Skip to comments.Apollo Astronaut: Climate Alarmism Is the ‘Biggest Fraud in the Field of Science’
Posted on 07/04/2014 11:44:09 AM PDT by xzins
97% Climate Consensus Most Nonsensical, Stupid Number in the World
Climate alarmism is "the biggest fraud in the field of science" and the 97% consensus claim is nonsensical, Apollo 7 astronaut Walter Cunningham tells MRCTV in a preview of his presentation at the upcoming Heartland Institute climate conference, July 7-9.
"Since about 2000, I looked farther and farther into it," Col. Cunningham (USMC, Ret.) tells MRCTV in an exclusive interview. "I found that not one of the claims that the alarmists were making out there had any bearings, whatsoever. And, so, it was kind of a no-brainer to come to the conclusion."
Cunningham rejects the notion of man-made climate, not only as fact - but also as even qualifying as an actual "theory":
"In the media, it was being called a theory. Obviously, they didn't know what it means to be a theory."
"If we go back to the warmist hypothesis - not a theory, but, a hypothesis - they've been saying from the very beginning that carbon dioxide levels are abnormally high, that higher levels of carbon dioxide are bad for humans, and they thought warmer temperatures are bad for our world, and they thought we were able to override natural forces to control the earth's temperature. So, as I've looked into those, that's the problem that I've found, because I didn't find any of those to be correct - and, they certainly were not a theory, it was just their guess at what they wanted to see in the data they were looking at."
Cunningham urges Americans to look at the data and decide for themselves, instead of taking anyone else's word for it:
"You go out and take a look at it and you find out that a lot of it is pure nonsense and wishful thinking on the part of the alarmists who are looking for more and more money to fall into their hands."
"Don't believe it just because your professor said it. You gotta go take a look at it. Go back and look at the history of temperature and carbon dioxide, and you look at the value of carbon dioxide, and how it's a benefit today."
Cunningham notes that, while climate alarmists are concerned that the atmosphere currently contains 400 parts per million of CO2, that's only a tenth of the level his spacecraft had to reach before causing concern. In his Apollo craft, an alarm would go off when CO2 reached 4,000 parts per million and, in today's space shuttle, the trigger is 5,000. And, in submarines where crewmen may be on three-month missions, CO2 has to reach 8,000 parts per million before the alarm is activated.
"In one area after another, we find these people overly concerned about, one, the danger they're trying to push on us and, secondly, the claim that we can somehow or other control the earth's temperature by affecting it," Cunningham says.
"I can't say we don't have any impact, at all, but it'd be so miniscule and so tiny, that it wouldn't be worth any effort."
So, what does dictate the Earth's temperature? Cunningham says it's well-established that "principle controllers" are natural forces like sun, ocean temperature, and even volcanic activity.
Thus, he calls climate alarmism "the biggest fraud in the field of science":
"The case is, to me, really, it's laughable to find somebody who claims to be a serious scientist - that he would buy into this. So, I would really question anybody who claims to be a scientist doing this - so, what they do is try to control the nomenclature."
"To me, it's almost laughable, it's the biggest fraud in the field of science, certainly in my lifetime, maybe the biggest one in centuries."
"If you go back and you look at the data that has been well-documented over the years, you can look and see, for example, that right now both carbon dioxide and temperature are simultaneously at one of the lowest levels in at least the last 600-800 million years. The last time they were both together at this low a level, more or less, was 300 million years ago, and if you go back go back about 500-600 million years ago, carbon dioxide was 15 times higher than what it is now. So, what I'm getting at is this, the history shows you that most of this is just plain nonsensical today."
"And, the amazing thing to people like me... is that there are people that believe the nonsense they're being fed."
The media are largely to blame for public misconceptions - not because they're intentionally misleading the public, but because they "just don't want to go into the time and trouble to find out." "If they do go into it and look at it for themselves, they become a lot more neutral in their presentation," he says.
Worst of all, Cunningham says, media are promoting the "nonsensical" claim that there's scientific consensus accepting the hypothesis of man-made climate:
"When they're out propagating this so-called 97% of scientists believe we're controlling the temperature - I mean, that's the most nonsensical, stupid number in the world - and all they have to do is do a little research on Google - I'm not going to do it for them - go in there and take a look and you find out that's a ridiculous statement that people are making - and even the president makes a statement like that."
"If you have a totally anonymous survey of real scientists involved in this field, I would almost guarantee you that you going to have a majority that are not going to agree with the alarmists."
"I can only tell you that, even back in the days of Apollo, we didn't have to face this kind of nonsense," Cunningham concludes.
Editor's Note: Watch the Heartland Institute's 9th International Conference of Climate Change streaming live July 7-9, 2014 from Las Vegas, Nevada on CNSNews.com.
