BY MICHAEL R. FOX PHD – Since the proponents of global warming are being caught without providing supporting evidence, the theory of man-made global warming is being destroyed before our very eyes. With no hardnosed physical evidence, measurable, observable, replicable evidence, the fiction has been sustained by non-science methods. These include appeals to authority, existence of an elitist scientific consensus, computer models none of which produce physical evidence.
Crippling national energy policies, environmental policies, economic policies are being seriously considered. Such suicidal policies did not originate in the recent fictions of climate change, but from the leaders of the UN and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and their friends within the American leadership.
Consider the statement from Maurice Strong, original head of the IPCC “- “Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?” This is a very destructive agenda proposed for the US and other free nations by the IPCC, which was met with thundering applause by the thousands of international leftists in Rio. They pretend to be peace-loving but definitely are not. New policies by state and federal agencies, which could cost trillions, cripple our economy, and destroy our nation, seem to be the awful agendas of many federal and state agencies and their leaders as well as the agenda of Maurice Strong and the IPCC.
One of the participants in the national climate debate has been the National Academies of Science (NAS). Many Congressmen love associating themselves with members the NAS, with many having never taken a science course in their educational careers. But over the years a major problem has been discovered with members of the NAS and the policy statements they produce.
As described by Chris Horner in his book Power Grab, the membership process to the NAS was corrupted more than 20 years ago. Much of the good science has disappeared as has the sound science policy dependent upon sound science. A backdoor policy for NAS membership has opened to nearly any green leftists seeking membership. They now control future membership, as well as the style and content of NAS reports. Instead we are getting documents from the NAS which are nearly void of hard-nosed scientific evidence and written in the vague meaningless terms of politic correctness.
Recently the NAS released a report entitled “America’s Climate Choices” discussing our future energy sources and our CO2 emission (http://dels.nas.edu/Report/Americas-Climate-Choices/12781). Predictably, it was written in the familiar styles of vague political correctness. One obvious solution to many of these energy problems could be solved with an actively supported nuclear energy program. The NAS did not mention this obvious solution. For the record there are currently 67 nuclear power plants under construction around the world (20 of them in China).
Remarkably, Paul C. Knappenberger, a subject matter expert has written an outstanding 20 page analysis of the NAS report. It is posted at (http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/originals/climate_change_causes_and_consequences.html).
He summarizes “In these in-line comments (indicated in red font) we will demonstrate, citing results from the peer-reviewed scientific literature and using data available from government web sites, that the certainties that the NAS panel assigns both to the causes of climate change and to its risk to human and natural systems belie the underlying scientific evidence.”
He catches the NAS overstating the scientific certainties (there are many throughout this discredited theory) of man-made global warming hypothesis. Overstating certainties is just another way to exaggerate all claims. Regrettably the NAS, leading science organization in the US, failed the obvious point, which is that it never stated that man-made CO2 is a climate problem. It simply assumed it to be true, and then proposes a program of energy rationing and economic suicide as a program for the US to mitigate the assumed non-problem of man-made CO2.
Tom Tancredo 