Sunday, September 29, 2013

Heartland Institute climate change panel reveals science the UN suppresses


by Ron Arnold

With headlines feeding public suspicion that a new U.N. climate report ignores evidence that global warming stopped (“paused” to the pious) nearly two decades ago, many readers likely already know that “IPCC” means the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Earlier this week in Washington, however, the "NIPCC" -- the Non-governmental International Panel on Climate Change -- made news with release of the second in a series of its own 1,000-plus-pages counter-report, “Climate Change Reconsidered II.”

Bearing the challenging tagline of “science the U.N. will exclude from its next climate report,” the NIPCC is meant as a counter-weight and a corrective to the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report, which is being released today.

The NIPCC report “documents the evidence that anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions are not causing a global warming crisis. The report contains thousands of citations to the peer-reviewed literature,” according to a news release.

Those citations should be welcomed by all scientists, regardless of their position on climate change, because the NIPCC authors paid special attention to “contributions that were overlooked by the IPCC or that presented data, discussion, or implications, arguing against the IPCC’s claim that dangerous global warming is occurring, or will occur, from human-related greenhouse gas emissions.”

It’s about time we had opposing scientists’ names and article titles instead of all that worshipful, non-scientific, politically correct consensus nonsense, the pressure-cooked manipulation used to force agreement from colleagues. There may be a smile on their face, but that's because of the dagger at their backs.

Why does the U.N. love consensus anyway? Because it sounds authoritative against critics who remember to follow the money: The 130 developing countries are a solid majority of the 195 governments that fund the IPCC.

They want a big payday funded by wealthier developed nations via climate treaties with hefty wealth transfer clauses to support “sustainable development” — that is, a solar panel on a hut for 40 watts of light...



No comments: