Global Warming Grift

Below is an interesting exchange between our friend Alnot from Love is Tough Enough and a vintage liberal named Tina on AOL`s Mad World Message Board. Tina and Alnot were arguing about Global Warming, and Alnot quoted from my American Thinker article Hot Air. She scoffed at this without dealing with what I actually SAID, and Alnot e-mailed me with her comments. Below are the posts and my response:


(From Hot Air)
I will admit that there have been cases in the past where societies have destroyed their environments. The natives of Easter Island (Rapa Nui) cut down all of their trees to move those big heads (those heads remind me of several Democrats - Ted Kennedy and John Kerry, for example, but I digress) and then killed each other fighting over the food that remained, after all the soil washed away and the birds stopped coming. The Mayan Indians were forced to move after they exhausted the land through over-cultivation. North Africa was once not as desolate as it is now; overgrazing caused massive desertification. We can put ourselves permanently out of business on a local and regional level.

It is much more likely, however, that we will destroy our spirit and our wealth through the adoption of draconian measures advocated by the socialist climate change people. The real horror would be to adopt the madness of Kyoto to tilt at the windmill of global warming, when the sun is the real culprit. We can’t fight the sun. Our ability to cope depends on the vigor of our science and economy, so crippling ourselves into a neo-Luddite dystopia is exactly the wrong thing to do. We must not rush headlong into the abyss of environmental shadows.

Below is an interesting exchange between our friend Alnot from Love is Tough Enough and a vintage liberal named Tina on AOL`s Mad World Message Board. Tina and Alnot were arguing about Global Warming, and Alnot quoted from my American Thinker article Hot Air. She scoffed at this without dealing with what I actually SAID, and Alnot e-mailed me with her comments. Below are the posts and my response:





What Miz T Had to say in Reply:

Sorry, I almost forgot the property managers sources.

The first three links he provided were from TCS, Tech Center Station, and as I asked before, please no sources in ExxonMobils pockets.

1133 21st St NW Suite M100 c/o Ralph R Brown Washington, DC 20036
Phone: 202-546-4242
Tech Central Science Foundation was formed in late November 2002 (Form 990). The Foundation appears to be a funding arm of the free-market news site, TechCentralStation.com.

ExxonMobil gave the Foundation $95,000 in 2003 for "Climate Change Support." According to Guidestar.org, a nonprofit research tool, the Foundation had 2003 income of $150,000 and $110,903 in assets. The Foundation commissioned a study by Charles River Associates alleging that the costs of the McCain-Lieberman bill of 2003 would be a minimum of $350 annually per household through 2010, rising to $530 per household by 2020, and could rise to as high as $1,300 per year per household. Related information: Tech Central Station was launched in 1999 as "a cross between a journal of Internet opinion and a cyber think tank open to the public" (TCS news release). According to Washington Monthly, TCS is published by the DCI Group, "a prominent Washington "public affairs" firm specializing in P.R., lobbying, and so-called "Astroturf" organizing, generally on behalf of corporations, GOP politicians, and the occasional Third-World despot." TCS shares office space, staff and ownership with DCI Group. ("Meet the Press" Washington Monthly, December 2003. ,http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0312.confessore.html) Corporate funders of Tech Central Station include AT&T, Avue Technologies, The Coca-Cola Company, General Motors Corporation, Intel, McDonalds, Merck, Microsoft, Nasdaq, PhRMA, and Qualcomm. (Tech Central Station website).

So thanks but these guys seem to be very content their corporate/powerlobby love nest.

T.


Al darlin, c'mon! Really, I give you NOAA as a source and you give me a property manager from St.Louis??!

Look, no rational person, property managers notwithstanding, can possibly argue that spewing toxins in the atmosphere can in any way be benefical.

I do not doubt for a second that volcanic activity, the sun and farting cows along with other natural issues influence our atmosphere, but humans contributions do the same. And with a constantly growing population wanting and using the very products that contribute to pollution and global warming, it has the potential to be devastating.

It absolutely astounds me that any person can claim to love their children, yet support the greedy bastards that are callously disregarding the future in order to fill their overloaded pockets more.

I'm equally astounded that anyone that declares their belief in God from the highest rooftops, can be so ungrateful for the earth he created, that they can be so utterly oblivious to the same greedy bastards constant and frivolous destruction of God's gift.

Al, can you seriously say that you believe the smoke and toxins belched into the air do no harm?

Can you look at the brown cloud of smog over most cities and say that it is a good thing and as harmless as the corporate asses would have the easily led to believe?

Please Al, no more ExxonMobil paid mouthpieces or property managers as sources.

Al Responds:

Why answer junk science?The first three links he provided were from TCS, Tech Center Station, and as I asked before, please no sources in ExxonMobils pockets.

This is a classic liberal trick; you cannot dispute the facts in these articles, so you make wild accusations about sinister corporate ties. The fact is, TCS writers are freelancers, and are generally very accomplished in their fields. The sources I sited include Dr. Roy Spencer (go here to view his bio) and his sources are the following:

1. Fu, Q., C.M. Johanson, S.G. Warren, and D.J. Seidel, 2004: Contribution of stratospheric cooling to satellite inferred tropospheric temperature trends. Nature, Vol. 429, p. 55-58. 2. Fu, Q., and C.M. Johanson, 2004. Stratospheric influences on MSU-derived tropospheric temperature trends: A direct error analysis. Journal of Climate, to be published December 15, 2004 3. Tett, S., and P. Thorne, 2004: Tropospheric temperature series from satellites. December 2, 2004, at Nature online (subscription required).

