THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume IX, Issue # 196, October 21, 2007
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
THE HIGH COST OF CLIMATE LIES
By Alan Caruba
POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM, THE UNITED NATIONS INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE, & CLAIMS
OF IMMINENT CATASTROPHIC CLIMATE CHANGE: SKEPTICAL SCIENTISTS QUESTIONING THE VALIDITY OF THE
GLOBAL WARMING THESIS, THE THEORY THAT THE EARTH & ITS ENVIRONMENT ARE THREATENED BY HUMAN-INDUCED
GLOBAL WARMING, DUE TO A BUILD-UP OF CARBON DIOXIDE & OTHER GREENHOUSE GASES IN THE ATMOSPHERE --
SCIENTISTS SUPPORTING THE CALL FOR A CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE IPCC & ITS PROCEDURES
FULL STORY:
An energy-rationing bill to address “global warming” has been introduced into the U.S. Congress. The “Climate Security
Act” would impose caps on how much carbon dioxide emissions can be allowed and would institute an elaborate program
to “trade” allowances among the industries and business affected.
Americans better hope that some members of Congress will ask if there truly is a threat of global warming and why a
similar program in Europe has proven to be a resounding failure.
If you really wanted to undermine the nation’s economy, you could not devise a better way. It is the Kyoto Climate
Change Protocol on steroids.
Little noted during all the headlines concerning Al Gore’s Nobel Peace Prize was the fact that it was shared with the
United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Among skeptical scientists I know, the emails were flying.
Several had served as part of the vast array of scientists whose opinions on the various IPCC draft reports were
requested and then ignored.
A lot of these expert reviewers are among the 2,000 scientists that the IPCC and Al Gore are always citing as being part of
the “consensus” on global warming. The problem for both is that many really, really, really disagree that any
planet-threatening global warming is occurring.
One of them is Dr. Vincent Gray, a New Zealand-based climate scientist who has been a part of the reviewing process
since the IPCC came into being. He is one of those scientists who will not and cannot be shut up, despite the din of the
IPCC propaganda.
Briefly, Dr. Gray has a Ph.D. in Physical Chemistry from Cambridge University, England, and his long career has included
stints in France, Canada, China, and New Zealand. He has published more than a hundred scientific papers on energy
and materials, plus a dozen in climate science.
So, following the announcement of the Nobel Peace Prize, Dr. Gray wrote to Professor David Henderson, who has called
for a “review” of the IPCC and its procedures. This is a nice way of saying that the Panel is so widely viewed as just one
more corrupt United Nations instrumentality, a lot of scientists think it should be tossed in a garbage can behind the UN
building.
Permit me to share some of Dr. Gray’s thoughts with you.
Commenting on his initial belief that the IPCC would proceed on the basis of “scientific ethics” and that its conclusions
would result from “facts, logic and established scientific and mathematical principles,” Dr. Gray’s experience revealed:
“Penetrating questions often ended without any answer.
Comments on the IPCC drafts were rejected without
explanation, and attempts to pursue the matter were
frustrated indefinitely.”
“I have been forced to the conclusion that, for significant
parts of the work of the IPCC, the data collection and
scientific methods employed are unsound … normal
scientific procedures are not only rejected by the IPCC,
but that this practice is endemic, and was part of the
organization from the very beginning.”
“I therefore consider that the IPCC is fundamentally
corrupt.”
Dr. Gray concluded that the only reform “I could envisage, would be its abolition.” Okay, okay, I hear all the
environmentalists saying, “but he’s just one crazy, old New Zealand climate scientist. Boo! Hiss!” Character
assassination is just one form of the corruption that is endemic to the entire environmentalist movement.
Undaunted, Dr. Gray continued, “The two main ‘scientific’ claims of the IPCC are the claim that ‘the globe is warming’
and ‘increases in carbon dioxide emissions are responsible.’ Evidence for both of these claims is fatally flawed.”
Aw, gee, I’m not a scientist you’re saying. What do I know? Well, if you know enough to be reading this, you know
enough to wrap your brain around Dr. Gray’s assertion that “No average temperature of any part of the earth’s surface,
over any period, has ever been made.” If the earth’s “average temperature” cannot be determined, how can you know
that it’s dramatically heating? How can you predict anything about an unknown?
As for the IPCC claims about CO2, Dr. Gray points out that “they have suppressed no less than 90,000 measurements
of atmospheric carbon dioxide made in the last 150 years. Some of these were made by Nobel Prize-winners and all were
published in the best scientific journals.”
The IPCC has depended on computer climate models for its claims and there is now a volume of papers demonstrating
how the computer models have repeatedly been proven to be inaccurate. As Dr. Gray points out, if you cannot validate
these models as actually capable of making predictions, “no self-respecting computer engineer would dare to make use
of a model for prediction.” Anyway, “No computer climate model has ever been tested in this way, so none should be
used to prediction.”
“The most elaborate of all their ‘evaluation’ techniques is far more dubious,” said Dr. Gray. “Since they have failed
to show that any models are actually capable of prediction, they have decided to ‘evaluate’ them by asking the opinions
of those who originate them, people with a financial interest in their success.” (Emphasis added.)
“Sooner or later all of us will come to realize,” Dr. Gray concluded, “that this organization, and the thinking behind it, is
phony. Unfortunately severe economic damage is likely to be done by its influence before that happens.”
But that’s the point of the IPCC!
If you can require that ethanol be substituted or just added to gasoline, you drive up the cost of corn to where the cost
of everything else — like food — dependent on corn costs more. Moreover, requiring the addition of ethanol increases
refinery costs that are, in turn, passed on to consumers.
If you mandate that wind and solar energy be substituted to provide electricity for that provided by coal (over 50% in the
U.S.A.) and other sources, then you assure that these two totally inadequate energy producers will drive up the cost to
consumers.
If every kind of industry contributes to CO2, then you can create an elaborate “cap-and-trade” scam to sell “credits” for
the permission to continue in business. The consumers will pick up the costs involved.
On the chance that Dr. Gray is not some crazy, old New Zealander, maybe we should all be in the streets calling for the
abolition of the IPCC? And, while we’re out there, let’s get rid of the United Nations too.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
Political Environmentalism Versus Human Progress & Prosperity:
Policy Issues Relating to Energy, Environment,
& Natural Resources
The Earth's Natural History, Global Climate Changes,
& the Future of Human Life & Civilization on the Planet:
Science, Ideology, & Public Policy
Political Economy -- Philosophies, Systems, & Public Policies:
Government, the Economy, & Economic Prosperity
The United Nations, Its Agencies, & U.S. National Interests
Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a
clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly commentary, "Warning Signs," posted
on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center, which is located at
www.anxietycenter.com.
Caruba has a daily blog at http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com.
Caruba’s new book, Right Answers: Separating Fact from Fantasy, has been published by Merril Press.
© Alan Caruba 2007
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Go to the WEBSITE INDEX
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
Most Recent Articles
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Volume IX, 2007
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
CONTACT & ACCESS INFORMATION
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity