The Debate is Over-the Climate Denier Mantle now rests on those who refuse to acknowledge accumulated facts

.
3/27/14, "The Denier Mantle Moves On," American Thinker, Charles Battig

"By their consistent refusal to acknowledge the accumulated facts of climate history, the mantle of “climate denier” has rightfully passed on to those who continue to promote misinformation and the unwarranted fear of manmade climate change.  It is time that the fabricators of fear be so labeled.

These new-age denialists have elevated their computer models above the real world of factual observations. Prof. Chris Folland, Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research set the standard for climate pseudo-science. “The data doesn't matter. We're not basing our recommendations on the data. We're basing them on the climate models.” 

"The models are convenient fictions that provide something very useful,”:  Dr. David Frame, Climate modeler, Oxford University. Indeed so, since the designer of the model can decide which “very useful” output is desired. The baking of a cake is a useful analogy.

The cook decides which ingredients to include in the recipe, the quantity of each, the final shape and name of the cake.  It could be named a lemon meringue, but if the lemon flavoring is omitted, it certainly will not be a valid lemon meringue.

Computer climate modeling has formed the basis for the continuing plethora of climate scare stories. The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) calls them “scenarios,” but these computer fabrications are treated by the media, politicians, and general public more like predictions.  The common ingredient in the dozens of these General Circulation Models (GCM) used by the U.N. and its supporters is the assumed primary role of manmade carbon dioxide in driving Earth’s climate. They assert that the role of manmade carbon dioxide is the singular answer to making their climate models work, and thereby match some carefully chosen period of climate history.  Like the lemon in the cake, the prime role of fossil fuel carbon dioxide in driving the results of their climate computers is the one essential ingredient purposely baked into the computer/cake.  “Lemon in, lemon out.”

The full list of climate determinants (“cake ingredients”), their multiple interactions, relative temporal significance, and relative quantitative importance remain beyond current scientific understanding. Even the basic records of global temperature, surface or atmospheric, are in dispute because of faulty measurement technology, selective editing, missing data sites, and urban heat contamination.  Yet, manmade carbon dioxide has been computer preprogrammed to a predetermined prime importance as the main determinant of global temperature and climate change.

What does the Earth say about the climate computer models?  The real-world record documents no warming for the past 17 years, even as atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased about 9 per cent.

How bad were the computer models? A recent paper  found that “global warming over the past 20 years is significantly less than that calculated from 117 simulations of the climate by 37 models.”   Oops.

The deniers claim deadly sea level rise based on their computers.  The actual record shows that recent global sea level rise has decelerated 31 per cent. Oops.

Did the U.S. have an extreme weather year in 2013?  Tornadoes? The number of tornadoes in the US in 2013 was the lowest total since 2000 and the lowest total in several decades. Oops.

 U.S. wildfires? The number of wildfires across the US in 2013 is the lowest it has been in the past ten years and the acreage involved is at the second lowest level in that same time period. (http://www.nifc.gov/)

U.S. extreme heat in 2013?  Extreme heat was down across the US for 2013. The number of 100 degree days across the country during 2013 was down, and may have been the lowest in about 100 years of records. (NOAA, USHCN reporting stations; through August).

U.S. hurricanes?  The U.S. is in the longest period since the Civil War Era without a major hurricane strike in the US (i.e., category 3, 4 or 5). The last major hurricane to strike the US was Hurricane Wilma in 2005.

So who are the climate deniers? The U.N.’s IPCC would be the presumptive leader, as it was founded to find the imprint of “human induced” climate change.  Other drivers of climate were largely dismissed unless they could be shown to support the pre-determined conclusion that there was a significant human fingerprint. This body is a political entity, not a scientific research organization. It is notable that even as earlier IPCC predictions of the impact of increasing  atmospheric carbon dioxide have proved false, and their magnitudes lessened in subsequent IPCC reports, the organization remains unrepentant in its claims of certainty.

