The validity of the global warming alarm, long on life support, is now dead and awaiting burial, and it's long past time to bury its rotting corpse before it helps bankrupt the United States.
With the nation mired in an economic slump, widespread unemployment, and out-of-control federal spending, this nation no longer can afford to waste its resources on an absurd scientific fiction.
Increasing numbers of scientists and their skeptical allies have questioned the validity of the claim that this planet is warming and is doomed to suffer its dire consequences, and the evidence has continued to pile up that that so-called climate change is a bogus creation of a collection of researchers involved with the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Take, for example, the recent disclosure at Marc Morano's ClimateChange.com about U.N. scientists' subterfuge on the IPCC's so-called climate change report.
Alabama State Climatologist John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, who served as an IPCC lead author in 2001 for the third assessment report, has detailed how he witnessed U.N. scientists attempting to distort the science for political purposes.
"I was at the table with three Europeans, and . . . they were talking about how they were trying to make the report so dramatic that the United States would just have to sign that Kyoto Protocol," Christy told CNN on May 2, 2007.
Then comes Murari Lal, the scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning U.N. report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035. He admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.
Lal also said he was well aware that the statement, in the IPCC's 2007, did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research, according to Climate Depot. In other words, the evidence didn't support the propaganda.
In an interview with Britain’s The Mail on Sunday, Lal, the co-coordinating lead author of the report’s chapter on Asia, said: "It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policymakers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.
"It had importance for the region, so we thought we should put it in," apparently regardless of whether it was true.
As Morano notes, the latest criticism of the IPCC comes just a week after reports in The Sunday Times forced the U.N. panel to retract claims in its benchmark 2007 report that the Himalayan glaciers would be largely melted by 2035.
Shockingly, it turned out that the bogus claim had been lifted from a news report that New Scientist magazine published as far back as 1999!
The new controversy, Morano noted, also goes back to the IPCC's 2007 report in which a separate section warned that the world had "suffered rapidly rising costs due to extreme weather-related events since the 1970s."
Morano wrote, "The Sunday Times has since found that the scientific paper on which the IPCC based its claim had not been peer reviewed, nor published, at the time the climate body issued its report. Moreover, when the paper was eventually published, in 2008, it had a new caveat. It said: 'We find insufficient evidence to claim a statistical relationship between global temperature increase and catastrophe losses.' "
According to the Daily Mail, in the face of this change, the IPCC failed to issue a clarification ahead of the Copenhagen, Denmark, climate summit last month. "It has also emerged that at least two scientific reviewers who checked drafts of the IPCC report urged greater caution in proposing a link between climate change and disaster impacts — but were ignored," the Mail reported.
All this at a time when the climategate scandal has rocked the scientific world with the disclosure that the top scientist in Britain's University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit had played loose with the facts.
"The conspiracy behind the Anthropogenic Global Warming myth. . . has been suddenly, brutally and quite deliciously exposed after a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (aka CRU) and released 61 megabytes of confidential files onto the Internet," James Delingpole wrote in the Telegraph.
Wrote Delingpole: "When you read some of those files — including 1079 emails and 72 documents — you realize just why the boffins at CRU might have preferred to keep them confidential. As Andrew Bolt puts it, this scandal could well be ‘the greatest in modern science.’”
All of this comes when Mother Nature has been busy showing us who is really the boss in deciding what the climate will do, and she has put the planet in the deep freezer.
In Robert Felix's invaluable iceagenow.com, which tracks the climate worldwide, up-to-date stories include headlines showing record-breaking cold weather events worldwide.
All this at a time when the United States is squandering billions on trying to prevent global warming when, if anything, the climate is getting colder.
We simply no longer can afford to subsidize this fiction.
Phil Brennan writes for Newsmax.com. He is editor and publisher of Wednesday on the Web (http://www.pvbr.com) and was Washington columnist (Cato) for National Review magazine in the 1960s. He is a trustee of the Lincoln Heritage Institute and a member of the Association For Intelligence Officers. He can be reached at pvb@pvbr.com.