GREEN Energy Is The Perfect Scam
Posted: November 15, 2018 Filed under: Climatism, Energy Poverty, Failed Green Schemes, Government Grants/Funding, Green Agenda, Green Energy, Renewables, RET, Solar, Unreliables, Wind Farms | Tags: Climate Change Scam, Climatism, Global Warming, Global Warming Scam, Government Subsidies, Grants, Green Energy, Green Energy Failure, green energy scam, Renewable energy, RET, Scam, Solar panels, Solar PV, unreliables, wind energy scam, Wind Farms, wind power 1 Comment
‘Green’ Energy Is The Perfect Scam
“Renewable energy technologies simply won’t work; we need a fundamentally different approach.” – Top Google engineers
“Suggesting that renewables will let us phase rapidly off fossil fuels in the United States, China, India, or the world as a whole is almost the equivalent of believing in the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy.” – James Hansen (The Godfather of global warming alarmism and former NASA climate chief)
“We get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.” – Warren Buffett
***
WESTERN climate-theory-obsessed politicians continue their ruinous obsession with wind and solar ‘energy’. Unreliables that fail dismally wherever installed.
ENERGY poverty, blackouts, sky rocketing power bills, grid instability and the destruction of pristine landscapes, flora and fauna among the many costs of low energy-density, weather dependent windmills and solar panels.
THIS article out of American Thinker brutally exposes the vast scam that allows these symbolic gestures to the folly of green madness to thrive and somehow survive.
*
Green Energy is the Perfect Scam
Green energy is an incredible money-making scam. The promoters of green energy make billions of dollars promoting dumb energy schemes that are completely useless.
What makes the scam extremely clever is that the scammers have convinced the public that the purpose of their scam is to improve the environment. The scammers pretend to be earnest environmental advocates.
Any really good scam needs endorsements from authoritative-sounding sources. In the case of green energy, the authoritative sources are in on the scam. The beneficiaries of the green energy scam go way beyond the wind and solar industries.
Non-profit environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club or Greenpeace, need to be seen as fighting against an urgent looming catastrophe. If they don’t have something dreadful to fight against, no one is going to join their organizations or give them money.
Global warming, allegedly caused by carbon dioxide, is the looming catastrophe and green energy is the solution. When the globe failed to warm they renamed the looming catastrophic climate change in place of global warming.
Now they blame every instance of bad weather on climate change created by burning coal and oil. What were formerly acts of God are now the fault of the oil and coal companies.
Scientists are a special interest group largely financed by the federal government. Global warming is a magnificent gift to the science industry.
The industry has been corrupted by pathological science that is primarily intended to increase the flow of money from Washington. Science directed toward discovering the truth is out of fashion.
The many scientists that are global warming skeptics don’t exist as far as the science industry is concerned.
Government agencies, and the politicians that give the agencies money, have embraced the threat of climate change.
It gives them something to do that is more noble, even romantic than highways and making the trains run on time. The government spends billions on subsidizing wind and solar energy.
Ironically, electric utility companies love wind and solar green energy. They know perfectly well that wind and solar are useless because wind and solar generate electricity erratically and have to be backed up by reliable conventional electric generating plants.
The only economic benefit is the fuel saved in the backup plants when wind or solar is actually generating electricity. But the cost of the wind or solar electricity is much higher than the benefit of fuel saved.
Thus, the more wind or solar that you have, the more money you lose. But, electric utilities are regulated by public utility commissions. The amount of profit they are allowed is calculated as a fraction of the utilities’ capital investment.
So, the utilities want to make capital investments, even if those investments are wind and solar plants that waste money on a grand scale. The electricity consumers bear the cost and the utilities are allowed a larger profit.
In some parts of the country rooftop solar is fashionable. Homeowners who install rooftop solar often save money because the reduction in the cost of electricity from the utility is greater than the cost of solar electricity.
These homeowners brag to their friends about how clever they are, and the purveyors of rooftop solar place advertisements claiming that rooftop solar is cheaper than buying electricity from the electric company.
This is part of the scam. Rooftop solar is profitable because it is heavily subsidized and because the electric utility is forced, by the governmental authorities, to provide a connection to back up the solar without compensating remuneration.
The real cost of rooftop solar electricity, exclusive of subsidies, is around 30-cents per kilowatt-hour and the real benefit is around two cents per kilowatt hour from fuel saved in the utility’s backup plants.
The subsidy, financed by taxpayers and electricity consumers, is greater than ninety percent.
