Global Warming Delusion Syndrome

I dread the day when my little girl comes home from school to tell me how she has learned that humans are destroying the planet through global warming. It is then that I will have to explain to her that the man-made global warming theory is a complete hoax.

For more information on the hoax that is gloabal warming alarmism, see:
The Great Global Warming Swindle DVD
Dr. Roy Spencer, Climatologist, University of Alabama and his book, Climate Confusion
Mysterious California Glaciers Keep Growing Despite Warming
Poll: most Britons doubt cause of climate change
Cold Water Thrown on Antarctic Warming Predictions by LiveScience
Gore Used Fictional Video to Illustrate ‘Inconvenient Truth’
Weather Channel Founder: Sue Al Gore to Expose Global Warming Fraud

I, of course, will have to explain that the global warming hoax has been perprtuated for political reasons, primarily by liberals and neo-communists who want the power of socialized government to reach into our lives and control the way we live. I will have to explain to her that global warming has become its own religion, with Al Gore as the high priest. It is a religion because you have to accept on faith the alarmists theories that the earth is trending warmer and that man is causing it. The data proves only natural cycles in the earth’s temperature, but the alarmists always fall back on the arguement that requires a new religous faith: ‘what if the global warming alarmists are right!?’ And Al Gore himself, said global warming is not so much a scientific issue, but it is a ‘moral’ issue.

And I will do all this explaining to my daughter lest she fall prey to Global Warming Delusion Syndrome. From the Australian Herald Sun: “Psychiatrists have detected the first case of ‘climate change delusion.’ A 17-year-old man was referred to the inpatient psychiatric unit at Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne with an eight-month history of depressed mood . . . He also . . . had visions of apocalyptic events. The patient had also developed the belief that, due to climate change, his own water consumption could lead within days to the deaths of millions of people through exhaustion of water supplies.”

Lest my daughter be led astray by false preachers and false doctrines that teach that the earth is running out of something that literally falls from the sky, I will relentlessly expose the hoax that is the man-made global warming theory.

Inconvenient for Al Gore, There Is No Truth to a Consensus on Man-Made Global Warming

Yesterday, the Nobel committee awarded Al Gore and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC) the Nobel Peace Prize for “creating an ever-broader informed consensus about the connection between human activities and global warming.” The Nobel committee also stated that Gore and the UN IPCC have “created greater worldwide understanding of the measures that need to be adopted” to stop “climate change.” (emphasis added, story from FoxNews)

It’s interesting that the Nobel committee used the word consensus to describe the foundation of their belief that human activity causes global warming. In 2006, Al Gore is quoted as saying, “The scientists are virtually screaming from the rooftops now. The debate is over! There’s no longer any debate in the scientific community about this.”

But wait a minute. Al Gore says the debate is over, but is there really consensus. Researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte recently published a study that shows that “less than half of all published scientists endorse global warming theory.”

-7% gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus
-38% gave implicit endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement)
-48% are neutral, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis
-6% reject theory of man-made global warming outright


Only a very few scientists endorse the theory of man-made global warm, but just as many reject the theory. The nearly 90% of remaining scientists find themselves in the middle, some tacitly endorsing the theory, some tacitly rejecting the theory. So much for consensus.

But if there isn’t consensus, maybe we can just look at the facts of Al Gore’s man-made global warming argument. This, unfortunately for Gore and the Nobel prize committee, doesn’t play out very well either…

The BBC recently produced a documentary devastating to man-made global warming theories entitled “The Great Global Warming Swindle.” In this film, “distinguished scientists specializing in climate and climate-related fields talk in plain English and present readily understood graphs showing what a crock the current global warming hysteria is.” (source: Thomas Sowell)

Also, recently, a UK judge ruled that An Inconvenient Truth, Al Gore’s global warming movie, had 11 factual inaccuracies (he later consolidated it to nine errors for his official judgment). The judge called Gore’s film “alarmist” and ordered that if shown to school children, teachers must first read the list of errors. Here’s just a few:

