Remember meForgot password?
    Log in with Twitter

article imageOp-Ed: The True Deniers of Global Warming Theory

By Johnny Simpson     Nov 29, 2009 in Environment
Skeptics of Global Warming theory have long been branded as deniers. Yet despite the fact that the very science of AGW has been brought into question via ClimateGate, AGW proponents race to Copenhagen to cut trillion-dollar tax deals. Who's in denial now?
Call me an Eco-Holocaust denier if you will. But in the past few years, I have seen a great deal of troubling evidence that the theory of Global Warming, aka Climate Change, isn't all it's scientifically cracked up to be. The debunked Hockey Stick graph. The lies about shrinking polar bear populations. The placement of sensitive temperature-monitoring equipment used to project global warming trends next to natural or manmade hot spots. The well-documented signs of global cooling, not warming. Most important, that CO2 may not even be a factor. We also had AGW and GISS guru James Hansen projecting the hottest October on record last year with September's data. That is not a mistake. That is outright fraud. It seems wherever you look closely at the "settled science" of Global Warming lately, even more troubling questions arise. For making such pointed observations in the past, I have been duly slammed by the True Believers of Global Warming as a denier. Yet who is being scientific here? Who is asking the tough questions? Who is poking holes where holes should be poked? Who is acting like Einstein, and who like John Nash? Who wants to know the scientific arguments from all sides of the issue? Who just Wants To Believe, and why?
Now we have the ClimateGate scandal, which has revealed that top scientists from the UK's East Anglia Climate Research Unit, upon whose research much of the theory of Global Warming is based (including the UN's IPCC reports), have been doing a lot more than just fudging the numbers to hide the decline and make the Global Warming picture fit their preordained conclusions. They have subverted the peer-review process to shut out dissenting scientists, denigrated scientific journals which published dissenting opinions, and even cheered the death of a prominent skeptic. Even worse, they have communicated intentions to hide or delete data and emails that were under official FOI requests, each communication of intent a criminal act. Those are not the acts of scientists. They are the acts of bullying racketeers trying to corner a market.
Today, we find that all the raw data from the past 150 years upon which the East Anglia CRU's and UN's IPCC reports are based, and upon which Global Warming theory is predicated, got dumped a long time ago. So now, I guess all we have to rely on is the "peer-reviewed" works of disgraced scientists who no longer have the data to prove their original case. That, and the gruesome falling polar bears fear-mongering infomercial. Yet none of this seems to trouble world leaders and AGW advocates who will soon be flying en masse into frozen Copenhagen via squadrons of commercial, private and government jets spewing countless tons of carbon. By the way, wouldn't a videoconference be more sensible and 'Green'?
Even more troubling is the total lack of interest in the ClimateGate scandals by those attending the Copenhagen summit. There's not a whisper of it in AGW guru Al Gore's recent "Time's Up" oped in the Financial Times. Lots of calls for transparency and disclosure regarding Green business opportunities. Just none on the science itself. Curious, since Mr. Gore posted that oped after the scandal broke. Considering that we in America are looking at a $3,500,000,000,000.00 Cap-and-Trade bill that will mandate skyrocketing energy and gas prices, huge carbon taxes (some global in nature), even more job losses in an already shattered economy and a draconian program of highly intrusive government regulations, shouldn't we at least do a comprehensive independent review of the science upon which that bill is based? A science which has been brought into serious question and has all but been proven fraudulent, even criminally so?
Of course not. I'm just a denier. But as such, I am way outclassed here. Since its inception, Global Warming advocates have been denying skeptical scientists their informed opinions in what should have been a vigorous debate, denying the right to peer review, even denying grants and the right of employment to scientists and climatologists who refuse to toe the Global Warming line. They deny anything at all is amiss in the "settled science" which they themselves have settled by popular consensus, all the while suppressing challenges or vigorous debate. They deny all that I have said here and in the past, the facts be damned, yet I am the denier. So, as a self-admitted denier, I make the following recommendation for one last major denial: to oppose with every fiber of my being Congress passing, and the President signing, a telephone directory-sized bill no one has read that doubles our energy costs, regulates us to Hell, and explodes an already expanding government bureaucracy to Orwellian proportions, and not just by size.
Are you, My Fellow Americans, willing to accept those nuclear hits to your earnings, your energy and gas bills and your privacy on a science that appears shaky at best and fraudulent at worst? What really scares me is how many will answer YES to that question. World leaders are all for it. The American media is all for it. In fact, the MSM's major outlets' top investigative and 'science' reporters have all been downplaying or totally ignoring ClimateGate. The New York Times' Andrew Revkin refuses to cite or reprint the scandalous emails, citing privacy concerns. This, from the paper that published the pilfered Pentagon Papers and every classified report from the Bush administration it could lay its hands on. Sounds like denial to me.
You certainly won't get a NO vote from GE/NBC Chairman Jeffrey Immelt, who stands to make billions from green technologies and government funding, and who has been propagandizing Green in every big TV show NBC produces. Nor, do I doubt, would you get a NO vote from the EnRon-like smoke traders on the Chicago Climate Exchange. Business is booming! Maybe the science got nothing to do with it. Maybe too much is invested and at stake in AGW for far too many people to shelve it now. Maybe AGW is just too big to fail, regardless of scientific concerns. We're talking trillions of dollars and massive government power here, people. Why else would the EPA suppress a dissenting 98-page report if it was just about the science?
But don't mind me. I'm just a denier. See you in Copenhagen! Don't forget your winter clothes. It's freezin'.
This opinion article was written by an independent writer. The opinions and views expressed herein are those of the author and are not necessarily intended to reflect those of
More about Michael mann, Phil jones, Obama, Copenhagen, East anglia cru
Latest News
Top News