Hundreds of thousands of homeowners, under the delusion that they have discovered cheaper electricity, are walking and talking advertisements for solar energy.
The biggest victim of the green energy scam is the public in general. Everybody pays more taxes and pays more for energy as a consequence of the scam.
But the waste of billions of dollars may not be noticeable when spread over the 320 million Americans.
The public has been exposed to relentless propaganda promoting green energy as beneficial and less expensive.
The public is the greatest victim, but most people don’t know that they are being victimized, so there is little incentive to organize against the scam.
There are certain other victims such as the coal industry and coal miners. But these groups mostly don’t understand that they are victimized by a scam.
Due to the propaganda, they may actually believe that burning coal is undesirable and dangerous. Thus, they lack a clear mandate to organize against the scam. (Modern coal generating plants are environmentally clean.)
The manufacturers of fossil fuel generating plants are beneficiaries, not victims. Wind and solar don’t reduce the demand for fossil fuel plants because wind and solar have to be backed up by traditional plants.
A campaign against coal, by the Sierra Club, has resulted in the closing of many coal plants. The closed plants are typically replaced by new natural gas plants.
Due to the strain imposed on the electric grid by erratic wind and solar, there are many commercial opportunities for upgrading the traditional components of the electricity grid.
Rather than hurting the manufacturers of fossil fuel generating equipment, the green energy movement actually helps them.
The green energy scam is the perfect scam because the beneficiaries include many influential individuals and institutions, while the victims are dispersed among large numbers of unorganized people.
The few concentrated groups of victims, like coal miners, are psychologically handicapped by propaganda that has convinced them that they, rather than the scammers, are at fault.
Wind and solar are truly useless, like having a 6th toe or an appendix. A detailed exposition on the uselessness of wind and solar is given in my book – Dumb Energy: A Critique of Wind and Solar Energy.
Green energy is often justified on the grounds that it reduces carbon dioxide emissions and thus prevents global warming. Of course, global warming, now called climate change, is itself a scam.
The science on which the predictions of global warming doom are based is incredibly weak. But, the weak science is presented as if it is reliable by self-interested parties.
In any case, wind and solar are very expensive methods of reducing CO2 emissions. Other, far more practical, strategies for reducing CO2 emissions are available.
Anyone who criticizes the green energy scam is ruthlessly attacked. Critics are often accused of being in the pay of fossil fuel companies. Fossil fuel companies are too timid to risk the wrath of the green movement, so they hardly ever give money to the critics of the green movement.
A favorite line of attack is to accuse the critics of using tobacco company tactics to cover up the danger from using fossil fuels.
Critics are often depicted as being mental cases, as when Al Gore said that critics of his global warming promotions were like people who think the moon landing was filmed in a Hollywood studio or think that the Earth is flat.
James Hansen, often considered that father of the global warming movement suggested that executives of fossil fuel companies should be sent to jail for crimes against humanity.
Green energy is the perfect scam because it is disguised as a do-good movement and the victims are dispersed, unorganized and disarmed by propaganda.
Green energy is endorsed by government agencies, environmental non-profits, and scientific groups.
These are people that are often seen as sources of reliable information but that, in reality, work to promote their own parochial interests. This is a scam that needs to be exposed.
Norman Rogers is the author of the book Dumb Energy and writes often about political and environmental issues.
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
Green Energy is the Perfect Scam | American Thinker
••• Read the rest of this entry »
MUST READ : Corrupted UN Must Never Be Allowed To Lecture Us
Posted: October 27, 2018 Filed under: Climate Change, Climatism, Communism, COP24, Government, Government Grants/Funding, Govt Climate Agenda, Politics, UN, UNEP, UNFCCC, Wealth Redistribution | Tags: Brussels, Bureaucrats, Climate Change, Climatism, COP24, Corruption, funding, Geneva, Global Warming, Grants, Green Climate Fund, IPCC, Maurice Newman, Misanthropy, Money, Politics, Trump, UN, UN IPCC, UNFCCC, wealth redistribution 4 Comments“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.“
– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” – Maurice Strong, founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)
“Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class – involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, air-conditioning, and suburban housing – are not sustainable.” – Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN’s Earth Summit, 1992.
“The Earth has cancer
and the cancer is Man.”
– Club of Rome,
premier environmental think-tank,
consultants to the United Nations
***
IT’s time for sensible, democratic governments to push back and vigorously question the motives of unelected, bureaucratic behemoths at the UN, stealing corralling global taxpayer money to fund their ruinous globalist, Leftist agendas that have absolutely nothing to with “saving the planet” or helping the environment.
