The First in A Series of Simplified Explanations of the Corrupted and Falsified Science of Human Caused Global Warming.

by Dr. Tim Ball on June 17, 2017

in Government,History,Theory

This article was originally posted in The Landowner

This is the first of a series of articles in which I will provide basic facts about climate and climate change, so the public will understand how much they have been misled by those with a political agenda. The most common comment after I make a public presentation is, “Why haven’t I heard any of this before?” The reply is simple, ask yourself the same question.

The series will provide you with basic facts so that when you are silenced by people I call eco-bullies, you will have some simple facts to push back. People who take the moral high ground because they care about the planet and the grandchildren and you don’t. Ontarians have been forced into a failed energy system that was based on the deliberately falsified science that claims human CO2 is causing global warming using this technique.

It hit home early in Ontario because Maurice Strong was the architect of the false science and applied his false science as Chairman of Ontario Hydro. Ontarians are bullied into acquiescence by a government that claims they had to do it to save the planet. If Ontarians want to get something out of the heavy price they are paying they can explain to the world what happens when your energy policy is based on deliberately corrupted and falsified science of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Derek Bok said, “If you think education is expensive – try ignorance.” He was right, and we can put a cost of at least $1 trillion on one example. The world was deliberately deceived by the claim that human-produced CO2 was causing global warming. It happened because the people who created the false claim that global warming was due to humans knew that some 85 percent of the public would not understand even the most basic facts. They also knew that most of the remaining 15 percent would accept without question the Reports of the IPCC. They knew people believed two things, 1. That a small group of people could not fool the world and 2. That any scientist would be involved in corruption.

Yale University Department of Education carried out a test of public knowledge in their ”Bridging Science and Society” series titled, “Americans’ Knowledge of Climate Change.” They created a multiple-choice high school test to examine,

what Americans understand about how the climate system works, and the causes, impacts, and potential solutions to global warming.

The results were a disaster as Figure 1 illustrates.

Figure 1

A full 77 percent failed the test. The authors then demonstrate the bias that underlies most climate research because they note,

The study also found important gaps in knowledge and common misconceptions about climate change and the earth system. These misconceptions lead some people to doubt that global warming is happening or that human activities are a major contributor, to misunderstand the causes and therefore the solutions, and to be unaware of the risks.

No! These misconceptions explain how the public are vulnerable to misinformation deliberately created by those who use global warming as a vehicle for a political agenda. The researchers then show their ignorance and bias further by assuming the claim that humans are causing global warming.

However, many Americans do understand that emissions from cars and trucks and the burning of fossil fuels contribute to global warming, and that a transition to renewable energy sources is an important solution.

Again, they demonstrate bias and misunderstanding when they explain why the deception was so effective.

Anthropologist Margaret Mead said about the first public misbelief that,

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

The Yale authors then substantiated our second point about public misbelief when they wrote,

In addition, despite the recent controversies over “climategate” and the 2007 IPCC report, this study finds that Americans trust scientists and scientific organizations far more than any other source of information about global warming.

Notice the authors downplay climategate, by not capitalizing it. In November 2009 the first 1000 of 6000 emails were leaked from Climatic Research Unit (CRU), the major centre of IPCC science. Mosher and Fuller, on the back cover of their book Climategate: The Crutape Letters, provide a detailed analysis that shows it is well beyond a controversy;

The Team, led by Phil Jones and Michael Mann, in attempts to shape the debate and influence public policy:

  • Actively worked to evade (Steve) Mcintyre’s Freedom of Information requests, deleting emails, documents, and even climate data
  • Tried to corrupt the peer-review principles that are the mainstay of modern science, reviewing each other’s’ work, sabotaging efforts of opponents trying to publish their own work, and threatening editors of journals who didn’t bow to their demands
  • Changed the shape of their own data in materials shown to politicians charged with changing the shape of our world, ‘hiding the decline’ that showed their data could not be trusted.

The first set of 1000 emails was leaked just prior to political approval of the Kyoto Protocol set for Copenhagen in December. This was a political protocol based on the claim that wealthy industrialized (developed) nations, led by the US, did so by burning fossil fuels. The by-product of their actions and avarice produced CO2 that was causing runaway global warming. They had to pay for this sin by transferring wealth to developing nations whose lives and economies were negatively affected. It was a massive socialist transferral of wealth but also a move to a one-world government. Maurice Strong was the chief architect of the plan. After spending five days with him at the UN, Elaine Dewar concluded,

Strong was using the U.N. as a platform to sell a global environment crisis and the Global Governance Agenda.

The major thing most people find they “never heard before” was why CO2 became the focus. When they learn just a few facts about CO2, they understand how the science was corrupted to achieve Strong’s political agenda. The few facts are:

There are three so-called greenhouse gases that act like one-way valves allowing sunlight to enter the atmosphere and heat the Earth’s surface. That heat is radiated back to space but is delayed in its escape by the same gases. They are, as a percentage by volume.

1. Water Vapor (H2O) – 95%
2. Carbon dioxide (CO2) – 4%
3. Methane (CH4) – 0.36%

Now compare that with the results of the Yale Study.

Figure 2

These results are not surprising considering this quote from NASA’s “Climate Kids” web page.

Besides CO2 there are other greenhouse gases. These include water vapor, methane, nitrous oxide, and ozone. Without any greenhouse gases, Earth would be an icy wasteland. Greenhouse gases keep our planet livable by holding onto some of Earth’s heat energy so that it doesn’t all escape into space. This heat trapping is known as the greenhouse effect.

The opening phrase implies CO2 is the most important and abundant. Nowhere does the site mention that those honours fall to water vapor. The entire page is given over to claiming CO2 and temperature are increasing because of human activity. It says,

Putting so much new CO2 into the air has made Earth warmer.

The only evidence for this claim are the outputs of computer models of the IPCC. The models are programmed so that a CO2 increase causes a temperature increase. The problem is that in every record from any time in the history of the Earth the temperature increases before the CO2. This explains why every climate forecast the IPCC ever made was wrong. Unfortunately, most people don’t even know that. Figure 3 is a graph Professor John Christy used in his testimony before the US Senate.

Figure 3

It is impossible to imagine any other agency or job where you can be so consistently wrong yet claim to the world your prediction of global warming is so certain. Now if we plot the same range of IPCC projections against their measures of CO2 increases you can see why they are so wrong (Figure 4). It proves CO2, let alone the human portion, is not causing global warming.

Figure 4