PrintMarch 15, 2009
More Global Warming Pills to Swallow...
The United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, has again pronounced that “Climate Change Evidence is Unequivocal:”
Scientists for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, say the group's latest findings on global warming show rapidly increasing carbon dioxide emissions and quickly shrinking Arctic ice. To compound matters, a separate study released on Wednesday finds that the melting of polar ice is more severe than previously thought.
The IPCC has no interest in being scientifically honest or clear. Its main purpose is to drive the AGW propagandized social policies of the UN, to force upon each of us a needless carbon tax, to empower subjugating socialist economic policies on the world.
Scientific exaggerations and fictions are not just the province of the IPCC. There are other organizations that are complicit. These include the UN’s IPCC sister European organization, the dubious International Council for Science (ICSU) that has sponsored an “endorsed” project called the International Polar Year (IPY). Nothing about this organization or its joint venture projects has anything to do with science itself. In fact, the ICSU seems to exist simply to re-amplify the follies of its bigger brother, the IPCC. Ironically, the immediate source for the IPCC’s latest proclamation (stated above) is the ICSU- IPY venture.
Through such carefully constructed propaganda stemming from these assumed and allegedly prestigious, differing and formidably named scientifically sounding authorities, we are led to believe that some serious and impressive work is being accomplished. But we would be wrong. All of this posturing and cross publishing of data is a ruse meant to disinform an increasingly skeptical public about the “reality” of AGW.
Indeed, multiple publications of this “newly” manufactured, further censored, and rehashed ICSU evidence is currently being spread across the face of the world in every medium, touted as a journalistic release of major global importance. For instance:
ScienceDaily (Feb. 26, 2009) — Multidisciplinary research from the International Polar Year (IPY) 2007-2008 provides new evidence of the widespread effects of global warming in the polar regions. Snow and ice are declining in both polar regions, affecting human livelihoods as well as local plant and animal life in the Arctic, as well as global ocean and atmospheric circulation and sea level….. The wide-ranging IPY findings result from more than 160 endorsed science projects assembled from researchers in more than 60 countries.
Sounds compelling, doesn’t it? But unknown to most, the IPY and ICSU alike are simply bureaucratic organizations used to spin and further perpetuate AGW fictions. Willfully represented is the idea that this research was a major undertaking conducted under the auspices of world scientific authority -- making the research sound more substantial than it really is.
Consider this description of IPY reported in the Sydney Morning Herald:
“IPY has been the catalyst for the development and strengthening of community monitoring networks across the North” said David Carlson, Director of the IPY International Programme Office. “These networks stimulate the information flow among communities and back and forth from science to communities.”
Here is what is actually going on: in an effort to reclaim the moment for AGW’s sinking boat, the ICSU-IPY “project” that was “endorsed” by the IPCC, simply involved the gathering of some previously published research, cherry-picking “over 160 studies” …“assembled from researchers” within “60 countries.” In effect, we are being sold last year’s re-runs as this year’s originals.
Reading carefully we discover that the ICSU didn’t actually participate scientifically with the studies themselves. According to the ICSU’s published annual report [1], all employees appear to be simple bureaucrats and office-staff members (non-scientists), who under the feigned authority (cover) of this non-scientific vacuous organization summoned the cherry-picked data together as instructed. Their only work was to sift through complementary publications and lift out what they wanted while canning anything that disagreed with AGW.
Predetermined conclusions, which were favorable to AGW, were conveniently found. Any and all opposing science was kept from weighing in, curiously at a time when more scientists , international scientific organizations and nations are doubting the AGW dogma. Clever timing….
ICSU has yet to actually list the studies that play into their dubious conclusions, though I don’t doubt that a list can be found. The point remains that for the most part there is no direct contact, no balanced oversight, nor relationship between ICSU staff and the authors of these studies. Call me a skeptic, but I doubt whether most authors were ever notified as to the inclusion of their work in the study or are aware of how accurately their work was being “scientifically” represented. (Compare this situation with the unauthorized use of data in the IPCC reports.)
Moreover, looking at ICSU’s published annual report [1], they declare a budget of some $4.5 million (€3.5 million a year), truly a paltry sum for a group that claims to be responsible for so much scientific activity. Nothing in its budget is spent on direct scientific research. ICSU describes itself as promoting global activities and cozy relationships with other NGOs, nations, and national grant awarding bodies all sympathetic to AGW agendas. In essence, the ICSU is simply a part of the propaganda machine of the UN and other AGW-complicit countries.
Misrepresented by the ICSU-IPY-IPCC joint venture, was the real and published scientifically vetted data that shows the Arctic and the Antarctic are in fact not warming but have returned to ice levels akin to 1979. These facts were deftly avoided in the report -- even though some of the information came from within IPCC itself.
Also not mentioned in the “study” was the fact that much of the recently measured Antarctic warming and ice-decline was verifiably biased and attributable to very active volcanoes indigenous in the isolated western area of the continent. It is clear that eastward Antarctica is cooling, as are the oceans around it, and the total ice-mass is growing.
Let us not forget, as noted in an updated [2] clarification from University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center, a contributor to the IPCC report, this information decidedly and suspiciously not included in the ICSU collection:
The Observed global sea ice area, defined here as a sum of N. Hemisphere and S. Hemisphere sea ice areas, is near or slightly lower [within 3%] than those observed in late 1979 [emphasis mine] as noted in the Daily Tech article [January 1, 2009]. However, observed N. Hemisphere sea ice area is almost one million sq. km [386,102 sq miles] below values seen in late 1979 and S. Hemisphere sea ice area is about 0.5 million sq. km [193,051 sq miles] above that seen in late 1979, partly offsetting the N. Hemisphere reduction.
Ironically, and as if on cue, on Feb. 18 the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center discovered that from at least early January, possibly before, a defective performance of satellite measured “drifting” caused an underestimation of the extent of Arctic sea ice by 193,000 square miles, which is approximately the size of California, half of the decrease previously posited again being “found.” That’s a lot of ice that was apparently not counted in the first go around, and which still remains unaccounted for in ICSU-ICY summaries -- if the summaries could be properly vetted.
So the data confirming that sea ice has now returned to levels closely consonant with 1979 levels was either censored, disregarded, or was late coming to the table for the ICSU report. But don’t expect an update soon.
Just as we are being misled by the IPCC reports which have previously exaggerated, falsified, and literally changed the scientific authors’ data and conclusions in obedience to their self-fulfilling AGW prophecies, so are the bureaucratic concoctions of the ISSU and IPY found wanting as well. Why else leave out any and all challenges?
Disgraceful. If this weren’t so serious, it would be comical.
Dr. Gregory Young is a neuroscientist and physicist, a doctoral graduate of the University of Oxford, Oxford, England. He currently chairs a privately funded think-tank engaged in experimental biophysics.
1. ICSU annual report can be found here.
2. Update information can be found here .
