Chutzpah!

 

When the history of our times is written, there will have to be a chapter on the great global-warming scam and the manner in which this generation’s best and brightest fell prey to con artists no less slick than Josef Stalin’s favorite – Trofim Denisovich Lysenko.

 

This chapter will have as its focus a variety of clowns. Al Gore, purveying his convenient and highly profitable lies, will of course loom large, as will Rajendra Pachauri and the aficionados of hype at the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, who were rewarded for their dishonesty, alongside Gore, with a Nobel Peace Prize. Their assistants in Britain at the Hadley Centre for Climate Change and the Climatic Research Unit in East Anglia, whose misrepresentation of the scientific evidence was exposed in and after November 2009, will also be prominent.

But this is by now old news – thoroughly explored in the mainstream press everywhere except, of course, in the United States, where “the worst scientific scandal of our generation” has been relegated to brief defensive articles hidden where they are unlikely to be widely read. What will, I think, be most evident in this chapter, however, will be the deep-seated reluctance of the great and good to back away from the extravagant and unfounded claims by which they have been conned.

Consider, for example, the directors of the MET office in Great Britain – that country’s weather service. Mindful of the anthropogenic global-warming orthodoxy, which that office helped generate, they have, for three years running, predicted exceptionally warm winters for Britain. And, of course, for three years running our cousins across the Atlantic have suffered through exceedingly cold winters. The current one is, in fact, the coldest on record, and in Britain the records go back to 1652. One wonders – and, in Britain, certain commentators do now openly wonder – just how long it will take the government of that country to admit that the whole thing is a fiasco.

We should not, however, confine our laughter to the British. If anything, our establishment is even more ridiculous. Consider, for example, the ever-reliable editors at “our newspaper of record” Pravda on the Hudson: I mean, of course, The New York Times.

Right now, as you no doubt know, it is bitterly cold – especially on the East Coast. Californians have been subjected to torrential rains. In Colorado, the snowfall has been mammoth.  In Minneapolis, it was so heavy that it brought down the roof at the Metrodome. The cold in Miami and Key West has set records. Philadelphia is reeling today under 24 inches of snow. In Elizabeth, New Jersey, the snowfall is 32 inches. In Brooklyn and Newark, it exceeds 24 inches, and, in Boston, which has received 18.2 inches, the story has not yet fully been told. Nor is this a freak accident. Seven of the last nine winters in the eastern United States and Eurasia have been exceptionally cold.

And what do we learn from the Grey Lady? Listen to Judah Cohen – “director of seasonal forecasting at” a suspiciously nameless “atmospheric and environmental research firm,” which, as you might guess, depends on government funding to support its research – who writes in that estimable journal that “the overall warming of the atmosphere is actually creating cold-weather extremes.”

Got that? “We’re freezing not in spite of climate change but because of it.” As for “annual cycles like El Niño/Southern Oscillation, solar variability and global ocean currents,” forget them. They “cannot account for recent winter cooling.”

Nope, the solar minimum and its aftermath – the prolonged absence of sunspots and solar storms – these have nothing to do with the temperature and the weather more generally. Nor does the appearance of La Niña. Our suffering is all a consequence of – you guessed it – anthropogenic global warming! It has to be. The alternative is unthinkable.

“As global temperatures have warmed and as Arctic sea ice has melted over the past two and a half decades,” Mr. Cohen reports,

more moisture has become available to fall as snow over the continents. So the snow cover across Siberia in the fall has steadily increased.

The sun’s energy reflects off the bright white snow and escapes back out to space. As a result, the temperature cools. When snow cover is more abundant in Siberia, it creates an unusually large dome of cold air next to the mountains, and this amplifies the standing waves in the atmosphere, just as a bigger rock in a stream increases the size of the waves of water flowing by.

