Global Warming Fraud

Let us go back to the early 1970's.  Yes, I was there (first as a soldier in the U.S. Army, and then a law student at the Unitversity of Texas at Austin).

Remember Michael Cricton's book, "State of Fear"?  The charts in that book showed that there was (stiall unexplained, ESPECIALLY in the "theory" of "global warming") world GLOBAL COOLING from 1940 to 1970 (give or take a year or two). 

What did environmentalists and leftists do?  They tried to USE this politically.  There were attempts to suggest that man's activities (pollution again) were causing GLOBAL COOLING.  The problem was that there was no plausible scientific rationale for that.  "Plausible" is ALL these people care about, because the agenda is POLITICAL and NOT "scientific".   So their arguments tended to drift off into the sterile subject of "nuclear winter"--sterile because the LEAST problem of a nuclear war would be "nuclear winter".  That merely exposed the whole thing as a leftist political ploy, and "global cooling" never not anywhere as an environmental issue.

However, there were already rumblings that our industrial civilization was putting greenhouse gases into the air.  There was no way to make this a POLITICAL issue, because the Earth was clearly not yet warming (other than the overall warming from the last Ice Age).   But see the archives of this blog about the guy in Alaska who criticized the "convential wisdom", circa 1970, that the Earth was going to continue COOLING on the graounds that we were pumping those greenhouse gases into the air.  The SAME GUY now is a critic of the hysterical present "conventional environmental wisdom" of "global warming"--not because he has changed his mind but because environmentalists have totally exaggerated the effect (as he asserted the danger of "global cooling" was being overhyped in the early 1970's).

Now let us go to energy.  One of the Laws of Thermodynamics is that the production of energy produces HEAT--inevitably.   Light bulbs produce HEAT.  Does that "warm" the Earth?  Of course it does--DIRECTLY, without having to look at the pumping of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.   We HEAT our homes in the winter.  Does that directly HEAT up the Earth?  Of course it does (again without even considering greenhouse gases).  As we exhale CO2 (greenhouse gas), our own BODIES produce HEAT (as does every other living thing on this planet) as our bodies produce energy.  EVERYTHING man does on this Earth produces HEAT (again, a Law of Thermodynamics--physics was my undergraduate major at New Mexico State University--1965-1969).  Even air conditioning (takes energy, remember) produces HEAT (net).

Why did environmentalists not make a big thing out of this (for example, we even TESTED hydrogen bombs in the 1950's IN AIR--lots of HEAT)?  It is simple to explain.  Our inevitable producton of heat (just from living on this Earth, and in EVERYTHING we do) does "warm" the Earth.  That is a fact of physics.   However, it is obvious to even the most "politically correct" scientist that the effect is MINOR.  If you compare the energy put out by the SUN, and the energy prodcued by man, and other living things, on Earth, the HEAT we produce is just not material.  Yet, as with greenhouse gases, there is absolultely no question that energy production has a direct WARMING effect on the Earth.  It is just obvious to everyone that the effect is not significant.

But the Earth (on average--this idea of one "temperature of the Earth is another "global warming" fraud) began to WARM in approximately 1970.  This soon became pretty obvious. 

The qustion for environmentalists and leftists became:  How do we USE the fact that the Earth was warming they way we had TRIED to use the fact that the Earth had previously seemed to be COOLING  (despite the increase in greenhouse gases from 1940-1970).

Enter greenhouse gases.  There is no doubt, in physics, that greenhouse gases have a warming effect on the Earth (as do light bulbs and HEATING your home during the winter).   However, there was no real reason to believe that this effect was any more significant than the direct HEAT put out by the acitvities of man.  In other words, there was no real reason to believe that greenhouse gases have any significant effect on the "temperature and climate of the Earth AT ALL.