  • Gore presents Mt. Kilimanjaro’s melting snows as proof of global warming. In fact, the snows are vanishing thanks to local factors, including deforestation
  • Gore suggests Antarctica’s ice cover is melting. Most studies say it is increasing or stable.
  • Gore shows scary graphics of cities drowning in seas that rise 7 meters, causing millions of refugees. But the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says the seas will rise at worst by 59 centimeters this century.
  • Gore uses images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests it was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert in this case admitted such one-off events can’t be blamed on global warming.
  • Gore suggests ice-core evidence shows rising CO2 caused temperature rises, which ended the past seven ice ages. In fact, the CO2 rises followed temperature rises by 800 to 2000 years.
  • Gore claims global warming could stop the Gulf Stream, causing an ice age in Europe. Recent studies deny it. They find that it fluctuates many times during the course of every year. But it isn’t dying out.
  • Gore blames global warming for species losses in coral reef bleaching. The government couldn’t show evidence to back this claim.
    Click here for the complete list of Inaccuracies in Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth.
  • So you see, the truth really is inconvenient to Al Gore, the Nobel Prize committee and other environmental alarmist groups.

    Live Earth: An Ice Cream Pig Out to Raise Obesity Awareness

    When I was a boy, my brothers and I and my parents participated in the Cub Scout program. If memory serves me correctly, we would occasionally have Cub Scout gatherings and at the end we would have what they called an “Ice Cream Pig Out.” This consisted of several flavors of ice cream and a variety of toppings to choose from, and everyone helped themselves to creating the ice cream sundae of their choice. Though not the most healthy dessert, it was fun and a very delicious way to celebrate advancement in the Cub Scout program.

    Now imagine holding an Ice Cream Pig Out to raise obesity awareness. Maybe not your best option; in fact, it’s quite counter intuitive. Even though the event my raise obesity awareness, the participants in this ice cream binge would be contributing to the obesity problem.

    The creators and supporters of Live Earth are apparently suffering from this same twisted logic. Live Earth (according to www.liveearth.org) “is a 24-hour, 7-continent concert series taking place on 7/7/07 that will bring together more than 100 music artists and 2 billion people to trigger a global movement to solve the climate crisis.” Concerts were held on 7/7/07 in eight cities around the globe and also broadcast on TV (though you probably didn’t see it on TV as the concert had record low ratings 1).

    One single Live Earth performer, Madonna, created more carbon emissions getting to the concert in her private jet 2 than I would create in 120 years. And just one of the 8 Live Earth Concerts used as much electricity (with it’s corresponding carbon emissions) as my house would use in 3 years.

    Of course, when confronted with this hypocrisy “fans in the crowd at Wembley Stadium were unperturbed, with 27-year-old Neil Hanafin telling AFP that, on balance, the concert was ‘more of a positive thing. Raising awareness is what this whole thing is about.'” (http://entertainment.iafrica.com/music/news/194579.htm) “Awareness” of course, is much harder to measure than the carbon emissions of the concert, so it’s easy for them to say it was an overall net positive. But awareness wasn’t even the stated goal of the concert; a solution was the stated goal. And with the amount of emissions coming out of these concerts, a solution appears to have been put on the back burner.

    Another rationale Live Earth concert supporters will use is that the organizers bought carbon credits to offset the emissions of the concert. This whole concept of carbon offsets is a ridiculous notion and will perhaps be a subject of a future blog. Until that time, maybe I ought to embrace the offset concept. I wonder what else can you buy offsets for? Speeding maybe? Pay money to an organization dedicated to reducing traffic violations in return for the liberty to speed at will.

