Bullshit! The man who established atomic theory, John Dalton, was all alone with his research for 84 years before physicists and nuclear theoretical scientists, including Einstein, began to look into it, and even then they had many conflicts and disagreements. If you dig into the history of scientific discoveries, you will see that being all alone with a theory was the rule rather than the exception.

A reading of the extraordinary and exhaustive history, The Making of the Atom Bomb by Richard Rhodes will demonstrate the enormous conflicts and disagreements among hundreds of scientists on the way toward producing a nuclear weapon, and the incredible difficulties encountered in bringing these "prima donnas" together to work toward a common goal. When they finally got down to business in their isolated labs at Los Alamos, the scientists certainly did not conduct their research and experiments based on consensus. Only General Leslie Groves and the Chief scientist, Robert Oppenheimer, were able to keep the entire project under control. (Note: Rhodes begins the history with a look back to the beginning of atomic theory and brings us forward, step by step. This is one of the most fascinating, often difficult in the technical areas, books on science history I have ever read.)

A scientific consensus is just that, it is a bunch of different opinions from which the common seeds are extracted then synthesized into a "conclusion." This is not how empirical science works and it is most definitely not the basis for applying the Scientific Methods of discovery.

A History of the Disastrous Global Warming Hoax

“It is the greatest deception in history and the extent of the damage has yet to be exposed and measured,” says Dr. Tim Ball in his new book, The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science”.

Dr. Ball has been a climatologist for more than forty years and was one of the earliest critics of the global warming hoax that was initiated by the United Nations environmental program that was established in 1972 and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) established in 1988.

Several UN conferences set in motion the hoax that is based on the assertion that carbon dioxide (CO2) was causing a dramatic surge in heating the Earth. IPCC reports have continued to spread this lie through their summaries for policy makers that influenced policies that have caused nations worldwide to spend billions to reduce and restrict CO2 emissions. Manmade climate change—called anthropogenic global warming—continues to be the message though mankind plays no role whatever.

There is no scientific support for the UN theory.

CO2, despite being a minor element of the Earth’s atmosphere, is essential for all life on Earth because it is the food that nourishes all vegetation. The Earth has passed through many periods of high levels of CO2 and many cycles of warming and cooling that are part of the life of the planet.

“Science works by creating theories based on assumptions,” Dr. Ball notes, “then other scientists—performing their skeptical role—test them. The structure and mandate of the IPCC was in direct contradiction of this scientific method. They set out to prove the theory rather than disprove it.”

“The atmosphere,” Dr. Ball notes, “is three-dimensional and dynamic, so building a computer model that even approximates reality requires far more data than exists and much greater understanding of an extremely turbulent and complex system.” No computer model put forth by the IPCC in support of global warming has been accurate, nor ever could be.

Most of the reports were created by a small group of men working within the Climate Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia and all were members of the IPCC. The result was “a totally false picture supposedly based on science.”

The revelations of emails between the members of the CRU were made available in 2009 by an unknown source. Dr. Ball quotes Phil Jones, the Director of the CRU at the time of the leaks, and Tom Wigley, a former director addressing other CRU members admitting that “Many of the uncertainties surrounding the cause of climate change will never be resolved because the necessary data are lacking.”

The IPCC depended upon the public’s lack of knowledge regarding the science involved and the global warming hoax was greatly aided because the “mainstream media bought into and promoted the unproven theory. Scientists who challenged were denied funding and marginalized. National environmental policies were introduced based on the misleading information” of the IPCC summaries of their reports.

“By the time of the 2001 IPCC Third Assessment Report, the politics and hysteria about climate change had risen to a level that demanded clear evidence of a human signal,” notes Dr. Ball. “An entire industry had developed around massive funding from government. A large number of academic, political, and bureaucratic careers had evolved and depended on expansion of the evidence. Environmentalists were increasing pressure on the public and thereby politicians.”

