COMMENTS

Opinion
Nov 30, 2009

Credibility gap

Credibility gap

In a couple weeks, the world will gather in Copenhagen, Denmark, with the idea of changing the world as we know it. The politics of climate change are heating up and the fear factor is being multiplied by the proponents of climate change and greenhouse gas abatement.

From what I can tell, if we don’t do something about climate change, we will see more civil war in Africa. We will also start to develop kidney stones and your beach house will be underwater by the end of the century. Some would say that climate change is responsible for every weather-related issue and will result in Armageddon. Ironically, several of the researchers riding point on climate change haven’t been entirely honest about their data collection or interpretations. They also appear to have been withholding their apocalyptic findings with other researchers who might oppose the conclusions.

Last week, a series of e-mails from climate change researchers was exposed that provides some inconvenient information about the quality of their data and how they managed it. Apparently, computer hackers obtained 160 megabytes worth of e-mails from the Climate Change Unit at the University of East Anglia in England. These e-mails involved a host of prominent researchers across the globe and other ideologically similar colleagues. They were discussing destroying and hiding climate data that didn’t support their global warming claims. These guys also worked with the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In other words, the world is attempting to make radical decisions on unreliable data.

One of the researchers in question discusses how truncating a data series can hide a cooling trend that would otherwise be seen in the results. Another researcher said that the results he is sending shouldn’t be shown to others because the results support critics of global warming.

On an issue as popular as global warming, it is unbelievable that a select group of scientists could adulterate the data and then not make it available for everyone to see. It’s clear that these guys are well educated, ideological advocates for their selected cause of global warming. Congressional Republicans have smelled a rat and have started investigating the issue.

President Obama’s point man on climate change, Dr. John Holdren, who contributed some of the stolen e-mails, supports the data generated by the scientists in question and said, "I’m happy to stand by my contribution to this exchange. I think anybody who reads what I wrote in its entirely will find it a serious and balanced treatment of the question of ‘burden of proof’ in situations where science germane to public policy is in dispute."

Despite the heat over the damaging emails, two dozen climate scientists released a report arguing that man-made global warming will intensify in the next few years. More fear.

I suppose timing is everything. You’ve got one group of scientists with very questionable credibility and another group saying things are going to get worse. This is happening just before the big climate meeting in Copenhagen where the U.S. is expected to hand over the car keys to our economy and saddle U.S. citizens with additional economic burdens through a global cap and tax scheme. It appears that our leaders need to apply some common sense on this issue, which is currently in very short supply.

Climate change activism is rapidly moving toward economic terrorism. The scientific mask has been lifted with these e-mails and the villains are being exposed. The Copenhagen Climate Treaty, if signed by the U.S., will have some profound effects. At the center of the treaty is a plan to regulate all economic activity in the name of climate security, with a side effect that would transfer billions of dollars from productive countries to the unproductive.

The control mechanism is the regulation of carbon emissions, which some think are causing global warming. The treaty would establish a Carbon Market Regulatory Agency and a Global Carbon Budget for each country. I’m starting to get the feeling that this episode is more about a new global society than it is about the environment. As far as I’m concerned, the debate about global warming has never been finished. But you’re being told that doom is imminent unless you act now. From where I sit, the past few hasty decisions haven’t been very good. I’d like to suggest that the U.S. sit this one out before they give away your farm. — PETE CROW

{rating_box}