Climate change as a result of the natural cycle of warming and cooling of the Earth has occurred throughout history.
The proposition that, beginning with the industrial age, this natural cycle might have been adversely affected, causing the Earth’s temperature to rise unnaturally and threaten some sort of planetary disaster, is worthy of scientific investigation.
But the proposition became a consensus premise of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change with its first report in 1990.
The IPCC, established by the UN through the efforts of its two organizations – the World Meteorological Organization and UN Environment Program – reports that increased emissions into the atmosphere as a result of human activity are causing a greenhouse effect by raising the Earth’s surface temperature.
For nearly two decades, the IPCC-backed “scientific” establishment made this proposition the official dogma of the environmental movement.
It has pushed the policy of forcefully reducing carbon emissions by industrialized and industrializing countries through UN-backed international treaties such as the Kyoto Agreement of 1997.
Those who question the consensus premise of the IPCC provide independent research on climate change and are skeptical of climate predictions based on computer models are tagged as “deniers” – similar to the despicable folks who deny the Holocaust – by the high priests of the environment movement and their legions of “green” enthusiasts.
Science without a healthy dose of skepticism and which isn’t open to hard questioning becomes ideology.
An ideology is a closed system that distorts or excludes empirical data to serve its dogma.
As opposed to ideology or pseudoscience, science advances through critical thinking by subjecting theories to falsification tests and revisions.
There is no church of science except independent researchers commonly engaged in humility, trust in each other’s integrity, and certain of one thing, as Einstein noted: “That all our science, measured against reality, is primitive and childlike – and yet it is the most precious thing we have.”
The U.K.-based Climate Research Unit is one of the world’s four centres where global-temperature data is compiled.
CRU computers were hacked by a whistleblower. The content of many of the 3,000 leaked e-mails and documents by CRU scientists confirms how much the “science” of man-made global warming has been subjected to deliberately false manipulation of data, deception and pseudoscience.
All in the interests of serving the ideology the IPCC has sold as science and for which it was awarded the 2007 Nobel peace prize.
Ian Plimer is an Australian geologist, a man-made global-warming skeptic and author of Heaven and Earth: Global Warming – The Missing Science.
Plimer writes that insisting “humans change climate requires abandoning all we know about history, archeology, geology, astronomy, and solar physics. This is exactly what has been done.
“The answer to this enigma was revealed last week. It is fraud.”
Now with proof of the scam in the pseudoscience of man-made global warming, the right thing should be a pause in pushing the IPCC agenda by parties invested in promoting it since Kyoto.
But since big governments and organizations such as the UN are not known for acknowledging any error or wrongdoing on their part, the global warming fraud will continue being pushed unless the people put a halt to it.
He is a member of the Board of Directors for the Center for Islamic Pluralism based in Washington, D.C., a Senior Fellow with the Canadian Coalition for Democracies, and an academic-consultant with the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. He has been a consultant with CIDA on development issues and has published widely in academic journals on foreign policy matters and area studies of the Middle East and South Asia.
Mansur is featured on the documentary Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West produced by the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He also unsuccessfully ran for the Canadian Alliance party in 2000.
Mansur has been accused by Canadian Islamic Congress of using "provocative, self-serving rhetoric", and for "promoting an anti-Arab and anti-Muslim agenda".
He is an Ismaili Muslim.
At a press conference on October 2, 2008, Mansur stated that "Islam is my private life, my conscience...[but] my faith does not take precedence over my duties...to Canada and its constitution, which I embrace freely;" "I am first and most importantly a Canadian;" "only in a free society will you find Islam as a faith and not a political religion." Mansur also criticized New Democratic Party Leader Jack Layton, whom Mansur said "has gone to bed with Islamists", because he is running candidates in Ontario and Quebec who are closely identified with the push for Sharia law.
- Israel: Decades-old conflict not about to cease - Saturday November 24, 2012 at 1:56 pm
- The better man lost the U.S. election - Saturday November 10, 2012 at 9:16 am
- The puzzle in U.S. presidential elections - Saturday November 3, 2012 at 8:43 am