The increased wave energy in the air spreads both horizontally, around the Northern Hemisphere, and vertically, up into the stratosphere and down toward the earth’s surface. In response, the jet stream, instead of flowing predominantly west to east as usual, meanders more north and south. In winter, this change in flow sends warm air north from the subtropical oceans into Alaska and Greenland, but it also pushes cold air south from the Arctic on the east side of the Rockies. Meanwhile, across Eurasia, cold air from Siberia spills south into East Asia and even southwestward into Europe.

What we have here is an unfalsifiable hypothesis. If it is exceptionally warm, the cause is global warming. If it is breathtakingly cold, the cause is the same. Karl Popper must be rolling in his grave.

The end is near. When a scientific hypothesis is on its last legs, its proponents have to engage in special pleading on an ever-growing scale. When you read Mr. Cohen’s argument, you should think of the cycles and epicycles added in a desperate attempt to make sense of the geocentric astronomy of Ptolemy. The field of climate science awaits its Copernicus, its Tycho Brahe, its Galileo, and its Newton. In the meantime, however, we can lean back and enjoy the chutzpah on display at The New York Times. There is sure to be more to come.

There are 29 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Profile Photo Member
    @

    For the last forty years I’ve been hearing from these watermellons that we only have ten years to save the planet. (That first Earth Day was forty years ago wasn’t it?)

    Yet somehow the planet survives beyond the Ten years we have left.

    I remember arguing in a classroom in 1973 that the Oil Industry was NOT going to be over in 20 years. I was right, but most of the people I argued with then (who now adamently endorse AGW) have forgotten that argument, and the fact that I was right.

    And in the end, that Since My Predictions were Wrong it only Proves I’m Right Attitude permiates this crowd so thoroughly, it will be impossible to get them to admit that they were wrong (about the coming Ice Age, Population Bomb etc.) because they will have another banner to fly in another crusade to save the planet (with only Ten Years to do so) that is too important to allow me to distract them with “Ancient History.”

    I’ve never seen people so impervious to evidence.

    • #1
  2. Profile Photo Member
    @tabularasa

    O, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.” When the same scientific conclusion follows from all data, one would think a real scientist would, as they are trained to do, question the “science” underlying the bizarre conclusions.

    • #2
  3. Profile Photo Inactive
    @MikeLaRoche

    Many an academic discipline suffers from such static introversion. Just consider how long it has taken the historical profession to rid itself of Hegelianism.

    • #3
  4. Profile Photo Inactive
    @Kervinlee

    The global-warming-climate-change authoritarian juggernaut barrels on regardless. It’s just too good a vehicle for centralizing control of everything to give it up now. It doesn’t matter in the slightest that the predictions don’t come true, that the hypothesis is not falsifyable, that people’s real-world experience betrays the claims. The propaganda machine still bangs the gong of climate catastrophe. I have seldom felt so powerless.

    This is real tyranny.

    • #4
  5. Profile Photo Member
    @

    If I’m not mistaken, the cat slipped out of the bag a couple of weeks ago when some mighty climate-change panjandrum said at the usual luxury resort where this crowd convenes that the whole business is a calculated deception to disguise the left’s plan to transfer vast wealth from developed countries to the third world in the interest of social justice. The media strangely went silent on this rare candor and said feline was returned to captivity.

    • #5
  6. Profile Photo Editor
    @RobLong

    Paul, right outside my window, in northwest Connecticut, is about nine inches of snow. And beyond that, a frozen lake. When I read that quotation from the NYTimes, I laughed.

    And isn’t that another sign that the global warming crowd are in deep trouble? They’re now a punch line. A joke. And that’s hard to come back from.

    • #6
  7. Profile Photo Contributor
    @PaulARahe
    Rob Long: Paul, right outside my window, in northwest Connecticut, is about nine inches of snow. And beyond that, a frozen lake. When I read that quotation from the NYTimes, I laughed.

    And isn’t that another sign that the global warming crowd are in deep trouble? They’re now a punch line. A joke. And that’s hard to come back from. · Dec 27 at 6:03pm

    It is, indeed. When people start rolling their eyes and laughing, the game is up.

