Al Gore's Global Fraud

James Lewis writes a great column about how Al Gore has been able to pull off the man-made global warming fraud on the whole world:

In Stalin's Russia any dissenter from the Party Line was guilty. Innocence had to be proved. It's a standard tyrant's trick. During the reign of Oliver Cromwell in England, witchhunters did not have to prove that their victims were guilty. The accused witches had to prove their innocence.

That's what Al Gore has done to science: He and his friends have flipped innocence and guilt from normal science to Stalinist science.

In Al Gore's America, any "global warming denier" is guilty until proven innocent. He or she must have been bought off by Big Oil.   Skeptics, no matter how well-qualified, must prove the negative about really silly alarmist hogwash. And whenever some prediction is falsified, the warm mongers have an explanation: it's just a temporary glitch in the data. Oh, yes, we were wrong about 1998, but just wait till 2050! The excuses are endless.

It's so convenient that the proof of the hype is so far in the future that everyone living now will be dead before it becomes apparent (though global warming disaster has already been predicted decades ago in relation to the current times - why isn't anyone recalling those predictions?).  In some ways, that should be the first clue that skepticism is warranted.  Lewis points out that in real science, it is the proposer who must prove his theories rather than the establishment:

Albert Einstein had to prove in his historic 1905 paper that there was a fundamental flaw in classical physics.  The distinctive predictions of Relativity Theory had to be verified for decades afterwards. Some are still being tested today. His predecessor Max Planck remarked that he encountered so much skepticism that he had to wait for the older generation of physicists to die off before his work was accepted.

So how has Gore pulled off the fraud?

It's really simple. They just flipped the burden of proof and put it on the "deniers" --- the skeptics, who don't believe the computer models. With the Left in control of the media, you can do it.

Yep, he borrowed Stalin's time-tested tactic to put a backward spin on the issue.  He also proposes the best way to combat the hysteria.

To answer the biggest con trick in the history of science, you just have to address a single question to True Believers:  What's your evidence for this barmy idea?

As far as actual facts go, the evidence is scant at best.

There are no facts robust enough, consistent enough, and verified enough to support the mass  hysteria. The climate system is hypercomplex, nonlinear and poorly understood. The media spinners are immensely ignorant about real science, and just care about the next scare headline. There's a lot of wild speculation and a mob of self-serving politicians, bureaucrats and media types who stand to gain a ton of power and money by suckering millions of taxpayers. Al Gore just started a 300 million dollar PR campaign to convince everybody.  When was the last time you saw 300 million bucks being spent to promote a scientific hypothesis that was already proven? We're not spending millions to prove the existence of gravity. The uproar and money involved in this fraud is in direct proportion to the lack of solid facts.

The last ten years have seen global cooling, not warming.  

Temperatures over the last hundred years look like the stock market: ups and downs, a very slow rise of a fraction of a degree until the late 1990s, then a drop for the last ten years, with so much cooling in the last year as to cancel out a century of warming. Why? Nobody really knows, but Mr. Sun is the logical suspect.

Lewis suggests that Gore is simply playing for money, power, and fame.  I agree.  I think that another part of how Gore has done this is to frame it as a moral obligation.  On a certain level, people with no true moral foundation find a lot of comfort in the idea of saving the entire planet by doing a few little things like changing their light bulbs and driving a hybrid vehicle.  It's a laughable idea, but it's seductively easy and (supposedly) has a huge impact.  That's a lot of feel-good for not much effort, and is attractive to a lot of people.

I would encourage you to question the man-made global warming doom-sayers, and ask them for the evidence in favor of it.  My guess is they'll usually say something like, 'science has proven it', as if that is enough.  Press them: what proof?  If it has been proven, why are hundreds (if not thousands) of highly-educated scientists saying it is not valid?  What about the real evidence of the temperature record since 1998?  If it has been proven, why is Gore having to spend another $300 million to propagate his ideas?

This truly is a global fraud, perpetrated through Stalinist tactics by a global fraudster: Al Gore, the self-appointed high priest of the Church of Global Warming.

There's my two cents.