Sunday, October 11, 2009

Worries About Climate Are Being Manufactured By The International Left

Check out this article by Michael Coren. Looks like the science is nowhere near settled when it comes to "climate change":
There are, however, an increasing number of peer-reviewed and intensely credible scientific minds who believe conventional thinking on global warming is nonsense.

One such being Lord Christopher Monckton, former science adviser to British prime minister Margaret Thatcher and a world-renowned scholar.

He was in Canada recently and appeared on my television show. A man of compelling wit and eloquence, he has defeated so many environmental activists -- he calls them "bedwetters" -- that few of them will now debate him.

"Al Gore has refused several times. Here is a man who is paid $300,000 per speech and has his staff control all of the questions that are asked. People ask why he is so committed," Monckton said. "Simple. He was a failed politician worth $2 million; he's now a famous activist worth $200 million!"

According to Monckton there are more than 700 major scientists who steadfastly refute the notion that the climate is changing to any worrying degree, that global warming is a reality and that the planet is in danger.

"It's all about the need of the international left to rally round a new flag."
And then we have this interesting story: It turns out that some UN "experts" on climate change, in an attempt to find some scientific facts that could confirm their theory, had to rely on a graph from... Wikipedia.
What started as a brouhaha in the blogosophere has turned into a minor embarrassment for the United Nations in the climate debates. As first reported on, the origin of a graph used in last week’s UN climate report, published to coincide with the summit in New York attended by President Obama and other world leaders, was not an august team of scientists working around the clock, but rather Wikipedia.

Perhaps equally surprising was the revelation that the graph’s author was not a climatologist, but instead an obscure Norwegian ecologist, Hanno Sandvik, who claimed no expertise regarding the data used in his graph.
But I guess they were in such a hurry to save the planet from overheating, that they just didn't have the time to find out who was the author of the graph. Climatologist, ecologist - what's the difference? The graph shows what the warm-mongers want to see, so it is 100% reliable, isn't it?

No comments: