September, 2017, Part 2, Why I Am A Global A Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science: More Bogus Forecasts and Destroying The First Amendment For A Likely Myth

Every month we have enough material to return to a continuing theme in this blog, namely that “I am a global warming doubter AND a believer in science.” This became of interest because of people like Al Gore who fanatically and verbosely claimed that you had to be an idiot to not believe in manmade global warming. It has been my life belief that anyone that is that loud and that obnoxious is hiding something, that rather than argue facts and reality it is better to beat down and insult anyone who disagrees.

As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:

• Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
• Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
• Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.

To see the past posts and the multitude of evidence that we have compiled that showed it is perfectly okay to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, enter the phrase "global warming doubter” in the search box above or go through the monthly historical posts listed on the right side of this page.

Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims.

1) William F. Buckley once said: “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.” Never was this more true when you see what global warming advocates, who typically would classify themselves as liberals, say and do to people like myself that want to have a discussion using ALL of the available research, data, and science rather than just cherry picking such research that only supports their position. 

Julie Kelly, writing for the National Review website on September 13, 2017, listed out the attacks that global warming/climate change advocates have launched against those of us that dare to desire a more comprehensive discussion of all climate data and research in her article, “Climate McCarthyism Is On The Rise.” These are the types of attacks and antics that small thinking people use when they cannot refute your claims and defend their claims with real science, a mature discussion, and logic:

• Liberal California Senator Kamala Harris grilled Trump nominee for the CIUA director job, Mike Pompeo, about his views on climate change during his confirmation hearing as if the CIA director had any control over climate policy even given Harris’s silly assertion and belief that somehow climate change leads to rising instability in the world. Somehow the nut cases running North Korea and Syria, Islamic radicalism, and Putin’s ego are less important than “climate change” relative to the CIA director’s job.
• Homeland Security advisor Tom Bossert, during a press briefing on Hurricane Irma, was asked by CNN reporter Jim Acosta about climate change even though that was the totally inappropriate time to ask about the more global issue of climate change during a briefing on a very active hurricane. Acosta added to his idiocy by falsely claiming that big storms are more frequent (they are not - Florida had not been hit with a major hurricane since 2014, 13 years ago). Ms. Kelly accurately assesses Acosta’s statement: “This is your average grade-school understanding of science.”
• Congressman Jim Bridenstine, Trump’s pick to head NASA, is under fire because he correctly asserted a few years ago a factual reality that global warming had ceased rising over ten years ago. In this case being right based on actual data is being wrong in liberals’ minds. Besides being right about leveling off temps, Bridenstine is a member of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, he is a decorated naval aviator, and staunch supporter of space exploration, and yet that is not enough to overcome his fault of telling the truth.
• Newsweek got into the Bridenstine bashing act by running an article called, “Who is Jim Bridenstine, the climate-change denier Trump picked to head NASA?” In their view, Bridenstine had the audacity to correct point out that “the climate has always changed,” a correct statement.
• Sam Clovis, a nominee for a scientific post in the Department of Agriculture, a post that has little to do with researching, affecting, or analyzing climate change, has been attacked by a whole host of global warming advocates for being a so-called climate skeptic including the Union of Concerned Scientists (whoever they are), Senator Chuck Schumer, and Senator Brian Schatz with the two Senators claiming that Clovis is “wildly unqualified for the position of USDA Chief Scientists” simply because he is a climate skeptic.
• But it is not just political appointees and government workers who face the wrath of global warming advocates. Talk show host Bill Maher hates those that dare to have a difference of opinion with him and other liberals: “These places that got flooded, like Texas, okay, they have a low tax base. So the federal government bails them out. Their governors, their legislators they don’t believe in climate science.” Two questions for Mr. Maher: 1) In your view, fellow Americans and human beings should be made to suffer because their views do not align with yours and 2) by the way, Texas is the second largest contribution to the Federal government tax stream so do not talk about “low tax base” nonsense.
• Even Pope Francis, who I believe has NO scientific training or background, got into the act recently during a flight on his Papal jumbo jet (can you say huge carbon footprint?) by stating that, “I am reminded of a phrase from the Old Testament, from the Psalm: ‘Man is stupid. When you don’t want to see, you don’t see.’” While he was directing this passage to those of us that are global warming doubters, it could just as easily been directed to global warming advocates who only choose to see data, research, and science that supports their one sided views. Thus, the statement is useless in deciding what is really going on climate wise.

We have gone down a very dangerous path relative to the First Amendment and scientific accuracy when those of us with a different, fact-based opinion are attacked for those positions, denied access to jobs that have nothing to do with climate, and told to suffer just for having an informed opinion.

2) We have often pointed out the reality that global warming alarmist forecasts of flooding, savage storms, extensive wildfires, and other climate calamities would engulf the Earth by 2017 have always been wrong and wrong to an incredible degree. And thus, at some point when the Chicken Little forecasts never come true you really should take a step back and regard any climate forecast with a huge grain of salt.

Andrew West writing for the Constitution.com website on September 19, 2017, summarized the latest findings regarding failed global warming forecasts:

• A landmark piece of research, that was recently published in the publication Nature Geoscience, concluded that computer models by global warming advocate scientists and the impact of carbon dioxide on the Earth’s climate were dead out wrong and the planet is warming much more slowly that forecasted.
• According to the Mr. West, “The paper – titled Emission budgets and pathways consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C – concedes that it is now almost impossible that the doomsday predictions made in the last IPCC Assessment Report of 1.5 degrees C warming above pre-industrial levels by 2022 will come true. In order for that to happen, temperatures would have to rise by a massive 0.5 degrees C in five years.”
• Since the planet’s temperature rarely has risen as much as .25 degrees in a DECADE, this means that based on historical data and trends, the Earth’s temperature at best would have to do 20 years worth of warming in the next five years.
• Mr. West accurately concludes that, “This, the scientists admit, is next to impossible. Which means their ‘carbon budget’ – the amount of CO2 they say is needed to increase global warming by a certain degree – is wrong. This in turn means that the computer models they’ve been using to scare the world with tales of man-made climate doom are wrong too.”

The best test of a forecast model’s accuracy is to see how closely that model actually predicts reality. In this case, it has failed miserably as have every other global warming doomsday forecast models. At some point, you just want Chicken Little-like science to just go away.

That will do it for this month’s discussion on “why I am a global warming doubter and a believer in science.” The destruction of the First Amendment and the scientific method and the reality that every global warming model has been wrong, sounds about right and reinforces the notion that it is perfectly sane to be a global warming, and man made climate change, doubter.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:

www.loathemygovernment.com

It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:


http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w