The AGW Denialists ……..

01 Dec


The AGW arguments have become completely polarized, and in this situation we notice a familiar phenomenon: evangelization. Each side is so convinced of the rightness of its arguments that almost any means come to justify the ends and argumentation becomes increasingly colourful and/or insulting. Few are they who retain a scientific detachment. The following is a good example of a believer rubbishing a heretic:

Anyone who does not acknowledge the fact that humankind is causing global warming is anti-science, anti-intellectual and on the same level as a religious fundamentalist.

This is not condicive to intelligent debate. And a “wanting-to-believe” layman has problems.  IF the science is overwhelming, then why ARE there so many denialists? We want to trust scientists, but we are wary of PC officialdom, and I would suggest with good reason. The vast majority of the ruling elites of the past 20 years have completely failed their voters. They have lied about the benefits of the euro. They have connived at the totally-unmandated progression of the EU towards a giant federal superstate, for which NOBODY has voted. They have wildly over-borrowed, thanks to a complete gutlessness and inability to say to their people: “No, we can’t afford that.” or “Sorry, but you have to postpone retirement.” and so on. Others have gone further, becoming as in Greece and Spain utterly venal and colluding in blatant corruption in their countries. Most political elites are in hock to financial institutions and/or big industry in some form or other. Almost all are obsessed with short-term propagandizing and soundbites designed to fool the public into voting for them at the next election.

All this has led to a massive debt and financial crisis resulting of course in mass unemployment, deflation, recession and all the rest, of which there is currently no end in sight. In other words, the credibility of our ruling classes is at an extremely low point. So much so, that many people simply NO LONGER BELIEVE in most of what they say. The GW debate has become infected by this general revulsion at much of the information given out by our so-called leaders to the point where rational arguments and thought are thin on the ground. Millions of people are ready and willing to believe in conspiracies and hidden agendas by the elites – political, industrial and/or financial – or even by other nations.(“It’s all a scam by the poor nations to force us to give them money.”)

The solution to this is obvious – elect better and above all more honest representatives. But here the despair sets in. By any standards, the Greek political elite has led the country to ruin, but when given a chance to vote the Greeks managed to reelect a coalition of most of the familiar old and venal faces that have been troughing off the Greek people for decades. No different in Spain – the dinosaur parties still reign. Hope for more honesty in European politics is therefore fairly hard to summon up. The US staggers on alternating between the two big old parties; is it not astonishing in the US that other viewpoints either do not exist or cannot get a foot in the door?

After my previous two posts on GW – each reflecting the opposing sides of the argument, I trawled some blog comments in “The Daily Telegraph” to illustrate the depth of feeling on the part of some “denialists”.

Of course, the term “denialists” is in itself hugely propagandistic. It could in theory and obviously be equally as much applied to the GW believers as the non-believers (denying that GW is a myth).  But if one side can appropriate a catchy term and use it to rubbish the opposition, it is of course very powerful. I am reminded of the power of brand names and marketing!

Anyway, for what it is worth, here are some denialists’ comments! Once again,m it takes an “expert” to tell us if and where the flaws are in these apparently sincerely-held opinions. On both sides “facts” are presented as unchallengeable and statistics tossed around like confetti. I admit to being somewhat confused, especially as the science seems pretty complex.