    • #7
  8. Profile Photo Member
    @PaulStinchfield

    Lysenko’s great sin was not his crackpottery but his enthusiastic use of the power of the state to silence and murder his critics. Similarly, we have heard many current environmental crackpots declare that “deniers” should be treated as criminals. Plus ca change….

    • #8
  9. Profile Photo Member
    @JimmyCarter

    It took every single ounce of energy to read this post.

    How can One be surprised? People still believe in the hot air of Keynesianism.

    • #9
  10. Profile Photo Inactive
    @JDFitzpatrick

    This still leaves conservatives with the problem of developing a response. We might not want to leave it up to resolving whether the Earth is getting warmer.

    In Modern Economic Issues, a TeachCo lecture, Robert Whaples undermines (pp48-49) the claim that we should spend money now to forestall global warming later. One point might resonate: people in the future are going to be richer than we are, so why should we transfer money from us (the poor) to them (the rich)? By way of analogy, would we expect an American family of the Depression era to give its life savings of, say, $800 to an American family today that had lost a house to extreme weather? The $800 today might cover living expenses for a month; however, the money accomplished much more when invested in the productive economy of the ’30s and ’40s because it produced technology and wealth that makes Americans capable of adapting to extreme weather in ways that statist nightmares like Haiti cannot.

    Today midwest farmers are much better poised to survive a Dust Bowl–not because America spent money trying to change the weather, but because it developed its economy without too much interference.

    • #10
  11. Profile Photo Inactive
    @KTCat

    Thanks for posting this! I used it as a springboard to a larger point – the intellectual chaos which stems from politicized science funding will lead to cynicism.

    • #11
  12. Profile Photo Coolidge
    @UndergroundConservative

    I really want to dance in the streets over this, but their religion still adheres to reports like the one from the World Meteorological Organization. The report continues to say that average temperatures are rising worldwide. Until we can rebut this, Lysenko still reigns.

    Meanwhile, I will laugh at the gall these people have. No, La Niña, the sun, etc. have nothing to do with climate. It’s ONLY this invisible menace that is independent of all other forces that threatens us. And ONLY government can solve it. It’s the perfect plot.

    • #12
  13. Profile Photo Member
    @CharlesMark
    Forgive me for rolling out an oldie but goodie- Warmists are like watermelons, green on the outside but red on the inside.

    Funny how these experts aren’t telling us either the expensive measures to control carbon output or the reduced economic activity due to recession are actually working by reversing warming in most spectacular style!

    • #13
  14. Profile Photo Inactive
    @CaseyTaylor

    Judah Cohen goes on to say:

    “The sun’s energy reflects off the bright white snow and escapes back out to space. As a result, the temperature cools.”

    As James Taranto points out in today’s Best of the Web, this tears down one of the pillars of global warmism:

    “But wait. Greenhouse gases are supposed to prevent the sun’s energy from escaping back into space, aren’t they?”

    Nice catch, Jim.

    • #14
  15. Profile Photo Member
    @JimmyCarter

    Hay, Casey, Ya forgot the ozone hole.

    • #15
  16. Profile Photo Inactive
    @CaseyTaylor

    D’oh! I knew I was missing something.

    Judah Cohen works for Atmospheric & Environmental Research, Inc., by the way. Their primary client is the U.S. gov’t, for whatever that’s worth.

    • #16
  17. Profile Photo Member
    @JimmyCarter

    Hay… it all depends on what day it is.

    • #17
  18. Profile Photo Contributor
    @jameslileks

    I’ve always found it convenient how the solutions to climate change – deindustrialization, small cars, compact cities, mass transit, reduced consumerism, less meat-eating – somehow parallel the things the left wants for their own sake. It’s a remarkably happy coincidence. But I suppose if you Believe in all these things, the interrelationship just reinforces the correctness of each set of objectives.

