November 29, 2014

100 percent! Now that's a consensus!

The blog has been slow for a couple days so I hope nobody minds if I re-post a comment made on an IBD editorial article.

Not only is global warming not accelerating, it is, in the words of Cato analysts Paul C. Knappenberger and Patrick J. Michaels, "actually decelerating, or, (nearly) stopped."

In fact, there is apparent 100% agreement among scientists that the planet isn't warming.

Knappenberger and Michaels looked at 35 scientific papers published in recent years and "every single one of them acknowledged in some way that a hiatus, pause, or slowdown in global warming was occurring."

They arrived at the figure using the same methodology that John Cook used to arrive at his famous claim that 97% of researchers endorsed the "scientific consensus" that man is causing Earth to warm.

Their 100% claim, found on the Watts Up With That blog, was made with their tongues firmly lodged in their cheeks. But even if only one scientist truly believes that, the facts are still the facts, and they say there's been no warming in 18 years and one month.

You remember the 97% claim, don't you? Well, Bart_R couldn't help himself and waded in to prove the veracity of the piece's title, 'Warming Has Stopped But Eco-Radicals' Lunacy Accelerates.' To wit:

While Knappenberger and Michaels have been industrious workers for Cato, one must ask oneself what sort of person industriously works to promote fossil waste dumping without consent of or compensation to the rest of the world?

What sort of business model is that, where waste disposal isn't paid for by the businesses responsible to the businesses and consumers they dump their wastes on, without limit or consideration?

What sort of investor takes advice to conduct themselves so unethically?

So I dutifully replied:

"Fossil waste dumping?" "Waste?" We're talking about CO2 here. The respiratory by-product of every mammal on earth, and the essential molecule for terrestrial plant life. CO2 could only be called "waste" by a mammal. Well, maybe also a reptile. Or invertebrate.

"I am the Lorax, I speak for the trees, MORE CO2, NOW if you please!"

The key words in your comment are "consent" and "compensation" i.e. EPA administrative law and redistributive taxation. A true environmentalist, one who cares about human progress without careless disposal of pollutants, should not support the use of pollution laws in furtherance of this agenda because when people see the so-called "Environmental Protection Agency" classify this life-promoting gas as a pollutant, they begin to lose respect for the mission and the credibility of the agency.

Deleterious Anthropogenic Warming of the Globe Shameless Self Promotion Posted by JohnGalt at November 29, 2014 11:11 AM

Thank you, Lorax, for giving voice to those who have none in this Kingdomist Mammalarchy.

There are many blogs I enjoy from my browser, but I subscribe to Cato's on Kindle. For a dollar or two a month, I always have something if I'm stuck waiting somewhere, but usually I get to read a whole week's on Saturday. Knappenberger and Michaels ("Chip & Pat") are in every week with a devastating, data-driven response to the catastrophists. Great stuff.

Posted by: jk at November 29, 2014 1:56 PM | What do you think? [1]