Al Gore is a Fraud and a Charlatan

WorldNetDaily | by Joseph Farah | 3/3/2010
Al Gore is nothing but a two-bit charlatan, but he is treated by the press establishment like a prophet, a courageous leader, a selfless crusader, a man of vision and ideals.

Which are you going to believe: Al Gore or your own eyes?

Forget what we in the United States and many around the world have experienced this winter, he writes in a New York Times op-ed. It may seem colder, but this is exactly what should be expected in a global-warming scenario, he claims. Just as a snowless winter in Washington a few years ago was also exactly what we should expect.

If it’s hot, blame global warming. If it’s cold, blame climate change.

Al Gore is not a serious person. He’s a get-rich-quick artist who is peddling the biggest con game in the history of man.

He once famously accused George W. Bush of “playing on our fears.” But listen to Gore’s voice of “reason” in his latest screed:

• We’re facing “an unimaginable calamity requiring large-scale, preventive measures to protect human civilization as we know it.”
• Our grandchildren will “one day look back on us as a criminal generation that … selfishly and blithely ignored clear warnings that their fate was in our hands.” (And, by the way, he’s not talking about the national debt his friends in power are placing on those grandchildren.)
• “The crisis is still growing because we are continuing to dump 90 million tons of global-warming pollution every 24 hours into the atmosphere – as if it were an open sewer.”
• Scientists “probably underestimated the range of sea-level rise in this century, the speed with which the Arctic ice cap is disappearing and the speed with which some of the large glacial flows in Antarctica and Greenland are melting and racing to the sea.”
• What’s coming next? “The displacement of hundreds of millions of climate refugees, civil unrest, chaos and the collapse of governance in many developing countries, large-scale crop failures and the spread of deadly diseases.”

I don’t know about you, but I never heard Bush speak in such apocalyptic hyperbole.

Al Gore once claimed credit for inventing the Internet. That, of course, was not true. But, as I have said before, give credit where credit is due. Al Gore did invent global warming – and he has profited mightily from that invention ever since.

He’s nothing but a two-bit charlatan, but he is treated by the press establishment like a prophet, a courageous leader, a selfless crusader, a man of vision and ideals.

He won’t debate anyone on the topic of global warming, because he is woefully short on facts, evidence, data. So he makes it up, and the New York Times eats it up with a spoon.

If it’s warm out, it’s confirmation of the approaching doomsday. If it’s cold out, it’s likewise confirmation of the approaching doomsday.

What a racket!

That anyone believes him at this point is astonishing.

But not so much when you consider the coercive, government-promoted hysteria and propaganda that paves the way for this false prophet – from elementary school through the academy, from the press to the entertainment industry, from the foundations to the other powerful cultural institutions.

Why do you suppose so many foster this paranoia?

The answer is simple: It empowers the powerful and dis-empowers the powerless. It promotes big government and globalism and moves us away from individual and state sovereignty accountable to the people and the rule of law.

I’ll tell you how we combat this: Al Gore needs to be the punch-line of more jokes.

And, later on this year, we have to throw out all of the bums who have partnered with him on selling this scam of manmade catastrophic climate change.

The day of reckoning is coming.

HT: WND

In a rather stunning series of admissions, the suspended chief of the East Anglia CRU now admits that the warming seen in the late 20th century may not be unprecedented after all, that the planet has stopped warming for the last 15 years despite the predictions of AGW advocates, and that his own record-keeping has been poor. Phil Jones, who stepped down at least temporarily from his position at the CRU when its e-mails exposed a series of embarrassing attempts by climate scientists to undermine careers of skeptics and to hide contradictory data, now says that the entire basis of the “hockey stick” graph could have been invalid:

The academic at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ affair, whose raw data is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has trouble ‘keeping track’ of the information.

Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant papers.  … The data is crucial to the famous ‘hockey stick graph’ used by climate change advocates to support the theory.

But that’s just the start:

Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon.

And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming. …

And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.

Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer between about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high temperatures in northern countries.

But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only applying to the northern part of the world.

Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: ‘There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.

‘For it to be global in extent, the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere. There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.

‘Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less warm than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented.’

The “hockey stick” graph has already been shown to be mainly a creation of graph-scaling bias, but this gets to the heart of the entire argument.  During the MWP, farmers grew crops on Greenland for a couple of centuries.  Until now, AGW advocates insisted that the warming only took place in the northern hemisphere.  If that warming was indeed global, then it dwarfs anything seen in the 20th century, as these two charts from Climate Audit, via  Sonic Frog, demonstrate:

If the massive warming seen in Europe occurred around the world, then what we have seen in the 20th century would be almost certainly a moderate, natural, cyclical warming coming out of a cold trough.  It would also call into question what exactly a good temperature would be for the Earth.  After all, even if the second graph only applied to the northern hemisphere, the increased temperatures didn’t cause the end of life on the planet; indeed, food became more plentiful, and the melting of the polar-region ice didn’t create massive catastrophes.  Further underscoring this interpretation are the cooling cycles seen in the mid-century and last fifteen years or so, expecially since the 1940s saw a huge increase in carbon emissions due to wartime production.

Jones’ late admissions demonstrate that there is nothing “settled” about AGW, and that the process and the data are too murky for any declarations of certainty.

To summarize the latest developments:
* Data for vital ‘hockey stick graph’ has gone missing
* There has been no global warming since 1995
* Warming periods have happened before – but NOT due to man-made changes

HT: HotAir.com