The other 'green' in global warming : Lamb notes big cash keeps some scientists sounding alarm

The up-tick in global warming propaganda in recent days is to set the stage for the release of the Fourth Assessment Report from the International Panel on Climate Change. Surprise, surprise, the report will say the sky is falling – faster and faster.

For people who have watched this process since the beginning, this report, at least the executive summary of the report, is mostly hogwash, wordsmithed by policy wonks and media specialists to scare the gas out of the economy.

The First Assessment Report was developed by a fairly balanced group of scientists from around the world and released in 1990. The report was quite extensive and dealt primarily with capturing and storing carbon dioxide.

The Second Assessment Report was adopted by a fairly balanced group of participating scientists in December 1995. Then, the lead author of the report, B. D. Santor, acting with the consent of the co-chairman of the Working Group, John Houghton, and with the consent of the executive secretary of the Framework Convention on Climate Change, Michael Cutajar, changed the report significantly, without the approval of the scientists.

Dr. Freidrich Seitz, president emeritus of Rockefeller University and former president of the National Academy of Sciences, said:

"I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report. Nearly all the changes worked to remove hints of the skepticism with which many scientists regard global warming claims."

A hundred distinguished scientists, meeting in Leipzig, Germany, released a joint statement July 10, 1996, which said:

"There is still no scientific consensus on the subject of climate change. On the contrary, most scientists now accept the fact that actual observations from earth satellites show no climate warming whatsoever."

From that point forward, any scientist who dared to offer research results that did not affirm the conclusions of the IPCC has been denied invitations to participate in the IPCC studies, denied funding and/or denigrated publicly by politically motivated scientists and/or the media. Any scientist who dares express skepticism is at once denounced as a pawn for the oil and coal industry.

Actually, the opposite is true: Advocates of global warming are pawns of the global warming industry. And, indeed, global warming is an industry. In 1996, at the same U.N. meeting at which the Second Assessment Report was released, Mohamed T. El-Ashry, chief executive officer and chairman of the Global Environment Facility, released its quarterly report. He told the delegates that his agency had leveraged $462.3 million into $3.2 billion in climate change projects. And that was just the beginning.

In the last decade, billions and billions of dollars have been spent by governments and foundations on research and mitigation programs related to global warming. To the endless bureaucracies, recipients of grant awards and non-government organizations, it is imperative that the global warming hysteria continue – to produce the funding that provides their livelihood. Their incessant hype has convinced many people, including legislators, that ridiculous policies should be enacted to prevent carbon dioxide from reaching the atmosphere.

Sen. James Inhofe is one of the few in Congress who really knows that the science of climate change is in its infancy, and no one really knows whether human activity has any impact on the climate at all. After all, the earth was warmer during the "Global Medieval Optimum" (1100-1250), when gas-guzzlers didn't exist. The same global warming zealots who manipulated the science to distort the Second (and subsequent) Assessment Reports reinterpreted the science that has stood for more than a century to now deny that there was a Global Medieval Optimum.

This study, produced by Michael E. Mann and Raymond S. Bradley in 1999, was shown to be flawed in a subsequent study by Drs. Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas. Global warming advocates extol the Mann study and decry the Soon/Baliunas study. Real science welcomes conflict as a challenge and evidence that further study is required.

Global warming hypocrites, such as The Weather Channel's Heidi Cullen, who wants the American Meteorological Society to decertify any weatherman who doesn't toe the global warming line, continues to disparage scientists and others who dare to disagree with her conclusions.

The Second Assessment Report was released in 1996 to instill fear and stir up support for the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. This current round of global warming hype, including the Fourth Assessment Report, is designed to instill fear and stir up support for forcing the U.S. to join the Kyoto crowd in adopting energy restrictions that will have no effect on the climate, but will severely impact the economy.

U.S. policymakers and the public would do well to reject the propaganda from the global warming hypocrites.

I would suggest that government take 50 percent of the funding for climate research...and dump it to the art of planting trees. Behind all of the smoking mirrors that they operate...if you really pinned these guys down...putting trees back up througout the world would clear up a huge amount of our issue. A 20-year project to just plant hundreds of billions of trees would be a better investment of government money and start to starve off this massive crowd of people in college currently, and counting on some environmental madness to ensure they have a steady income for the next 40 years. Find these guys a job with the Georgia state highway patrol and lets some concrete action work with planting trees...we'd all be better off in the end.

Follow the money..I believe the US is close to a state of Anarchy..Every part of life is politicized and political correctness, much like Hitler used to gather his power, is the "bread and butter" of the left in America. Young people are especially vulnerable to a distorted view of freedom because they think to be able to do anything physical or sexual with your own body and to rebel against your folks without retribution is freedom..However, they run into brick walls when they find that it is freedom of speech and ideas which are being abolished in the US and in other civilized nations. It is this freedom of speech and of ideas which are being destroyed in the Global Warming debate..The Propaganda machine is media-led and media-fed, putting forth the idea that only one scientific view of this is acceptable. If the masses just accept this, the next step will be to prosecute those who dissent from the politically correct pronouncement. If the earth is, indeed, getting warmer, I do not believe that mankind effected it..We may destroy ourselves but we do not have the ability to destroy the earth..However, the earth, like man and all life, may have a life cycle..Perhaps Mother Earth has just entered menopause in her process of aging. If something like this is reality, then environments on our planet might change and we need to know that..But, to wreck the day-to-day existence of human beings, and their government's ability to keep them safe and fed, based on flawed science, is a travesty. "Knee jerk" reactions are dangerous in situations like this. This debate needs to call together all scientists involved in this and it needs to identify those who get a check from the government for any part of their work because, the outcome, is definitely effected by the income.

I agree. In particular, the photos of barren land and sandstroms from the Middle East concern me. If we would focus on cooling down the hot spots with old fashioned conservation methods wouldn't that reduce warming? Someone here has a very interesting presentation designed to show that Florida hurricanes start out as sandstorms and Iraq which gather speed as they sweep across the deserts of the ME and N Africa. Also, there is no downside to such conservation that rehabilitates the land. We win, even if it does not stop hurricanes. Sems to me that all the enviros do is raise the prices of cars.

Follow the money

Is that the smell of George Soros permeating this latest crises announcement? Funny we haven't heard from him lately. What's he been up to?

It is this freedom of speech and of ideas which are being destroyed in the Global Warming debate..

Environmentalism is the Fascists' dream issue. It is ideal for them: all prior morality, law, and ethical understanding can be swept aside on behalf of the 'Environment'. This nebulous, vague and malleable conception permits anything: you can seize property,disinherit, starve entire regions, consign others to perpetual ignorance and poverty.

Had Hitler been able to wield this issue...

Mr. Lamb: Please forward a copy of this article to Bill Handel at radio station KFI 6.40 AM on the dial in Los Angeles.
He is firmly believeing that all scientists are pure in their thoughts, and hence pure in their findings.
He refuses to believe that the source of their funding could influence their results.

Thank you--from Northern Nevada where I have cut ice from horse water tanks for the last 7 weeks+.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.