The question has always been why so many people would passionately believe something that is so patently unlikely and for which there is hardly a sliver of serious evidence. Take this which has just been released today by NASA:
NASA satellite data from the years 2000 through 2011 show the Earth’s atmosphere is allowing far more heat to be released into space than alarmist computer models have predicted, reports a new study in the peer-reviewed science journal Remote Sensing. The study indicates far less future global warming will occur than United Nations computer models have predicted, and supports prior studies indicating increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide trap far less heat than alarmists have claimed.
The evidence for global warming is tenuous at best with repeated exposures of lying and bad faith across the entire spectrum amongst those who have argued that such warming is actually taking place. “Hide the decline” has been the approach at almost every turn. No one who was genuinely open to the science could doubt that there are many flaws in the theory. And with the undeniable fact that global warming has stopped during the last decade while CO2 concentrations have increased, there ought to have been some serious questioning of the conclusions that are being drawn by those who support the warming thesis.
Vaclav Klaus, the current President of the Czech Republic, spoke to us today in Melbourne. And since the core question, given the flimsy evidence, is why are they so hard at work trying to convince the rest of us about a climate that may not be warming, that even if it is warming may not be doing so because of human activity, and even if it were human activity may not cause us any harm, why they are so hard at it is indeed the central question of our time. And this is the answer Klaus gives:
They are not interested in climate – they are interested only in restricting our freedoms.
Global warming is an issue that a bunch of people who would otherwise be total nonentities are attempting to ride towards power and wealth. I, too, agree that the science is settled. It is the politics alone that remains open and it is an issue that has the potential to impoverish us while creating positions of power for individuals with terrifying authoritarian personalities who have not a single useful thought about how to successfully manage any single one of our collective affairs. They may be able to save us from a global warming that is not actually taking place, but as for everything else that matters, such as how to make our economies productive, they have no answers. Why we should trust such people with rule over our lives was the question Vaclav Klaus asked for which none of us in the room tonight could think of any reason at all.