Skip to comments.Climate Change, Act Three
Posted on 04/04/2012 1:59:08 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
Once upon a time, it was the contention of global warming alarmists that the earth was getting warmer -- a lot warmer. Now, after decades of such claims, the evidence points to a world that is, for the present at least, growing colder. When that fact became evident, alarmists shifted the ground of their argument. The earth's climate was not necessarily getting warmer; it was just "changing," and that was somehow a bad thing. No matter that the climate had been changing for more than four billion years, ever since the earth's formation.
Not to be deterred, climate alarmists insist that the climate is changing in new ways -- for example, in the "extreme weather" that has purportedly struck the U.S. since 2005. Focusing on Hurricane Katrina in that year and an outbreak of deadly tornadoes in 2011, alarmists contend that the weather is becoming more extreme and that climate change is the cause.
The facts undercut this claim. Only one hurricane has made landfall on the U.S. mainland since 2005, while tornado deaths in the 2000s were the least of any decade on record. Heightened media coverage of extreme weather events, not the weather itself, has made it appear that climate change is reaching epic proportions.
This is precisely the intent of such coverage: to manufacture a crisis so as to facilitate government takeover of large segments of the economy. In reality, the climate is no more extreme than it has been in the past. The deadliest hurricane in American history remains the great Galveston storm of 1900. The worst tornado was the Tri-State storm of 1925, which killed nearly 700 persons. The Joplin tornado of 2011 was the only U.S. tornado to kill more than 100 persons since 1953.....
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
"LYON, France -- For the first time, heads of environmental, biodiversity and natural resources agencies from across the world have met with heads of law enforcement agencies to craft a global compliance and enforcement strategy for environmental security."
"Convened this week by Interpol and the United Nations Environment Programme, the International Chiefs of Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Summit drew some 230 delegates from 70 countries to Interpol headquarters in Lyon.
The three-day summit concluded Thursday with an agreement to focus on key environmental crime issues - fisheries, forestry, pollution and wildlife crime, as well as violence, money laundering and tax evasion.
Bernd Rossbach, Interpol's acting executive director of Police Services, said evidence that environmental crime is connected to other forms of serious and organized crime is increasing."............
Environment News Service had the story March 30, 2012.
....."During a side meeting on prosecution in environmental cases, prosecutors said investigations should be prosecutor-led as well as intelligence-led.
They said that judges must be made aware of the seriousness of environmental crime and prosecutors need to play a role in achieving this greater level of awareness.
The Information Management panel led by Sheldon Jordan, national director of wildlife enforcement with Environment Canada, explored the key roles that member countries and Interpol can play in sharing information and developing intelligence-led enforcement to combat environmental crime worldwide."..........
More at..... Environment News Service
Delegates at the International Chiefs of Environmental Compliance and Enforcement Summit (Photo courtesy Interpol)
......"Masa Nagai, acting deputy director with [United Nations Environment Programme] UNEP's Division of Environmental Law and Conventions, told summit delegates that currently compliance and enforcement are not adequate to eradicate environmental crime.
"While countries around the world and the international community have made important progress in establishing national and international environmental policies, institutions and laws in the past decades, the implementation of environmental compliance with agreed institutional goals and enforcement of environmental laws remain inadequate," said Nagai.
To advance compliance and enforcement regimes, Nagai is looking towards the World Congress on Justice, Governance and Law for Environmental Sustainability to be held in Rio de Janeiro this June ahead of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development, known as Rio+20.
Nagai said the World Congress "will provide a platform to identify a way forward to strengthen the entire chain of environmental enforcement."........
Yup. I've been watching since Katrina and seen less powerful hurricanes every year, where the climate experts were predicting even worse than Katrina for coming years. They couldn't have been more wrong.
"Global warming" is dead. Man-made carbon pollution affect on global climate is a failed psuedo-science theory much like the "ice age" predictions back in the '70's from Time and Newsweek and other publications, although that may come about nowadays.
Then there was the "population bomb" (also back in the 70's) where we would all die from starvation as the same media predicted. We're still here and growing by the day. The only reason why some populations don't have enough to eat (mostly Africa) is because of their tribal warfare. Think Somalia and "Black Hawk Down" and the original intent to feed them.
There was also the DDT, Alcar (apples), and themaldihide scare (which has proven to be a medicine of late).
Really loved the stupid headlines about NO difference between young boys and girls - nurture vs nature debate. The liberal media was promoting nurture and that if you give a Barbie to a young boy, he will turn out to be a girl, or vice versus. GI Joe would turn a 4 year old girl into a boy.
Later, the media said, oops, there ARE inherent differences between boys and girls. Here's why: Someone (don't remember) did a number of experiments with 3 year old boys and girls. They put Mom on one side of a short barrier and kids on the other side. They watched as the girls sat and cried looking at Mom and the boys tried to get over the barrier to get to Mom. So the "experts" realized that boys were more aggressive than the girls. Big surprise!