The second article is by Patrick Michaels from the Cato Institute, Frederick Seitz-past President of the National Academy of Science, and Professor Emeritus at Rockefeller University, and Dr. David Douglass-professor of physics at the University of Rochester.

The third article is by Sally Baliunas. Read her bio here:

Sallie Baliunas, Ph.D. served as part Deputy Director of Mount Wilson Observatory and as Senior Scientist at the George C. Marshall Institute in Washington, DC, and chairs the Institute's Science Advisory Board and is past contributing editor to the World Climate Report. Her awards include the Newton-Lacy-Pierce Prize of the American Astronomical Society, the Petr Beckmann Award for Scientific Freedom and the Bok Prize from Harvard University. She has written over 200 scientific research articles. In 1991 Discover magazine profiled her as one of America's outstanding women scientists. She was technical consultant for a science-fiction television series, "Gene Roddenberry's Earth: Final Conflict," airing 1997 - 2001. She received her M.A. (1975) and Ph.D. (1980) degrees in Astrophysics from Harvard University.

__________________________________-

The fact that you disregard these authors because they write in what YOU denounce as an Exxon funded site shows your unwillingness to examine the science. You disregard them because they do not agree with you. You are very willing to accept the word of other special interest-the Government Agencies and Universities which stand to receive a great deal of money for ``research`` into global warming; these institutions will lose millions if they admit that the emperor has no clothes, but you take their word as gospel truth! What hypocrisy!

I notice you ignore my other sources completely. You ignore Michel Jarroud at the World Meteorological Organization, Sami Solanki from the Max Planck Institute, Dr. Henrick Svensmark from the Danish Meteorological Institute, and Conservationist David Bellamy. Fine! How about Fred Singer, how about going here or here or here How about the BBC Would you believe the 1200 scientists who signed a petition against Kyoto?

Look, no rational person, property managers notwithstanding, can possibly argue that spewing toxins in the atmosphere can in any way be benefical.

I thought this was about Global Warming, not toxins in the atmosphere. In case you don`t know, these are different issues. (I might point out that the air is far cleaner now than it was twenty years ago.)

It absolutely astounds me that any person can claim to love their children, yet support the greedy bastards that are callously disregarding the future in order to fill their overloaded pockets more.

I agree! Kyoto is an attempt to rob the United States! The greedy bastards on the left are callously disregarding the future in order to fill their overloaded pockets.

I'm equally astounded that anyone that declares their belief in God from the highest rooftops, can be so ungrateful for the earth he created, that they can be so utterly oblivious to the same greedy bastards constant and frivolous destruction of God's gift.

There you go with the greedy bastards part again! Me think thou doth protest too much! God has Commandments against covetousness and theft, dear!

Man made global warming is the great myth of the age. Like all myths, it will perish in the light of truth.

_________________________________________________________


Interestingly enough, David Hogberg has an
article in The American Spectator Online today dealing with this very thing-the mountains of money available to the Global Warming Hysterics. He shows that Climate Change is big business, and that the scientists and organizations who push this junk science have a serious financial interest in maintaining the myth. This Tina doesn`t want to allow anyone to argue with facts from TCS because they receive corporate funds, but she is perfectly happy to use NOAA which receives huge governmental funding, and she apparently doesn`t see the hypocrisy!

Saul Alinsky wrote the gospel for liberals in the 1960`s, and all of their tactics come from his book ``Rules for Radicals``. One of his tactics is to impugne the motives of your opponents when the facts are against you. Tina employs this trick here with her exposition on the evil corporate influence on Tech Central Station. She mocks me because I don`t have numerous Latin figures after my name. She is afraid to actually talk about the science, or examine reality to see if it fits her particular model. Man-made Climate Change is all about theory and models, but has no actual real-world facts to back it up. They are always using graphs and percentage increases to make their case, all the while ignoring the actual physical evidence-which is completely against them. They try to dodge the inconvenient fact that the temperature has increased 1 degree worldwide in 100 years-and that this is obviously within the parameters of normal variation (in fact, we haven`t been keeping careful worldwide temperature records all that long so we are merely guessing even at that!) They start their temperature records to coincide with the end of the Maunder Minimum (the Mini-Ice Age) because this will show a larger increase in worldwide temperatures. (That is like dating river levels on the Mississippi by starting in 1993 during the Great Flood, and then using these records to prove that we are in a period of desertification!) They obfuscate, hide inconvenient facts (like the water temperatures show a rise but the atmospheric tests actually show a slight cooling) and manipulate to prove themselves right. When anyone challenges them on the facts they fall back on Alinsky and attack the motives of their critics. What liars!

Fortunately, the information is there for the asking, and reality is disproving the doomsayers. The end is near for the Global Warming Grift. It`s primary purpose was to swindle the United States, and most of us haven`t fallen for it!