Written by Michael F. Haverluck (OneNewsNow.com)
Original link: https://principia-scientific.org/3-decades-of-alarmists-false-climate-prophesies-unfulfilled/
Thirty years of continued false climate
alarms have sounded since climate change scientists started making their
cataclysmic predictions that global manmade pollutants will
catastrophically rise global temperatures to the point of killing off
crops, mankind and other species – not to mention diminishing habitable
land by rising sea levels due to melting icecaps.
Institute for Energy Research (IER) Founder and CEO Rob Bradley, Jr., considers a New York Times (NYT) story by Philip Shabecoff titled “Global Warming Has Begun” as ushering in three decades of continuous prophesies that would go unfilled to the dismay of climate change activists around the world.
“If the current pace of the buildup of
these gases continues, the effect is likely to be a warming of 3 to 9
degrees Fahrenheit [between now and] the year 2025 to 2050,” Shabecoff wrote in his June 24, 1988, NYT piece.
“The rise in global temperature is predicted to … caus[e] sea levels to
rise by one to four feet by the middle of the next century.”
Joining the party
That year, Shabecoff’s alarmism blaming
industrialized society was buttressed by two scientists’ bogus
predictions – a trend that has seen one ominous climate forecast after
another fail … year after year.
“[P]redictions made on that day – and ever since – continue to be falsified in the real world,” Bradley stressed in his report.
“The predictions made by climate scientist James Hansen and Michael
Oppenheimer back in 1988 – and reported as model projected by journalist
Philip Shabecoff – constitute yet another exaggerated Malthusian scare,
joining those of the population bomb (Paul Ehrlich), resource
exhaustion (Club of Rome), Peak Oil (M. King Hubbert), and global
cooling (John Holdren).”
The pseudo-science based on the concept of
global warming scared mainstream media connoisseurs and easily
influenced students attending America’s public schools and universities,
who have been taught that crops and people would soon die if society
doesn’t adopt ultra-green environmentalists practices and policies to
“save the Earth.”
“Dire predictions of global warming and
sea-level rise are well on their way to being falsified – and by a lot –
not a little,” Bradley pointed out. “Meanwhile, a CO2-led global
greening has occurred, and climate-related deaths have plummeted as
industrialization and prosperity have overcome statism in many areas of
the world. Take the mid-point of the above’s predicted warming, six
degrees … at the 30-year mark, how is it looking? The increase is about 1
degree – and largely holding (the much-discussed ‘pause’ or ‘warming
hiatus’) – and remember, the world has naturally warmed since the end of
the Little Ice Age to the present, a good thing if climate economists
are to be believed.”
Surprising to many, during the last full
year in office of ultra-green former President Barack Obama, NASA
revealed a study proving the opposite of what climate change alarmists
have been warning the world about – showing that more carbon dioxide in
the air produced by pollutants is actually making vegetation flourish …
not die off or shrivel away.
“From a quarter to half of Earth’s
vegetated lands has shown significant greening over the last 35 years,
largely due to rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, according to
a new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change on April 25,” NASA reported in April 2016.
“An international team of 32 authors from 24 institutions in eight
countries led the effort, which involved using satellite data from
NASA’s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer and the National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration’s Advanced Very High Resolution
Radiometer instruments to help determine the leaf area index, or amount
of leaf cover, over the planet’s vegetated regions. The greening
represents an increase in leaves on plants and trees equivalent in area
to two times the continental United States.”
Drowning alert downsized
Photos of drowning polar bears clinging
onto the last piece of floating sea ice are drawing less fearful
compassion today and becoming more satirical as scientific evidence
shows that beaches and islands are not disappearing due to rising sea
levels – which have been greatly exaggerated.
Bradley pointed to climate scientist
Judith Curry, who admitted that manmade pollutants have little to do
with sea-level rise, as decades before and after the 1980s have shown
increases of just a few inches – and the rate has not been getting
noticeably greater of late.
“The rate of sea level rise during the period ~1925–1960 is as large as the rate of sea level rise the past few decades,” Curry explained. “Human
emissions of CO2 mostly grew after 1950; so, humans don’t seem to be to
blame for the early 20th century sea level rise, nor for the sea level
rise in the 19th and late 18th centuries.”
Former Vice President Al Gore – who has
made millions as a climate alarmist after serving under former President
Bill Clinton – has been one of the major proponents who has sold the
world on the notion of rising sea levels.
“The sky-is-falling pitch went from bad to
worse when scientist James Hansen was joined by politician Al Gore,”
Bradley noted. “Sea levels could rise 20 feet, claimed Gore in his 2006
documentary, An Inconvenient Truth – a prediction that has brought rebuke even from those sympathetic to the climate cause.”
Gore’s gross exaggerations didn’t stop in the sea, but extended to the skies.
“In the same book/movie, Al
Gore prophesied that unless the world dramatically reduced greenhouse
gasses, we would hit a ‘point of no return,’” Bradley stressed. “In his
book review of Gore’s effort, James Hansen unequivocally stated, ‘We
have at most 10 years – not 10 years to decide upon action, but 10 years
to alter fundamentally the trajectory of global greenhouse emissions.’”
But for years, Gore has racked up hundreds
of thousands of dollars per speaking event to scare environmentalists
and gullible students into believing that his scare tactics are not
based in profit, but in scientific fact.