The growing problem for the CRU and the entire global warming hoax was that no clear evidence existed to blame mankind for changes in the climate and still largely unknown to the public was the fact that the Earth has passed through many natural cycles of warmth and cooling. If humans were responsible, how could the CRU explain a succession of ice ages over millions of years?

The CRU emails revealed their growing concerns regarding a cooling cycle that had begun in the late 1990s and now, some seventeen years later, the Earth is in a widely recognized cooling cycle.

Moreover, the hoax was aimed at vast reductions in the use of coal, oil, and natural gas, as well as nuclear power to produce the electricity on which all modern life depends. There was advocacy of solar and wind power to replace them and nations undertook costly programs to bring about the reduction of the CO2 “fossil fuels” produced and spent billions on the “green” energy. That program is being abandoned.

At the heart of the hoax is a contempt for mankind and a belief that population worldwide should be reduced. The science advisor to President Obama, John Holdren, has advocated forced abortions, sterilization by introducing infertility drugs into the nation’s drinking water and food, and other totalitarian measures. “Overpopulation is still central to the use of climate change as a political vehicle,” warns Dr. Ball.

Given that the environmental movement has been around since the 1960s, it has taken decades for the public to grasp its intent and the torrents of lies that have been used to advance it. “More people,” notes Dr. Ball, “are starting to understand that what they’re told about climate change by academia, the mass media, and the government is wrong, especially the propaganda coming from the UN and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

“Ridiculous claims—like the science is settled or the debate is over—triggered a growing realization that something was wrong.” When the global warming advocates began to tell people that cooling is caused by warming, the public has realized how absurd the entire UN climate change argument has been.

Worse, however, has been “the deliberate deceptions, misinformation, manipulation of records and misapplying scientific method and research” to pursue a political objective. Much of this is clearly unlawful, but it is unlikely that any of those who perpetrated the hoax will ever be punished and, in the case of Al Gore and the IPCC, they shared a Nobel Peace Prize!

We are all in debt to Dr. Ball and a score of his fellow scientists who exposed the lies and debunked the hoax; their numbers are growing with thousands of scientists signing petitions and participating in international conferences to expose this massive global deception.

Warning Signs

OMG Rayban, you and the fools who wrote that article are so confused you don't know what you are talking about. Here are two points to consider, as simply and bluntly as I can put it.

1. YES, the vast majority of scientists agree that climate change is real. Yes it is happening just as it has happened for millions of years. But THAT is not the point!

2. Man and CO2 have nothing to do with it. NOBODY has ever proved that man and CO2 have anything to do with it. Scientists can agree all they want that warming is occurring, but that alone is not proof that man and CO2 are involved.

Your article talks about how scientific opinion has changed since the original petition was signed in 1998-99. I'll tell you how scientific opinion has changed. Since the peak in temperatures in 1998, temperatures have gone sideways. That's nearly 20 years of nearly no change in temperature, despite continued increases in CO2 levels. Whoa partner, how can that be if higher CO2 drives higher temperatures? Well, the majority of REAL scientists are realizing that the true source of climate change is the SUN. OMG, the SUN drives temperatures on earth? Well who da thunk? Turns out, changes in solar activity trends tightly with trends in global temperatures. For example the Maunder minimum and the Dalton minimum in solar activity were directly responsible for the Little Ice Age that lasted from 1350 to about 1750. More recently, the short-term solar cycle has been in decline since 2000, conforming with the stable temperatures since 1998.

Problem for alarmists -- there is NO MONEY in admitting that the sun is the source of global warming. So they can't admit it. They must continue their bogus claim that CO2 is the source to continue getting federal money.

So Rayban, I leave you with a repeat bit of advice. Give it up! We now have a far more intelligent President in the White House who will not sucker for the greedy alarmists who stop at nothing to get federal money. We will not continue to destroy hundreds of thousands of jobs to support bogus science. And we will not hand hundreds of millions of dollars to other countries in support of a bogus climate agreement.