  • With their report the IPCC promised to explain why they had failed to predict the 15-17 year pause and cooling in global temperatures, and then went on by failing to do so.  The scary scenarios they pedaled in their AR4 report have failed to come to pass, and the world is missing 0.6C of warming already.Meanwhile CO2 emissions are growing faster than ever. China has doubled their CO2 emissions, and are set to double it again, so that by 2020 they will account for 2/5 of all the world’s CO2 emissions.
  • I have already researched a number of so-called unprecedented AGW events and found in everyone I researched, there had been a similar or worse event in the immediate region, if not the exact same place, 60 or 70 or 80 years ago and probably periodically throughout history. Of course communications are better today and populations denser, so we know about events we might have never heard about 60 or 70 or 80 years ago, and more people are affected by such events.The most devastating hurricane to hit the U.S. in terms of loss of life was in Galveston, Texas in 1900. Between 5000 and 6000 were killed – and this was an actual hurricane event, unlike Katrina, where deaths came from a lake overflooding and going through a non-maintained levee and flooding a beneath sea-level city.Sandy was massive in size. But it was only a cat 1 storm – in hurricane season. Meteorologists said the actual impact wasn’t just because of the hurricane. It was that the hurricane hit a cold front. Surely cold fronts in the Northeast U.S. are not unusual in autumn. No one has explained why a cat 1 hurricane in hurricane season – which extends through autumn, hitting a cold front in a cold part of the U.S. would be an AGW event. An unfortunate coincidence, yes. But what makes it an AGW event? That the area was densely populated; much sea front with beaches which erode every year anyway and much built on flood plains which private insurers won’t insure and despite all, completely unprepared for the possibility of storms – well, I don’t think any of that can be called “AGW.”
  •  It is now a complete joke. The world is warming….somewhere, according to NASA and our trolls, but there has been a hiatus according to the MetOffice, Phil Jones, the IPCC and the New York Times. Yet the IPCC is 95% certain of all the things in which they have low confidence. And since the world is warming, that’s why it’s cooler in most places where people live and there are blizzards. Any fool would understand that. And there is more drought, which is why there are (supposedly unprecedented) rainfalls, even in the deserts. Any fool would also understand that. And the Arctic ice is melting, I think because of jet streams, which are at least 20,000 feet above earth and as much as 50,000 feet. Why jet streams, where it is very, very cold (anyone know of anyone climbing Everest in a bathing suit?) would melt ice on the surface of the earth, also obvious to anyone. (Not!).Is there even a pretence anymore that there is any science? What are the CRU people and Mann doing with their time (and our money) these days? Seriously? How are they spending their time?
  • Did my ears deceive me or, just before 2pm today, did I hear somebody on Radio 4 say that scientists were quietly tip-toeing away from the catastrophic predictions of global warming alarmism. Oh dear, the game really is up.
  • There has been no statistically significant warming for over 15 years (as acknowledged by the IPCC) and there has in fact been minor cooling since 2002 (but not yet statistically significant) according to UEA / Met Office HadCRU data. This is despite the fact that human emissions of plant food have been over a quarter of total human plant food emissions since 1750. So much for the hockey schtick.”Although the forcing uncertainties are substantial, there are no apparent incorrect or missing global-mean forcings in the CMIP5 models over the last 15 years that could explain the model–observations difference during the warming hiatus”i.e. they don’t know, except for explaining the divergence away with the loose term “natural variability”, something that was conveniently ignored with their hockey schtick before it all went wrong for them.
  • Warsaw COP-19 was the end for the warmists.  It showed that the global warming scam was never about science but about the Marxist distribution of wealth from the industrialised nations to the UN, so that they can use the money to buy influence over the poorer nations as part of the roll out of Global Governance and Agenda 21.The industrial nations have woken up to this, and the process of distancing themselves from the UN global warming, global governance scammers has begun.
  • On the night of 31st January -1st February 1953 one thousand eight hundred and fifty-five people died in The Great North Sea Storm which combined a viscous storm and high tide to create a storm surge which inundated parts of Holland, totally destroying ten thousand buildings, ruining four times that number and drowning thirty thousand farm animals, and also killed more than three hundred people in England and Scotland. Freak weather events have always happened, be that sixty years ago in this case or hundreds of years ago, long before the anthropogenic global warming idea caught on or could have happened.
  • Global warming is a massive scam. There can only be a very few people who find anything about making hoax calls to the police, ambulance or fire services in the least bit a joke. People can die as a result of these calls. Hoax calls seems to be the general term for these calls. In the same way pseudo-scientific hoaxes such as the global warming con trick can be just as deadly but on a scale of millions upon millions of deaths, just so a particular group of ‘scientists’ can claim vast amounts of government funding.These funds and the vast amount of time tied up in such a scientific con trick are diverted from deadly threats such as the Fukushima disaster.   It is beyond doubt that the human race is threatened by what is happening at Fukushima, especially the future generations being born after 2010.   Deformities and death on a massive scale are what is going to happen from now on and for thousands of years to come.A global effort of all the world’s scientists and engineers should at this moment be working out how to safely contain the core melt downs at Fukushima. Radiation is pouring into the atmosphere and the world’s oceans. The Northern hemisphere is bearing the brunt of the airborne radiation at the moment, but all the worlds oceans will be irradiated as the radiation spread from the waters of the Pacific Ocean.Humanity, although most people are not aware of it, is in a frightening race against time. The longer Fukushima goes on being ignored the more the horrific results are going to be bourne by our children and children’s children. Please watch this documentary. It is the first one I have found that shows just what is going on at Fukushima, and why the world’s governments want to project the reassuring picture to us that all is well, and everything is under control. Nothing is well, and nothing is under control. Please watch this documentary: – (See also this site)
  • The Climate Establishment is corrupt and is engaged in pedalling lies, fraudulent manipulation of data, ignoring inconvenient science that conflicts with their CO2 mantra, controlling the peer review and publishing process to keep out publications that disprove their CO2 fraud, control the media to create alarm and to publish lies which are not supported by the data, and claim a consensus while constantly making up new unsupported seance to explain away and fob off why the real climate is refuting their scam.It is about time every nation ignored this spurious rubbish. Headlines like this only suggest one thing,  the left-wing are rattled. Anything that stands on any of their pious beliefs is met with language that only squabbling alley cats can appreciate. Dangers to society may be mortal without being immediate.A great rift could easily occur as the prevailing social vision of our time is creeping upon us without many people realising it.. The expansion of the media has enabled intellectuals to control the agenda without any feedback. The principle of empirical study is ignored. Statistics are manipulated to fit the argument and are slewed to such an extent as to create a world that does not exist. The hockey stick graph on climate change proved that point beyond doubt.This is how the left-wing works. As one of the strongest adherents of climate change admitted that results did not matter. What mattered more than anything was to maintain the crisis at its peak thereby polarising public opinion at the same time. I often wandered why the left-wing had such thick skins and why there was so much insistence about particular concerns such as poverty when in actual fact the poverty is only relative. The truth of the matter is that regardless of which subject is chosen that is in the news at the time, declarations of the widening gap of rich and poor for example, could on closer inspection be proved to be totally false depending on the data sampling of the system.Many of the main bodies of thought have  been hijacked by the left-wing using misinformation or by just declaring their position as sacrosanct. Anybody that doesn’t agree with them ia a heretic. The climate change hysteria is typical of a process providing false information. Despite many incidents and admittance of irregularities, billions are being wasted. The bullying tactics used by the left to threaten officials who did not go along with the main agenda resulted in sackings of personal who refused to toe the line. After studying all of the deliberate attempts of the left-wing on the climate change agenda, it occurred to me that this is how they operate all the time regardless what the subject is.