    • #18
  19. Profile Photo Inactive
    @outstripp

    AGW combines Mother Earth animism with anti-capitalist regulation. It’s a win-win situation for the left. It won’t die easily.

    It also appeals to low self-esteem narcissism. If you had to choose between your mediocre existence and saving the planet, which would you choose?

    • #19
  20. Profile Photo Inactive
    @LadyKurobara
    Paul Stinchfield: Lysenko’s great sin was not his crackpottery but his enthusiastic use of the power of the state to silence and murder his critics. Similarly, we have heard many current environmental crackpots declare that “deniers” should be treated as criminals. Plus ca change….

    You mean executed as criminals…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Mw5_EBk0g&feature=related

    No pressure…

    • #20
  21. Profile Photo Coolidge
    @UndergroundConservative

    Maybe I’m a bit behind, but I’ve never seen that video before. That’s horribly disturbing.

    Lady Kurobara

    Paul Stinchfield: Lysenko’s great sin was not his crackpottery but his enthusiastic use of the power of the state to silence and murder his critics. Similarly, we have heard many current environmental crackpots declare that “deniers” should be treated as criminals. Plus ca change….

    You mean executed as criminals…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Mw5_EBk0g&feature=related

    No pressure… · Dec 27 at 7:46pm

    • #21
  22. Profile Photo Inactive
    @LadyKurobara

    It is not only chutzpah, but hubris.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubris

    Look at it this way: The Earth is a titanic geothermal system. Climate is a global phenomenon. Weather is a regional phenomenon — local manifestations of climate. One of the smallest manifestations of weather is a tornado, which, for all its power, is (relative to weather and climate) a very tiny thing.

    Can we control tornadoes? Can we switch them off? Of course not. We have nothing like that kind of power. And yet eco-fanatics propose to change the climate, which is almost infinitely bigger in scale than a tornado. It is beyond hubristic; it is howling insanity. What does that say about our President, who boasted that he would make the seas recede?

    • #22
  23. Profile Photo Inactive
    @LadyKurobara
    Dave Molinari: Maybe I’m a bit behind, but I’ve never seen that video before. That’s horribly disturbing.

    Lady Kurobara

    Paul Stinchfield: Lysenko’s great sin was not his crackpottery but his enthusiastic use of the power of the state to silence and murder his critics. Similarly, we have heard many current environmental crackpots declare that “deniers” should be treated as criminals. Plus ca change….

    You mean executed as criminals…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-Mw5_EBk0g&feature=related

    No pressure…

    It is, indeed, horribly disturbing. But it is also a vivid demonstration of the way eco-fanatics actually think. They are clinically insane and very, very dangerous, and they must never be given power over their fellow human beings.

    We are, after all, talking about people who believe that the human race must be eradicated in order to “bequeath a healthier planet to future generations.” Future generations of what?

    Insane.

    • #23
  24. Profile Photo Inactive
    @TheMugwump

    Heresy! Blasphemy! Anathema! Oh, thou unbelievers, Nessie has not been photographed in fifty years, the Abominable Snowman has gone missing, and Sasquatch not sighted for a decade. You think this mere coincidence? What more proof do you need that global warming is a FACT? Just yesterday I received a calendar with a month of Sundays. There’s a dog in the manger, and a cow has jumped over the moon. What more do you need? The Four Horsemen are loose upon the earth, looking strangely like Al Gore, George Soros, Michael Moore and Lady Gaga, but I digress. Truth is fiction, and fiction has become stranger than truth. What more proof do you need? Repent! Abase yourselves before the altar of Gaia before it’s too late. Repent! You can now purchase indulgences at most major airports. We accept Master Card, Visa, and American Express.

    • #24
  25. Profile Photo Member
    @AaronMiller
    ~Paules: Repent! You can now purchase indulgences at most major airports. We accept Master Card, Visa, and American Express.

    This nails it.

    As I watched the Saints game tonight, I saw at least three commercials that explicitly mentioned CO2. Far too much business and politics is dependent upon the Big Lie for it to die quickly or easily.

