A manufactured crisis
Even as climate scientists and meteorologists stand up and refute the, “consensus,” they are not showcased or counted. They are instead labeled, “climate deniers.” Dissent, the all-important uber-patriotic essence of democracy, according to the left, is crushed by those unwilling to brook any deviation from their ‘consensus’.
Climate denial is now a full fledged thought crime. And yet, more scientists and meteorologists are speaking up, like John Coleman, founder of the weather channel:
I do not oppose environmentalism. I do not oppose the political positions of either party. However, Global Warming, i.e. Climate Change, is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you “believe in.” It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise. And I am telling you Global Warming is a non-event, a manufactured crisis and a total scam. I say this knowing you probably won’t believe a me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. So be it. ~John Coleman
Global Warming is so obviously a fraud that it should be embarrassing to those who still believe in it. The effort to create a post-consumer pro-environmentalist socialist society using Global Warming is naked propaganda.
Shows like Planet in Peril on CNN are so over-the-top that it’s laughable. Planet in Peril is a perfect example of the kind of cheesy sensationalist and blatant emotional manipulation lampooned on the Simpsons by characters like Kent Brockman.
“This is a planet under assault. This is a planet in peril.” Indeed, under an assault of propaganda! Just read this transcript. Cliches and cheesy lines devoid of any logic or sense:
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
ANDERSON COOPER, HOST (voice-over): For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. It’s one of the fundamental laws of physics, of nature. Nothing occurs in a vacuum in the natural world. There are ripple effects and that is putting our planet in peril.
This first paragraph is a logical landmine of fallacy. An equal and opposite reaction for every action? This is the proof that we are causing global warming? A cliche? Taking a ‘truism’ (whose ‘truthiness’ is undisputed) and misapplying it to a misdirected cause and effect? Brilliant.
This journey around the globe is an investigation into the reasons our planet is changing. It’s about the front lines, the places where threats aren’t just forecasts of the future, but are happening now.
Where forests are lost.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We’re destroying nature’s natural regulators.
COOPER: Where islands are discovered.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This island exists because of global warming.
COOPER: Where water is poisoned.
DR. SANJAY GUPTA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: A lot of people live around here and are dependent on this water.
COOPER: Where endangered animals are bought and sold and killed.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There’s a lot of animals right here that range the gamut of critical status.
COOPER: Where people are dying.
GUPTA: We’re hearing people are getting cancer from drinking water.
COOPER: This is a planet under assault. This is a planet in peril. ~transcripts.cnn.com
Goebbles would be proud. Phrenology has a more convincing scientific argument than Anderson Cooper’s amateurish foray into Global Warming propaganda.
climate change isn’t really happening! there really were WMD in Iraq! And Milton Freidman is the messiah! of course, the entire world is brainwashed and only raving right-wing libertarians can see the truth…
OR could it be that as the madness of heedless consumerism, environmental degradation, and war-mongering is becoming more and more apparent to most of the world’s population, people like you are clinging ever tighter to their ideological security blankets? this is what a child does – clings to his beliefs even when the reality around him is suggesting that he should act like an adult and reconsider those beliefs. climate change IS happening. instead of denial and nationalistic bullshit, we need real solutions that go beyond the dogmatic positions of the right AND the left…
Rich,
Where’s the proof? Science is testable. Models are not reality. What can we do about the variability of our orbit? Or the variability of the sun’s output?
The problem with the both of you , HP and Rich, are that neither of you are really making much of a case. First and foremost, I think we can all begin by accepting that we do, in fact, produce carbon dioxide. This is accepted, no?
Ok, now that we’ve got established fact #1 down, let’s move on logically from there.
Established fact #2: There are fewer acts of photosynthesis occuring now than there were 1000 years ago.
I think we can all agree on that, too. If not, please speak up. I’d love to see any research you have saying there are more trees (or anything else converting CO2 to O2) than there were in 1007 AD.
Ok, so let’s move on to established fact #3: the world, before humans came, was definitely in harmony. By which I mean, there was an established pattern that would continue without disastrous effects. It was in balance.
Now, If we look at these three facts, and think really really hard, we can see that there’s going to be more CO2 than the world has handled before, simply because we’re producing some, and the world is reducing less.
The question now is, will this lead to any negative effects?
This is where there should be deviation of opinion. Some might say greenhouse gases. Others might say the oceans can suck up CO2. I say, however, that because the world was in equilibrium, it will act like a chemical equation: there will be disastrous short term consequences, but after that, it should get used to the new way of action and adapt. In other words, bad things are going to happen before good things happen.
I hope you actually read that, I don’t feel like repeating it.