Where Is The Lie On Global Warming?

Global warming is something I’ve been watching for years… not the so-called “fact” that man is causing our world to heat up and explode, but rather the political circus that has replaced true scientific inquiry.

For those of you tuning in late, apparently politicians have decided that the science on man-caused global warming is “settled,” and therefore there is a consensus that global warming is a fact that must be corrected by draconian laws passed by government. Against you, me, and our freedoms… all in the name of saving the planet, of course.

Forget that thousands of scientists disagree… we have a politically-mandated consensus.

But what do we do with inconvenient facts that aren’t in line with global warming theory? For example, what about the fact that global temperature has NOT increased over the past ten years? None of the global-warming models predicted this, and none of the global warming scientists know why it happened… but they assure us it’s just a temporary aberration that will be followed by massive temperature increases… etc, etc.


And meanwhile, most scientists who author a study contradicting global warming orthodoxy are ignored, ridiculed, and refused the right to publish in the best journals. This sounds a lot like the old “scientific tribunals” rejecting new theories and persecuting the scientist who dared to be unorthodox.

Yes, Galileo, the earth does revolve around the sun and not vice versa, no matter what the Roman Catholic Church said. And the scientists who doubt the whole man-caused global warming theory are still correct, no matter what the political orthodoxy says.

And now some new evidence has been produced, and it has little to do with science. It appears as if a hacker broke into the computer system over at the Hadley Climatic Research Unit at Britain's University of East Anglia and downloaded a TON of documents on global warming over the years. Little of the information concerns itself very much with science, though some DOES detail the tricks and hoaxes they’ve perpetrated to support their theory.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/11/24/the_fix_is_in_99280.html

They just can’t explain why the earth isn’t warming…

These e-mails show, among many other things, private admissions of doubt or scientific weakness in the global warming theory. In acknowledging that global temperatures have actually declined for the past decade, one scientist asks, "where the heck is global warming?... The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't." They still can't account for it; see a new article in Der Spiegel: "Climatologists Baffled by Global Warming Time-Out." I don't know where these people got their scientific education, but where I come from, if your theory can't predict or explain the observed facts, it's wrong.

They have used statistical tricks to show temperature increases that never really occurred.

More seriously, in one e-mail, a prominent global warming alarmist admits to using a statistical "trick" to "hide the decline" in temperatures. Anthony Watts provides an explanation of this case in technical detail; the "trick" consists of selectively mixing two different kinds of data-temperature "proxies" from tree rings and actual thermometer measurements-in a way designed to produce a graph of global temperatures that ends the way the global warming establishment wants it to: with an upward "hockey stick" slope.

They tried hard to keep their data secret so they wouldn’t be exposed.

Confirming the earlier scandal about cherry-picked data, the e-mails show CRU scientists conspiring to evade legal requests, under the Freedom of Information Act, for their underlying data. It's a basic rule of science that you don't just get to report your results and ask other people to take you on faith. You also have to report your data and your specific method of analysis, so that others can check it and, yes, even criticize it. Yet that is precisely what the CRU scientists have refused.

And they tried to gimmick the peer-review system to keep dissenting reports from being published and considered legitimate.

But what stood out most for me was extensive evidence of the hijacking of the "peer review" process to enforce global warming dogma. Peer review is the practice of subjecting scientific papers to review by other scientists with relevant expertise before they can be published in professional journals. The idea is to weed out research with obvious flaws or weak arguments, but there is a clear danger that such a process will simply reinforce groupthink. If it is corrupted, peer review can be a mechanism for an entrenched establishment to exclude legitimate challenges by simply refusing to give critics a hearing.

And that is precisely what we find.

In response to an article challenging global warming that was published in the journal Climate Research, CRU head Phil Jones complains that the journal needs to "rid themselves of this troublesome editor"-hopefully not through the same means used by Henry II's knights. Michael Mann replies:

I think we have to stop considering "Climate Research" as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal.

Note the circular logic employed here. Skepticism about global warming is wrong because it is not supported by scientific articles in "legitimate peer-reviewed journals." But if a journal actually publishes such an article, then it is by definition not "legitimate."

This behavior should be criminal, seeing as how many governments are attempting to pass laws and set policies based upon this fraudulent data. One thing it certainly is NOT is scientific… because science WELCOMES dissent in order to arrive at the truth. Global warming supporters seem to want to hide the truth to protect their phony-baloney jobs.

That’s the current global warming scandal. If you’d like to read a little more about it, you can find a good article over at the Telegraph.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100017393/climategate-the-final-nail-in-the-coffin-of-anthropogenic-global-warming/

The whole global warming movement is a scam, and laws such as PresBo’s Cap & Trade are not only unnecessary, they’re ineffective and actually will be harmful to our country. And they know it… otherwise, why lie about it and try so hard to keep the truth from getting out?

So, where IS the lie on global warming… that it DOES exist or that it doesn’t?

You be the judge.