    Rob Long:

    And isn’t that another sign that the global warming crowd are in deep trouble? They’re now a punch line. A joke. And that’s hard to come back from.

    Government is slower to respond to feedback than the market. Direct that laughter at companies with their “green” advertisements and perhaps we’ll get somewhere.

    Most people recognize an inherent responsibility as stewards of their environments. There are many reasonable adjustments that should and would be made if presented with humility and civility. But it’s hard to take any discussion of environmental ethics seriously these days because the Left begins by assuming humanity is the enemy.

    • #25
  26. Profile Photo Contributor
    @PaulARahe
    K T Cat: Thanks for posting this! I used it as a springboard to a larger point – the intellectual chaos which stems from politicized science funding will lead to cynicism. · Dec 28 at 6:57am

    Indeed, it does.

    • #26
  27. Profile Photo Inactive
    @CoolHand
    Rob Long: Paul, right outside my window, in northwest Connecticut, is about nine inches of snow. And beyond that, a frozen lake. When I read that quotation from the NYTimes, I laughed.

    And isn’t that another sign that the global warming crowd are in deep trouble? They’re now a punch line. A joke. And that’s hard to come back from. · Dec 27 at 6:03pm

    I sure hope so. I am sick to death of hearing that everything I do is “killing the planet” (TM).

    In all honesty, should we not be applying this line of thought to a great many other liberal lies as well?

    Alinsky (mush as I despise him) advises to ridicule your adversary, and in our case, our adversaries are imminently mockable. They’ve lead with their chins on this whole AWG thing, so my thinking is to go ahead and oblige them with a haymaker while we’ve got the chance.

    I propose that we heap ridicule upon them every time AGW is mentioned, and further, that we explore other areas that may benefit from similar treatment. Regulatory overreach for example.

    BTW, first post! Huzzah!

    • #27
  28. Profile Photo Inactive
    @CoolHand
    Lady Kurobara

    It is, indeed, horribly disturbing. But it is also a vivid demonstration of the way eco-fanatics actually think. They are clinically insane and very, very dangerous, and they must never be given power over their fellow human beings.

    We are, after all, talking about people who believe that the human race must be eradicated in order to “bequeath a healthier planet to future generations.” Future generations of what?

    Insane. · Dec 27 at 8:24pm

    It seems quite apparent that many on the environmentalist left are of the “violent nutty” subgroup (of the more general group “nutter”).

    I am constantly aghast at the thought that people are willing to vote folks with these kinds of views into positions of power.

    Who wants to be represented by a guy who wants 2/3’s of the human population to die off? But somehow that manages to happen.

    If you take all the evidence like this and make a big pile of it, you find it very hard indeed not to conclude that we as a country are completely and totally screwed.

    Someone convince me otherwise. Please!

    Edit: Holy double post batman.

    • #28
  29. Profile Photo Inactive
    @Talleyrand

    Lysenko starved his fellows whilst his evil lies were masked as science; and sent opponents to their deaths. Meanwhile a real scientist and noble man called Nikolai Vavilov and his team, did real work to build and keep a seed bank for future generations through the seige of Leningrad.

    (Imagine permitting yourself to starve whilst surrounded by edible seeds. You should check out their acts of courage and self sacrifice that may save us all from starvation in the future. )

    Vavilov died because he was an opponent of that bastard Lysenko. Green politics continues to starve the poor diverting green ethanol fuel from food crops. From Red to Green is not a large step, but the starvation walks in step with them both.

    In New Zealand, a victory of sorts occurred where the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) were repeatedly questioned on their warming hypothesis and forced to backtrack (even though the were peer-reviewed by fellow warmies at Australia’s Bureau of Meterology).

    Admissions temperatures have not risen in NZ since about 1960, together with removal of 34 “adjustments” made to the data confirms another case of AGW theory shaping the data to yield a press release.

    • #29

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.