“If you go back and you look at the data that has been well-documented over the years, you can look and see, for example, that right now both carbon dioxide and temperature are simultaneously at one of the lowest levels in at least the last 600-800 million years. The last time they were both together at this low a level, more or less, was 300 million years ago, and if you go back go back about 500-600 million years ago, carbon dioxide was 15 times higher than what it is now. So, what I’m getting at is this, the history shows you that most of this is just plain nonsensical today.”
Walter Cunningham has a distinguished military career, and from UCLA Masters in Physics, and all the coursework for a Doctorate in Physics, less the thesis, due to military and NASA concerns at the time.
wait a minute, Al Gore said the debate is over.
Obama has said that the debate is over also. When good liberals tell us the debate is over, and that any who believe otherwise believe in the flat earth society, isn’t that good enough for everyone??? (sarcasm)
Obama said, during a bad spate of wild fires in Texas a few years ago, that the governor of a state on fire denies global warming. That was Obama’s compassion for Texas and Rick Perry dealing with a disasterous fire season.
On the other hand, PC climate alarmism is one of the best excuses to win constitutionally indefensible federal earmark funding.
I think Obama is still p**ed off that Congress didn’t pass his cap and trade bill.
The debate is over for Al Gore because he got his $300 million from this scam.
Ok, but he’s not an Obama worshipping, New York Times subscribing liberal. What could he possibly know?
Ignore this Astronaut for three reasons.
He is a cracker, who dares speak against us.
And his agency has utterly, completely
failed in its only mission which your King
assigned it ... to improve the self-esteem of Moslems."
These are kind of funny statements:
“If you have a totally anonymous survey of real scientists involved in this field, I would almost guarantee you that you going to have a majority that are not going to agree with the alarmists.”
Who really cares about majority/minority when it comes to the validity of scientific theory?
“I can only tell you that, even back in the days of Apollo, we didn’t have to face this kind of nonsense,” Cunningham concludes.”
He has nothing to worry about from NASA,since his last assignment was working on Skylab. The VA is a different story.
Thank you. and add this to John Coleman’s excellent 30 min youtube video on this costly hoax.
So on one of the promo broadcast from orbit, she's waxing on and on about seeing the destruction caused by AGW.
I figured she was ordered to do it, but changed my mind when it came out that she preferred to land at wide strips at Edwards, rather than at back at KSC.
An Affirmative Action shuttle commander, not comfortable with handling the ship she was in charge of, imo.
And the igNobel Peace Prize, and an Oscar for Best "Documentary".
He meant a relatively short time ago no one was trying to force pseudo science on them.
“To me, it’s almost laughable, it’s the biggest fraud in the field of science, certainly in my lifetime, maybe the biggest one in centuries.”
He was addressing the “97% of scientists support global warming” claim. He said that it wasn’t so.
Apparently, they had to face some nonsense about moon travel. One theory, if you recall, was that the moon was so covered in dust from billions of years of dust that they’d sink right in.
He also had to face bureaucratic nonsense, if you read his bio.
And in John Coleman’s video he addresses federal research funding as the main spur behind the ‘globull warming research’ to the tune of $4.7 billion per year.
John Coleman, an award-winning meteorologist and weatherman with sixty years of experience and founder of the Weather Channel, produced a video explaining the history of the man-made global warming hoax.
And President Eisenhower, in the same speech in which he warned about the military-industrial complex, he warned about the ACADEMIC RESEARCH - GOVERNMENTAL FUNDING COMPLEX
The debate is over. You've been caught in fantastic lies beyond the best scifi Hollywood could have even put out.
when libs say something is over, it means, it isn’t, they’re losing, and they wish it was over.
I should have stressed the excuse aspect of federal research funding. Who knows how these constitutionally indefensible federal funds are actually spent?
If the (formerly) `global warming’ alarmists/now `climate change’ cranks are going to make an argument that we should spend billions on, to compare the concern with something equivalent, say, discovering whether or not a Proctor-Silex toaster oven is orbiting (former planet) Pluto, they are going to have to come up with more evidence than: 1. “Because we say so”; and/or, 2. You have to disprove it.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Until they do so, we can continue to say, “Go fell a tree with a herring and boil your bottoms! Then pee up sisal ropes you lefty queer-bait silly persons ... we fart in your general direction you—ho ho—wipers of animal food troughs. Oui, ha ha, that’s telling them it, mon Dieu!”
Way to go Col. Cunningham (USMC, Ret.), tell it like it is. Facts are great destroyers of the untruth. Yes, the alarmist just skip over the required steps of the Scientific Method. And consensus is NOT a part of the Scientific Method.