QUEENSLAND One Nation leader, Steve Dickson conveying what most Australian’s are feeling, in stark contrast to the major ruling parties who are both pandering to the UN climate gods …
***
A MUST read opinion piece on the corrupt United Nations by Maurice Newman, former head of Deutsche Bank, the ABC and ASX…
“Australians are at that point, sick of being lectured to by UN “special rapporteurs”. They are crying out for leaders to stare down faceless bureaucrats in Geneva. They are angry at meaningless gestures and slavish obedience to pointless emissions targets that are crippling our industry and causing personal hardships.“
Corrupted UN must never be allowed to lecture us
US President Donald Trump addresses the United Nations General Assembly at UN headquarters last month.
If the leaders of some nation states were citizens living in a civilised society, they would be in jail for perpetrating, or being accessories to, murder, torture, theft and corruption.
Yet they and their chosen representatives shamelessly take their place in the hallowed chamber of the UN General Assembly as arbiters of how the rest of the world should behave.
Take the Human Rights Council, which counts among its members the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where Joseph Kabila’s unconstitutional rule features massacres and gender-based violence among a long list of atrocities; and Venezuela, where President Nicolas Maduro strangles political opposition by carrying out hundreds of arbitrary killings under the guise of fighting crime.
There’s The Philippines, whose President Rodrigo Duterte condones policies that result in extrajudicial killings of suspected drug dealers; and Cuba, where President Miguel Diaz-Canel, in true Castro style, allows beatings, public shaming and termination of employment to quell political opposition. China’s President-for-life Xi Jinping oversees the holding of about a million Muslim Uighurs, including women and children, in re-education camps.
Yet this year Australia celebrated its membership of the UNHRC, while the US commendably withdrew, saying the council “has provided cover, not condemnation, for the world’s most inhumane regimes”.
Australia is also a member of the Economic and Social Council which, “to find effective approaches to ending poverty”, believes “those experiencing it must have a seat at the table’’. And so they do. The leaders of Algeria, Chad, El Salvador, South Africa, Sudan, Togo and Venezuela, to name a few, all believe in wealth redistribution. They practise authoritarian central planning and asset confiscation.
Not too many champions of competition and market economics there. Australia acts as a good global citizen, lending support for “collective action” that rewards bad behaviour.
Unsurprisingly, the UN’s Ecosoc readily accepts that “climate change and environmental crises are the result of vastly unequal levels of development in the last few centuries. The countries which are now rich became so by ignoring the consequences for the environment which now threaten the entire planet.” Ecosec reminds us of Agenda 21, put to the UN’s 1992 Rio de Janeiro Earth Summit, which recognises that the burden of climate change (whatever that may be) “falls most heavily on poor countries”.
The United Nations headquarters in New York.
Masterminded by Canadian socialist/Marxist and multimillionaire Maurice Strong and held under the auspices of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Rio summit was the largest political gathering in history. Strong believed the UN should become a world government with “environmentalism” the key driver. He believed: “The concept of national sovereignty … will yield only slowly and reluctantly to the new imperatives of global environmental co-operation. It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation states, however powerful.”
Journalist and long-time UN expert Claudia Rosett observes Strong understood how the “UN’s bureaucratic culture of secrecy, its diplomatic immunities, and its global reach, lends itself to manipulation by a small circle of those who best know its back corridors”.
Strong exploited this culture to ensure climate change became so embedded in global politics that few Western politicians would have the courage to challenge it, no matter how exaggerated its claims, or the financial cost. And so it has proved. His successor and fellow Marxist, Christiana Figueres, led the Paris climate conference that captured Australia.
Enter US President Donald J. Trump. In his second address to the UN General Assembly in September, Trump said: “America is governed by Americans. We reject the ideology of globalism and accept the doctrine of patriotism.”
He said the UN Human Rights Council had become a “grave embarrassment” and that countries admitted to the WTO “violate every single principle on which the organisation is based”. He said: “We will not allow our workers to be victimised, our companies to be cheated, and our wealth to be plundered and transferred.” He withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, calling it a “massive redistribution of United States’ wealth to other countries”.
In the 26 years since the Rio summit, no world leader has posed such a comprehensive threat to UN hegemony. Not only does Trump reflect disillusionment with globalism at home, he also taps into growing disenchantment with supranational governments in many places around the world, particularly in Europe.
Brexit was the first example. Italy’s defiance in the face of Europe’s rejection of its draft budget is the latest. While acknowledging Italy violates EU rules, Deputy Prime Minister Luigi Di Maio says: “This is the first Italian budget that the EU doesn’t like. I am not surprised. This is the first Italian budget that was written in Rome and not in Brussels.” A recent poll in Poland found a third of the country now backs an EU exit.
