Recently, Channel 4 News aired a documentary titled “The Great Global Warming Swindle,” which has sparked considerable controversy. One of the scientists featured in the documentary – Carl Wunsch from MIT – is now accusing the producer of misrepresenting his views (see comments), which were taken out of context. Notably, global warming ‘super-expert’ George Monbiot appeared in The Guardian to defend the exaggerated claims of global warming. Progressive neo-environmentalist forces are – as always – resorting to defamatory tactics, aiming to undermine the credibility of Martin Durkin – the documentary’s producer – and almost everyone who agrees with the perspectives presented in it. There has been an attempt at an FOI request (what was this guy thinking?) to fund the documentary, and in summary, the moonbat howlers are in a complete state of outrage.
This blog has had its share of controversy surrounding global warming. Venezuelan readers and fellow bloggers have disagreed with my opinions on this topic, arguing that I’m immature, arrogant, ignorant, and that I generally ridicule my ability to distinguish leftist drivel – what redundancy – from reality. It seems I can’t hold a contrary opinion to the one established by the geniuses at the IPCC, the very ones who have failed to demonstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that the current warming trend is attributable to humanity. It’s the “consensus” that matters; the “belief” of UN panel members touted as the ultimate truth. Cynically, Monbiot opens his diatribe mentioning Galileo, Newton, Darwin, and Einstein as examples of scientists who proved the consensus wrong, when, in fact, today – thanks to the systematic media bombardment – the majority of people subscribe to the hysterical claims and the “consensus” of experts like Monbiot, attacking independent thinkers as showcased in Durkin’s documentary.
For these reasons, I decided to borrow the idea from blogger Francisco Toro to express it visually and sketch a couple of charts to illustrate my point: I’ll call it Global Warming for Dummies.
The vertical axis represents temperature and the horizontal shows time since the formation of the Earth. For this purpose, I plotted a line reflecting global temperature fluctuations over time, but by no means does this graph accurately depict cooling or warming periods. Geological evidence illustrates that the planet has undergone several of these phases; the intention is merely to show that it happened in the past, long before the delightful mummies driving Chelsea tractors and aviation ever existed. Earth’s temperature has increased by 0.5 degrees in the last century. Should we be as worried as the global warming fraternity wants us to be?
concern for the human species if it had any relation to reality. The red line indicates temperature fluctuations over time. The fact is it has no actual correlation with reality; however, in my view, it perfectly illustrates the hypothesis of doomsday advocates, who irresponsibly and without scientific evidence have already ruled that the current warming trend (+0.5 degrees Celsius) is man-made, ignoring paleoclimate records.
The politicization of this topic has led to misinformed politicians, media outlets, Hollywood types, the green fraternity, radical leftists, and all sorts of people claiming without reservation that it’s all our fault. For most of them, it seems an impossible task to provide coherent explanations for why this phenomenon has occurred throughout Earth’s history, as it undermines their ridiculous hypothesis. So, what better than to ignore the inconvenient truths? Why is this time global warming caused by the burning of fossil fuels and anthropogenic CO2 emissions when it wasn’t in the past? How can Earth’s climate have changed to the point that the dynamics that used to influence global temperatures are no longer relevant, or worse, have been relegated to secondary roles? These are some of the questions I asked myself when I first heard the hype. I remember thinking, “Since when is climate a fixed and unchanging variable?” But, well, who am I to doubt the well-informed IPCC, right? Fortunately, not all scientists agree with the media-driven political imposition of the “consensus.”