As if us parents did already know that. My wife and I were amazed when we saw the initial Newsweek/Time pronunciations about nature vs nurture debate in that it was all about nurture (how you raise). We laughed our ass off once they recognized that there is a difference between boys and girls. Think hormones. More testosterone in boys - more aggressive. What a surprise. Sheesh. Get my point about scientists and sociologists?
Now let's think about Copernicus who proposed the Earth revolved around the Sun, although he thought the Sun was the center of the Universe (wrong again). Before him, all thought the Sun revolved around the Earth (including Aristotle)! Scientists they were. Fast forward to Columbus, and all thought the Earth was flat. Get my point?
I have a question: When did our scientists become so biased? Is it really all about grants now? Do they actually massage their stats for money? What a shame, that's not how science should work. Science was our last connection to reality.
Show us, dipshit. Make your case. I dare you. You can't and you won't. Like many politicians with an agenda you speak in generalities. Again, show me the unequivical statistics for the world to review.
Screw anything connected to the UN. I call them "agenda maximus".
What is "environmental crime"? Fisheries and such aside, what does "violence, money laundering and tax evasion" have to do with any environmental concerns?
I swear, these people need to be led out by a leash and forced to have a real job, if nothing more than a burger flipper in McD's. They are insane.
It’s not the scientists.
It’s the media.
It’s always been the media.
Think about it... Scientists don’t produce the articles we read or the TV shows we watch; the media does. In the real world, most scientists work for a living (often for an “evil” company like Exxon or BP or a “greedy” pharmaceutical or chemical company—Monsanto, ADM, etc) and are not liberals. If anything, they’re more likely to be slightly conservative, since logic rules their world.
The media is the ones who report this nonsense—not scientists.
Most educated adults would call that a classic case of circular reasoning.
But if that allows you to widen your carbon footprint by partying in faraway places, at taxpayer expense, what the hell...
Conveniently, the media is utterly clueless. They have a relatively small handful of activist “scientists” feeding them this rubbish and have no idea or ability to read the other side.
Co-authored by John P. Holdren [with Anne and Paul Ehrlich]. Holdren is Obama's long serving Science and Technology Czar who holds that Americans should not expect to be number one in everything all the time.
John P. Holdren .............."6. The situation has been analyzed and reanalyzed in the technical and popular literature. Two key technical papers are P. R. Ehrlich and J. P. Holdren, "The Impact of Population Growth," Science, vol. 171 (1971), pp. 1212-17, and J. P. Holdren and P. R. Ehrlich, "Human Population and the Global Environment," American Scientist, vol. 62 (1974), pp. 282-92. Much important information can be found in works by Lester Brown and his colleagues in the excellent State of the World series issued by Worldwatch Institute and published by W. W. Norton, New York, and in the World Resources series issued by the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), in collaboration with the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), (published by Basic Books, New York).
Two other landmark works are the Global 2000 Report to the President, issued in 1980 by the Council on Environmental Quality and the Department of State, and the World Commission on Environment and Development's 1987 report Our Common Future (the "Brundtland Report," named for the commission's chairwoman, the Prime Minister of Norway), published by Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford. A detailed exposition of the connection of population growth to the rest of the human predicament can be found in P. R. Ehrlich, A. H. Ehrlich, and J. P. Holdren, Ecoscience: Population, Resources, Environment (W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1977). The most recent extensive popular treatment is A. H. Ehrlich and P. R. Ehrlich, Earth (Franklin Watts, New York, 1987).
Paul R. Ehrlich & Anne H. Ehrlich, The Population Explosion, 1990.
In 1968, The Population Bomb1 warned of impending disaster if the population explosion was not brought under control. Then the fuse was burning; now the population bomb has detonated. Since 1968, at least 200 million people -- mostly children -- have perished needlessly of hunger and hunger-related diseases, despite "crash programs to 'stretch' the carrying capacity of Earth by increasing food production."2 The population problem is no longer primarily a threat for the future as it was when the Bomb was written and there were only 3.5 billion human beings."... Source
July 21, 2011 - Mary Ellen Harte and Anne Ehrlich: The world's biggest problem? Too many people"...Our unsustainable population levels are depleting resources and denying a decent future to our descendants. We must stop the denial. Source
It's the scientists - the tenured, think tank, opinion writing, policy churning out social engineering gray pony-tailed scientists and their "message" is amplified by the MSM.
CW, you’re talking about a small minority of scientists. I work at Auburn University. Since we’re in Alabama, we have a substantial amount of conservatives here—even though, like any large university, we have too many liberals.
Anyway, almost all of my fellow scientists/professors who teach hard science or engineering are conservative or at least libertarian. They are the real majority of science—most of them have worked in private industry or are going back to it, and those private employers are not to be confused with government employers.
Very few are leftists, unless they’re soft social “scientists”, which is just phony science, hence the quotes.
Good to hear that AB!
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.