Comments (113) | Add a comment
EDITORIAL
Global warming's awful fortune tellers
Tools
Remember Jeane Dixon, the famous astrologer/psychic who in the 1950s and '60s would annually make a few hundred vague and nebulous predictions, and then boast about the one or two that appeared to come true? Such was her 1956 prediction in Parade magazine that some president some day would be assassinated or die in office. She later boasted that John Kennedy's death was a proof of her ability, ignoring the hundreds of her predictions that came nowhere near the mark.
A mathematician dubbed this bent the Jeane Dixon Effect.
The global warming doomsayers aren't even that good.
In October 2005, Britain's The Guardian newspaper quoted Janos Bogardi, director of the Institute for Environment and Human Security at the United Nations University in Bonn, predicting there would be 50 million climate change refugees by 2010. Mr. Bogardi was quoted as saying, "There are well-founded fears that the number of people fleeing untenable environmental conditions may grow exponentially as the world experiences the effects of climate change."
The Guardian story went on to point out "100 million people live in areas that are below sea level or liable to storm surge. A total of 213 communities in Alaska are threatened by tides that creep three metres further inland each year." It also noted New Zealand was planning to take in the 11,000 residents of Tuvalu, a low Pacific island.
The United Nations report included a map showing hundreds of islands in jeopardy because of rising seas.
The residents of Tuvalu have yet to evacuate, nor has anyone from the United Nations or anywhere else had to shelter those 50 million climate refugees. In fact, researchers from Duke University and Meredith College, using satellite images, have discovered 657 new islands around the globe.
As for the rising seas that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Al Gore's movie warned about, that's another failed prediction.
Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner of Stockholm University, who has been studying the sea level for 35 years, said in an interview, "There is absolutely no signal that the sea level is rising. If anything, you could say that maybe the tide is lowering a little bit, but absolutely no rising.
"And again, where do they get it from?
"They get it from their inspiration, their hopes, their computer models, but not from observation. Which is terrible."
The editorial writers at Investor's Business Daily chewed on the unsavory irony of the fear-mongering predictions of the global alarmists.
"If there is any disruption in food supplies," they wrote, "it's caused by rising food prices ironically caused by increased demand for biofuels to save the earth, and the diversion of cropland and even the clear-cutting of sacred rainforests to produce them.
"The endless fraud perpetrated by the climate hucksters knows no bounds."
Even Jeane Dixon had a better record.
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Folks like Jack are impossible to deal with because they refuse to agree upon a common set of facts that lead to an obvious conclusion, not the one they want. The fact is that our climate is constantly changing. About 10,000 years ago glaciers covered the north extending down as far as Wisconsin. The fact is that our use of carbon based fuels has increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The fact is that we need to always be conscious of leaving the smallest footprint we can upon our environment. Where folks like Jack diverge is on what amplification of these pre-existing processes by human activity. And the fact is that we aren't impacting the already existing climate changes nearly as much as the "scholars" would have you believe. Their disingenuity and ulterior motove of profit on the panic (yes, lefties like profit too, as long as it's THEIR profit) has been exposed. But the proper big picture understanding has been revealed to the folks and we know better.
as I said Jack totally WRONG CHURCH consensus is what got Galilleo in trouble with his science facts and his proven and unproven (at that time) hypothesis'....in that instance also consensus was wrong....thanks for proving that you are on the right track even though you do not uncerstand that fact....(look up fact, consensus, correlation and hypothesis it will do you good)
creepy little rat keeps cutting and pasting...makes me do it too..maybe he'll be eaten by a snake in Harry back yard? Ya Reid RODENT!
Hamster Jack in his little professor suit, tail swishing proudly. telling you all how SCIENCE works!--
Jack.Webb wrote on April 28, 2011 09:18 PM:
"...this isn't the early 1600s, and the Church was Galileo's main opponent.
You see, Galileo was one of the pioneers of the scientific method. You know, the same scientific method that led to the consensus of the vast majority of the planet's climate scientists..."
Now here is one of those "consensus climate scientists" the little rodent is lecturing about.. (this is actually one of the leading voices in that "consensus" group)
East Anglia Climategate-teer and leading proponent of AGW Phil Jones to Australian scientist Warwick Hughes in a 2005 email:
"Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it."
DOH! Homer the Scientist explains it ALL!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704342404574576683216723794.html
Rodents don't know much, but they are shrill about what they think they know.
HEY I can post the same thing over and over too! Who knew so cool! Why would one ever have to write anything original again? Do it once and then..just copy it over and over! WOW!
You go with Gilligann Beck, the other carnival barkers and Exxon-Mobil. I'll go with the consensus of the vast majority of the planet's climate scientists.
Hamster Jack in his little professor suit, tail swishing proudly. telling you all how SCIENCE works!--
Jack.Webb wrote on April 28, 2011 09:18 PM:
"...this isn't the early 1600s, and the Church was Galileo's main opponent.
You see, Galileo was one of the pioneers of the scientific method. You know, the same scientific method that led to the consensus of the vast majority of the planet's climate scientists..."
Now here is one of those "consensus climate scientists" the little rodent is lecturing about.. (this is actually one of the leading voices in that "consensus" group)
East Anglia Climategate-teer and leading proponent of AGW Phil Jones to Australian scientist Warwick Hughes in a 2005 email:
"Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it."
DOH! Homer the Scientist explains it ALL!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704342404574576683216723794.html
Rodents don't know much, but they are shrill about what they think they know.
HEY I can post the same thing over and over too! Who knew so cool! Why would one ever have to write anything original again? Do it once and then..just copy it over and over! WOW!
Small mind, dull wit, but he can copy and paste the same screed like a trained pet on a treadmill!
There's a political future for that boy...
You go Hamster!
You go with Gilligann Beck, the other carnival barkers and Exxon-Mobil. I'll go with the consensus of the vast majority of the planet's climate scientists.
NONE of the climate predictions the co-religionists of Goreism/humanism have come true....NONE.....climate change is a REAL thing, it has happened thousands of times in the world's history, it is happening now in many ways man is too limited to record, but man's cumulative impact since 2000 BC is so puny compared to one day of solar wind and direct radiation and cloud reflection and vulcanic action and ocean currents and the orbit and tilt of the Earth to the sun that it is silly to talk to Human caused GW...we can't even produce winter in summer or VSVS and the earth does that EVERY year (with some minor routine variations) without our help....silly humans.
Gee Hamster say it again. It gets funnier. Read this. (Yes--its a book. BUT! it has pictures!
"Climategate: The Crutape Letters"
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1450512437?ie=UTF8&tag=wattsupwithth-20&link_code=as3&camp=211189&creative=373489&creativeASIN=1450512437