Money dictates claims on climate

Arctic Ice 2I got a chuckle out of the quote in “A thought” by James Hansen in Wednesday’s paper. His assertion that you cannot blame a single event on global warming, but you can blame frequency and intensity on global warming, seems to fly in the face of reality.

Let’s look at a prediction made by Al Gore. When Gore accepted the Nobel Prize in 2007, he predicted that in seven years there would be no Arctic ice cap. His dire prediction was not only wrong but incorrect by a long shot. Both the U.S. Snow and Ice Data Center (part of NASA) and the Danish Meteorological Institute report significant growth and that an area the size of Alaska that was water is now frozen and part of that ice cap. While alarming the world about the perils of a dramatically rising sea level and the ensuing floods, the former vice president was spending $8 million on an ocean-front estate in Montecito, California, the height of hypocrisy.

In 2004, researchers claimed Hudson Bay polar bear numbers would fall from 900 to fewer than 700 by 2011. In fact, they have risen to more than 1,000. Another failed prediction was of multiple massive hurricanes bordering on Armageddon reaching our shores. Hurricane landfalls were at the 100-year average from 2001 to 2010 with seven during the decade.

The fact that the name of the movement was changed from “global warming” to “climate change” should be alarming. Of course, the climate has changed and will continue to do so as it has done since the time of creation. Some of the conditions touted as being manmade were present in our environment before man could have affected them. And that is “settled science?” I don’t think so.

If the real settled science in this instance were found, it would be at the end of the money trail.