How can we tell that we are to blame for Global Warming? Well, we, the prolls, rely on the somewhat loud and aggressive voices of those who tell us it is happening and it’s all our fault.
The problem is that when anybody dares to ask questions they get subjected to considerable ridicule and harassment It’s a strangely familiar kind of ridicule and harassment. It’s exactly the same type of ridicule and harassment that used to be used and dished out by the deeply religious against any who might dare question their doctrine or even the tiniest element of it.
Luckily, the sceptical community within the UK persisted in asking those awkward questions of the religious leaders and we were able to break free. Questions like, “How come you are obsessed with controlling and disallowing the sex life of consenting adults whilst you are secretly having sex with children and hiding the fact, from the top down, when you get caught?” soon put them under pressure to admit that something was very wrong with their organisations. And it also released so many from their hold as well as encouraging critical thinking to replace centuries of blind faith.
Critical thinking is something that the new religion, the religion of Global Warming, and how man is to blame, also doesn’t like. They don’t like anybody questioning their doctrine or even the tiniest aspect of it.
Today we have the internet and we have lay people who understand science and how to make calculations and projections. With access to the raw data from which the religion of global warming is derived, anybody can reconstruct, validate and reproduce the conclusions that the shouty people have arrived at. It’s an ability that anybody with an engineering background has, once they’ve access to the raw data.
Now then. That’s what scares them. Access to the raw data. And that’s why the raw data they were quoting from wasn’t being made available to those who dared question the conclusions. It took court cases and Freedom of Information Act requests to try to access it. Why would they deliberately withhold data they were telling us proved that we were to blame for Global Warming?
Eventually, when the data was published and those on the outside of the multi-trillion-dollar Global Warming Alarmist industry ran the figures through the various formula designed to forward track the future of Global Warming, as you might imagine, nothing agreed with those who were running back and forth shouting ‘Panic! Panic!’
It was at this point that a number of things happened. Firstly, the huge and highly funded lobby groups started to shout and scream and make personal remarks about those who were asking the questions. When you don’t want others to hear the message, you try to kill the messenger.
There’s a lot of money to made from everybody believing that humans are to blame for Global Warming. Indeed, there’s a lot of money to be made from running drug cartels.
In both cases, those raking in the cash will do what they have to do in order to carry on racking in the cash. Hence why those sceptical about the human contribution to climate change are subjected to quite terrible campaigns against them. Nobody’s been shot or kidnapped yet, but employers have been targeted and publications that dared to appear to be supportive have had their Editors removed in attempts to appease the money grabbers.
A lot of this anti-questioners activity was exposed when a large number of emails going back and forth between member of the Global Warming religion were released to the world (known as ‘Climategate’) after a mail server was hacked a good few years ago.
Secondly, data mysteriously changed overnight. Historical temperature records were suddenly adjusted down whilst late 20th century records were adjusted up. Then the original raw data was ‘lost’. Indeed, every now and then the currently available data gets adjusted yet again. And, guess what? That’s right, further back in history gets cooler whilst the last few decades get warmer.
However, here we are after nearly 17 years (plus or minus a couple of years depending on which temperature dataset you use) and there’s been no statistically significant global warming. Indeed, there’s the hint of global cooling (depending on which dataset you use).
When the Global Warming Alarmist movement was at its strongest and most persuasive, and managed to terrify the politicians into passing legislation to limit carbon dioxide emissions (It’s important to have a bogieman, and CO2 became theirs, although they prefer to refer to it as ‘carbon’ to make it sound dirty), it did so suggesting that by now we would be seeing massive sea level rises and, for UK children, snow would be a forgotten mystery from the past.
As you may have noticed, none of their catastrophic prophesies ever came true.
Slowly, country by country, politicians are seeing through the ‘lie’ or maybe ‘mistaken calculation’ of climate change and man’s contribution to it. Although there are many for whom the ‘belief’ is a religious belief they refuse to let go of, and many more for whom the propagation of the ‘belief’ allows for huge funding, the elephant in the room is the fact that despite the huge amount of carbon dioxide we humans are pushing into the air, the catastrophes refuse to happen.
But then neither do the various apocalypses that are predicted by the more traditional religious groups.