Climate Alarm Industry Is Scientifically Bankrupt
Climate science has become a politically-corrupted, agenda-driven,
federally-beholden science-industrial complex; along with a
military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned about in
his 1961 farewell address.
As he stated: “The prospect of the nation’s scholars by Federal
employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present —
and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and
discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to equal and
opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of
scientific-technological elite.”
Estimating that as many as half of all medical studies are wrong,
Editor-in-Chief Richard Horton of The Lancet, a leading peer-reviewed
international medical journal notes that medical science “has taken a
turn towards darkness."
He attributes this circumstance to research “afflictions,” failings
which can also be observed to infect many U.S. and U.N.
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports.
Included are small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory
analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession
for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance.
As in the case of highly sensationalized IPCC reporting, Dr. Horton
admits that scientific journal editors “aid and abet the worst
behaviors” in order to gain a maximum “impact factor.”
He charges that “In their quest for telling a compelling story,
scientists too often sculpt data to fit their theory of the world.”
A May 22 New York Times article agrees. Titled “What’s Behind Big
Science Frauds?” authors Adam Marcus and Ivan Oransky discuss how
leading scientific journals have been duped into publishing bogus
studies which reference nonexistent data.
Again, this results from pressure to double down on that all-important
“impact factor” of influence determined by the likelihood studies will
be referenced in subsequent “downstream” articles.
Given that most all climate research funding comes from public
alarm-dependent agenda-driven government sponsors, and their ideological
green activist acolytes, there should be little surprise that so many
researchers bend objectivity and science to oblige.
As the late Stephen Schneider who authored important parts of three U.N.
IPCC reports has explained, "like most people, we’d like to see the
world a better place, which in this context translates into our working
to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climatic change.”
Schneider argued that, “To do that, we need to get some broad-based
support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, entails
getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of the
doubts we might have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is
between being effective and being honest.”
Very recent evidence of this agenda-driven “biased finger on the scales”
balancing problem is revealed by attempts of National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration scientists to re-write surface temperature
records prior to the late 1990s downward and inflate temperatures since
then in order to tell the warming alarm story they wanted.
More accurate atmospheric satellite data reveals that there has been no
statistically significant global warming over the past 18 years and
counting.
After global warming (which hasn’t occurred since today’s high school
students were born) was rebranded as “climate change” (which it always
does), Obama administration alarm sirens now warn us about an “extreme
weather” trend attributed to human CO2 emissions.
Yet simple fact checking would show that it’s been nearly a decade since
the last major hurricane named Wilma made landfall in the U.S. in 2005.
Meanwhile, tornadoes, droughts, wildfires — along with polar ice and
sea levels — are in line with or improving in regard to historic
trends.
Prominent University of Manchester professor emeritus of chemical
thermodynamics and Fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry Leslie
Woodcock blames powerful green lobbies for creating a “do-good industry”
premised upon unwarranted climate alarm.
As quoted in interview with Britain’s Yorkshire Evening Post, the
prominent scientist said: “If you talk to real scientists who have no
political interests, they will tell you there is nothing in global
warming. It’s an industry which creates vast amounts of money for some
people.”
My friend, former EPA analyst Alan Carlin, who blew the whistle on IPCC
junk science used to advance fossil fuel regulatory agendas observes
that “The global warming scare is a textbook example of what can happen
when politics and ideology guide environmental policy rather than
science.”
Important skill sets of agenda-driven climate scientists and politicians obviously share much in common.
As Winston Churchill explained, “Politics is the ability to fortell what
is going to happen tomorrow, next week, next month and next year, And
to have the ability afterwards to explain why it didn’t happen.”
Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the
University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International
Center for Space Architecture (SICSA) and the graduate program in space
architecture. He is the author of “Scared Witless: Prophets and
Profits of Climate Doom”(2015) and “Climate of Corruption: Politics and
Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax” (2012). Read more of his
reports — Click Here Now.
© 2015 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
http://www.newsmax.com/LarryBell/Climate-Change-Global-Warming-Media-Bias/2015/08/31/id/672766/
No comments:
Post a Comment