2) Common sense
3) Considerations of proportion
4) Basic knowledge of paleoclimatology
5) Awareness of mendacity & hyperbole
6) Awareness of political motivations
7) Awareness of environmentalist motivations
Logic (a reasonable way of thinking about something)
Since the temperature variation of the earth’s equator and north and south poles is more than 200 degrees, does it seem reasonable that the average temperature of the entire planet can be known to a fraction of one degree, not only currently, but fifty, one hundred, and ten thousand or more years ago? Is there really enough accurate temperature samples to conclude that the average temperature of the planet has increased by 7/10ths of one degree since the industrial revolution? Since we know that it has been about as warm as today in the past, and that a few thousand years ago much of the northern hemisphere was covered by more than a thousand feet of ice, why should a possible temperature increase of less than one degree be considered unusual, or manmade?
Common sense (sound practical judgment derived from experience rather than study)
Carbon dioxide, at 400 parts per million, comprises .04% of the earth’s atmosphere. Of all the CO2 produced and absorbed annually, burning of fossil fuels contributes about 3.5%, this according to NASA and NOAA estimates. This means that each 85,000 molecules of atmosphere, contains 1 molecule of man produced carbon dioxide. Does common sense allow us to conclude, with sound practical judgment, that a man produced one 85,000th part of the atmosphere is driving the earth to catastrophic global warming? Or does common sense tell us that this 85,000th part is lost in the noise of natural variation? Furthermore, the claim that carbon dioxide released by the burning of fossil fuels is causing the temperature of the atmosphere to increase is based solely on the assumption that CO2 and temperature are increasing concurrently. This relationship is correctly termed a correlation. It is false logic to assume that correlation is causation. It may be that increasing temperature is causing the increase in CO2, or that both are caused by a third variable.
Considerations of proportion (the relationship between parts of the whole)
Expanding on the above: increasing the average temperature of the entire earth, necessarily including the oceans, requires an almost unimaginable quantity of energy. To propose that a manmade 1/85,000th part of carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere is capturing enough additional energy to increase the average temperature by one or more degrees in anything less than many millions of years defies any reasonable sense of proportion.
Basic knowledge of paleoclimatology (The study of changes in climate taken on the scale of the entire history of Earth.)
Scientists have known for decades that earth’s climate has been cycling between ice ages and moderate temperatures for at least two and one-half million years. These climate changes occur in one hundred thousand year cycles, with about eighty-thousand years of cold and twenty thousand years of moderate temperatures. To date, there is no widely accepted hypotheses explaining these cycles. It is well established through ice cores, seafloor borings, and other proxies, that there have been many periods of temperatures comparable to current conditions, and that there have been periods when carbon dioxide concentrations have been greater than currently. Furthermore, the depth of the most recent ice age occurred about twenty thousand years ago, and it has been warming, in fits and starts, ever since. Since we know this has happened many times in the past, and since we would, therefore, expect the climate to be warming now, why would we conclude that a supposed warming of seven tenths of one degree is caused solely by human activity? Why would we conclude that a tiny increase in carbon dioxide concentration is caused solely by human activity? Why would we NOT conclude that there are far more powerful forces driving the climate than the manmade addition of 1/85,000th part to the atmosphere?
Awareness of mendacity & hyperbole (The deliberate falsification, distortion, and exaggeration of scientific facts, data, and studies with intent to deceive the public.)
This is the hardest thing to understand about the Manmade Climate Change Movement. How could a significant part of the climate science community undertake to deceive the public, the media, and many world leaders? There is a large body of evidence that this is what has happened.
One of the earliest, and most effective, statements proposing the notion of manmade global warming, was the hockystick graphic produced by Michael Mann, PHD., a professor of earth science at Pennsylvania State University. This graphic was chosen by the IPCC, Al Gore, and much of the Manmade Global Warming Movement, as a major tool to convince the public, the media, and everyone else that the burning of fossil fuels was driving the climate to disastrously increased temperatures. The graphic was very widely circulated through scientific journals, news media, official government pamphlets, and even a film documentary. Everyone seemed to accept the graphic as factual.
But even a rudimentary knowledge of climate over the past ten thousand years, should have been enough to discredit the hockystick graphic. It is a well known and accepted fact that the Medieval Warm Period was about as warm as the current supposedly elevated temperatures. Yet this warm period does not appear on the hockystick graphic. The Medieval Warm Period was followed by the Little Ice Age, also not appearing on the graphic. The warming from the end of the Little Ice Age to the start of the industrial revolution easily exceeds the supposed warming since then, all without the benefit of fossil fuel produced carbon dioxide.
