Global warming fraud

Date: 15 Feb 15

By: Frank Gue, B.Sc., MBA, P.Eng.,

2252 Joyce St.,

Burlington, ON L7R 2B5

905 634 9538

For: Steve Buist, The Spectator

Re: Flawed science, Feb. 14 Spec

GE, Steve.

Good article. I hope some of the vaccination opposition takes it to heart.

However, when you write “ … even though something like 97 percent of eminent scientists believe in the premise of global warming”, you are a victim of several items in your own 10-point “literacy” guide.

That 97 percent is of a very small, very biased sample of folk some of whom were not climate scientists at all. Further, a “consensus” is not proof, merely an expression of opinion. There was once a consensus that there are only four elements, air, earth, fire, and water. Try that on with your Physics professor at Mac.

Consider: In a certain “survey” several years ago, three people were consulted, two of whom gave a certain answer. The “survey” was then publicized to the effect that “67% of those surveyed thought that ….. “ True statement, yes? Would you start a war based upon that statement? “Figures don’t lie but liars figure.”

I don’t suggest that there isn’t global warming; because in Burlington, on the walls of a 5-foot excavation right here on Joyce St., I can trace five warm-cool, cool-warm reversals. See the photo below.

Perhaps

we’re entering a warming period. We’ll know for sure in about 1,000 years. Watch for it.

Further,

The AGW subject, sadly, is well peppered with examples of misused math, invented data, and outright fraud. Example:

In January the Spec published under a black headline that there is no further doubt about global warming according to NASA, when, in fact, by NASA’s own figures there is lots of doubt and some deliberate misuse of formal statistics (I speak as a one-time statistics teacher). The tiny amount of global warming cited is far inside the percent probable error of the measurements themselves. This has to mean that the NASA people deliberately and fraudulently misused their own numbers. There can be no other interpretation. The next day there was a flood of contrary, debunking, hard evidence on the internet, none of which got published in the MSM that I consulted. You can find it today. Try search words “Global Warming fraud”. You’ll find hundreds in 0.46 second.

The MSM has historically demonstrated adherence to the Lemming Law (Everyone is doing it so I’d better do it too [cuz my tenure depends on it]) by lending influential credence to everything from South Sea islands to Dutch tulip bulbs to dot-com startups.

Steve, don’t be part of that. Your reputation is too good to be ruined that way.

Best,

Frank.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s