It is clear serious cracks in the relationship between the people and governing bodies like the UN and the EU are emerging. People may not fully understand the way remote, supranational governments work, but they can recognise authority which is harmful and lacking in integrity.
Australians are at that point, sick of being lectured to by UN “special rapporteurs”. They are crying out for leaders to stare down faceless bureaucrats in Geneva. They are angry at meaningless gestures and slavish obedience to pointless emissions targets that are crippling our industry and causing personal hardships.
The latest Australian Institute of Company Directors survey confirms the desperation corporate leaders feel over the government’s inept response to climate change, the No 1 issue they want addressed.
The UN and agencies like the IMF have been exposed as hypocritical emperors without clothes. If this is a preview of world government, we face a grim future.
Corrupted UN must never be allowed to lecture us | The Australian
•••
MAURICE NEWMAN related :
- Maurice Newman | Search Results | Climatism
- Shock news : The UN’s Real Agenda Is A New World Order Under Its Control | Climatism
LOOKING For Reasons Why Wind ‘Power’ Can Never Work? Here’s The Top 21
Posted: May 28, 2018 Filed under: Failed Green Schemes, Green Energy, Renewables, RET, Taxpayer waste, Unreliables, Wind Farms | Tags: big government, Climate Change, Global Warming, Government grants, Grants, Green Energy, Green Energy Failure, Renewable energy, renewables, RET, unreliables, Wind Energy, wind energy scam, Wind Farms, wind power Leave a commentDEVASTATING read exposing the blatant fraud and utter uselessness of weather AND fossil-fuel dependent wind ‘power’….
HIGHLIGHTS:
* There has been zero scientific empirical proof provided by the wind industry to support their claims of consequential CO2 reduction.
* The claim that wind energy is “green” or “environmentally friendly” is laugh-out-loud hilarious – except for the fact that the reality is not funny at all. Consider just one part of a turbine, the generator, which uses considerable rare earth elements (2000± pounds per MW).
* The mining and processing of these metals has horrific environmental consequences that are unacknowledged and ignored by the wind industry and its environmental surrogates. For instance, just the rare earths of a typical 100 MW wind project would generate approximately:
1. 20,000 square meters of destroyed vegetation,
2. 2 million pounds of CO2,
3. 6 million cubic meters of toxic air pollution,
4. 29 million gallons of poisoned water,
5. 600 million pounds of highly contaminated tailing sands, and
6. 280,000 pounds of radioactive waste. (See this, and this, and this.)Read on…
It doesn’t take a genius to work out that wind power is the greatest economic and environmental fraud of all time. All it takes is a little cognitive power and a sense of inquiry.
Once people work out that they’ve been conned, they never turn back.
In our travels we’ve met plenty who’ve started out in favour of wind power and turned against it; we’ve never found an example of the reverse.
STT dishes up the facts on a daily basis, much to the annoyance of the wind cult. Anyone looking for a solid set of reasons as to why wind power can never work, need look no further than this cracking little list put together by John Droz.
Twenty-One Bad Things About Wind Energy — and Three Reasons Why
Master Resource
John Droz
22 March 2018
Trying to pin down the arguments of wind promoters is a bit like…
View original post 3,317 more words
More Ice, Less Ice. More Penguins, Less Penguins – It’s All Global Warming!
Posted: October 17, 2017 Filed under: Alarmism, Alarmism Debunked, Alarmism uncovered, Alarmist media, Antarctic, Antarctica, Climate Alarmism, Climatism, Dud predictions, Eco-Activists, Fact Check, Fake News, Government Grants/Funding, Green Agenda, Pseudo-Science | Tags: Adelie, Adelie Penguins, Alarmism, antarctic, Antarctica, Climate alarmism, Climate Change, Climate Change Scam, Climate science, Global Warming Scam, Global Warming Scare, Government Funding, Grants, Sea Ice 4 Comments
All in all, Adelies seem to be doing just fine.
A penguin-perfect example of the global warming “climate change” scam in action…
And, don’t forget to believe the climate faithful next time they yell “The Science Is Settled!”
TOO MUCH ICE, TOO LITTLE. MORE PENGUINS, LESS. IT’S ALL GLOBAL WARMING, YOU KNOW
THERE were too few penguins in the Antarctic, and then lots more. Now they’re starving. Same thing with ice: there was too little and now too much, which is killing the penguin chicks. Yet every change we’re told: it’s global warming. Be scared.
