Last week, I noted an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal signed by 16 scientists and engineers with the general thesis that “drastic action” to curb catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is unnecessary and not economically beneficial. Today, climate scientist’s ecotards who support taking drastic action to try and mitigate the effects of so called catastrophic anthropogenic global warming have written a rebuttal – with 39 authors — in WSJ.
Even with their rebuttal, the ecotards continue to blatantly lie. Take this line for example.
Climate experts know that the long-term warming trend has not abated in the past decade. In fact, it was the warmest decade on record.”
That’s utter bullshit. Below is the actual truth as reported in the Daily Mail:
The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.
The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.
Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.
The scientists in the WSJ op-ed rebuttal state that a quote by Kevin Trenberth saying it was a “travesty” that they couldn’t “account for the lack of warming” was taken out of context in the “No Need to Panic” piece. They clarify what Trenberth was really saying was that the systems that track warming trends in the ocean were inadequate to show actual warming. Sure he was. Again the ecotards can’t be honest with the truth.
Interestingly, a blogger going by the name of “Zombie” on PJ Media writes that he has been looking into 1977 published book - The Weather Conspiracy: The Coming of the New Ice Age. Here are some of the things Zombie learned.
Climate change is happening faster than we realize and it will have catastrophic consequences for mankind.
There’s very little we can do to stop it at this late stage, but we might be able to save ourselves if we immediately take these necessary and drastic steps:
- Increase our reliance on alternative energy sources and stop using so much oil and other carbon-based fuels;
- Adopt energy-efficient practices in all aspects of our lives, however inconvenient;
- Impose punitive taxes on inefficient or polluting activities to discourage them;
- Funnel large sums of money from developed nations like the U.S. to Third World nations;
- In general embrace all environmental causes.
Sounds familiar, right? Zombie writes that these are exactly the same efforts that global warming alarmists are stating must be done to deal with impending consequence of “catastrophic” anthropogenic global warming. He points out in both cases that there is call to “cede power and money from the First World to the Third World”. This is already happening: at the conclusion of the most recent United Nations Conference on Climate Change in Durban, South Africa, there was an agreement to set up bodies that will collect, govern and distribute funds to poor countries adversely affected by “catastrophic” anthropogenic global warming.
Zombie expands on his opinion further:
The true purpose of climate change disaster-mongering is to permanently cripple the First World, and to elevate the Third World, in order to create a planet with no economic inequality. The goal remains constant; the supposed imminent catastrophes justifying it come and go as needed.
The 16 scientists in the WSJ piece don’t come right out to say that the ultimate goal of climate alarmism is to reduce economic inequality, but they do suggest we “follow the money”.
Follow Andy on twitter
