Uh Oh. Another Big Media Outlet Wonders About AGW And Consensus

Yet another domino has fallen. On Wednesday, the U.K. Mail Online, part of the Daily Mail, was in full wondering mode. After a recitation of some seriously cold weather in the US and Austria, in an article they entitle Whatever happened to global warming? How freezing temperatures are starting to shatter climate change theory, they write

But most pertinent of all, of course, are the growing volume of statistics.

According to the National Climatic Data Centre, Earth’s hottest recorded year was 1998.

If you put the same question to NASA, scientists will say it was 1934, followed by 1998. The next three runner-ups are 1921, 2006 and 1931.

Which all blows a rather large hole in the argument that the earth is hurtling towards an inescapable heat death prompted by man’s abuse of the environment. 

Indeed, some experts believe we should forget global warming and turn our attention to an entirely differently phenomenon – global cooling.

The evidence for both remains inconclusive, which is unlikely to help the legions of world leaders meeting in Copenhagen in December to negotiate a new climate change deal.

Unfortunately, they could have a 100 year blizzard in Copenhagen (something not likely to happen. Copenhagen tends to get little snow, and the temps tend to be moderate for the region, with little freezing) and world leaders will still pass whatever idiocy they have up their sleeves. Air Force One could get stuck on the tarmac because of massive snow and ice, and he will still sign whatever is passed. Because it is all about control, not science.

And, as far as control goes, Lord Christopher Monckton had this to say (from Fightin’ Words)

I read that treaty. And what it says is this, that a world government is going to be created. The word “government” actually appears as the first of three purposes of the new entity. The second purpose is the transfer of wealth from the countries of the West to third world countries, in satisfication of what is called, coyly, “climate debt” – because we’ve been burning CO2 and they haven’t. We’ve been screwing up the climate and they haven’t. And the third purpose of this new entity, this government, is enforcement.

How many of you think that the word “election” or “democracy” or “vote” or “ballot” occurs anywhere in the 200 pages of that treaty? Quite right, it doesn’t appear once. So, at last, the communists who piled out of the Berlin Wall and into the environmental movement, who took over Greenpeace so that my friends who funded it left within a year, because [the communists] captured it – Now the apotheosis as at hand. They are about to impose a communist world government on the world. You have a president who has very strong sympathies with that point of view. He’s going to sign it. He’ll sign anything. He’s a Nobel Peace Prize [winner]; of course he’ll sign it.

As the saying goes, read the whole thing.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

2 Responses to “Uh Oh. Another Big Media Outlet Wonders About AGW And Consensus”

  1. John Ryan says:

    Actually Teach as I have pointed out MANY times the National Climate Data Center dors not say that 1998 was the hottest year they say that 2005 was the hottest I have provided a link showing this. Also Teach the US Army War College says that climate change is one of our nation’s most serious national security problems.. I have also provoded a link to that. Do you think that the War College are all lefty fools?
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature_record_since_1880
    And here is the link to the US Army War College and what THEY think about global climate change.
    So who do you believe Teach some foreign newspaper or NOAA and the US Army
    http://www.americansecurityproject.org/theflashpointblog/jessi-berlin/2009/09/01/the-war-college-chimes-in-time-is-ripe-for-us-leadership-on-climate-security/

  2. John what is the basis of the NCDC claim? Are they using incomplete surface data or satellite data?

    As for the U.S. Army, I didn’t realize they were staffed with climatologists. No I don’t believe the U.S. Army on this one. I wouldn’t seriously the UN IPPCC’s views on military strategy either.

    I do believe Monckton on climate change.
    http://www.hootervillegazette.com/LordMonckton.html
    http://www.hootervillegazette.com/monckton2.html
    http://www.hootervillegazette.com/moncktonav.html

    I like his views on health care too.
    http://www.hootervillegazette.com/moncktonletter.html

Bad Behavior has blocked 7769 access attempts in the last 7 days.