“Bill’s Adelies, struggling, failing, persisting, succumbing, were a small poignant example of a potentially vast reality. In one sense, they had become surrogate humans. Through them, the impact of a changing climate on established communities was palpably visible, a kind of parable in real time. This is how it is, if you have been residing in attractive island real estate, and climate change comes knocking on your door.” p. 268, The Ferocious Summer, Profile Books Ltd, 2007
The literary awards of Labor Premier John Brumby are … worth a total of $210,000… And the non-fiction prize … [went to”> The Ferocious Summer: Palmer’s penguins and the warming of Antarctica by Meredith Hooper Again, to explain:Meredith Hooper has captured how one scientific team uncovered the story of the devastating impact of rapid global warming on the Adelie penguins of the Antarctic Peninsula.
New, very short film from the E. O. Wilson Biodiversity Foundation highlights threats to Adelie penguins from climate change, already. Actor and conservation activist Harrison Ford narrated “Ghost Rookeries, Climate Change and the Adelie Penguin.”
SBS reports: Penguins are in peril because of extreme environmental conditions linked to climate change, research has shown…. Adelie penguins on Ross Island, Antarctica, are finding it harder to feed as melting sea ice fragments to form giant icebergs.
For the first time, researchers have counted all the world’s Adélie penguins—a sprightly seabird considered a bellwether of climate change—and discovered that millions of them are thriving in and around Antarctica… “What we found surprised everyone,” said ecologist Heather Lynch at Stony Brook University in Stony Brook, N.Y., who led the penguin census. “We found a 53% increase in abundance globally.” Counting the birds by satellite, Dr. Lynch and imaging specialist Michelle LaRue at the University of Minnesota found that the Adélie penguin population now numbers 3.79 million breeding pairs—about 1.1 million more pairs than 20 years ago. In all, they identified 251 penguin colonies and surveyed 41 of them for the first time, including 17 apparently new colonies.
Now, not too little ice but too much:
Almost the entire cohort of chicks from an Adelie penguin colony in the eastern Antarctic was wiped out by starvation last summer in what scientists say is only the second such incident in over 40 years. Researchers said Sunday the mass die-off occurred because unusually large amounts of sea ice forced penguin parents to travel farther in search of food for their young. By the time they returned, only two out of thousands of chicks had survived.
Yet the global warming story gets trotted out again:
Sea ice extent in the polar regions varies each year, but climate change has made the fluctuation more extreme.
TOO MUCH ICE, TOO LITTLE. MORE PENGUINS, LESS. IT’S ALL GLOBAL WARMING, YOU KNOW | Herald Sun
(Climatism bolds)
•••
Related :
- Adelie Populations Growing | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
- Bigger, smaller, whatever. It’s global warming | Climatism
How The Big Lie Is Being Constructed
Posted: April 1, 2014 Filed under: AGW, Alarmism, BIG Government, Carbon Dioxide, Carbon Tax, Climate Alarmism, Climate Fraud, Data Tampering, Environmentalism, Government Grants/Funding, Govt Climate Agenda, Green Agenda | Tags: big government, Eco-fear, funding, Grants, Socialism, Theology 1 Comment
There are two key components to the big climate lie.
- Tampering with temperature data
- Lying about climate history. The goal is to convince people that the climate is “getting worse” and that it will continue to “get worse.“
Climate change politics is straight out of the worst annals of human history, back to the days of burning witches for cooking the weather. Who could have imagined this would happen in the 21st century?
Driessen : A Climate of Fear, Cash and Correctitude
Posted: January 11, 2014 Filed under: AGW, Climate Change, Climate Money, Climatism, Environmentalism, Global Warming, Government Grants/Funding, Govt Climate Agenda, Green Agenda, IPCC, NIPCC, Politics, Pseudo-Science, Socialism, UN, UNEP, Wealth Redistribution | Tags: Climate Change, Environmentalism, funding, Global Warming, Grants, IPCC, Paul Driessen, UN, UNEP 3 Comments“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse?
Isn’t it our responsiblity to bring that about?”
– Maurice Strong,
founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)
“No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…
climate change provides the greatest opportunity to
bring about justice and equality in the world.”
– Christine Stewart,
former Canadian Minister of the Environment
“It doesn’t matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true.”
– Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace
•••
No introduction needed to this Driessen masterpiece, other than to say the article sums up nicely how modern environmentalism has nurtured a regime of government funded, pseudoscientific endeavour that has fuelled man-made global warming hysteria.
via TownHall.com
A Climate of Fear, Cash and Correctitude
Paul Driessen | Nov 23, 2013
Editor’s Note: This article was co-authored by Dennis Mitchell.
Earth’s geological, archaeological and written histories are replete with climate changes: big and small, short and long, benign, beneficial, catastrophic and everything in between.
The Medieval Warm Period (950-1300 AD or CE) was a boon for agriculture, civilization and Viking settlers in Greenland. The Little Ice Age that followed (1300-1850) was calamitous, as were the Dust Bowl and the extended droughts that vanquished the Anasazi and Mayan cultures; cyclical droughts and floods in Africa, Asia and Australia; and periods of vicious hurricanes and tornadoes. Repeated Pleistocene Epoch ice ages covered much of North America, Europe and Asia under mile-thick ice sheets that denuded continents, stunted plant growth, and dropped ocean levels 400 feet for thousands of years.
Modern environmentalism, coupled with fears first of global cooling and then of global warming, persuaded politicians to launch the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Its original goal was to assess possible human influences on global warming and potential risks of human-induced warming. However, it wasn’t long before the Panel minimized, ignored and dismissed non-human factors to such a degree that its posture became the mantra that only humans are now affecting climate.
Over the last three decades, five IPCC “assessment reports,” dozens of computer models, scores of conferences and thousands of papers focused heavily on human fossil fuel use and carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions, as being responsible for “dangerous” global warming, climate change, climate “disruption,” and almost every “extreme” weather or climate event. Tens of billions of dollars have supported these efforts, while only a few million have been devoted to analyses of all factors – natural and human – that affect and drive planetary climate change.
You would think researchers would welcome opportunities to balance that vast library of one-sided research with an analysis of the natural causes of climate change – so that they can evaluate the relative impact of human activities, more accurately predict future changes, and help ensure that communities, states and nations can plan for, mitigate and adapt to those impacts. Unfortunately, that’s rarely the case.
In autumn 2013, Nebraska lawmakers budgeted $44,000 for a study of climate cycles and natural causes – avoiding additional speculation about manmade effects. Several Nebraska researchers rejected the idea, saying the budget was insufficient and they would not be interested unless human influences were made part of the study. They would not compromise their integrity or let politics dictate their research, they said. Ultimately, the project was cancelled in favor of yet another study of human influences.
Integrity is an important concern, especially when so many scientists have accepted far larger sums for research that emphasizes human causes, including some at Penn State, Virginia, George Mason and other institutions associated with the IPCC and EPA. Such grants have brought us “studies” connecting “dangerous manmade global warming” to dwindling frog populations, shrinking Italian pasta supplies, clownfish getting lost, cockroaches migrating, and scores of other remote to ridiculous assertions.
It is essential that some studies now begin to assess, understand and calibrate the powerful, complex, interrelated natural forces that drive climate fluctuations, cycles and changes. Only then will we be able to discern and separate significant human influences – and begin to predict why, when, how and where Earth’s climate is likely to change in the future. Even $44,000 would have enabled these accomplished Nebraska researchers to examine existing scientific papers and prepare a valuable report on natural factors that would help to put human influences in context. Only such comprehensive knowledge will enable us to predict, prepare for, mitigate and adapt to future climate variations with sufficient accuracy.
American taxpayers alone are providing billions of dollars annually for research focused on human factors, through the EPA and other government agencies. The universities and other institutions routinely take 40% or more off the top for “project management” and “overhead.” None of them wants to derail that gravy train, and all fear that accepting grants to study natural factors or climate cycles would imperil funding from sources that have ideological, political or crony corporatist reasons for making grants tied to manmade warming, renewable energy and related topics. Peer pressure, eco-activist harassment, politically correct posturing, and shared ideologies about fossil fuels, forced economic transformations and wealth redistribution via energy policies also play a major role, especially on campuses.
Racial and sexual diversity is applauded, encouraged, even required, on campuses, as is political diversity across the “entire” spectrum from communist to “progressive.” But diversity of opinion is restricted to 20×20-foot “free speech zones,” and would-be free speech practitioners are vilified, exiled to academic Siberia, dismissed or penalized – as “climate skeptics” from Delaware, Oregon, Virginia and other institutions can testify. Robust debate about energy and climate issues is denounced and obstructed.
As The Right Climate Stuff team points out, we cannot possibly model or distinguish human influences on climate change, without first understanding and modeling natural factors. But solar, cosmic ray, oceanic and other natural forces are dismissed in the corridors of alarmism. Even the adverse effects of climate change and renewable energy policies on jobs, economic growth, human health and welfare, and bird and bat populations receive little attention. Sadly, science has been subjected to such tyranny before.