“Time is up on Gore’s ‘point of no return’
and Hansen’s ‘critical tipping point,’” Bradley continued. “But neither
has owned up to their exaggeration or made new predictions – as if they
will suddenly be proven right.”
Leaders across the globe championing climate change policies
The world’s most prestigious universities,
as well as the United Nations – which Trump has parted ways with on
issues from climate change to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict – are
also behind the climate change movement, as the lead of the U.N.’s
climate panel, Rajendra Pachauri, made a “scare-and-hide” prediction the
first year of Obama’s second term.
“While head of a United Nations climate
panel, he pleaded that without drastic action before 2012, it would be
too late to save the planet,” Bradley pointed out. “In the same year,
Peter Wadhams, professor of ocean physics at the University of
Cambridge, predicted ‘global disaster’ from the demise of Arctic sea ice
in four years. He too, has gone quiet. Nothing new, back in the late
1980s, the U.N. claimed that if global warming were not checked by 2000,
rising sea levels would wash entire countries away.”
The former leader of the United Kingdom also aired his hysterical panic about climate change.
“In 2009, then-British Prime Minister
Gordon Brown predicted that the world had only 50 days to save the
planet from global warming,” the climate change cynic recalled. “But 50
days, six months, and eight years later, the Earth seems fine.”
Trump not trumped by Dem climate alarmists
One of the major issues brought up by
Democrats at the last presidential election was that Trump would cause
the end of the world by not casting billions of American tax dollars
into climate change initiatives and projects around the world – an idea
championed by Obama and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.
“The Democratic Party Platform heading
into the 2016 election compared the fight against global warming to
World War II,” Bradley recounted.
Republicans have been blamed with starting a war against the Earth itself.
“World War III is well and truly underway,” the New Republic’s Bill McKibben wrote. “And we are losing.”
Conservatives not on board with climate alarmists have been labeled as being much worse than mere polluters.
“Those opposed to a new ‘war effort’ were
compared to everything from Nazis to Holocaust deniers,” Bradley
explained. “Heading into the 2016 election, Washington Post columnist
Eugene Robinson warned that ‘a vote for Trump is a vote for climate
catastrophe.’ In Mother Jones, professor Michael Klare similarly argued
that ‘electing green-minded leaders, stopping climate deniers (or
ignorers) from capturing high office, and opposing fossil fueled
ultranationalism is the only realistic path to a habitable planet.’”
Regardless, Trump won – to the chagrin of many ultra-environmentalist Democrats.
“Donald Trump’s climate policies would create dozens of failed states south of the U.S. border and around the world,” Think Progress’ Joe Romm lamented. “It would be a world where everyone eventually becomes a veteran, a refugee, or a casualty of war.”
This opinion was mirrored by others in the leftist media who complained about the president.
“Donald Trump is going to be president of
the United States, [and] we’re at risk of departing from the stable
climatic conditions that sustained civilization for thousands of years
and lurching into the unknown,” Vox’s Brad Plumer warned.
“The world’s poorest countries, in particular, are ill-equipped to
handle this disruption. Renewable energy researcher John
Abraham contended that Trump’s election means we’ve ‘missed our last
off-ramp on the road to catastrophic climate change.’ Not to be outdone,
academic Noam Chomsky argued that Trump is aiding ‘the destruction of
organized human life.’”
Bleak future to climate alarmists
Curry complained before United States Congress that climate change has sounded off false alarms and compromised science.
“In their efforts to promote their
‘cause,’ the scientific establishment behind the global warming issue
has been drawn into the trap of seriously understating the uncertainties
associated with the climate problem,” Curry declared before Congress in 2015. “This
behavior risks destroying science’s reputation for honesty. It is this
objectivity and honesty which gives science a privileged seat at the
table. Without this objectivity and honesty, scientists become regarded
as another lobbyist group.”
Problems behind climate change science are becoming uncovered at an ever-increasing rate.
“Even DC-establishment environmentalists
have worried about a backfire,” Bradley contended. “In 2007, two
mainstream climate scientists warned against the ‘Hollywoodization’ of
their discipline. They complained about ‘a lot of inaccuracies in the
statements we are seeing, and we have to temper that with real data’ –
to which Al Gore (the guilty party) responded: ‘I am trying to
communicate the essence [of global warming] in the lay language that I
understand.’”
Environmental Defense Fund’s Fred Krupp admitted that alarmists need to taper down their volume a few notches.
“There has to be a lot of shrillness taken out of our language,” Krupp voiced in 2011. “In the environmental community, we have to be more humble. We can’t take the attitude that we have all the answers.”
When all is said and done, it is argued
that even though climate change apologetics might not longer be on the
rise, it is here to say … at least for the foreseeable future.
“If the climate problem is exaggerated,
that issue should be demoted,” Bradley concluded. “Enter an unstated
agenda of deindustrialization and a quest for money and power that
otherwise might be beyond reach of the climate campaigners.”
He recalled Sen. Tim Wirth’s (D-Col.) statement when the climate alarm originally sounded a few decades ago.
“We have got to ride the global warming
issue,” Wirth insisted. “Even if the theory of global warming is wrong,
we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and
environmental policy.”
Bradley commented on Wirth’s call to environmentalists.
“’Right thing’ in terms of economic and
environmental policy?” Bradley sarcastically posed. “That’s a fallacy to
explode on another day.”
Read more at onenewsnow.com
