As another Global Climate Conference winds down, the question for those who have expended the time to study this movement is this: "how long is this misadventure going to continue before the general public recognize that it has nothing to do with science per sae and everything to do with an ideology?"
Ever since Maurice Strong (the Canadian) worked his way up the U.N. bureaucratic ladder and started this movement (then called the Global Warming Movement) and founded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the motivation for this movement by his own admission has been clear … Strong was of the view that the industrialized societies had to be dismantled and climate fear-mongering was his instrument of choice. The object of this climate fear-mongering was to empower the United Nations, diminish the nation state, and produce a new world order.
Although this ideology is wrapped in the cloak of science, there is very little about this field of endeavour which would fit within the scope of the scientific method. Their fundamental methodology is to create computer models designed to predict the future climate. Since anthropogenic global warming is their assumption … these computer models have that assumption built into their logarithms. Naturally when these computer programs are run … they predict catastrophic global warming. Unfortunately for the movement but fortunately for mankind, the empirical evidence never coincides with the computerized predictions. In short, they predicted catastrophic global warming … but this never actually occurred. (hence the “global warming” moniker was changed to “climate change.”)
Normally in science if your theory is not supported by the empirical evidence, the theory is determined to be invalid and the scientist goes back to the drawing board. However, that has not been the case with anthropogenic global warming. In this case, since the empirical data did not substantiate the theory that man-made CO2 was the primary driver of climate change, the data was simply “adjusted” and that scientific hoax is well documented in the “climategate” emails.
The assumption that human activity and the emission of CO2 is the primary driver of climate simply has no empirical evidence to support it. The idea that man-made CO2 is the primary driver of climate change is simply flawed since the volume of CO2 in the atmosphere and the temperature have no correlation. Historically, CO2 levels have been low … and climate has been warm. Historically, CO2 levels have been high … and climate has been cool. Secondly, this idea that the miniscule amount of CO2 injected into the atmosphere by mankind in relation to the total quantum of the atmosphere means that the man-made CO2 is a miniscule sum in the climate equation. Consequently, the very idea that man-made CO2 causes global warming is unproven and that is the very foundation for the entire global warming/climate change movement.
Possibly the best way to test the validity of a scientific theory is to ask a simple question … can the science predict the future. If your scientific theory can accurately predict future events then the math and the theory are considered sound. So how do the Global Warming Movements predictions pan out? On July 8th. 2008 the United Nations predicted “….it had been estimated that there would be between 50 million and 200 million environmental migrants by 2010… but that has never occurred. In 2009, world leaders met in Copenhagen, Denmark to potentially hash out another climate treaty. That same year, the head of Canada’s Green Party wrote that there was only “hours” left to stop global warming. “We have hours to act to avert a slow-motion tsunami that could destroy civilization as we know it,” Elizabeth May, leader of the Greens in Canada, wrote in 2009. “Earth has a long time. Humanity does not. We need to act urgently. We no longer have decades; we have hours. We mark that in Earth Hour on Saturday.”
Strangely enough the Earth has survived Elizabeth May’s apocalyptic prediction. And of course, they have predicted the end of the Arctic Ice Cap which has not occurred… and predicted that we will be reaching the “tipping point” on so many occasions they are now too numerous to count. They have predicted the oceans will rise … but the data shows they have fallen. Most importantly, they predicted a rise in the global temperature of 2 degrees C … but over the last 18 years the climate has stayed basically constant. If the key characteristic of a science is its ability to predict the future … then global warming/climate change cannot be classified as a science.
So why does this global warming movement not die a natural death? The answer seems to be because there is too much money involved and too many jobs at stake. It is all about an ideology which believes in an global transfer of wealth from the western industrialized countries to the so called Third World countries and there are thousands of worker bees to try to achieve that objective.
In an article styled “25 Years Of Predicting The Global Warming ‘Tipping Point’ the author says: “ The world’s 48 poorest countries will need to find around $US1 trillion($A1.39 trillion) dollars between 2020 and 2030 to achieve their plans to tackle climate change – and those plans should be a priority for international funding, researchers say.
Estimates based on plans submitted by the least-developed countries (LDCs) toward a new UN deal to curb global warming show they will cost around $US93.7 billion a year from 2020, when an agreement expected to be ironed out in Paris over the next two weeks is due to take effect.
That includes $US53.8 billion annually to reduce emissions and $US39.9 billion to deal with more extreme weather and rising seas, according to a report from the London-based International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED)So actually this whole movement has nothing to do with weather, global warming, or climate change. It has to do with implementing global socialism to produce their cherished new world order.