Posted by on December 1, 2013 in Environment, Politics


4 responses to “The AGW Denialists ……..

  1. John Gardner

    December 9, 2013 at 9:13 am

    “Marxist conspiracy” – “global warming scam ” – “The Climate Establishment is corrupt and is engaged in pedalling lies, fraudulent manipulation of data”.

    The fact that left wing conspiracies are being blamed is a good indicator of the sources and motivations of those fighting science with rhetoric.

    The IPCC took a lot of stick for not explaining away the apparent lack of global warming over the past 15 years. It was simple – they didn’t know the reason. The mystery now seems to have been solved. Because of a lack of data, the models assumed that the Arctic was warming at the same rate as the rest of the world. Recent evidence indicates that it is actually warming much faster to the extent which puts the average global temperatures at the expected rate. See

    As far as “unprecedented AGW events” are concerned, these are not acknowledged by climate scientists. No single event is attributed to anthropogenic global warming. If more energy is put into the atmosphere, then models (and common-sense) say that the weather will change. Some monsoons will become heavier, tropical storms will tend to be more severe, wet latitudes will have more rain, dry latitudes will be drier.

    The scientific principles at the heart of climate change are not that hard to understand. Forecasting, however, is difficult. The models are only as good as our understanding of the processes involved, the data available, and the power of computers. Our knowledge of the processes will improve, the data will improve, and computer resources will become more powerful.

  2. Chris Snuggs

    December 11, 2013 at 4:45 pm

    Thank you John for this and previous posts. Things are becoming clearer, even to the layman, but the battle seems to be being lost. I found this in “Le Monde” today:

    40 milliards de tonnes : les émissions de CO2 atteignent un niveau record

    “Le monde émet toujours plus de gaz à effet de serre et la courbe des émissions s’installe désormais au-dessus du pire scénario imaginé par les experts. Dans son bilan annuel, publié mardi 19 novembre, le Global Carbon Project (GCP) – un consortium scientifique conduit par l’université d’East Anglia…”

    To sum up, CO2 emissions are now at 40,000,000,000 tons, exceeding the worst predictions of experts in a scientific consortium attached to the University of East Anglia. I find the figure of 40 billion tons impossible to imagine, especially as CO2 is only a relatively small % of total gases in the atmosphere.

    There is no way we are going to reverse this, is there? It would involve abandoning coal and gas for a start, which means nuclear, wind, water and solar, but WHO can go it alone without bankrupting their economies?

