During the first Democrat Debate, Senator Bernie Sanders (Socialist-VT) proclaimed that climate change was America's most pressing National Security threat. In fact, the unabashedly unreligious Sanders was pleased to praise Pope Francis' environmental encyclical Laudato Si in order to convince America to do something by giving more money and power to governments and international organizations to combat anthropogenic climate change.
Last week, during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, the Sierra Club President Aaron Mair was ill prepared to accept Senator Ted Cruz' scientific point that satellite data has not demonstrated global warming in the last 18 years. However, if one dares to dissent from the false study claiming that 94% of scientists agree about global climate change, progressives will unleash an alluvia of bile which rivals the EPA polluting the Animus River.
So much of this environmental alarmism is premised on the notion that anthropogenic climate change is "settled science". However, Dr. David Evans, a former climate modeler for the Australian Government has found two errors in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change model that significantly skews the IPCC findings.
Dr David Evans: Prime Minister wrong on... by MaribelMansfield
When the physics in the IPCC model is corrected, it seems that CO2 levels have been overestimated by a factor of 10. Taking this into consideration, CO2 levels have been only 20% of global warming over the last few decades.
So the rush to surrender individual liberty and the Western post industrial way of life as will be discussed during the Paris COP21 Conference on Climate Change in December 2015 might be falsely premised. Of course, this would not be the first time that international scientists have sought to foist faux data to push for more funding and radical political solutions to address climate change. Take the now thoroughly discredited East Anglia hockey stick model.
|Fabian Society Window designed by George Bernard Shaw(1910) |
now displayed at the London School of Economics Shaw Library
It seems like a contemporary progressive tactic to demand emergency action on flimsy premises which aggregates power in centralized governments (both national and international) at the expense of individual liberty. The irony is that for climate change it is being sold as science but treated like a religion. Before we succumb to Fabian solutions to recast the world, we should rightly discern if that mold is already cracked.