By Headmistress, zookeeper | Published: OCTOBER 17, 2012
The three researchers audited the forecasting procedures used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), whose “procedures violated 81% of the 89 relevant forecasting principles,” Armstrong noted.
Armstrong and his colleagues recommend Congress end government funding for climate change research as well as other research, government programs, and regulations that assume the planet is warming. They also recommend Congress cease funding organizations that lobby or campaign for global warming.
Read more: http://digitaljournal.com/pr/266474#ixzz29a3xlP8v
A study by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) determined that the United States funded the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the United Nations’ authority on alleged man-made global warming, with $31.1 million since 2001, nearly half of the panel’s annual budget.
The GAO also found that this funding information “was not available in budget documents or on the websites of the relevant federal agencies, and the agencies are generally not required to report this information to Congress.”
Read more: http://cnsnews.com/news/article/us-taxpayers-cover-nearly-half-cost-un-s-global-warming-panel
An interesting tidbit about the fact that the government funds the global warming studies; there is almost no likelihood that the government will ever fund a study that doesn’t support that global warming is happening, and that it’s caused by human beings.
So it’s self perpetuating. If it’s self serving for oil companies to fund studies saying that there is no global warming or isn’t caused by what we are doing or can’t be fixed at anything like a reasonable cost, it’s equally self-serving for the government to be funding yet another group of ‘There’s a crisis the government must save you from’ studies. Furthermore, there actually aren’t that many studies funded by oil companies on the skeptical side- that’s because oil companies quickly saw the financial benefit to them of playing the carbon credits game, where you buy and sell something that is essentially nonexistent. Like Gore, they are lining their pockets with global warming scares.
This isn’t merely a scientific question, either. We need to have some working knowledge of history to add some perspective. Science may tell us that the earth’s temperatures are warming (although it hasn’t been for 16 years, contrary to predictions by all the warmists and their cronies. Assuming we can even trust their massaged data) or that sea levels have been steadily shifting for thousands of years. History helps us answer the question ‘have there been similar warm temperatures before current oil based technologies? Why, yes, there have.’ If there have been similar warm temperatures on earth before current oil based technologies, doesn’t it stand to reason that it’s at least POSSIBLE that recent oil based technology may not have much to do with the current cycle?
And history again- I was in middle school when instead of ‘earth day’ programs we had ‘the world is coming to an end in a global ice-age because of our over dependence on fossil based fuels’ scare mongering. So I just can’t take these guys seriously. It’s like what they really mean is, “Something terrible is happening, we don’t know what, and we change our minds on it every other decade, but we know it’s bad, so you should give us more money to save you from it. Whatever it is. Just in case. Because we’re experts, and we have an insatiable need for your money.”