Thanks for the ping. The evidence that this is a fraud continues to accumulate.
Yes, this administration is financing this fraud.
AGW is also popular for those who are looking for more and more money to fall into their hands as they invent "green" "and earth-friendly" products and services for gullible consumers who need to show how much they care.
I wonder what is the breakdown between true believers in AGW and those who are laughing all the way to the bank with their "green" in hand.
Seems like the meanings of re-use and recycling have been divorced from the concepts of thriftiness and resourcefulness, and now are wedded to emotional arguments that cost a whole lot of money and waste resources, time, money, and talent.
There are an awful lot of home products/building materials out there that cost an arm and a leg over conventional materials, yet are x% recycled content. IOW, glorified trash. A successful business model based on converting trash to treasure is one thing, but I suspect that there are some hefty profit margins for those who demonize profits while shaming "wasteful" people.
Generally the whole eco scam is predicated upon ego, insincerity, underhanded manipulation, and outright deceit. Explains why AlGore is the high priest.
I've got the first 3. What is the sacrifice in their earth religion? (Serious question)
My outdoor wood furnace, for example
excess co2....soda pop fountains. (You had to ask? :>)
Natural resource rationing and restriction (voluntary or otherwise). Reducing that "carbon footprint" or if you can't make the scarifice yourself, you pay for carbon offsets to cancel the effects of your bigfoot carbon monster.
Purchasing substandard products and services in order to benefit Gaia. We are increasingly forced to buy new items on replacement that "save energy" vs. goods/appliances that work properly and efficiently, because the old style has been either been run off/shamed out of the market or outlawed. Don't like the new light bulbs, toilets, and washing machines? Well now, if you were a proper worshiper you would willing embrace the inefficiencies and be happy to make sacrifices in comfort and convenience in order to save the planet. The true believers will let you know if your sacrifices aren't sufficient.
And on a more humorous note, think of all the time people spend rinsing and sorting their recyclables, in order to separate paper/plastic/glass from common/profane trash.
These are then offered up to the garbage god every week or whenever the truck rolls through, or the items are dropped off at some central collection point.
The God of Abraham required perfect sacrifices, the best of the animals, without blemish. Gaia, OTOH, demands... trash. Garbage in, garbage out.
Thanks, Ezekiel. I was thinking along those lines, but wanted to be sure.
The rocket stoves are the masonry type built right into corners of a house?
One thing that amuses me are the numbers on cost of their centralized “solar power stations”. They can buy a complete, independent solar panel unit with 20+ kw service for each home more cheaply than they can centralize it and send it out on wires to each of those homes.
Besides that, they’d create a huge number of installation and service jobs, the service jobs being permanent.
So, it really isn’t about ‘clean’ energy. It’s about centralization and awarding a new class of energy cronies with the money from monthly energy bills.
Not so fast. Astronauts will their bodies to NASA for research. Who knows what macabre desecrations the greens and muslims in charge there will order.
And I’m sure you have noticed that the eco-cult society that America has morphed into is becoming increasingly hostile, hateful, jugmental, and intolerant of those who hold to traditional American forms of worship and ethics.
Kind of strange if the enviromovement is just science and progress IOW religiously neutral. Talk about a government establishment of religion. Beast.gov rammed its poison “communion” wafers down our throats in broad daylight by steering clear of a religious label.
Our government is run by professional political class of self promoting, self serving con artists making laws to legally steal our money, and promote at our expense more avenues, and opportunities for themseves to legally steal even more.
Our traditionally respected institutions likewise are run by similar types of opportunists who support they of the professional political class with their hands out for much of the stolen taxpayer treasure.
A cycle that needs to be addressed.
The left is full of frauds.
Global warming, and Obama: the 2 biggest frauds on the planet.
Like ‘new’ math, we have a ‘new’ scientific method.
Here is how it works.
Pick you conclusion. Then go back and try to find facts which support your conclusion.
If you do, then only use those facts or figures.
If you can’t find any, then make them up.
And if your theories lead to action that further adds control to the elites, they will be happy to fund your work.
Your basic rights.
That’s it in three words.
> The media are largely to blame for public misconceptions - not because they’re intentionally misleading the public, but because they “just don’t want to go into the time and trouble to find out.” “If they do go into it and look at it for themselves, they become a lot more neutral in their presentation,” he says. Worst of all, Cunningham says, media are promoting the “nonsensical” claim that there’s scientific consensus accepting the hypothesis of man-made climate...
He’s almost right — the media push leftist agitprop, and know they are doing that.
"And, the amazing thing to people like me... is that there are people that believe the nonsense they're being fed."That applies across the board, not just to the climate liars.