A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

Climate-Shifters Run into a Man For All Seasons: Logan

By Larry Logan

A recent op-ed headline in my local newspaper stopped me dead in my tracks. It read, “Even if climate scientists are wrong, good will come from their point of view.”

Indeed, ‘climate’ scientists are wrong. The last 17 years shows no statistically significant trend in the global temperature. Here in the Pacific Northwest, NOAA records show our winter temperatures have cooled at a rate of 1.2 degrees F per decade during the last 20 winters. Of the 73 IPCC climate (models) predicting a hotter future climate, not a single one has been correct to date.

Yet, although these predictions of warming by climate scientists have recently been falsified at a confidence level of >98%, leaked copies of the upcoming IPCC report has these same scientists claiming they are 95% confident they are correct! Such is the power of confirmation bias and the need to keep climate alarmism alive for research funding, prestige and their jobs. Further, a new published study shows the IPCC is using statistical techniques that are ‘out of date’ by well over a decade.


Since “global warming” didn’t work, and “climate change” is a truism since it always does, alarmists have switched themes again, now to “climate disruption.” Yet:

·      U.S. climate is getting ‘less extreme.’ ‘For example, in 1936, there were 14,793 record maximums and minimums set. So far this year there have been only 2,903.

·      Sea level rise is slowing, with the rate from 2005 to 2012 below the range from 1954 to 2003.

·      Nature magazine reports that drought has “for the most part, become shorter, less frequent and covers a smaller portion of the U. S. over the last century.”

·      The U.S. is currently experiencing the longest absence of severe landfall hurricanes in more than a century.

·      The U.S. count of strong to violent tornadoes (F3+) has decreased from 1954 to 2012.

·      There is no increase in floods in the U.S in frequency or intensity since 1950.

·      The majority of ‘hottest days’ recorded by weather stations occurred prior to 1960, and 88% were set with CO2 below 350 PPM.

·      We’ve just finished the coldest summer on record at the North Pole and a record high August Antarctic ice extent.

That op-ed said we should suspend our critical thinking and defer (lemming like) to the “unanimous judgment of climate scientists.” The writer unknowingly was referring to the infamous Doran survey to which 3,146 scientists responded. Of those, the survey’s authors self-selected only 77 to be included in the final tabulation, with 75 agreeing to the proposition, as would be expected, that indeed there must be at least “some” contribution by mankind to temperature, regardless how trivial. Stunningly, this is the (flawed) survey that created the oft-repeated meme ‘97 percent of scientists agree in catastrophic global warming.’

This urban myth should have been canned years ago. Yet, in May, President Obama cynically used it to rally his 31,000,000 followers to support his economy-crippling climate programs, tweeting “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree. Climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.”

The op-ed further proposed that regardless of whether the science is wrong, America should take “global leadership” toward mitigation efforts with a resulting “boom in our economy.”

Well, in Spain, 2.2 private sector jobs are lost for every one created through government-subsidized “green” jobs. In Italy it’s 4.8. Ruinous wind power schemes have increased energy prices in the U.K. by 25 percent and in five years are now projected to be as high as monthly mortgage payments. In Germany, ‘free wind’ renewable energy has nearly doubled energy prices from 2000, and more than 300,000 households a year are seeing their power shut off because of unpaid bills. (The op-ed writer defined these burdens on homeowners as “affordable.”) Elderly pensioners are choosing between heat and food. A wind farm built near your house in the U.K. reduces the selling price 30 percent — if you can sell at all.

For years Obama has said the U.S. should follow the “leadership” of these European countries, although they’re rapidly in retreat after these devastating results. The European Union will pay $250 billion for its current climate policies each and every year for 87 years. For almost $20 trillion, temperatures by the end of the century will be reduced by a negligible 0.05ºC, ‘if’ the IPCC models are correct. And here in America, we have the billions lost in Solyndra-styled cronyism.

At the 2008 Copenhagen Consensus, eight of the world’s most distinguished economists, including five Nobel laureates, ranked climate mitigation — what the op-ed proposed — the 30th and last place in a ranking of where to spend our resources. They pointed out that it is less expensive to fund adaptation efforts later, if needed, rather than robbing money from our children’s and grandchildren’s futures now. Further, the billions of dollars diverted every year to fund Kyoto and other schemes would be better used instead to actually eliminate the current, real challenges of disease, sanitation, malnutrition and hunger.

No, we don’t need scientists’ “points of view,” as even the most famous of the lot have been caught adjusting both data and even theory to accommodate politically correct positions and to keep the funding machine going. Global climate alarmism has been damaging to science and costly to society — and potentially more so.

Larry Logan is a Lake Oswego resident who began studying global warming doctrinaire in 2007, attending climate conferences and communicating with scientists around the world. He is the author of “Do Wet Sidewalks Cause Rain?” a critical exposé of Al Gore/Bill Bradbury climate presentations.

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>