    I also read in “Le Monde” a couple of days ago about another gas in teh atmosphere which scientists have only just begun to appreciate and which is far, far more damaging than CO2. Stupidly, I did not make a note of the details at the time and can’t find the article again either. I shall continue to investigate!


    ‘Our emissions are not only continuing, but they’re accelerating; that’s a scary thing.’—James Butler, director of global monitoring,National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

  3. John Gardner

    December 13, 2013 at 1:31 am

    I am delighted that you are turning your back on the weird and wonderful world of anthropogenic global warming denialism, and committing yourself to the world of science and common-sense. To be quite honest, I lump climate AGW denialists, Creationists, and Flat-earthers all in the same category. We can never be sure of anything, but we can sometimes be 95% sure that something is correct, and 95% sure that something else is wrong. It’s rather unfortunate that climatologists have to argue against AGW denialists, whereas palaeontologists don’t have to argue against Creationism, and cartographers don’t have to argue against Flat-earthers.

    The problem can be mitigated, but it requires commitment by all parties, and that ain’t going to happen in a hurry, and there isn’t a single magic bullet.

    A considerable saving can be made by improving agricultural methods; by making the petrol engine more efficient; by designing better buildings; and generally being more efficient in our use and generation of power.

    Alternative energy resources have to be developed. It’s ridiculous that we can afford to go to war every decade but don’t seem to be able to afford to develop efficient wave power generation. Electricity generation is the major source of CO2. We have bags of tidal energy, solar radiation, and wind power out there – we should be trying to harvest it efficiently. Although having said that, to grow the economy at the current rate beyond 2030 we need to develop revolutionary technologies, such as beaming energy back from solar farms on the Moon. That’s only 15 years away…

    Stop cutting down rain forests. If I remember correctly, about a tenth of the anthropogenic CO2 pumped into the atmosphere comes from land clearance.

    Carbon capture can be made to be cost-effective. Basically the CO2 is captured using existing technology from chimneys, compressed, and pumped into suitable deep saline-rich sandstone strata.

    Finally, we can impose economic measures to limit the use of CO2 fuels. The problem with CO2 production at the moment is that it is an external cost – one that does not directly effect the producer, and that has to change. This can be done in one of two ways: have a carbon tax, and regulate the tax to limit CO2 emissions to that the environment can afford; alternatively, ration CO2 emissions and allow the market to bid for its requirements.

    We need commitment from the major energy users – especially America. The American industrialists are being incredibly short-sighted at the moment – there is a mountain of money to be made out of solving the problem. Instead, the American oil and coal industries spend money trying to persuade the American public and their Congressional friends that ‘global warming’ is a left-wing conspiracy. Fortunately, American public opinion is starting to turn.

    Over the last couple of decades, the UK has developed a rather wonderful way of developing infrastructure by building now, and leaving it for the next generation to pay. That approach to life will have to be turned on its head. We have to pay now to mitigate AGW to enable future generations to reap the benefits. Can we do it?

  4. Chris Snuggs

    December 13, 2013 at 11:51 am

    These arguments deserve a wider audience. I shall try to propagate them.

    “The American industrialists are being incredibly short-sighted at the moment.”

    Home Sapiens is naturally a short-term animal! And this connects with another idea I have. Many denialists are “short-termists”. They have been hearing for years about the diasters that GW will bring but so far haven’t seen anything dramatic. They are too impatient! Of course, our own perceptions of the passing of time don’t match the actual rate of change, which though relentless and accelerating is not clear from week to week on a planetary scale. Basically, we are incapable of really internalising the vast length of the history of the Earth, for example.

    Love all your ideas. I would say on water-power that a Severn Barrage would have been a more memorable project than the Milleniu, Dome. But there you run into “environmentalists” (supreme irony there!) who are concerned for the wildlife. Well, if things go on as they are there won’t BE any wildlife anyway. Besides, wildlife is pretty tenacious and usually can find an alternative environment. But if the atmosphere heats up then NO environment will be safe for – for example – frogs, which I understand are very sensitive to these changes we are now experiencing.

    My solutions in addition to yours?

    A) vast solar farms in the Sahara
    B) small wind turbines in domestic gardens and/or on rooves
    C) nuclear energy, including on the moon
    D) vast solar farms in space, reflecting energy to Earth
    E) the return of horse-drawn carriages to replace taxis for a start – they were good enough for Sherlock Holmes!
    F) an end to the industrial manufacture of useless rubbish – plastic and other junk of all kind – what is the POINT of Christmas crackers with plastic bits inside that people immediately throw away?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: