IPCC Insider Admits Climate Consensus Claim Was a Lie

Writes David Theroux:

Such a deception could only have gone on as long and far as it has because of the cultural cover provided by contemporary Western elites who have embraced environmentalism as the new secular religion.

11 thoughts on “IPCC Insider Admits Climate Consensus Claim Was a Lie

  1. ‘Lie’ is such a bland word. I prefer Winston Churchill’s word for deception in warfare- ‘A Terminological Inexactitude.’

  2. I’m guessing not many people have responded to this thread because it no longer seems that surprising… what does that say for the AGW movement? Losing steam, perhaps?

  3. Polls report that there’s only about 50% of Australians, Britons and Americans left who firmly believe in AGW. And for Australians, very few are willing to pay more than $100 per year for CO2 reduction measures. I think the capacity for politicians to do significant damage is gone.

  4. If we don’t want to be taken for a ride again, we have to come down on the traitors on the libertarian side of the street who were soft on this science fraud. They have been an ongoing menace to us.

  5. If we want to break free of these various scams that we are being subjected too, it is pretty clear that we have to punish the alleged libertarians, who were soft on this global warming fraud. These are people who refused point blank to offer evidence for this racket. These are people who are natural traitors, and who have been a constant menace to us.

  6. To us libertarians, it was not a shock- we had all wondered about the ‘hardness’ of the sciences. Our openmindedness prepared us for it- except for a few who had made up their minds, and were/are determined to believe! Perhaps it’s simply the old longing for certainty in a shifting world- which might be another reason why statists attract followers. They seem to know what to do.

  7. Actual libertarians were open-minded. But we have many in our ranks who cannot be trusted. We saw this in the banking crisis as well, where the same sort of crowd who would advocate carbon taxes were often weak on the bank-thieving.

    The global warming fraud could be unravelled by the simple matter of applying process. Evidence is never evidence, and remains merely data, until it is applied to a specific hypothesis. Rigged data can never be used. Asked for evidence, this crowd refused to come up with a specific hypothesis to justify the actions demanded-for, by their cause. They had no evidence for such an hypothesis. Even evidence for a warming effect was essentially non-existent once the data-rigging had been taken into account. But it was never explained how some tiny warming effect could justify the actions they were demanding.

    Since it was so easy to expose this as a fraud, and we had so many people going along with it, we had a case where we could separate the weak-minded from the reliable. Note how the weak-minded on climate change were also the first to want to throw in the towel on firearm rights as well. It was not the case of “from my cold dead hands” but rather “we didn’t do quite so well in the last election…. here take my rifle….”

    These people are always back-slapping the latte left and trying to get the approval of the enemy. Running down anyone who actually is for liberty. Royal libertarians rather than real libertarians. Astonishingly many of these faux-libertarians were supportive of Obama in the lead-up to the last election. We really have to look askance at these people.

  8. I think our libertarian ranks might be a bit too thin to conduct a purge, Graeme. Even misguided support is better than none. As long as they are not in charge.

  9. I heard something on the radio this morning- evidence from stalectites shows that Australia’s southWest has been getting drier for the last three hundred years- i wonder how this drying spell would screw with the data used to ‘predict’ global warming? It seems to show that we don’t know as much as we thought, and we should always be open to new facts, and hypotheses.

  10. This is somewhat illuminating:

    http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s1848641.htm

    “1000 year drought”

    *Is Australia in the grip of the worst drought on record or the worst ever?

    What if we could return to the ancient past a hundred times further than our oldest weather records to find out? …One man and his team have.

    Professor Patrick De Deckker has spent decades digging up core samples from the bottom of freshwater lakes and deep sea canyons. From the mud, dust and strange animals inside, he has searched for Australia’s drought cycles.

    In one core sample alone, a mere 400 centimetres of mud, De Deckker unearthed the biggest rain gauge we have – 10,000 thousand years of climate history. Not only will it tell us how long we’ve been in drought but it will give us clues as to when it might break.

    For the first time and after 20 years of painstaking research, Patrick is about to release his results.*

  11. There was more in the Aus today, about how the IPCC was reprimanded for only highlighting worse-case scenarios, or not telling all the factors about forecasts. One prediction of less drinking water had, apparently, been based on an increase in population, but this factor was dropped from the press release- so it seemed as though climate change alone would be responsible for people having less drinking water.
    The IPCC still says that Global Warming is real, but they promise to be good, and not cherry-pick their data, in future.

Comments are closed.