UK Daily Mail reporter Jonathan Petre has written the following about Professor Phil Jones, one of the primary sources of “information” regarding the climate change “crisis” whose work formed much of the basis for Al Gore’s slide show, “An Inconvenient Truth” :
“Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer in medieval times than now – suggesting global warming may not be a man-made phenomenon. And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no ‘statistically significant’ warming.”
Even a casual reading of the latest on “Climate Change” reveals that the climate-change campaign is coming apart at the seams. Many people, ranging from scientists to ordinary citizens, have been convinced over the past decade or so that the earth needed “saving,” that we faced an immediate crisis unless drastic global action were taken. There were strong suggestions that National Sovereignty would have to be sacrificed to enable experts to institute programs big enough to save humanity and polar bears.
One would think that in light of these and other revelations we should pause to reassess. Even those who still are convinced that global change is real and man-made need to take time to factor into their thinking the growing body of evidence that the Climate Change campaign is a put up job. Perhaps take time to read Michael Crichton’s novel “State of Fear” (complete with footnotes).
Yet in the face of these new developments, we read in the The NY Times that the Environmental Protection Agency is moving forward with possible regulations on heat-trapping gases blamed for climate change, while a bill to cap such emissions (cap and trade/tax) languishes in the Senate. Again it seems that President Obama and his administration either haven’t gotten the word or choose to ignore it. Why?
Dwight Boud ©2010
TheMiddleofSomewhere 
Posted by Mickey Boud on February 17, 2010 at 4:38 am
I enjoyed your blog on climate change and agree. Michael Crighton’s novel, “State of Fear,” was intriguing. I just want to add that the earth has passed through many glacial and interglacial periods and this was long before human beings were here. Another comment is that CO2 is not a pollutant. Plants need CO2 just as we need O2 to live. Furthermore, animal life depends upon plant life. Maybe we could just plant forests around our coal processors. Actually, most coal processing in the U.S. is done with new technology which is far cleaner than in the fast growing emerging countries, eg. China and India. In answer to your last question, ‘Why?’, I’ll just say ‘for control over the economy which = control over the citizens.’ Sorry to sound so cynical, but I’m way passed being naive about this administration.