Carbon dating debunked dating friends online tajikistan
Many are not scientists at all, but economists or sociologists - even just environmental activists with no scientific qualifications whatever.The IPCC was never intended to be an impartial body, weighing the evidence for and against man-made global warming and coming up with objective conclusions.Sea levels may have been rising very slowly, but no faster than they have been for 200 years.In other words, as a growing army of genuine experts across the world has been trying to tell us, there is not a single item on the list of apocalyptic predictions we have been fed for so long by the IPCC and the likes of Al Gore which is being called into question by what is actually happening to the world's climate.The hockey stick was used by the IPCC and Gore as the supreme icon of their cause.
There is no less ice at the Earth's poles today than there was 30 years ago.One of the more suspicious features of the man-made global warming theory is precisely this extraordinary pressure, which has been built up to insist the evidence for it is so overwhelming that it is a moral crime to question it.For several years, anyone daring to doubt the theory - not least some of the world's most eminent climate scientists - has been vilified as a 'denier', to be compared with those who try to deny the historical reality of Hitler's Holocaust. and Europe, it has long been a major scandal that those daring to doubt the official orthodoxy on global warming face ostracism from their academic colleagues, have had research funding withdrawn and have not been allowed to publish their papers in the leading scientific journals.Almost all this handful of scientists were firmly committed to the official view on global warming before they were appointed - and they include those whose leaked emails have now created a shock wave running around the world.Tellingly, what they also all have in common is that their findings are based on computer models programmed to assume the chief cause of global warming is the rise in greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide.In fact, the true cost of the act, if complied with to the letter, would certainly be far higher, because what it lays down is that, over the next 40 years, we must cut our emissions of carbon dioxide by over 80 per cent.Pretty well every aspect of our lives in today's industrialised society involves emitting carbon dioxide - and short of some technological revolution as yet undreamed of, the only way we could meet that target would be to close almost every part of our economy.And now come these leaked emails showing that the very scientists who were responsible for championing the hockey stick - all at the heart of the IPCC establishment - have been regularly discussing how the evidence could be manipulated to promote their cause.The greatest myth of all in this story is the claim that the succession of alarmist reports produced by the IPCC represents a 'consensus' of the views of '2,500 of the world's top climate scientists'. The vast majority of those who contribute to those IPCC reports are not climate scientists.Al Gore was one of the first to condemn as 'flat earthers' anyone who was sceptical of his reckless scaremongering, likening such people to the cranks who believe the Moon landings were all somehow 'faked on a movie lot in Arizona' (delightfully, among the scientists who have come out as 'climate sceptics' are two of the U. astronauts who did land on the Moon, Dr Buzz Aldrin and Dr Jack Schmitt). But equally suspicious has been the way the advocates of the warming orthodoxy have been repeatedly shown to have fiddled the scientific evidence being used to promote it.The most notorious example of this was the so-called 'hockey stick' graph, which for years was brandished to show that, after flat-lining for 1,000 years, global temperatures had suddenly soared upwards in the late 20th century to levels never known before in recorded history.