As predicted, the house of cards surrounding AGW continues to fall. The latest comes from Andrew Neil from the BBC, who reviews some other aspects of the AGW fraud that are coming to light.
The dam began to crack towards the end of last year when leaked e-mails from one of the temples of global warming, the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, suggested that a few sleights of hand were being deployed to hide facts inconvenient to the global warming case. An official investigation into these e-mails is on-going.
But the flood gates really opened after the IPCC had to withdraw its claim that the Himalayan glaciers would likely all have melted by 2035, maybe even sooner.
This turned out to have no basis in scientific fact, even though everything the IPCC produces is meant to be rigorously peer-reviewed, but simply an error recycled by the WWF, which the IPCC swallowed whole.
The truth, as seen by India’s leading expert in glaciers, is that “Himalayan glaciers have not in anyway exhibited, especially in recent years, an abnormal annual retreat.”
So the 40% of the world’s population that relies on the seven major river systems supplied by these glaciers can sleep a little more soundly in the knowledge that their water won’t run out in 25 years after all.
So, the WWF released an unscientific, report, based on nothing, that the IPCC just swallowed whole? Surely some of the 2500 scientists that “can’t be wrong” could have been spared to review this?
Then at the weekend another howler was exposed. The IPCC 2007 report claimed that global warming was leading to an increase in extreme weather, such as hurricanes and floods. Like its claims about the glaciers, this was also based on an unpublished report which had not been subject to scientific scrutiny — indeed several experts warned the IPCC not to rely on it.
The author, who didn’t actually finish his work until a year after the IPCC had used his research, has now repudiated what he sees has its misuse of his work.
His conclusion: “There is insufficient evidence to claim a statistical link between global warming and catastrophe loss.”
Yet it was because of this — now unproved — link that the British government signed up to a $100 billion transfer from rich to poor countries to help them cope with a supposed increase in floods and hurricanes.
Sounds like the Porkulus here in the US. Money was allegedly being spent to help people, but without reason or effect. BTW, how many major hurricanes, in spite of dire predictions, have hit the continental US since Katrina? Look it up, you might be surprised…or not.
Now after Climate-gate, Glacier-gate and Hurricane-gate — how many “gates” can one report contain? — comes Amazon-gate. The IPCC claimed that up to 40% of the Amazonian forests were risk from global warming and would likely be replaced by “tropical savannas” if temperatures continued to rise.
This claim is backed up by a scientific-looking reference but on closer investigation turns out to be yet another non-peer reviewed piece of work from the WWF. Indeed the two authors are not even scientists or specialists on the Amazon: one is an Australian policy analyst, the other a freelance journalist for the Guardian and a green activist.
The WWF has yet to provide any scientific evidence that 40% of the Amazon is threatened by climate change — as opposed to the relentless work of loggers and expansion of farms.
(Sighs) Claims made with no scientific basis whatsoever? We’re being subjected to a scare campaign filled with doom and gloom, and much of it seems to have been written by advocates, government bureaucrats, and other non-scientific people! No science, no peer-review (unless it’s the AGW folks killing any research that exposes them), and we’re just supposed to chant, “the science is settled, time to live like peasants?”
But it is now clear that the majority of those involved in the IPCC process are not scientists at all but politicians, bureaucrats, NGOs and green activists.
I guess the definition of scientist has become rather loose lately.
The sceptics may be about to get their first scalp. Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC chairman often wrongly described in the media as the world’s leading climate scientist (he’s actually a railway engineer), at first attacked those who questioned the IPCC’s alarming glacier prediction as “arrogant” and believers in “voodoo science”.
Arrogant? How dare we question the WWF, the NGOs, and a railroad engineer!! Clearly, they know more than we do, or even actual scientists do. Frankly, I’d trust the old WWF more than the new one.
Conservative Hideout Recommends
- Sean Hannity interviews Rush Limbaugh – Segment 2 (LonelyConservative)
- The Universe of Liberal Lies (WesternFront America)
- ClimateGate, American Style (WesternFront America)
Do you favor the restoration of our Republic?
Do you dislike the nanny state?
Do you believe that our Constitution should be followed?
Have you joined the RESISTANCE? .
Be part of the solution!
Related posts:
I believe that future generations should have the same opportunities that myself, and those that came before me, had. My parents taught me that I could do anything I wanted to do. I don’t want to have to tell my daughter, “You can do whatever the government tells you to do.” We are at a crossroads in this country; are we going to be free, or are we going to be slaves to the nanny state. I choose freedom. 
![Recommend [conservativehideout]](http://s3.amazonaws.com/arkayne-media/img/badge/logo-recommend-badge-medium.png){kind=icon}
Loading ...
The truth here is actually shocking when you stop to think about it, the railroad engineer probably knows just as much about future climate conditions as do the climate experts. Chew on that! Hell, glaciers melt as they creep to lower elevations and are added too above the snow line. They are always melting—anyone heard of the Great Lakes.
Yeah, the more this goes on, the more and more ridiculous that it looks.
I propose a Royal Rumble between the old WWF (now the WWE) and the present WWF. Winner take all, haircut match, table ladders and chairs match, or even a steel cage match, I don’t much give a damn what type. It would just be SO excellent to see those idiots get their just rewards and I WOULD pay $49.95 to see it on PPV!
That would be entertaining. I propose Michael Mann vs. Stone Cold Steve Austin.
They’re not interested in science, Matt… only the advancement of a political agenda.
Very true Karen. But ya still have to expose the fake science, and how it was derived.
Be careful Don, it looks good on paper, but those refs get easily distracted. All it takes is a few seconds, for Al Gore to sneak up with a folding chair.
One solution…HELL IN A CELL!!!
Is there any way to arrest some of these scientist for receiving grants from several governments and the UN based on fraudulent data? They committed fraud in order to get money. It seems like some laws were broken somewhere. This is just getting crazy! Of course, during his state of the union address our President said that the science behind climate change is settled. I guess no one has bothered to show him the news in the last few months. They are probably hiding all the climate change news next to his falling poll numbers so he doesn’t know about any of it!
Defrauding the government is, or course, a great charge, but what if the government was purposely paying for the fraud? That’s where it gets really muddy!