The Great Global Warming Swindle

The Great Global Warming Swindle…

A Channel 4 documentary you might want to miss if you’re part of it… and watch if the Environmentalists, Greenies, THE GOVERNMENT, and anyone else is now getting a premium out of your butt as a result.

Channel 4, Thursday 8 March, 9pm

Are you green? How many flights have you taken in the last year? Feeling guilty about all those unnecessary car journeys? Well, maybe there’s no need to feel bad.

According to a group of scientists brought together by documentary-maker Martin Durkin, if the planet is heating up, it isn’t your fault and there’s nothing you can do about it.

We’ve almost begun to take it for granted that climate change is a man-made phenomenon. But just as the environmental lobby think they’ve got our attention, a group of naysayers have emerged to slay the whole premise of global warming.

I’ve never, ever gone for the CO2 – Carbon Tax – Carbon Trading scare stories, and the first thing they did was debunk the CO2 Causes Global Warming mantra. Apparently this follows an A; Gore film, where he ‘shows’ how a rise in CO2 is followed by a rise in global temperature. He even goes on to claim there is a “Complex Relation” between the two. How can I put it? LIE!

An accurate analysis of the polar ice core samples that showed this evidence ALSO shows that the CO2 level FOLLOWS the temperature rise by some 800 years, i.e. the temperature rises, then the CO2 appears. Why? Well, it’s a kind of natural process, if the sea temperature rises, vast amounts of the stuff are released

As one of the contributors put it “I get upset when I hear CO2 being referred to as a pollutant“. Everything on the earth produces it naturally, it’s part of life, and the man-made contribution pales into insignificance when compared to the global output of volcanoes, animals and the sea.

In Medieval times, this country was much warmer than now, with vineyards in England.

The global temperature was rising steadily until 1940, then fell until the 1970s, when it recommenced its previous change.

Oddly enough, that’s roughly when THE GOVERNMENT began to put money on the table to fund research to ‘prove’ Global Warming’ existed.

Then the Cold War ended, and the Peaceniks became the Greenies, Environmentalist, or Anti-Capitalists.

America didn’t ‘buy-in to Global Warming, so the Anti-Americans got a new platform.

By the 1990s, any scientist could virtually guarantee funding for their pet project by adding the words Global Warming somewhere in their funding application.

Global Warming models apparently assume a 1% CO2 increase per year in their disastrous predictions – the actual figure for the past 20 years is actually around 0.43%. However, the computer modellers are in receipt of millions of $£ to create and refine their weather models. One wonders what would happen if they produced the ultimate model, and it said “Hey, there’s no global warming”.

If you’re not aware of the general process of getting scientific studies and papers published, then you should bear in mind that the process is one of peer-review. In theory, you get published if those you work with deem your research justifiable. So, if you want to publish that upsets the funding apple cart, and the apples are all stamped ‘Global Warming’, then where to you think your research that rubbished it is likely to go? (cough-cough, round file, cough-cough).

Skeptical scientists speak of death threats.

The programme ended on an interesting note. Africa has resources of coal and oil, yet environmentalists argue that Africans should not use these, but develop wind and solar power to generate electricity. Poor Africans are dying young, their children are dying, smoke is killing them due to their use of wood and dung fires in unventilated huts because they have no electricity.

If it wasn’t so serious, you could laugh, but that’s not an option. The danger of Global Warming seem to have nothing to do with climate, but lots to do with money and power.

I was never convinced before, and let me separate that comment from issues of pollution, but now I’m convinced – AGAINST the Global Warming financial juggernaut.

The reason is simply that I’m a trained scientist, the numbers actually mean something to me, the numbers never stack up in favour of Global Warming, unless accompanied by someone explaining them. When I look at them without the propaganda, they still don’t stack up, so I’m out.

That doesn’t mean individual issues raised under the banner are don’t merit attention, they do. Take the African smoke deaths referred to above. It just means that I’m declaring my move out of the pack, and won’t nod quietly and accept all the penalties being levied in the name of halting Global Warming.