While ruling class warm-mongers like Denmark's PM
Loekke Rasmussen strut on the world stage in
Copenhagen (above) people from California to the East
Coast are left to cope with one to two feet of cold, blowing
global warming (below).
Global warming, or as a new Pope takes on a saint's name, "Climate Change," has gone from credible scientific enquiry beginning in 1824 to a small cottage industry hoax in the mid twentieth century created by a few members of the wild-eyed intellectual classes (What, nobody believes our "coming ice age" warnings? Let's try global warming instead) to a full-blown international hoax today.
With the current Copenhagen Climate Conference in full swing it's almost obligatory for every hack writer, pundit, blogger, opinionizer and blathermonger with a keyboard to write something about it. So here goes:
The Copenhagen Climate Conference is sort of like a modern Council of Trent, attempting to determine which sciency-sounding assertions are divinely inspired and therefore worthy of being canonized and which email hackers can be excommunicated as grievous heretics.
By now it ought to be obvious to everyone, although it never is, that the actual science of global warming is entirely irrelevant to the current discussion of global warming. Here's why:
1. The world warms and the world cools and it's been doing so for millennia, without human cause, since almost all of the thermometer's ups and downs (i.e., the well-documented Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age) occurred before humans began burning fossil fuels in more than relatively miniscule amounts.
2. Global warming (rebranded "climate change" so as to cover all temperature fluctuations) has been fully politicized, religionized and ideologued. Politicians and the politically connected who stand to gain vast power, vast wealth, and/or vast ego expansion simply don't care about science, other than using "science" (i.e., tax grant-purchased sciency-sounding pronouncements) as a means to their ends.
3. No mere human science, nor any amount of massive worldwide redistribution of other people's wealth, will change what natural planetary phenomenon is going to do anyway. Furthermore, the political classes and their connected sycophants are perfectly aware of this. Global warming, like all religions, is simply a device imposed on the masses by the ruling classes in order to control and manipulate the masses for the benefit of the rulers.
Some hoaxes perpetrated on populations, such as the divine right of kings, the Medieval Inquisition, and various forms of socialism, fulfill this purpose. Some don't.
For comparison, here are some actual scientificy domains that don't lend themselves to hoaxery very well.
Evolution is a scientific theory of how living organisms change through time but nobody is trying to politicize it in order to "Stop Evolution NOW!" (Creationists deny evolution, so they can't very well "stop" what they claim doesn't exist.)
Plate Tectonics is a scientific theory that explains such geological phenomena as earthquakes, volcanism, continental drift, and mountain building, but nobody is trying to politicize it in an effort to "Stop the Earth's Crust from Moving NOW!"
The Big Bang is a scientific theory about the origin of the universe, but nobody is trying to politicize it in an effort to "Stop the Universe from Expanding NOW!"
Again, global warming is not about science. It's about politics and ideology and religion. Discussions of the science at this point are interesting but irrelevant.
Remember, being called an Anthropogenic Global Warming Denier is like being called a Flat Earth Denier or a Martian Canal Denier or a Tooth Fairy Denier so take it as a compliment.
Get the latest libertarian news from the All Libertarian All The Time news source:
The Libertarian News Examiner.
Comments
I can't believe how many climate scientists there are. There seems to be hundreds of thousands emerging on the internet this week.
I've put global warming on the same shelf as acid rain & the hole in the ozone.
This is crap. You're all idiots.
Isn't it "funny" how many people think science can be "settled" and is advanced by "consensus". If the data fails to support the theory, as is the case with Anthropogenic Global Climate Change (AGCC), then the theory needs to be scrapped and a new theory needs to be found that fits the facts. It doesn't matter how many people still believe the failed theory, or how "important" the believers imagine themselves to be. With politicized "science", like AGCC, the agenda is more critical than the truth.
"It doesn't matter how many people still believe the failed theory, or how "important" the believers imagine themselves to be."
Well, science is a meritocracy of ideas. You seem to have decided for yourself Kent, however I choose to keep an open mind.
Throw the bums out. Don't vote for anyone who mouths this "non-science." The power still lies with the people.
To both comments by Anonymous below: this article isn't about climate science, it's about climate politics. To Eva's comment: spoken like a dogmatic true believer.
