Every time I look into climate change dogma, I find more deliberate deception. Take this story for example, which details exactly how researchers "cherry-picked" the data to produce the famous Hockey Stick that Al Gore uses to beat nay sayers into submission. It's a hoax, as artificial as the Piltdown Man, and ironically, just as widely accepted by scientists.
It took 40 years for paleontologists to realize that Piltdown Man was a fraud. We don't have 40 years this time. Our politicians are busy using the hammer of global warming to destroy our freedom. Using Global Warming as an excuse, the EPA is ready to start regulating the discharge of greenhouse gases like CO2 and methane as pollutants. In case you forgot grade school biology, you discharge CO2 every time you breath, and methane with every fart.
Yes, this means that a Federal Agency will soon be capable of regulating every breath you take, not to mention how often you can have that burrito for lunch.
Far fetched? It wasn't too long ago that OSHA tried to regulate safety standards in your private home if you had a home office.
And that is the driver behind all of this. It's less about protecting the Earth than it is about controlling our behavior. Let's be honest for a moment. If these climate dictator wannabees truly believed there was a risk, would they be behaving as they do? Flying in private jets to Copenhagen? Traveling in limousines? Living high on the hog like AL Gore? When you show me politicians taking real action to reduce their carbon usage (and buying carbon offset credits from your own company doesn't cut it, Al.) then I'll believe they are serious. When the scientists (for lack of a better word) decide to operate transparently, sharing their data publicly instead of hiding it for 10 years, answering critics with facts instead of attacks; when they start revising hypotheses to fit the observed facts instead of the other way around, then I'll take them seriously. When they can show me a computer model that accounts for all of the data, not just the subsets that agree with their hypothesis, and that makes predictions with a margin of error smaller than the predicted deviation, and a track record of accuracy better than the local weatherman, well, then I'll take it seriously.
Until then, global warming theory is more sideshow than science, and I've never been a big fan of clowns.
Except for Red Skelton.
(H/T Volokh Conspiracy)
Global Warming: As Valid as the Piltdown Man
Next entry: Using 'real data' to get a false result
Previous entry: Kseniya Simonova: Making Sand Sing
Commenting is not available in this site entry.