Seven Big Failed Environmentalist Predictions

I have degrees in the earth sciences, been published in peer-reviewed journals as both a lead author and a co-author, and have long-term memberships in several professional societies (including the Society for Sedimentary Geology, formerly the Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists).  I have a professional sub-specialty in micro-paleontology, which is largely the basis for paleoclimatology.

I am very well versed in the issues.

When it comes to bona fides, I have them, you don't.

I won't block you quite yet, because I would like to hear about your academic and professional credentials, which allows you to pass judgement on me.

Even the wording of your bombast, quoted, suggests you see the climate change question as a moral, or religious, issue. I have learned in years of dealing with the public on policy matters, when confronting New Age religious eco-zealots, no amount of evidence can change their minds.

Eco-loonies

These people believe the global warming mantra

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElJFYwRtrH4

Quotations from scientists:

The Global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried the APS (American Physical Society) before it like a rogue wave.  Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life.

 - Dr. Harold Lewis, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara

To reduce modern climate change to one variable (CO₂) or, more correctly, a small portion of one variable (i.e., human-produced CO₂) is not science, especially as it requires abandoning all we know about planet Earth, the Sun and the cosmos.

- Earth Science Professor Ian Plimer, author of Heaven and Earth; Global Warming: the Missing Science

The global warming alarm is dressed up as science, but it is not science.  It is propaganda.

- Professor Paul Reiter, world expert on tropical diseases at Pasteur Institute, Paris, member of United Nations IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change).

The public has been repeatedly misled that there is a scientific consensus on global warming.  Totally false.  Unfortunately, man-made climate change, or anthropogenic global warming as it’s more commonly known, has become a political issue rather than a scientific one.  Those who want you to accept that humans have caused climate change have a not-so-hidden agenda of imposing carbon taxes here in the United States that will cripple our economy and make us even more unable to compete with other nations.

- Senior Chemist Glenn Speck, Oklahoma City Isotek Environmental Lab

In my dealings with meteorologists nationwide, about 95% share my skepticism about global warming.

- Ohio meteorologist Dan Webster

“The ‘global warming scare’ is being used as a political tool to increase government control over American lives, incomes and decision making.  It has no place in the Society's activities.

- NASA Astronaut/Geologist/Senator Harrison Schmitt who flew on the Apollo 17 mission. formerly U.S. Geological Survey

I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound.

- Hurricane expert, Dr. Christopher Landsea, as he withdrew from the IPCC in 2005

I predict that the IPCC experience will end up being the worst case of scientific malpractice in history…. If the new President[Obama] and Congress are not careful, the resulting “sub-prime science meltdown” we are headed for will have caused carbon dioxide regulations which will make the current financial crisis seem puny by comparison.

      - NASA Meteorologist and Climatologist, Dr. Roy Spencer

How can a barely discernable, one-degree F. increase in the recorded global mean temperature since the late 19th century possibly gain public acceptance as the source of recent weather catastrophes?  And how can it translate into unlikely claims about future catastrophes?

The answer has much to do with misunderstanding the science of climate, plus a willingness to debase climate science into a triangle of alarmism.  Ambiguous scientific statements about climate are hyped by those with a vested interest in alarm, thus raising the political stakes for policymakers who provide funds for more science research to feed more alarm to increase the political stakes.  Indeed, the success of scientific alarmism can be counted in the increased federal spending on climate research from a few million dollars pre-1990 to $1.7 billion (per year) today.  Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks, or worse.  Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis.

Controlling carbon is kind of a bureaucrat’s dream.  If you control carbon you control life… One of the things the scientific community is pretty agreed on is those things (carbon taxes, etc.) will have virtually no impact on climate no matter what the models say.  So the question is do you spend trillions of dollars to have no impact?

Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21^st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to  contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age.

- MIT meteorology Professor Richard Lindzen                 

Governmental officials are currently casting trillions down huge rat hole to solve a problem which doesn’t exist.  It’s misapplied atmospheric science for profit.  It is an expanding profit-making industry, growing in proportion to the horror warnings by  government officials and former vice-presidents.

- Meteorologist Tom McElmurry, member of the American Meteorological Society

The new religion of global warming…  is a great story, and a phenomenal best seller.  It contains a grain of truth and a mountain of nonsense.  And that nonsense could be very damaging indeed.  We appear to have entered a new age of unreason, which threatens to be as economically harmful as it is profoundly disquieting.  It is from this, above all, that  we really need to save the planet.