It is true; global warming is a hoax. The largest hoax ever to be perpetrated. And the entire scientific community would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling patriots. We were just making up numbers; who knew that all you Glenn Beck-alites would be able to actually do the research that we had just pretended to do. For instance, when our "data" showed that human activities are undeniably responsible for the huge increases in atmospheric CO2 levels over the last century (i.e., it would be irrational to suggest otherwise), you guys were able to demonstrate that only 3% of atmospheric CO2 is human-generated (as Fox News' Greg Gutfeld recently accomplished). Bravo; we should have known we wouldn't be able to get away with this. The $$ we could have made from this sham blinded us to the possibility that Republican non-scientists, with no obvious financial interest in disproving human-induced climate change, could reveal the farce that is science.
I could not agree more with this, The fact of the matter is that whats happening is Climate change, nothing more, and the self centered, arrogant liberals and activists decide they're not getting enough attention, they create some half hearted excuse to make money. Five billion pounds of CO2 are released into the atmosphere by humans, Ninety billion pounds of CO2 come from the earth its self. How could you possibly side with global warming?
I've known it all along global warming is completely fake and Al Gore is a retard and all the people that believe in "Global Warming"
Human activities (especially land conversion and the burning of fossil fuels) generate huge amounts of CO2. We've seen an enormous spike in atmospheric CO2 since 1800. We are seeing polar ice and tundra melt and thaw at unprecedented rates. The burden of proof is on YOU, deniers, to explain how this is normal AND not human caused. If you believe that every scientist is in on the largest conspiracy the world has ever seen, you are no more sophisticated than deniers of the common descent of life on earth, the Jewish holocaust, or the moon landing. The evidence for anthropogenic global warming is not complicated or convoluted; however, any explanation of the present warming trend that excludes the activities of man would have to be. You look to your heroes for support of your beliefs (e.g., Palin, Beck, Inhofe); your heroes are either moronic or profoundly greedy & cynical and they see you as amazingly moronic.
To Ben: Personally, I don't know any libertarian who would call Palin, Beck, or Inhofe their hero. If a person can't even tell the difference between a libertarian and a conservative I wouldn't trust him to tell the difference between human caused and naturally caused warming, or the difference between (to repeat) actual climate science vs. climate politics. But of course, believing in the current climate politics absolutely requires one to believe in the human caused version of warming, otherwise one can't justify the politics. Clearly, the political agenda came first and the human cause was invented to justify the agenda. But of course progressives will never own up to that. It's against the agenda.
To Garry: You speak as if ideology has some bearing on the validity of facts. Through your political glasses, everything is conditional on your political leaning. How ‘bout an original thought for once? One not gleamed from a party platform. You really think a conspiracy involving 100,000’s of scientists around the globe is a tenable theory? Because science in a particular field does not proceed in isolation; it is connected in multifarious ways to all other fields. If climate science is bunk, physicists, biologists, geologists, and practitioners of every other field would have made a mockery of them long before the general public even had a whiff of the research. You don’t believe me that all disciplines stand behind the work of climate scientists? Check out the leading editorial in the December 3rd issue of Nature (462:545). So, Garry; what is it? Is this the largest conspiracy the world has ever seen or are you a politically-driven denier, no better than Ahmadinejad?
Garry has shown, by bringing the AGCC believers out of the woodwork, that "Climate Change God" is more important to "His" followers than science is. Look at the evidence yourself. Don't wait for the Climate Pope to read to you from his latin Bible and interpret it as it benefits himself.
Beck, Palin, and Inhofe (who?) are supposed to be my "heroes"? Hardly. Beck hasn't the spine to be libertarian; Palin hasn't the mental capacity.
"To both comments by Anonymous below: this article isn't about climate science, it's about climate politics"
Nice try Garry, however your article is clearly dismissing the current scientific consensus. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, all have issued statements in recent years concluding that the evidence for human modification of climate is compelling.
The scientific consensus might, of course, be wrong. If the history of science teaches anything, it is humility, and no one can be faulted for failing to act on what is not known. But our grandchildren will surely blame us if they find that we understood the reality of anthropogenic climate change and failed to do anything about it.
I recommend we all keep our minds OPEN.
No matter how it's explained or what they say,
continual global warming is NOT E-OK
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!