It isn’t always the case that everything about a hoax is false. Skeptics of Western global warming are really aware of obvious mistakes that fall within their particular areas of expertise and most skeptics take issue with the picture of impending calamity that global warming fearmongers always try to paint. Climate scaremongering may win a few headlines but facts are facts. The truth always has appeal and no matter how well-funded, a hoax finally dies when lying lynx are finally spotted and the public sees it has been lied to and feels tricked, manipulated and deceived by supporters of the hoax.
In a world where those in power glorify atheism as True Believers of the need to find those who have robbed us of our stable climate we can only expect next the horrible but familiar sight of ideologues just around the corner looking for Jews to burn. The West’s global warming hetairoi have become True Believers of Thermageddon and in the process have betrayed both science and country.
Skeptics are not afraid of nature. The curious skeptic respects nature and gains strength by understanding limitations and breaking down barriers to the unknown. It is superstition and fear that freezes the weak — logically and spiritually – and, fear of climate change has frozen Western academia to death: government funding of global warming alarmism is a fraudulent inducement to deceive the public and academia has been a willing accomplice.
The Fire-Ready-Aim C02 policy of government scientists in the EPA is a dramatic realization of self-defeating bureaucratic authoritarianism. What shall we call government-funded global warming fearmongers who would condemn the third and developing world to misery, poverty and death if not an army of Liberal Fascists who would deny nature to spread their secular, socialist doomsday?
Facts are facts: free market capitalist economies have lowest emissions due to efficient production. It is not possible to reduce CO2 even if those in government demand that everyone else must go poorer and dirtier. The null hypothesis has never been rejected—that all global warming is natural. Use of the null hypothesis is how science works! And, we all should have learned by now that when science doesn’t work neither does society.
Did you know there’s a 100-year supply of recoverable natural gas in the US? In the Leftist world of Liberal Utopians and an activist EPA the sacrifice of truth and honesty in science and spending money you do not have are not alarming. Only CO2 is alarming. The aggressive tactics against CO2 show that the EPA and a Liberal Utopian government policy is an anti-business enabler of a hard line Leftist takeover of US energy and industry.
Wagathon
…Abandoning the null hypothesis in science sends a signal to flimflammers everywhere: you’ll believe anything—even global warming. Something that has been happening on Earth for billions of years is by definition, reality. And we have a word of it: Nature–See, e.g.,
Global Warming Vaporware and the Perpetual Motion Machine
Mathematically speaking, there’s no way to “prove” a null hypothesis.
We need to be speaking the same language. You might start with whatever source you trust for simple and impartial facts about how we look at the world, scientifically–e.g.,
“The practice of science involves formulating and testing hypotheses, statements that are capable of being proven false using a test of observed data. The null hypothesis typically corresponds to a general or default position. For example, the null hypothesis might be that there is no relationship between two measured phenomena or that a potential treatment has no effect.” (Emphasis added, see–e.g., Wikipedia)
Ok…the existence of climate oscillation BEFORE the modern industrial age doesn’t prove that industrialization doesn’t contribute to climate change anymore than saying that since people died in car accidents before seat belts were invented that seat belts don’t save lives since people still die in car accidents.
What we know:
(Scafetta N. Empirical evidence for a celestial origin of the climate oscillations and its implications. JASTP 2010 Apr.)
Btw, a null hypothesis is a mathematical, and statistical, model. It has nothing to do with the scientific method.
So then the answer is no…a gallup poll is not scientific evidence. Is there any scientific data to support that climate change is a natural phenomenon or not?
I would direct you to the scientific method. It is the only reliable way to prevent becoming a mark for hucksters and scam artists. The null hypothesis has never been rejected—that all global warming is natural. Everything else is dogma… That is how science works!
~Jay Richards
Well then, as far as I can see, there are only two alternatives. Either a) global climate change is a natural phenomenon and our actions do not contribute to us, or b) the entire thing is a sham fabricated by a group of people. Could you direct me to some evidence for either of these alternatives, other than the fact that people profited off of it? (which really isn’t evidence of a hoax…)
Government has spent billions demonizing oil companies. Government scientists and willing Leftist-liberal journalists blame evil Big Oil and the productive for global warming and hypocritically proclaim industrialization to be bad news. Al Gore expects us all to pay more and more taxes just to be told we cannot live like Al Gore who has made millions pushing his climate porn.
~Paul Driessen, Willie Soon, and David R. Legates (Cause for alarm, May 2010)
I guess my follow up question would be do you believe that global climate change is happening, but it’s just a natural process, or do you believe that the whole thing is an outright lie?
So Al Gore and a cadre of scientists invented global warming for money?
There are simple explanations for everything we see. And mostly, the simple explanations are the right explanations–e.g., follow the money.
Regardless of what you and I define as science and academia, I still don’t understand what’s gained by such a hoax.
Don’t confuse Western academia the vast majority of the scientific community. Outside the West, climatology has been likened to the ancient science of astrology.
So the vast majority of the scientific community is perpetrating a giant hoax about global climate change? once again, what do they possibly have to gain?
~Judith Curry
So Al Gore is the loan perpetrator of a global warming hoax?
Do you mean, what other than personal gain was the motive for Al Gore?
I guess my question is what exactly would be gained by perpetrating such a hoax?