    I leave you with the advice given Live Earth concert goers, “If you want to save the planet… start jumping up and down!” 3

    1. “Perhaps it’s because watching TV isn’t a carbon-neutral activity, or perhaps those Fourth of July hangovers were especially nasty this year, but Saturday’s Live Earth broadcast on NBC was the lowest-rated programming of all four major networks. The Washington Post reports that nearly twice as many people watched a repeat of ‘America’s Most Wanted,’ and even ‘Cops’ beat out the “historic” concert.”
    http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Live-Earth-Concert-Earns-Historic-Low-Ratings-5164.html

    2. “Madonna, who headlined the Wembley concert – one of nine held on all seven continents – seems to have got the most rap for not practising what she preaches. With her nine homes, a private jet, a fleet of cars and a carbon footprint nearly 100 times larger than the average person’s 11 tons of greenhouse gasses per year, the Washington Post points out, it’s not hard to see why. “
    “But she wasn’t the only one on stage that night whose life doesn’t exactly fit the climate change message. Some of the artists, the Red Hot Chilli Peppers, for example, even used their private jets to get to and from the concerts. At least the British comedian Ricky Gervais acknowledged the paradox in one of his jokes: “We did have to fly some people in on private jets. They do use up a lot of fuel – but it saves queuing.” ” http://www.alertnet.org/db/blogs/1265/2007/06/11-125127-1.htm

    3. “If you want to save the planet, I want you to start jumping up and down!” Thus Madonna revealed her plan to combat global warming. Clad in a black satin leotard, she gyrated with dancers and simulated sex with an amplifier and a guitar. Along with the Foo Fighters, the 48-year-old Queen of Pop transformed a Live Earth concert that at times had seemed earnest and slow.”
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/07/AR2007070701201.html

    Who is to Blame for Global Warming?

    So as California and Florida are facing unseasonably low temperatures that have threatened our country’s citrus crop, we tackle the issue of global warming. It’s a frequent topic in the news, in politics and even our school children are inundated with alarming information (and often mis-information) on global warming. So once again, let’s look at the facts in the case to see if we can determine to what extent the earth’s climate is changing and who could be the culprit.

    The following charts plot the yearly average global temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit, over the past 140 years (data taken from http://www.nepa.gov/nepa/reports/statistics/global.html). Both charts plot the exact same data; I just present the same data from two different views. From the first chart, it would appear the earth’s climate is remarkably stable, not appearing to vary much at all over the past 140 years.

    The second chart tells a different story; it shows how the earth’s temperature has risen about one degree Fahrenheit in the last 140 years. But more than that, it shows some interesting trends, telling us where temperatures might have been prior to the collection of data and perhaps where we will see temperatures go in the future.

    In the third chart, I have three different types of trends the temperature changes could be following.
    The blue, polinomial trend seems to be the best fit for the data and does a good job showing the cyclical nature of the data. Such tempurate cycles have been a part of this earth since its creation. Some geologists believe the earth experience global warming during the early Jurassic period, with temperatures rising nine degrees Fahrenheit. A thousand years ago, the Vikings settled a new land and for its lush environment called it Greenland. They later were forced to leave Greenland, though, due to falling temperatures killing crops and expanding ice sheets. In the 16th century, Europe expeienced what historians call the Little Ice Age.

    We now turn the discussion towards causes. We have seen the data and it is clear there is overall warming in recent years. This along with the historical perspective of climate change, we see that warming and cooling of the earth is cyclical. But is there more to it than natural cycles about which we can do nothing? Experts in the field also say solar activity, volcanic emissions, variations in the earth’s orbit, livestock flatulence and greenhouse gases from human activity are causing the earth’s temperature to rise. A recent article in the UK Telegraph outlines how scientists believe the sun is burning hotter than ever before and thus contributing to global warming.

    Now we have barely touched on man-made causes of global warming such as car emissions and pollution. Mankind and modern living may be a factor but how much of a factor is a matter of dispute in scientific and politcal circles. I do not see any data to suggest the sky is falling as so many environmentalist alarmists wish us to believe. Al Gore has stated that the automobile is the earth’s greatest enemy and he supports “completely eliminating the internal combustion engine” (Earth in the Balance, page 325). I believe this is an extreme view and such drastic steps are not necessary; in fact it is quite arrogant to think that man has this kind of power to raise the earth’s temperature by our life styles alone or to lower it by changing the way we live our lives.

    It is our responsibility, though, to take reasonable steps to keep the earth clean and safe. I see our responsibility to care for the environment as a God-given stewardship, rather than an effort to prevent some type of global climate catasphophe.

    Genesis 1:28 “And God blessed them (Adam and Eve), and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”