The devastating book which debunks climate change

Daily mail UK ^ | 23rd November 2009 | CHRISTOPHER BOOKER

[dila813]

Just imagine if we learned we were about to be landed with the biggest bill in the history of the world - simply on the say-so of a group of scientists. Would we not want to be absolutely sure that those scientists were 100 per cent dependable in what they were saying?

Should we not then be extremely worried - and even very angry - if it emerged that those scientists had been conspiring among themselves to fiddle the evidence for what they were telling us?

This is the extraordinary position in which we find ourselves thanks to news reported in Saturday's Daily Mail which has raised huge question marks over the reliability of the science behind the theory of global warming.

[dila813]

I am still reading this, but it is good so far.

[Noob1999]

I guess this will have the scientists in more trouble than the centuries old Christian fight between strict bible believers, and Darwin evolvers.

This issue has become the modern day equivalent to what Darwin faced in the 1860’s!

[Mr Ramsbotham]

Pretty well every aspect of our lives in today's industrialised society involves emitting carbon dioxide - and short of some technological revolution as yet undreamed of, the only way we could meet that target would be to close almost every part of our economy. Yet, astonishingly, scarcely a single MP even questioned the need for such a law; only three voted against it.

I wonder how much of the millions in research grants was used to bribe those MPs?

[Kirkwood]

You're too generous to call them scientists. They are charlatans.

[Asfarastheeastisfromthewest...]

In Eisenhower's farewell address, his reference to the 'military-industrial complex' is the one that always seems to be remembered first. However, just a few sentences further, he offers another serious warning.....Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. Sounds quite apropos to what has been going on with those fraudsters at the IPCC and their climategate.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[Windflier]

In Eisenhower's farewell address..."...we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.

Wow! Another Republican president that the left-wing press mercilessly maligned. Nuggets of prescient wisdom continue to pop up from the writings and speeches of Republican presidents of yesteryear. It continues to amaze.

[JLS]

Yeah that is a powerful article.

[DrDavid]

On every side we are told that 'the science is settled', that '2,500 of the world's top climate scientists' agree that these terrifying predictions will all come true unless we take the most drastic action. So carried away have they all been by this belief that scarcely a single politician dares question it.

Science does not follow parliamentary rules. Conclusions should be based on the facts. Frequently, it takes years to find all the relevant facts. There is no group of scientists that can sit down and argue and the prevailing side ends up with the wining law of nature. For me the most annoying one is "Calling the Question" to end debate. This just does not work in science, because it would abort the scientific method.

[supremedoctrine]

No, this is EVER so much more serious and potentially damaging than the old 19th Century Science vs. Faith argument you are comparing it to. If anything, THIS time around WE’VE got the science and THEY’VE got the faith.
I see Al Gore as a new breed of apocalyptic messianic pseudo-science demagogue who have bequeathed large parts of the rest of the world, all those who’d like to do us in, or take us down a peg or two, a whole new set of political tools, a new, and totally bogus rhetorical argument, and added an ever changing and more precarious global dynamic
to our dealings with all our antagonists in this issue.
Think of Al Gore and all is followers as the true “End of the World” prophets, which is a job description that previously only fit the MOST extreme and desperate sects of the the major religions, yet constituted some of the Ground Zero foundations for ‘made-up’ religions.
I sense the steam is going out of the entire Global Warming Scare/Scam, but it’s offshoots may have a life of their own, and keep popping up like Whack-a-Mole targets, asking us to consider THEM, even while what we used to think of as Global Warming gets sheepishly put aside, and forgotten about. The entire Global Warming Scam may yet manage to get ancillary or related laws passed, even more costly, even more ludicrous, even more damaging.

[tongass kid]

I agree, science by consensus is not science it is politics. It only takes one scientist with the proper data, facts and conclusions to prove all of the other scientist wrong.

[Jenny217]

Al Gore was so ticked off he lost the election he decided to devise a plan to screw us all and make a bundle of money. Wonder what scam he’ll think up next once this one tanks?

[Balata]

Maybe it will be about the alien ship landing and seeking him out for his expertise and inventive skills.

[boop]

Nice picture of the republican presidents playing poker. I just saw the democrat version yesterday. The dem poster was called “True Blue”. Do you know what the republican one is called?

[Windflier]

Do you know what the republican one is called?

Yes, it's called, "Grand Ol' Gang" by Andy Thomas.

Grand Ol' Gang

[HiTech RedNeck]

“Debunking climate change” might not be the most elegant phrase. Surely this old globe has had its share of ice ages and other such stuff; I believe “debunking anthropogenic climate change” would be a better way of putting it.

[grey_whiskers]

This issue has become the modern day equivalent to what Darwin faced in the 1860’s!

Piss-poor analogy, for a number of reasons:

1) In this case, the people currently in power are the ones who are claiming the mantle of science.

2) In this case, the people with the evidence, who are against the dominant paradigm, are not being reviled as "atheists" : they are instead being reviled as in the back pocket of corporate interests.

3) In this case, the people in power are being backed by banking and financial interests, and corporations (who hope to profit directly from the machinations to be put in place -- can you say "Ecomagination at work"?) and Third Worlders and Globalists (who hope to execute a neat takedown of the West, i.e. the United States).

4) In this case, the people with the dominant paradigm started by collecting the actual scientific data and then hiding and suppressing it and twisting it in scientific journals and institutions; not passing on what they claimed to be "revealed truth" from a higher power.

Cheers!