When Copernicus, Kepler and Galileo found that science and observations did not support Ptolemy’s clever and complex model of the solar system, the totalitarian establishment of their day advised such heretics to recant – or be battered, banished or even burned at the stake. Today’s climate models are even more clever and complex, dependent on questionable assumptions and massaged data, unable to predict temperatures or climate events, and employed to justify costly energy and economic policies.
The modelers nevertheless continue to enjoy fame, fortune, power and academic glory – while those who question the garbage in-garbage out models are denounced and ostracized. Continue Reading »
•••
UPDATE
Gerald Warner: Global warming’s deranged disciples
CLIMATE change is real and it is happening very fast. The climate of opinion, that is, regarding the rapidly imploding fantasies of the global warming alarmists.
After a decade in which sane commentators have been angered and frustrated by the purblind adherence to the warmist superstition by followers of the Al Gore cult – prominent among them our own esteemed First Minister and President for Life Designate – the whole climate change scam has finally degenerated into a joke, provoking widespread derision.
That has not deterred the climate Gnostics, sustained by their mystical insight into inner truths hidden from sceptics (“deniers” in their language of anathema) and, increasingly, from scientists who have not taken the IPCC shilling. The cultists can rely on the support of politicians since non-existent global warming furnishes the pretext for all-too-existent and exorbitant taxes, which is what the whole myth is all about. Thus, during discussion of the recent floods in the Commons last week, David Cameron was prompted by the Liberal Democrat MP Tim Farron to attribute the problem to climate change. The Prime Minister dutifully replied: “Colleagues across the House can argue about whether that is linked to climate change or not. I very much suspect that it is.”
That statement was overdue as it was seven weeks since he had been reported as telling his colleagues “We have to get rid of the green crap”, an exceptionally long period for Dave to entertain a consistent opinion. Unfortunately, Owen Paterson, the Environment Secretary, refused to endorse his leader’s view. Then the Meteorological Office intervened to contradict Dave: “At the moment there’s no evidence to suggest that these storms are more intense because of climate change.” That was a significant development because formerly the Met Office could be counted upon to support climate alarmism. Clearly it is now conscious of reputational damage and is hedging its bets.
It is not alone. Very subtly, unobtrusively, other institutions and individuals are backing away from the discredited orthodoxy of warmism. The process began some time ago when the Royal Society declared its switch to a more neutral stance in the climate debate. Scientists not committed to the cause by financial considerations are growing aware that the imposture is disintegrating so fast it could achieve Piltdown status within their own career spans. It is a measure of the bogus nature of the alleged climate crisis that the last time warming occurred there was a majority Tory government in office under John Major (“Oh, yes!”). Continue Reading »
•••
More Driessen :
- Risking Lives to Promote Climate Change Hype | CACA
- DRIESSEN: Climate alarmism’s 10,000 commandments | CACA
- Greedy Africans are starving our cars | CACA
- Carbon Dioxide: The Gas of Life – Paul Driessen
- Stop Denying Climate Science and ACT! (Before People Realize it’s a Scam) – Paul Driessen
- Real Climate Science the IPCC Doesn’t Want You to See – Paul Driessen
Climate Money Related :
- Warmists burn a billion a day | CACA
- Climate money: Monopoly science « JoNova (Judith Curry IPCC Update) | CACA
- ‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’ | CACA
- Shock News : Australia’s Carbon Tax Has Killed Jobs And Destroyed Nation’s Competitiveness | CACA
- Shock News : Industrial Wind Is A Fraud Of Enormous Consequence | CACA
- Obama’s Energy Chief Hails Loss Of Taxpayer Billions A ‘terrific success’ | CACA
Climatism Related:
- Richard Lindzen: Cool it on the climate | CACA
- The Truth About the Global Warming Agenda by Former NASA Climatologist | CACA
- Peer into the Heart of the IPCC, Find Greenpeace | CACA
- Shock News : UN Wants To Ban Private Property And Create “Human Habitat Settlement Zones” | CACA
- IPCC Insider Says That The 97% Consensus Actually Consists Of “A Few Dozen” | CACA
‘Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life’
Posted: December 16, 2013 Filed under: Climate Money, Climategate, Climatism, Global Warming, Government Grants/Funding, Govt Climate Agenda, Green Agenda, Ideology, Politics, Pseudo-Science, Socialism, Sustainability, Warmism | Tags: Anthropogenic Global Warming, Climate Change, Climategate, funding, Government, Grants, Politics, Post-Normal Science, pseudo-science, UN, UNEP 1 Comment“We’ve got to ride this global warming issue.
Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of
economic and environmental policy.“
– Timothy Wirth,
President of the UN Foundation
“Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse?
Isn’t it our responsiblity to bring that about?”
– Maurice Strong,
founder of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP)
“It doesn’t matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true.”
– Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.
Anthony Watts describes :
This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.
Telegraph reporter James Delingpole, who originally broke the Climategate affair, begins his reporting of the letter with this:
It’s so utterly damning that I’m going to run it in full without further comment.
•••
Can’t repeat this often enough.
From: Hal Lewis, University of California, Santa Barbara
To: Curtis G. Callan, Jr., Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society
6 October 2010
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate
2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.
3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.
4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.<
5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.
6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety
Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)
•••
UPDATE
THE REPORT FROM WASHINGTON
IS GREEN THE NEW RED (COMMUNISM)?
Exclusive: Ellis Washington challenges scientists to speak truth on ‘climate change’
Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudo-scientific fraud I have seen in my long life.
~ Dr. Harold Lewis
Ten days ago, Harold Lewis, Ph.D., emeritus professor of physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara, tendered his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr., Princeton University, president of the American Physical Society, because Dr. Lewis finally realized that he could no longer support what he called the “successful pseudo-scientific fraud” of global warming.
 Communist Chinese dictator Mao Zedong (1893-1976) |
Remember, to the Democratic Party and RINO Republicans, truth doesn’t matter, because to them truth is relative. All that matters to liberals and progressives is Nietzsche’s “Will to Power” and control over the people. Like the Islamic doctrine Taqiyya, which sanctions deceit to further Islam, to progressives the end justifies the means; therefore, lying, stealing, killing and perverting the Constitution and science is acceptable to utopian socialists as long as they “change the world.”
Recall the words of New Deal brain-truster Stuart Chase who, after visiting the Soviet Union in the 1920s, asked with incredulity, “Why should Russians have all the fun remaking the world?” Progressives are very resilient, so when Soviet communism finally collapsed after 70 years of world wide tyranny, progressives and liberal Democrats pushed the existential green movement to the forefront, which was in reality the same old exhausted red communism in a new disguise.
Green is now the new red (communism).
•••
Related links :
- Shock News : Big Government Money Is Corrupting Climate Science | Real Science
- Climate money: Monopoly science « JoNova (Judith Curry IPCC Update) | CACA
- Is man really the cause of global warming? – The Therapy Book
- The Truth About the Global Warming Agenda by Former NASA Climatologist | CACA
- MUST READ – Heresy and the creation of monsters | Climatologist Judith Curry – Climate Etc.
- One Of The More Illuminating Articles You May Ever Read On Global Warming | CACA
- Global Warming Theory – Circular reasoning at its best | CACA
- Bureaucratic Dioxide | CACA
- Shock News : UN IPCC Rewrote Temperature History To Suit Their Political Agenda | CACA
- Another View Of NASA Temperature Data Tampering | CACA
- Shock News : Industrial Wind Is A Fraud Of Enormous Consequence | CACA
- NATURE STUDY Confirms Global Warming Stopped 15 Years Ago | CACA
- UTTER INSANITY: Spending $160b to cut the temperature by 0.00005 degrees | CACA
Climategate Related :
- Climate change: this is the worst scientific scandal of our generation – Telegraph
- MUST READ : Climate change emails between scientists reveal flaws in peer review | Fred Pearce
- The Climategate Chronicle: How the Science of Global Warming Was Compromised – SPIEGEL ONLINE
- IPCC Researchers Admit Global Warming Fraud – The New American
- Climategate 3.0: FOIA – The Man Who Saved The World – Telegraph Blogs
- The CRU Mails
- Tom Nelson: 50+ Michael Mann ClimateGate emails
- Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been no global warming since 1995 | Mail Online
- But I thought the ‘science was settled’ | Las Vegas Review-Journal
United Nation’s Agenda 21 :
- United Nations Agenda 21 : The Death Knell of Liberty | CACA
- Shock News : UN Wants To Ban Private Property And Create “Human Habitat Settlement Zones” | CACA
- The Creator, Fabricator And Proponent Of Global Warming – Maurice Strong | CACA
- U.N. Official Admits: We Redistribute World’s Wealth By Climate Policy
- UN Agenda 21 Links | CACA
Recent Comments