Cannot find evidence to prove science wrong

In a recent column that I wrote, I referred to a book that was written 10 years ago “False Alarm” written by Paul MacRae. I am now about halfway through reading it. 

While the information in the book is 10 years old, the attitude and influence of the environmental alarmists have not changed. 

How these alarmists have been able to control the agenda with their phoney science is mind-boggling. 

I think the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is what is giving them some credibility. 

These people are not interested in tolerating any debate on the issue.

They go to great lengths to discredit any opposing information to their position and cause. 

When real science is presented to the public that they cannot dispute they will attack and ridicule the messenger calling them names and accusing them of being climate change deniers rather than attacking the science because they cannot find evidence to prove the science wrong.

They were and still are successful in getting governments and universities to withhold grants to any researcher that does not present an outline in their application that would support the alarmist position on climate change. 

What we have here is a corrupt racket costing billions of dollars. 

The author of the book states that, “the irony here is that the vast majority of the funding for climate research goes to the alarmist believers: more than $5 billion a year in the United States alone. 

They accuse scientists that publish papers on real science of getting funding from the evil oil companies and industrialists. 

Those kinds of organizations got a total of almost $23 million from 1998 to 2005 which is an average of about $3 million a year for 41 organizations for an average per institution of $73,000 a year. 

Now to compare those figures. 

Money to warming alarmists: $5 billion a year; money to warming skeptics: $3 million a year. 

Clearly, the big money is in climate alarmism, not climate skepticism.

Bjorn Lomborg is a Danish statistician who describes himself as a leftwing Greenpeace member who believed in the end of the world rhetoric the environmental alarmist movement puts out. 

He and a group of his students decided to compare the statistics put out by the United Nations with what the environmentalists were saying. 

Here is what they discovered. 

“We expected to show that a talk by Julian Simon was simple American right-wing propaganda. 

“And yes, not everything he said was correct, but– contrary to our expectations – it turned out that a surprisingly large amount of his points stood up to scrutiny and conflicted with what we believed to know. 

“The air in the developed world is becoming less, not more, polluted: people in the developing countries are not starving more, but less and so on.” 

Based on that study he wrote a book called “The Skeptical Environmentalist”. 

He expected a lively debate when that book came out. What he got was implacable hostility. 

He had the audacity to challenge the alarmist environmentalists. 

As a result, Lomborg was labelled a traitor to both the environmental cause and to science itself, to the point where ‘Scientific American’ ran a special section of four articles attacking Lomborg’s optimistic ideas, and then allowed him only a one-page reply in the magazine. 

You can see that the alarmist environmental paradigm will go to great lengths to prevent the real scientific truth from coming out. 

The real power behind all this is the United Nations and the IPCC. 

The United Nations is a leftwing organization that wants to put an end to capitalism.

If they ever got their way the whole world would have a standard of living like Russia did after 70 years of communism. 

THAT would result in mass starvation around the world.


by Herman Schwenk

About the author

ECA Review