- Nigel Lawson, p. 106, “An Appeal to Reason:  A Cool Look at Global Warming,” 2008

How have we come to universally accept this new religion based on dubious prophecy that condemns so many poor souls to a living hell and will greatly limit the salvation offered by free economies?  That's where the missionaries come in.  These missionaries, aka  ‘teachers’ and ‘professors,’ have gone out into the fields of the education system to disseminate the depressing gospel that the Earth is forever in big trouble.  Thus, with sustained indoctrination from grade school through graduate school, proselytes have been harvested.

- Meteorologist Anthony J. Sadar

I'm not sure which is more arrogant - to say we caused [global warming] or that we can fix it.

- Meteorologist Mark Nolan 

This still doesn't answer the big mystery that has been puzzling man forever.... if a tree falls in the forest and no body is around, will a Democrat raise my taxes?

I have a Bachelors in Physics & a Doctorate in Chemistry.  I have published in peer-reviewed journals.  Some of my work has dealt with Inorganic compounds that absorb IR radiation very efficiently.  This work was done in conjunction with The Solar Energy Reseach Institute (SERI) in Golden, CO.

Over the course of my professional career I have been a member of and received publications from The American Chemical Society, The Electrochemical Society & The American Physical Society.

I first became interested in the AGW movement when in the early 90's (somewhere between early 93 and mid 95). Physics Today published an article about the IPCC proceedings.  It seems at the time the group of IPCC scientists came to one set of conclusions and one rogue scientist wrote the (essentially) Executive Summary.  In the summary, he made out AGW as a huge threat and the other scientists were complaining that that's not what the panel concluded.  Of course the Clinton administration and AlGore ran with the summary and proclaimed dire consequences.  I've kept tabs on the AGW arguments ever since.  It's sad how many fall for the hoax.

The answer is "yes" - and for your own good, because they know better! ;^)

"The Earth has a fever and just like when your child has a fever, maybe that's a warning of something seriously wrong," Gore said on "Good Morning America" today. - Albert Gore, Jr, June 2006

NASA's Earth Minute: "Earth has a fever" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAuv1R34BHA - posted October 2014

This isn't science!  It is recycled political rhetoric.

Where can I join the J.D.Fanclub?

I love how robbie and zen practically tied their own nooses and marched onto the gallows.

Oy, gevalt.  

None of this should be about personalities - it should be about the science.  However, the Global Warming alarmists and fellow travelers are emotionally invested in the issue.

The "Earth has a fever" quote from Albert Gore was coupled with the dire prediction of the loss of polar ice.  Just before that the climate-fantasy "The Day After Tomorrow" was in the theaters.

If you want to read about the convenient untruths in "An Inconvenient Truth," see here:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckton/goreerrors.html

Flabbergasting!!!

You should read it first.

Ok, thanks, Jamie, scanned it...very convincing.

If not recycling wasn't illegal, I'd stop immediately.

Yes, because they will raise your taxes regardless

Here is an interesting exaggeration by Albert Gore, in "An Inconvenient Truth."

Gore postulated a 6-meter rise in sea level, due to global warming-induced melting of continental ice in Greenland an Antarctica.  The data shows otherwise.  Here too is evidence of how far Alarmists will go to hide the truth.

"Gore says low-lying inhabited Pacific coral atolls are already being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming, leading to the evacuation of several island populations to New Zealand.  However, the atolls are not being inundated, except where dynamiting of reefs or over-extraction of fresh water by local populations has caused damage

In the Maldives, a detailed recent study showed that sea levels were un changed today compared with 1250 years ago, though they have been higher in much of the intervening period, and have very seldom been lower....

A well-established tree very close to the Maldivian shoreline and only inches above sea level was recently uprooted by Australian environmentalists anxious to destroy this visible proof that sea level cannot have risen very far."

Here is ... err was ... that poor tree.

Al Gore raises the earths temperature every time he speaks, he's such a gas bag. 😊

Here is the latest update for the other non experts here.

The Earth may be in a warming cycle, or not.

It may be influenced by mans actions, or not.

Meanwhile .....In Nepal, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya and just about every other country in Africa.................

Now back to the important stuff. 

When should I become concerned about this warming, whether its mans fault or not?   Or cooling for that matter.  ( No graphs please, its beyond me.)

Gas?  I thought he had a zinc mine on his property

Al Gore has a 50,000 square foot house, now there's a huge carbon footprint. How about his private jet spewing green house gases everywhere, what a hypocrite.