, it’s not playing out on the ground as a simple yes or no question, but an attempt to quantify how much of climate change is natural and how much is anthropogenic. The skeptical position tends to operate on the higher side of the 50-50 blend in that question, since almost everyone concedes that there is a blend and so the question revolves mainly around what proportions. Personally I see it as about 70-30 natural and this by no means excludes the rather ironic position that a natural cooling trend could be offset by human signal of slight warming, to our advantage. As many have observed we are not better off in a colder climate and there is some room to tolerate warming if it does not exceed about 2 deg C.

  5. Cjunk I wouldn’t say that our Canadian politits mouth platitudes, first in the world to openly sink Kyoto, etc.
    Yea I’ve gone through a good chunk of my popcorn supply watching the fireworks at WUWT. And the smug watermelons furiously backpedaling. LOL
    d

  6. When will it all end? NEVER! Slowly wither away, perhaps under the onslaught of facts, but only just PERHAPS. There is too much time, ego, ideological certitude, career reputation and money invested to back down now; doubling-down with increasing vitriolic character-assassination of their opponents while further attempts are made to hide/fudge the data/record is really the only option for the watermelons. As Bertrand Russel once famously said when confronted by his grad. students with the evidence that the facts “on the ground” did not jibe with his theories on the structure and workings of culture and society: “Well, so much worse for the facts, then.”

  7. It certainly wouldn’t come under the broad definition of fraud, because if so it would undoubtably be legal – but I notice that David Suzuki and his co-founder Tara Cullis are listed as ‘donors’ in the Suzuki Leadership Circle category of $100k – $250K category.
    I’m kind of curious if this is a ‘cash’ donation or ‘in kind’. It would certainly serve both of them well to lower their published salaries and ‘donate’ their services in kind – thus providing a very nice tax rebate on the pay cheques they do bring home.
    Are these people who would probably be in favour of higher taxes on the ‘rich’, working the system for their own financial benefit? Just curious.

  8. Mining/fracking causing earthquakes? Second-hand cell phone radiation? What will liberals spank themselves with now?

  9. The Climate Scientology crew is growing ever more desperate as Gaia refuses to do what their computer models and data adjustments predicted would happen.
    As their sense of failure in understanding their god’s intentions grows stronger, they will get ever more desperate as they try to understand why Gaia has forsaken them, abandoned them, allowed them to make fools of themselves.
    But they have no choice now but to double down on their beliefs, even though they know deep down it is a scam, a grift. Double down and commit more crimes, tell bigger lies, invent bigger adjustments to the historical data, increase the warming variables in their computer models.
    Too much water under the bridge, too many careers and reputations at stake, too much squandered R&D money to explain and still too much funding to be conned out of gullible governments (hello Dulton) and stupid buy sympathetic foundations – yes we mean you dolts at Hewlett Packard.
    Nope, not over yet, still wind turbines to put up in pristine country landscapes so the insiders can get rich on Feed In Tariffs, still lots of conferences in Bali in February to attract climate scientologists from cold northern nations.
    Just think of the opportunity costs of all this greenie global warming nonsense, the real science that wasn’t funded, the potential cure for cancer that hasn’t happened, the patients stuck in hallways in Canadian hospitals because the money has been diverted to the nutters & scammers that infest the Climate Science departments everywhere.
    Schools not funded, children not educated, roads neither paved nor plowed, police investigations aborted for lack of funds, criminals set free because under funded courts can’t try them in a timely fashion.
    The opportunity costs of the Great Global Warming scam are real and there will be an accounting.
    An accounting . . . coming soon to a Climate Scientologist near you.
    Yes, we will be vengeful for your crimes against humanity.
    We will not forget what you have done.

  12. I’m of mixed opinions on this.
    Although GW is clearly a poorly orchestrated scam, it’s a necessary hoax if the earth’s resources are to be saved for future generations of the elites.
    We realized 40 years ago, that the world population needed to be reduced by 90%. We’re not going to allow our remaining oil, forests, water, fertilizers, to be consumed by useless eaters who no longer provide any net benefit to us.
    In the same fashion that a rancher slaughters his herd when they are no longer profitable, you people have outlived your usefulness.

  13. Has anybody else noticed that when leftard loogans get caught out they justify their actions by citing “frustration”?
    Peter Gleick blames frustration caused by skeptics for his fraudulent actions. Pat Martin blames foul mouthed tweets on frustration. Justin T excuses cussing in The House and inciting separatists on his harper induced frustration.
    It’s like dealing with a bunch of petulant two year olds…all emotion no cognition.

  17. Unfortunately, the majority of Canadians tend to believe Dr fruitfly and the Goracle to a certain extent, especially since they saw it on TV and such. Politicians by their very nature will tell the people what they want to hear and so taxpayer’s dollars continue to flow into the green initiative abyss. Since the government is backing these projects then the public assumes the government knows best. Voila, an infinite loop.
    In order for this country to survive some politicians are going to have to cowboy up and tell the public sheeple the truth, not what they want to hear.
    Tough love is what is needed. btw, you can replace “climate change” with deficit, pensions, or entitlements, and it will still be a valid observation.

  19. @C_Miner posted at February 26, 2012 12:37 PM
    Exactly, the billions and billions spent on promoting this fraud of CAGW makes one sick to the stomach. Especially when that money comes from the pockets of the taxpayers. They have the audacity to attack the 6.7 million per year of private donations this obscure think tank receives, yet ignore the billions and billions being funneled at the Green Movement. Not to mention that Greeenpeace, WWF, Sierra Club etc receive hundreds of millions of dollars of donations by big oil, the very thing they accuse this tiny little think tank of receiving. I have always said, it doesn’t cost much to tell the truth.

  20. If you’re going to lie, at least make it juicy. The ‘scanal’ that fake Heartland memo attempted to insinuate was so lame. Just so lame.

  21. Dystopian – great parody.
    I suspect we’ll see as many apologies and mea culpas for CAGW as we did for eugenics. Hopefully the death toll before it’s all done will not be comparable.

  22. “When will it end?”
    It will either end when they run out of OUR money to spend, or there will be a revolution/civil war.
    Or possibly both. I increasingly see no middle way. A middle way requires both sides to give a little, and the TAX EVERYTHING CONTROL EVERYTHING crowd shows no signs of flexibility.

  23. I have to agree with peter O’Donnell. Good example is B.C.’s Liberal government desperately seeking an issue to excite the masses,but though I’ve mentioned it to my MLA in person, not a word about rescinding the carbon tax,due to go up from the current 5.8 cents/l.
    Governments couldn’t care less about AGW/CC,they just love the excuse to tax us.

  28. To good an excuse to flay the public with taxes to enrich themselves & their buddies. No matter how big the lie. Its forbidden fruit for free, why believe the truth when lies profit you more is the mind set.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation