Debunking the Climate Scam
Billions of Dollars - Fudged Data - Corrupt Scientists
Greedy Green Corporations - Trillion Dollar Prize
No Warming For Two decades - Illiterate Media
Bought and Paid For Organizations
(Lifted from Australia’s Climate skeptics Party Blog)
There are at least a dozen differences between man-made global warming (AGW) and
real science. While science follows a defined scientific method, AGW uses political
campaign tools like polls, demonizing opposition, scare tactics, deception, and propaganda.
- Real science says "Question everything". AGW says "Questioning AGW is reckless because
it threatens the planet."
- Real science never ends, but is an ongoing cycle of testing and correction. AGW tries
to break that cycle by claiming "the debate is over" and "the science is settled".
"SETTLED SCIENCE" IS AN OXYMORON invented by non-scientist Al Gore to avoid debating
his profitable beliefs in public. http://physics.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node6.html
- Real science develops hypotheses that are falsifiable via testable predictions. AGW
ISN'T FALSIFIABLE because it makes contradictory, changing predictions. More hurricanes
(see Al Gore's movie cover) or fewer hurricanes (reality now attributed to AGW),
more snow or less snow, warmer or cooler than average temperatures, etc. are all
cited AFTER the fact as proof of AGW. There is no observation that AGW proponents
will accept as refuting their belief. Predictive models created by warming proponents
are consistently wrong: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/12/05/new-peer-reviewed-paper-shows-just-how-bad-the-climate-models-are/
- Real science relies on skeptics to make progress. Many real scientists spend their
careers try to disprove accepted wisdom. AGW, on the other hand, intimidates and
SMEARS SKEPTICS as "non-believers", equating them to holocaust deniers and treating
them more like the Church treated Galileo: http://business.financialpost.com/2014/05/15/eminent-swedish-scientist-latest-
- Real science grants awards for disproving accepted truths. AGW researchers, on the
other hand, have a VESTED INTEREST in only one outcome. They can access billions
of dollars in government money only while MMGW is perceived by the public as a threat
to humanity: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/05/19/the-well-funded-climate-business-follow-the-money/
- Real science has nothing to do with polls or consensus, but AGW proponents CONSTANTLY
USE POLLS to defend their claims. Ironically, even when they use polls they have
to spin their outcomes: http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/
- Real science doesn't claim validity by citing the credentials of proponents. It respects
only data and analysis, regardless of who is publishing it. Einstein was a little
known patent office clerk when he overturned the consensus understanding of space
and time in 1905 with Special Relativity. “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your guess
is or how smart you are or what your name is. If it disagrees with experience, it’s
wrong.”-Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize Physicist
- Real science keeps testing to remove bias and discard bad models. Einstein's Relativity
is still being tested a century later. AGW ignores or HIDES DATA it doesn't like:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/globalwarming/6636563/University-of-East-Anglia-emails-the-most-contentious-quotes.html
- Real science accepts that bad predictions imply bad hypotheses. When AGW predictions
are wrong they don't question the hypothesis...they just change the predictions and
REBRAND the movement.
- Real science never recommends that skeptics be JAILED: http://gawker.com/arrest-climate-change-deniers-1553719888
http://ecowatch.com/2015/03/16/al-gore-sxsw-punish-climate-deniers/
- Real science doesn't create billionaires who get rich peddling untested theories.
- Real science tries to account for all interfering variables in studies. AGW simply
ignores all the variables that have drastically impacted Earth's climate for billions
of years unless those factors are needed to excuse faulty predictions.
Posted by Geoff Brown at 6:20 AM
Lifted from Australia’s Climate skeptics Party Blog
Original is credited to Mike Herman at https://disqus.com/by/disqus_7a2SGZPse5/