The Great Unraveling
Posted 02/05/2010 07:16 PM ET
Climate Change: Professional global warming alarmists better think about looking for new jobs. It looks like they’re in for a long, cold winter — and a frigid spring and summer as well.
Those who’ve been spreading global-warming fears must be waking up each morning and asking themselves: What’s going to happen today? A new revelation about the corruption of climate science has become almost a daily event.
On Thursday, the U.K.’s Telegraph reported that India was pulling out of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and forming its own agency to study global warming. Why? Because the Indian government feels it can’t depend on the IPCC’s work.
And why should it? The concerns about the IPCC’s accuracy are justified. A day after India’s announcement, the Netherlands asked the U.N. to explain why the IPCC had said in its 2007 report that 55% of the country was below sea level when the Dutch themselves have reckoned that only 26% of the nation is that low.
This is the same IPCC that said in the same 2007 report that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035 — though there’s no scientific study to confirm the claim. It was based on the hunch of one scientist who expressed his opinion to a reporter.
The IPCC withdrew the assertion when it became widely known that it was bogus. But if the panel hadn’t been called out, we suspect it would have kept mum.
Compounding the headaches for warm-mongers is a probe being launched by the British Parliament into the Climate Research Unit e-mail scandal. The inquiry is intended ”to determine whether there is any evidence of the manipulation or suppression of data which is at odds with acceptable scientific practice and may therefore call into question any of the research outcomes.”
This isn’t terribly fresh news, having been announced on Jan. 22 by Parliament. But news that casts doubt on global warming tends to move slowly, if at all, in the U.S. media. If not for the foreign press, the inquiry would be virtually unknown in this country.
That 2007 report helped the IPCC win a share of the Nobel Prize. But its work is looking less credible by the day. Can any of its claims be trusted?
Its authors — who merely compiled others’ work and did no research of their own — sure haven’t inspired confidence in their work. In fact, their blunders are quickly pushing the global warming farce toward a grand collapse.
Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/milj%F6” rel=”tag”>miljö</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/yttrandefrihet” rel=”tag”>yttrandefrihet</a>, <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/fri-+och+r%E4ttigheter” rel=”tag”>fri- och rättigheter</a>, Läs även andra bloggares åsikter om <a href=”http://bloggar.se/om/USA” rel=”tag”>USA</a>
Etiketter: Al Gore, Carbon Trading, CO2, Etanol, EU, EU Parlamentet, Global Warming Hysteri, Havsis, Havsnivå, IPCC, Isbjörnar, Journalism, Klimatmodeller, Korruption, Kyoto, Media, News, Obama, Orkaner, Peer review, Politik, Press, Riksdagen, Snötäcket, Temperaturdata, Traditional Media, UN, Vindkraft