Whatever Happened to “Global Warming”?

By Clive Wakely. Even as recently as a year ago the term “global warming” was very much in vogue, but nowadays its usage by the media is increasingly infrequent. This is odd, considering that it is supposed to be the biggest single threat to mankind outside of nuclear Armageddon.

At the heart of the “global warming” myth is the claim that the earth is warming up, that this warming up is caused by Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions from the industrial world, and that the inevitable result of an ever warming and hostile climate is environmental and economic disaster on a biblical scale.

Since the cause of “global warming” is CO2, a green house gas largely produced by the industrialised Western nations, then it follows that the Western industrialised nations must reduce the amount of CO2 they produce or, better still, licence their usage through the purchase and trading of carbon credits.

Carbon credits thereby becoming a commodity that can be traded for private profit in much the same way as coffee, oil or gold is traded.

Unfortunately for those designing to profit most handsomely from the myth it, like most myths when examined rationally in the cold light of day, just does not stand up to scrutiny; but that does not really matter so long as the public at large is kept in ignorance.

It may be considered something of a generalisation but the “global warming” scam (for that is exactly what it is) really began to gain traction when leading and extremely wealthy and influential figures associated with the American and Western political establishments realised its potential as a means to get even richer and more influential.

This is an inconvenient truth.

To that end the promotion of pseudo and bad science supporting the “global warming” hypothesis was promoted in the media, supported by “experts” often employed or funded by companies and institutions having a vested interest in the development of the alternative energy sector, or dependent upon government grants.

Having embedded “global warming” in the public mind these very same people then used their very considerable political clout to get government to legislate in favour of programmes requiring the investment of vast sums of public money in alternative green energy research and development ventures, and in the concept of carbon credit trading – the latter ostensibly to control the growth in CO2 emissions, but in reality to create a market based upon the privatisation of public taxation.  .

That these same plutocrats were also heavily invested in hedge funds sectored on this potentially lucrative niche of the market and economic activity was, of course, purely coincidental; well – that’s what they would have us believe..

To add an international dimension to the scam – climate is global after all – an already existing United Nations (UN) agency presented a readymade promotional vehicle.

In 1988 The UN set up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) a supposedly scientific body with a supposedly international reputation.

Unfortunately for those championing the “global warming” myth the IPCC, contrary to what one would expect from a scientific body, wasn’t exactly scrupulous when it came to checking the veracity of results upon which a number of its major reports were based; particularly and coincidentally, those reports that gave further credence to “global warming”.

Consequently there followed a series of monumental gaffs that increasingly eroded confidence in that body, called into question its findings and stalled the political motor driving governmental funding and investment in what had been up to then a industrial and financial sector with very serious investment return potential.

Notable gaffs based upon the use of non-peer reviewed, erroneous, incomplete or fabricated data, included the claim that the Himalayas would be virtually glacier free by 2035 – when such an event, if it were to occur at all, was at least 300 years off!

Other “dubious” claims presented as proven fact predicted a huge increase in the frequency of Katrina scale hurricanes and the submersion of various low lying parts of the world – including Pacific island nations and much of the Netherlands – due to sea levels rising at an alarming rate, arising from allegedly rapidly melting icecaps and glaciers!

In addition, media revelations exposing the links between some chief protagonists of “global warming” and hedge fund investment in carbon credit trading and alternative energy development further eroded credibility.

Consequently the media increasingly prefer to use the correct term “climate change” when describing variations in our weather, a term that has no connotations where CO2 is concerned. That this takes the “steam” out of the previous mad rush to carbon trading and alternative green energy development is understandable.

Unlike “global warming”, which has it that the world is heating up and that man-made CO2 is responsible, climate change describes the obvious, that the earth’s climate is in a constant state of change – always has been and always will be – and holds solar activity responsible.

This explains why, for instance, the historical record shows that Western Europe has experienced extended periods of both unusual cold and unusual heat over the last two thousand years – centuries before the first internal combustion engine ever coughed CO2 and belched soot into the atmosphere.

However the big question remains; now that “global warming” as been exposed for the scam it is, how will the global plutocrats make their billions now?

Could it be they intend to ramp up the “War on Terror”, possibly expanding it to include the threats to mankind allegedly posed by Libya, Iran and even, perhaps, Pakistan – such a venture will surely offer unparalleled investment opportunities in the armaments sector for those having the political and financial clout to manipulate such things on the world stage?

5 thoughts on “Whatever Happened to “Global Warming”?

  1. Sadly, Global warming isn’t what you think it is. Whilst the term was originally coined in 1975 by a climate scientist, the ways in which you and the emdia have used it are quite innaccurate. Simply put, most climate scientists look at increasing global climatic instability of which warming is one component. Other components can include temperature fluctuations, increased aridity or rainfall and high incidences of extreme weather events. All of these are demonstrably occuring, as in some areas is surface warming. Articles like this just reinforce ignorance and are to be avoided. And in any case, if we take a raincoat and it stays dry, at least we were prepared. if we leave it and it rains, we get wet. i prefer to stay dry….

  2. I would like to point out that not all BNP members disbelieve in global warming. As far as I am concerned, carbon dioxide can certainly produce a global warming effect, a statement agreed on by the vast majority of the world’s scientists.

    I do follow the party line that the government is using the Global warming agenda to make money through introducing tax regulations.
    Carbon dioxide has always been released; life itself would not exist without the absorption of oxygen and the release of carbon dioxide as a waste product. It is Plant life including trees, which absorb most of this carbon dioxide, using it as a building material. The Vast majority of a tree is made from carbon, which has been processed from the air.

    Why not plant more trees? If the Government was genuinely interested in reducing carbon in the air then why are they not promoting tree-planting projects? The true reason is that they are not at all interested in reducing carbon, but making more money through taxing us.

    So much of the world’s rain forests are being destroyed and nobody in the government mentions how this affects the amount of carbon in the air, why? The Government again has no interest in reducing carbon just taxing us by pointing out its harmful effects.

  3. Good article.
    I sometimes muse about what my parents would have said had they known there would be a ‘climate secretary’ in the future.
    My dad would have laughed his socks off…then said something like: ‘If these clowns think I am paying taxes so they can have daft jobs like this, they can bugger off! Gawd, they’ll be wanting a Ministry for the bloody Moon next!’

  4. i got call from company called mycarbontrade about investing in carbon credits its new thing to me and my stocks not doing well on the market at the monent is it any good ?!?help!!

Leave a Reply