110% Of All Climate Change Scientists Believe Earth Will Warm to 300 Degrees In 50 Years. This Makes As Much Sense As Global Warming Does!

Kerry Raises ‘Global Warming Consensus’ To 99 Percent; Obama Compares Skeptics To Those Who Believe Moon Made Of Cheese

June 23, 2014 by Bob Livingston 

 81 21

 

 2 276

UPI FILE

The theory of man-made global warming is based on spurious science, phony statistics and outright lies; so it’s no surprise that a known liar and propagandist for the regime and green energy boondoggles, none other than Secretary of State John Kerry, has pulled another bogus figure out of his pompous hat.

Speaking at a State Department ceremony last week, Kerry proved the old saw that figures don’t lie, but liars will figure. It has long been established conventional wisdom — despite evidence to the contrary — that “97 percent of scientists endorse man-made global warming.” Obviously, Kerry has nothing important to do as Secretary of State, given that there is no terrorist organization currently putting our $750 million embassy in danger by trying to depose our puppet government in Iraq with backing from our supposed ally, Saudi Arabia, while our supposed enemy, Iran, is offering to help us prop up our puppet; there is no U.S.-backed insurgency in Syria; there is no U.S.- and International Monetary Fund-instigated conflict in Ukraine; the U.S. isn’t firing drone missiles at people around the globe; and our southern border isn’t being invaded by illegals swarming in from and at the encouragement of Central American countries. The 97 percent figure is one Kerry has repeated ad nauseam. But now Kerry has upped the ante.

“When it comes to climate change, when it comes to food security, we are literally facing a moment of adversity — perhaps even dire necessity,” Kerry said at a State Department food security award ceremony. “It’s hard to convince people — hard to convince people of a challenge that isn’t immediately tangible to everybody particularly. But it is clear to at least 98, 99 percent of all the scientists in our country that to confront these challenges, we must invent and we must innovate, and most of all, we need to work together and we need to get to work.”

Why not go all the way to 100 percent? Without a doubt, that’s where it’s headed after the 98 percent to 99 percent estimate makes the rounds for a while.

Not to be outdone, President Barack Obama also got into the act. In a speech to graduates at the University of California at Irvine, he compared climate change skeptics to those who would say the moon is made of cheese.

“I do know that the overwhelming majority of scientists who work on climate change, including some who once disputed the data, have put that debate to rest,” he said.

These are typical propaganda ploys employed by statists to drown out and stifle dissent. I’ve told you before in more esoteric terms how the elites use code words, repetition, andmisdirection and subterfuge in order to dumb us down and have us accept an agenda that is antithetical to our well-being. This lesson is more concrete. This is not a new ploy by the elites.

But even the 97 percent is arrived at only by using a feat of statistical legerdemain.

First, there is no global warming occurring and hasn’t been for nigh on 20 years. See the graphs below, taken from John Coleman’s blog.

And as scientists Joseph Bast and Roy Spencer, who are among the thousands of scientists who don’t believe in the “settled science” of man-made “climate change,” wrote in The Wall Street Journal last month,  there is no basis for the claim that 97 percent of scientists believe that man-made climate change is a dangerous problem. (Read the linked article for their reasoning.)

Kerry and the rest of the climate change alarmists are attempting, by employing a multitude of logical fallacies, simply to stifle any discussion before it starts. And unfortunately, Kerry, Al Gore, Obama and their alarmist brethren are aided and abetted by a compliant media that ignores or ridicules climate change skeptics.

Progressives, who are the ones who shout loudest on behalf of tolerance, have little tolerance for dissenting views. The only “tolerance” they actually tolerate is “tolerance” that aligns with their version of conventional wisdom. (See Brendan Eich and Phil Robertson for examples.)

Just ask Caleb Rossiter, an adjunct professor at American University with a Ph.D. in policy analysis and a master’s in mathematics. Rossiter has taught courses in climate science and once held a position at the progressive think take Institute for Policy Studies. It is now a once-held position because Rossiter was fired after 23 years at ISP just two days after he wrote anop-ed for The Wall Street Journal in which he claimed, “The left wants to stop industrialization–even if the hypothesis of catastrophic, man-made global warming is false.”

Responding to the firing in an interview published on Climate Depot, Rossiter said: “If people ever say that fears of censorship for ‘climate change’ views are overblown, have them take a look at this: Just two days after I published a piece in the Wall Street Journal calling for Africa to be allowed the ‘all of the above’ energy strategy we have in the U.S., the Institute for Policy Studies terminated my 23-year relationship with them…because my analysis and theirs ‘diverge.’

“I have tried to get [IPS] to discuss and explain their rejection of my analysis,’ Rossiter toldClimate Depot. “When I countered a claim of ‘rapidly accelerating’ temperature change with the [UN] IPCC’s own data’, showing the nearly 20-year temperature pause — the best response I ever got was ‘Caleb, I don’t have time for this.’”

Of course, Kerry’s goal — and that of Obama and other lawmakers who are using global warming alarmism — is to impoverish Americans, destroy the U.S. economy and transfer wealth to the globalists and international green energy firms. Their goal is certainly not “consensus,” nor is it real “science.” And the goal of the “consensus” scientists is to ensure their gravy train of grants and government largess keeps rolling right along. They’ve sold their souls to make it so.

But the bigger issue is the way the elites use coded language, logical fallacies and deflection to drive a meme and stifle discussion.

Anyone who defies established orthodoxy is called a racist, a homophobe or a bigot. Anyone who seeks to crack conventional wisdom is called a tin foil hat-wearing conspiracy theorist or an uneducated buffoon from the Stone Age. Anyone who stands up for their rights is called a terrorist. And when that doesn’t quiet the opposition, well, they say the debate is closed — even when the evidence throws the door wide open.