In recent years, the hockystick presentation has been entirely discredited by dozens of eminent scientists. Not only have the science and statistical methods been proven false, but the veracity, and integrity of the author, Michael Mann, has been seriously questioned. All this was put forth in great detail in the recent publication, A Disgrace to the Profession, by Mark Steyn. And yet, Michael Mann still strenuously defends what has been called “a pseudoscientific fraud”, and “scientific forgery”.
The second most influential claim extensively publicized by the IPCC as well as the rest of the Manmade Climate Change Movement, is that 97% of climate scientists agree that carbon dioxide produced by fossil fuel burning is causing global warming and that it is a serious problem. Like the hockystick graphic, this is a deliberate corruption of statistical evidence. It has been thoroughly documented that this supposedly scientific determination was based on seventy-nine cherrypicked scientific papers. And yet, the 97% claim appears almost daily in newspaper stories, political speeches, opinion columns, and television news presentations.
One of the greatest threats to the credibility of IPCC science came with the “accidental” release of 1000 emails from the CRU in November of 2009. A further 6000 released in November of 2011 expanded and elaborated on the extent of activities and actions taken to produce a specific scientific claim. The emails provided evidence of the methods used to pursue what they referred to as “the cause” by key players in the IPCC Science and Summary for Policymakers reports. In their words, they tell us how they created the ‘scientific’ evidence to support the political agenda. These emails also discuss plans and actions of retaliation directed at scientists that publicly disagreed with the IPCC’s manmade global warming claims.
There can be no doubt that mendacity and hyperbole are rampant in the Manmade Climate Change Movement.
Awareness of political motivations (Political agendas are one of the major forces behind the corruption of climate science: )
Quote by Club of Rome: “In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill….All these dangers are caused by human intervention….and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself….we believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose.”
Quote from the UN’s Own “Agenda 21”: “Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.”
Quote by Mikhail Gorbachev, communist and former leader of U.S.S.R.: “The emerging ‘environmentalization’ of our civilization and the need for vigorous action in the interest of the entire global community will inevitably have multiple political consequences. Perhaps the most important of them will be a gradual change in the status of the United Nations. Inevitably, it must assume some aspects of a world government.”
Quote by Dixy Lee Ray, former governor of State of Washington, U.S.: “The objective, clearly enunciated by the leaders of UNCED, is to bring about a change in the present system of independent nations. The future is to be
world government with central planning by the United Nations. Fear of environmental crises – whether real or not – is expected to lead to – compliance”
Quote by David Brower, a founder of the Sierra Club: “The goal now is a socialist, redistributionist society, which is nature’s proper steward and society’s only hope.”
Quote by H.L. Mencken, famous columnist: “The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.”
Quote by David Shearman, an IPCC Assessor for 3rd and 4th climate change reports: “Government in the future will be based upon . . . a supreme office of the biosphere. The office will comprise specially trained philosopher/ecologists. These guardians will either rule themselves or advise an authoritarian government of policies based on their ecological training and philosophical sensitivities. These guardians will be specially trained for the task.”
The IPCC, a bureaucracy established and supported by the United Nations, is the source of funding for the Manmade Climate Change Movement.
Awareness of environmentalist motivations: (extreme environmentalism is a powerful force behind the corruption of climate science: )
Quote by Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister: “No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits…. climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.”
Quote by Maurice Strong, a billionaire elitist, founder of the IPCC: “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Quote by Michael Oppenheimer, major environmentalist: “The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States. We can’t let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the US. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are.”
Quote by UK’s Keith Farnish, environmental writer, philosopher and activist: “The only way to prevent global ecological collapse and thus ensure the survival of humanity is to rid the world of Industrial Civilization…Unloading essentially means the removal of an existing burden: for instance, removing grazing domesticated animals, razing cities to the ground, blowing up dams and switching off the greenhouse gas emissions machine.”
Quote by Paul Ehrlich, professor, Stanford University: “Giving society cheap, abundant energy would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun.”
Quote by John Holdren, President Obama’s science czar: “A massive campaign must be launched to restore a high-quality environment in North America and to de-develop the United States…De-development means bringing our economic system (especially patterns of consumption) into line with the realities of ecology and the global resource situation…Redistribution of wealth both within and among nations is absolutely essential, if a decent life is to be provided for every human being.”
Quote by Club of Rome: “The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man.”
Quote by Maurice King, well known UK professor: “Global Sustainability requires the deliberate quest of poverty, reduced resource consumption and set levels of mortality control.”
They are telling us in plain English that we are being manipulated! Why do we not believe them?