However, we had NO extensive theory of "climate" (still don't).  And the gross amount of "greenhouses gases" that man's acitivities are pumping into the atmosphere is large (although minute in comparision with the total atmosphere).  Unlike heat produced by direct energy, which is OBVIOUSLY immaterial in comparison with the sun as to the total heat impacting on the atmosphere of the Earth, we don't presently know enough about atmospheric science and the climate of the Earth to KNOW how insignificant man's production of greenhouse gases probably is.

The environmentalists/leftists finally had it:  a means of USING the warming of the Earth to advance their POLITICAL AGENDA.  What did they have to lose?  Global COOLING had gotten them nowere.  But it is well known that trends tend to continue for awhile.  It was likely that the Earth was going to continue to warm (once that trend was apparent) for awhile.  What environmentalists/lefitists WANTED (politically) had NOT changed from the day's of "global cooling".  But "global warming" was a much more PLAUSIBLE avenue for advancing the policial agenda of the radical, anti-capitalist, anti-American environmetalists/leftists.  We did not know enough to disprove it (albeit we never have come close to knowing enough to prove that man-made activities have any SIGNIFICANT effect on the average temperature of the Earth--much less what effect they have on CLIMATE). 

There you have it.  The origin of the Book of Genesis of the religion of "global warming".

But, you say, what happens if the Earth STOPS warming?  If you ask that questiion, you are totally missing the point.  See the previous entry.  The Earth HAS stopped warming-even by the standards previously embraced by "global warming" "theorists".   Even the statellite measurements which provided an apparent godsend to the "gobal warming" agenda no longer show a "warmng" of the Earth.

However, this was ALWAYS all about a POLITICAL AGENDA.  The point has never been the "science".  Therefore, what did "global warming" fanatics DO when the Earth STOPPED warming?  They IGNORED IT.  It is simply dismissed as a momentary pause in the "global warming" "trend"--even though that warming trend lasted no longer than the previous COOLING trend.

Further, the "global warming" fanatics, realizing that the Earth's actual warming might be slowing, or ending, began pushing a total FRAUD--the fraud of "climate change".  They, of course, could NEVER be caught out on that one. The climate is ALWAYS changing.   Therefore, new data could never contradict the idea of "climat change."

But.  The whole concept of "global warming" was generated by the WARMING of the Earth.  If that warming STOPS, the whole concept of greenouse gas "global warming" COLLAPSES.  There is no longer ANY evidence for it.  There is NO other mechanism for "climate change" being caused by greenhouse gases.  So the whole idea of "climate change" totally divorces the "global warming" movement from the science.

It  does not matter.  For environmentalists, it has NEVER been about the science. This is why you get the argument that we should be doing these things (radical environmental agenda) ANYWAY, and therefore it is not important whether you "believe" in "global warming".  That was the entire purpose of "global warming" "theory in the first place:  to advance the already existing POLITICAL AGENDA of the radical environmentalists.

Problem:  The FRAUD has distorted the debate.  WE should be debating radical environmental matters ON THEIR MERITS (or lack of same, in many cases).  Instead, radical environmentalists/leftists have accomplished what they want:  to short circuit debate on the basis that we MUST do the things in their political agenda (ironically distorted by having to fit the agenda into the "global warming" framework of "greenhouse gases") to avoid the apocalypic disasters predicted by the HYPE/PROPAGANDA of "global warming" (rather than supported by the "science").

There you have it--a summary of the "global warmnig" FRAUD.  It has become abundantly obvious that we have no more reason to believe that greenhouse gases have a SIGNIFICANT effect on the "temperature of the Earth" than we have for believing that heating your house in the winter time (and other direct heat produced by energy) has a SIGNIFICANT effect on the "temperature of the Earth".   There is no question that BOTH do have a warming effect.  However, there is NO real evidence that the effect is more than minor in either case.  The SUN completely dwarfs both things.

Yes, leftists ARE counting on the mainstream media to shut up the critics of the fraud of "global warmng".  So far they have been mainly successful.  But see the previous entry.  There are cracks in the facade.

What does this fraud tell you about the credibility of radical environmentalists, lefttists, and the mainstream media.  You should be able to answer that one.  They have NO credibility.