This is essentially a scientific argument and it’s quite amazing that all the foul mouthed abuse is being slung by the side who claim to rest their case solely on scientific fact. If that’s the case then why the need for all the vitriolic bullying, bordering on fanaticism? It seems that an important component of the tactic is to whip up a frenzy to get mob rule to carry on the argument where the facts don’t add up.

I apologise for even repeating this example, and I won’t go into explanation as to what it suggests, but the fact that it was spouted by an Anglican Bishop in the UK just makes my jaw drop in amazement.

People who fail to tackle climate change are acting like an Austrian man who locked his daughter in a cellar for 24 years, an Anglican bishop has said.

The Bishop of Stafford, Gordon Mursell, wrote in a parish letter that not confronting global warming meant people were “as guilty as” Josef Fritzl. source

Of course Dr R K Pachauri’s comments are legendary, but not in a good way, and the IPCC must cringe with embarrassment every time he opens his mouth. They might like to honour him with the title ‘Lord of the Blooper’ to recognise his ability to offend fried and foe alike with such little effort or thought.

“[skeptics] are people who deny the link between smoking and cancer; they are people who say that asbestos is as good as talcum powder, I hope that they apply it [asbestos] to their faces every day.” source

But by attacking both the government’s own report on the glaciers – which he described as “voodoo science” – and the environment secretary, Jairam Ramesh – who he accused of “strengthening the claims of climate change deniers” – he made powerful enemies.

If Dr Pachauri leaves any legacy to the world after he leaves the IPCC, it will be recognition that you don’t make a weak argument any stronger with abuse, something UK politicians haven’t learned with their accusations of skeptics being ‘flat earthers’ and ‘deniers’.

I can respond using equal childishness, but lacking their offensiveness – with ‘Just because you’re losing.’

Here was my reply:

I am a legal advocate, totally unpaid in relation to fighting these climate criminals. I have litigated against government corruption for over a decade in the U.S. federal Court Second Circuit as well as the New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Appeal Court and Division of Human Rights. I have insight plus I still haven’t lost a case. If that makes me ‘obsessive’ about fighting corruption then count me in.

I am 100% in support of conservation, recycling and prudent use of natural resources. I have close friends who were former members of environment groups until those organizations became heavily politicized in the early 1990’s.

I argue the free market has been most adept at taking care of the supply and demand issues over dwindling fossil fuels. Fuel price rises compel us to conserve regardless of unnecessary government policy. Nationalized industries have an appalling history of waste and inefficiency. Common sense tells us if a commodity becomes more rare it goes up in price, so we become more precious about it. Technological development occurs best in a free market economy so we do not need big government to force us to ‘go green.’
Many so-called green energy alternatives are uneconomic and futile e.g. wind turbines use vast amounts of copper, are wholly unreliable plus extremely expensive to build and maintain. Without huge government subsidies no one would touch them. France runs on 80% nuclear power most efficiently and happily. Nuclear power is the only practicable long-term solution for national base energy loads.

Humans are NOT heating up the planet. Simply check the two oldest and most reliable ground RAW temp records in the world: the CET (England) and the Central European Record (Prague). These prove that for the past several hundred years global warming has been occurring naturally at a rate of 0.25 C per century, entirely normal for the Holocene interglacial period in which we live.

Indeed, the warming blip that climate scaremongers get all hot about is that time from 1975-98, which compares neatly with those entirely natural yet similar blips of 1860-80 and 1910-40 and which no climatologist attributes to human emissions. Therefore, we see no human climate-forcing signal.

The truth is in the science. Science is about facts, not a show of hands. The complexity of climate involves a multiplicity of scientific disciplines. Yet climate scientists have had to rely on a small core of a mere two dozen or so ‘elite’ climate scientists who are responsible for the ‘homogenized’ temp data sets produced from a central WMO source. That is where the fraud lies.

Government agencies GHCN, NOAA and CRU have been artificially heating up the numbers to show a warming signal; they call it ‘homogenisation.’ Independent analysts have now exposed the fraud of homogenization of climate data. The raw data so far examined proves that older temperatures have been pushed down, while recent temperatures have been ramped up–that’s fraud.

Hundreds of honorable climate scientists have been fed the faked numbers so that they have been duped for years, en masse. This is why independent auditors, for the past seven years, have tried to have access to how the homogenization process was done by those few crooks. But they have been declined. Why?

From the leaked Climategate emails we learn that this crooked elite rigged the peer-review process and also admitted to ‘fudging’ the data to ‘hide the decline.’ Discredited Professor Phil Jones of CRU admitted to the BBC that there has been ‘no statistically significant’ temperature rise since 1995, proving the world had been continuously fed the lie that the temperatures were rising at a ‘catastrophic’ rate.

I have analyzed the leaked emails from CRU, and in my opinion they prove a conspiracy to commit fraud. This is the greatest Ponzi scheme of all time. Bernie Madoff is a small fry by comparison. That is why 16 major climate actions have just hit the US courts. The truth is out and the game is up. I care not whether you ‘believe’ in global warming or not–the task of legal advocates, like me, as for honorable scientists, is to work with the facts.

I am actively lobbying the UK police and Attorney General to bring criminal charges against Jones et al. I can assure you, on the lower quantum of proof in civil courts, the likes of Al Gore, Jones, Mann, Hansen, etc. will be fined and made bankrupt. But we need their kind behind bars–they have wasted over $50 billion of taxpayer’s money already. Even this corrupt UK government had to admit that Freedom Of Information (FOI) requests were criminally refused as per ICO investigations. Only self-serving politicians continue to obstruct justice. But as they see their political constituency dwindle they, too, will soon capitulate to facts and reason.

Carbon trading was going to make billions for a select few. That investment bubble has now burst. Climategate has irrevocably changed history. The proposed carbon economy was intended as a global wealth redistribution scheme and green taxes were the thread to sew together all nations into a one world government. Read the Copenhagen Draft Treaty–it spells out in black and white the plan for a new world socialist order–no elected representatives for you, no democracy! Read it, and then try telling me I’m a conspiracy theorist. Just be thankful climate skeptics saved you from that dystopia.