Notable scientific organizations such as the World Meteorological Organization (present at the founding of the IPCC), the American Meteorological Society, and the American Physical Society have, at the leadership level, supported the premise of harmful climate change, primarily caused by manmade carbon dioxide. Their published papers are mostly skeptical of climate drivers not based on manmade carbon dioxide. Most recently, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has declared itself firmly in the skeptics’ camp by issuing its report to “Recognize Climate Change Risks.” The failure of climate modeling predictions is not acknowledged…the relevance is denied.

There are many individuals including Al Gore, science advisor John Holdren, and John Podesta who are skeptics of scientific reports which point out the disconnect between the manmade climate change mantra, and the actual physical record."...

[Ed. note: Al Gore and Podesta aren't the problem. This was never going to be stopped by Democrats. That leaves only one option--the so-called GOP leadership, Boehner and McConnell. These two men have had access to microphones every day for decades and have done nothing to stop the growth of imaginary CO2 terror into a $1 billion a day racket. GOP 'leadership' has in fact doubled down in the past year in their refusal to stop this fraud. When is AT going to stop blaming Democrats and address Boehner and McConnell as the single problem? Either one could end this in five minutes but they won't. If AT were concerned it could long since have made this a daily focus.].

(continuing): "Most notable is the lack of a definitive scientific report that can identify and quantify the impact of human carbon dioxide on global climate, and distinguish it from the natural background of climate change over time. The presumptive human influence signal is lost as background noise in the over-riding signal of normal climate variability.

The deniers of computer-generated climate failures are denying the real world."

====================

6/26/13, "Republicans shift strategy on climate change," Jennifer Dlouhy, fuelfix.com

=========================

By June 2013 as reported by Politico, GOP "leadership" policy on global warming became, "change the subject to jobs." The GOP clearly pivots, almost laughingly refuses to stop this decades long massive criminal theft of US taxpayers. They give Obama and his EU bosses space to continue drafting language to chain US taxpayers to a 2015 UN "climate treaty" and then to "post 2015" America which consists of enslavement to unelected, drooling UN criminals, parasites, thugs, mental cases, and their lazy relatives:

6/27/13, "GOP climate tack: Talk jobs, not science," Politico Pro, Darren Goode

"Republican leaders have a clear strategy for combating President Barack Obama’s climate agenda: Don’t talk about the science."...

[Ed. note: When Politico says "the science" it means something imaginary. There is actual science proving CO2 doesn't cause temperature increase but if Politico acknowledged it the multi-trillion dollar climate industry would go bankrupt along with at least one European monarchy].

(continuing): "Just as top Republicans have called for their party to rebrand itself by avoiding rhetoric that alienates minorities, young voters and women, key GOP lawmakers are trying to stay out of the long-running debate about whether global warming is real..."

==================

3/12/14, The LA Times is thrilled that Mitch McConnell pointedly refused to deny the existence of man-caused global warming climate terror. $1 billion a day was invested in the idea of "global warming" in 2012 alone. Pretty good for something that doesn't exist:

3/12/14, "How curbing climate change can prevent Russia from becoming a superpower," LA Times, Matthew Fleisher, guest blogger

"On Monday night, Democratic senators held an all night “talk-athon” on the Senate floor to bring increased attention to the issue of climate change. Predictably, their efforts were mocked by the Republican leadership.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky called the Democratic efforts "30 hours of excuses" for why "families are losing work because of government attacks on the coal industry."

Interestingly, McConnell didn’t deny that global warming existed. His argument was that fighting climate change isn’t worth the economic costs. That puts him in line with the majority of non-tea party Republicans on the issue -- 61 percent of whom, according to a recent Pew poll, agree that global warming is occurring."...

=====================

A Republican insider consultant quoted in 6/27/13, Politico article, "GOP climate tack: Talk jobs, not science," seems to suggest the lure of global warming for politicians:

"“If you really believe or accept that global warming is a legitimate, real, immediate threat, then there's no amount of money you wouldn't pay to avoid it" he said. “But if it’s not, then you can talk about the economics all you want.”"

 

 

.