Nature not nurture

0 57

If Climate Change could be run by the mafia, it would.

In reference to the recent Guardian article “Australia, ‘hostage to climate change madness’? To say so is madness indeed”, we say madness indeed not.

If the Climate Science debate wasn’t filled with snake oil salesman, as well as government and corporate profiteering rackets then possibly the general public would have a bit more faith in the system.

It seems quite well timed the Guardian release an article today on ‘Australia’s Hottest Year recorded in 2013’,  considering the flack the ‘warmists’ are taking from the Akademik Shokalskiy Antartica fiasco. Yes I’m aware its the beginning of a new year and time to look back on the old, but it just reeks of damage control and government / big business endorsed propaganda. Lord knows we receive enough spin and coercion throughout the year as we play puppets to their ‘mastery’.

What they wont mention in the report though is how over the past 3 years Australia has also seen some of the coldest days recorded in history.

Canberra recorded their coldest day in 43 years in 2009; Alice Springs their coldest day in 44 years in 2010; and in July 2011, both Perth, and Sydney experienced record cold spells, with Sydney having its coldest day in 8 years, and Perth its coldest spell in 45 years.

They also all seem to have forgotten that the UK is set to experience their coldest winter since 1947, and whilst that may not have set in yet, long-term weather forecasters still have this on their radar.

The weather fluctuates, this we all know. Stop snatching at relatively small samples of data and then abusing it to squeeze money out of the public or further your careers. You don’t need to look at the temperature to suggest the 90 big corporations out there that contribute to 70% of the worlds pollution needs to curb it. It just so happens that those companies are also some of the biggest contributors to government.

In 2010, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) were forced to admit that their 2007 report on climate findings surrounding the fact that the Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035 was unfounded. This coming only after a New Scientist article revealed the source of the claim to not be part of a scientific peer-reviewed peice of literature. Had the New Scientist journalist not uncovered or brought to the attention of the mainstream this small fact, governments and climate scientists would still be quoting this today.

What makes this even more interesting is when we look at the definition of the IPCC.

Wikipedia defines it as “a scientific intergovernmental body set up at the request of member governments…it’s mission is to provide comprehensive scientific assessments of current scientific, technical and socio-economic information worldwide about the risk of climate change caused by human activity, its potential environmental and socio-economic consequences, and possible options for adapting to these consequences or mitigating the effects”

Here’s where it gets juicy,

Thousands of scientists and other experts contribute to writing and reviewing reports, which are reviewed by representatives from all the governments, with a Summary for Policymakers being subject to line-by-line approval by all participating governments. Typically this involves the governments of more than 120 countries.

So with all these top-level scientists from around the world reviewing the reports, not one of them in 3 years picked up that the Himalayan glaciers claim was unfounded? Then you have Poster boy Al Gore claiming the Arctic would be completely melted by 2013. Talk about a bunch of snake oil salesman and shifty operators.

Whilst curbing pollution and stemming the impact man has on the environment is important, it’s the people who have taken the helm of ensuring this happens that cause the doubt. Ulterior motives and money influences are also sniffing around this garbage dump of potential money making opportunities.

From global taxes and increased commodity prices; carbon credit trading and billions spent on spin and lobbying; to even the possibility of nations being able to sue companies in the future for natural disasters, this industry is indeed stained green, just not the organic tree hugging kinda green that would be good for future generations. Where a tidy sum of money can be made, those with power unfortunately seek to exploit it.

It’s not about ‘warmists’ or ‘nay-sayers’. It’s about finding the truth in the middle, balancing the act and taking money out of it. Its about greedy old men stopping at their 2nd 50 000m2 mansion; its about world dominating power hungry politicians taming their ego and remembering that they are public servants placed in power by the public; and its about thinking of a time other than the one right now serving only them.

View all contributions by

Similar articles

Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *