Climate Change’s Evolution From Prediction to Hysteria to Global Money Maker


Climate science is made up of claims based on predictions from computer models and no small amount of bad science backed by committed totalitarians.

One example of a climate model prediction that didn’t come true out of hundreds is this:

“Clear climate trends are seen from the computer simulations. Foremost the winter months will be warmer all over Germany. Depending of CO2 emissions, temperatures will rise by up to 4°C, in the Alps by up to 5°C.”

Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, Hamburg, 7 Dec 2009.

Exaggerated climate change has existed for a long time but it got its biggest boost from the Great Nationalizer, Barack Obama, who is using it as an opportunity to nationalize industries and re-direct the U.S. fighting machines of the Armed Forces into global warming fighting machines.

Climate Change is the great controller of the masses. If we all believe it, we won’t fight back. Peoples’ eyes glaze over when scientific facts are laid out and they go catatonic within seconds, but people have an obligation to at least get the gist of what is going on and question the “decided” science – which is in of itself an oxymoron. The idea behind science is to question and base findings on facts, not computer models.

Assumptions, theories, computer models are all great if they are not portrayed as fact.

It’s beneficial to go back into history to understand where we are today and where we should be on the global warming front. I’ve included only a small fraction of quotes from the so-called experts, but many scientists agreed and echoed these claims. One must always keep in mind that all the people can be wrong. We only need to look at Nazi Germany to know that is true.

In the 1970’s, the coming ice age was the calamity we were all supposed to prepare for.

Earth Day’s Kenneth Watt, an ecologist summed up the assumptions of the day:

“The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

At least  in those days, people recognized unsubstantiated claims for what they were.


In 1922, the Associated Press report was posted in The Washington Post. In it, they claimed:

“The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer, and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot. Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.”

The announcement didn’t bring too much response at the time.

James Hansen, head of NASA’s Goddard Institute and later at Columbia University, is a world renowned climatologist. The Economic Policy Journal quoted him as telling journalist Rob Reiss in 1988 that by 2008:

“The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water. And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change…. There will be more police cars … [since] you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.” declared (essentially inventing) the “Greenhouse Gas Effect” (GHE) to be 33 degrees centigrade (33C). [This was based on his assumption that the Earth is a black body with a radiating temperature of (-18.3C). Since the radiating temperature of Earth is measured to be about +15C, Hansen declared the GHE to be 33C.]

Two years earlier he said the Earth would be two degrees warmer within 20 years.

In 1988, a NASA climate expert gave testimony that the ‘high latitudes’ (i.e. polar) would experience greater warming due to growth of human greenhouse gases (GHGs), including CO2 emissions. This year, scientists predict ice sheets will completely disappear by 2020 (CNN), raising ocean levels.

The newest empirical research runs completely counter to these fears and beliefs. Over the satellite era, some 30+ years, Antarctica’s ice sheets have slightly grown and the South Pole’s sea ice extent is at record levels.The Antarctic region is not warming.

On July 5, 1989, Noel Brown, then the director of the New York office of the United Nations Environment Program, warned of a “10-year window of opportunity to solve” global warming — “entire nations could be wiped off the face of Earth by rising sea levels if the global-warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000. Coastal flooding and crop failures would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos.”

In 1990, the esteemed Princeton professor and UN IPCC author, Michael Oppenheimer, predicted that within five year, the greenhouse effect would be “desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots.”

All that never took place but 1995 became a very important year in global warming research.

In 1995, the rewriting of climate history began with the later discredited proof of global warming that has taken place from the Medieval Warm Period until today. The incorrect data was collected through the famous Hockey Stick graph.

It was pivotal in achieving today’s hysteria and though it has been completely debunked and the scientist behind it humiliated, the theory lives on without it. The theory doesn’t need facts in today’s environment. The idea is to achieve environmental – Marxist – justice at all costs.

The entire carbon poison theory rests on it. To make a long story short in explaining it, Professor Michael Mann claimed he could determine the beginnings of global warming from Medieval times by using tree rings. As it turned out, he was comparing unlike entities and his results were meaningless. You can read the explanation at A Sceptical Mind.

Scientists are supposed to question but that’s not the case with climate science, they parrot like mindless birds.

By 1996, Oppenheimer claimed, the Platte River of Nebraska “would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers.” The situation would get so bad that “Mexican police will round up illegal American migrants surging into Mexico seeking work as field hands.”

While working as an adviser to Al Gore, Oppenheimer said he stood by the predictions.“There’s been extensive drought, devastating drought, in significant parts of the world. The fraction of the world that’s in drought has increased over that period.”

In fact, there has been little change in droughts over the past 60 years. That’s according to scientists reporting on a study in Nature magazine in 2012.

The snow would stop falling!

In March 2000, David Viner, working at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, told the U.K. Independent that within “a few years,” snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event” in Britain. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.” The headline for that myth was “Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past.”

In 2004, he was still at it. Viner warned that skiing in Scotland would soon be a memory because of global warming. “It’s too hot,” he fretted to The Guardian. Another expert, Adam Watson with the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, told the same paper that the skiing industry in Scotland had “less than two decades left to go’.

Many others said the snow was disappearing everywhere. In 2006, Daniela Jacob o Max Planck Institute for Meterology, Hamburg, claimed:

“Yesterday’s snow… Because temperatures in the Alps are rising quickly, there will be more precipitation in many places. But because it will rain more often than it snows, this will be bad news for tourists. For many ski lifts this means the end of business.”

I needn’t tell you they are still skiing in Scotland and there is plenty of snow everywhere.

A leaked Pentagon climate report appeared in early 2004 in a piece at the U.K. Observer, under the tabloid-style title: “Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us.” Also highlighted by the authors was this summary: “Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war” and “Britain will be ‘Siberian’ in less than 20 years.” It was discredited but still, the fiction was out there and the hysterics would soon refine their approach.

In 2007, the chief of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said, “If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment.”

Also in 2007, under the headline: “Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’,” the BBC posted “modeling studies” that indicated “northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years.” This was left online until 2014. Many scientists agreed.

Well, that hasn’t happened.

On Jan. 19, 2009, James Hansen again, climate expert, firmly declared that President Obama “has only four years to save the Earth” — unfortunately he’s been doing the opposite I might add.

Back in 2006, Al Gore told us that we had only “10 years” to solve the global-warming problem.

The just-released report by the IPCC toned down much of the rhetoric from its previous reports of its predictive models because of the 18-year pause in global warming.

The experts can’t explain the pause because they don’t know what’s going on in general.

They are quick to make up whatever excuse necessary to cover their tails however. One such excuse concerns the fact that the sea levels are not rising. It’s a Mr. Obama favorite and as he likes to say, “The Ocean Ate My Global Warming”. It’s been debunked by the Associated Press. Last year, the AP reported that our government pressured the UN IPCC to incorporate that excuse [without basis in fact I might add].

What that Obama line means is as follows. The experts had to do something quickly so they fiddled with sea level data and came up with “global isostatic adjustment” which claims that the sea levels would have receded and that’s why we aren’t seeing the rise. It’s explained well at Watts Up With That.

In 2010, Al Gore aka “The Goracle” definitively stated that “the entire North Polarized [sic] cap will disappear in five years.”  He said it more than once and suggested at the U.N. climate summit in Copenhagen that there was a 75% chance the entire north polar ice cap would be ice-free in the summers within five to seven years.

As it happens, the Arctic ice hass expanded and is expected to continue expanding for the indefinite future.

In 2012, at the beginning of his second term, Mr. Obama said, “Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and powerful storms.”

That’s not true either.

From Economic Policy Journal:

As Forbes magazine pointed out last year, the number of wildfires has plummeted 15 percent since 1950, and according the National Academy of Sciences, that trend is likely to continue for decades. On “droughts,” a 2012 study published in the alarmist journal Nature noted that there has been “little change in global drought over the past 60 years.” The UN’s own climate alarmists were even forced to conclude last year that in many regions of the world, “droughts have become less frequent, less intense, or shorter.”

Regarding hurricanes and tornadoes, it probably would have been hard for Obama to choose a worse example to illustrate the alleged threat of man-made warming. Contrary to predictions by global warmists, hurricanes and tornadoes have been hitting in record-setting low numbers.

The United Kingdom’s Nigel Lawson, former chancellor of the Exchequer, has argued that it makes far more economic sense to concentrate on adaptation rather than mitigation, which is probably impossible with existing technologies as well as the political reality.

A sane voice in a sea of toadies!

Richard W. Rahn, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and chairman of the Institute for Global Economic Growth, said that crisis sells and that is why we are seeing this melodrama play out.

“It allows politicians to tax, spend and assert more control,” he wrote in a piece for The Washington Times, from which a number of the quotes in this article were gleaned.

Sen. Jim Inhofe, a longtime fact checker of climate change, believes climate change is a power grab by the U.N. aided by Mr. Obama and his administration.

At the Heartland Institute’s Tenth Annual Climate Change conference this past Thursday, Sen. Inhofe addressed the costs briefly.

Several years ago, hundreds of leaked emails between scientists and other movers and shakers in the climate change debate, caused a brief stir. In the emails, the authors admitted the science was grossly exaggerated to manipulate the masses into going along with them.

The media immediately ignored the event dubbed as “Climategate.”

We now have EPA head Gina McCarthy putting out costly, suffocating “laws” disguised as “rules” that will give the government control of all the nation’s water down to puddles on everyone’s property.

The next video is a clip from the ABC special Earth 2015 which aired in 2009 and as seen on Newsbusters. It made the most ominous and ridiculous predictions just as they do today, only they didn’t come true. So far, most of the predictions are like this.

The next Doom and Gloom video is the full special of Earth 2100. Appropriately, communist VanJones speaks at the end along with other assorted leftists. They want you out of your cars because they decided that humans caused it and they have arrogantly decided they know how to control the weather.

We must be good stewards of our planet but these people are nutty extremists wasting our money with failed policies. They even blame terrorists on global warming.

As one example, in the movie, they talk about the gas crisis of the 1970s but that was a direct result of bad government policies to name one incorrect statement from the film.

They didn’t put facts into the film, just hysteria. There’s no there there.

Notice in the film how they blame us so they can then rape us.

They claim China and India will cut emissions if the U.S. passes over technology which can’t be done since it belongs to private enterprises, so, generously, they’ve offered our money to pay for it. The fact is that the fake China agreement with Obama is a promise by China to think about doing something in 2030.

They even put out the faux story of the boiling frog as if it were true. They blamed the fall of Rome on the weather when that was not at all the problem. They destroyed themselves from within.

A better video to watch is Richard Linzen’s deconstructing of global warming hysteria.

Another good lecture to watch is one by engineer Dr. Pierre Latour.