CS Lewis warned us about men without chests. That is technocrats who use what Winston Churchill called “the lights of perverted science” to play God without ethics, without morality, without responsibility.
And now they have a website.
It's called globalchange.gov.
And they have a legal mandate too, not just to investigate so-called climate change, but to investigate “global change” in general.
Join John Ransom and Ransom Notes Radio Live from Caesar's Palace May 12-15th! @ the Money Show
“The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP,)” says the website, “was established by Presidential Initiative in 1989 and mandated by Congress in the Global Change Research Act (GCRA) of 1990 to ‘assist the Nation and the world to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global change.’”
And whatever else that open-ended mission statement means, one thing you can be sure of is that the USGCRP will get shriller, more strident and more partisan as the science behind so-called “global change” becomes more damning to their hypothesis.
“Researchers have issued the ‘loudest and clearest alarm bell to date,’” reports Bloomberg, “signaling the need for urgent actions to combat climate change in the U.S., the president's science adviser said May 6. The third and most comprehensive installment of the National Climate Assessment shows that evidence of human-induced climate change is growing stronger as its impacts are increasingly felt across the country.”
Yes, and so was Tolstoy’s War and Peace.
But then both are only works of fiction.
Still, mainstream media is using globalchange.gov's latest position paper as more thin scientific evidence-- and I use the term sarcastically-- that global warming is already causing great harm to the United States.
The rest of us, they believe, are just too stupid to know it without a website.
The report catalogs a litany of hypothesis, fantasy, wishful thinking and poor science to bolster claims about so-called climate change that have already been proven scientifically incorrect.
For example, the report states that since 1980 hurricanes have become more prevalent, more intense, and probably--it's implied--much more racist.
In fact the scientific evidence and history show just the opposite.
While the so-called climate change models have predicted a vast number of killer hurricanes, and the hurricane predictors year after year have predicted a vast number of killer hurricanes, the predictions have been so far off base that hurricane predictions are even less reliable than NFL draft projections.
This most popularized predicted effect of global warming from the models given us by the climate change clowns-- increased hurricane and tropical storm activity-- was shown conclusively to be without merit in 2011 by a paper produced by the science and operations officer at the National Hurricane Center, Dr. Chris Landsea.
In a workpublished in late November of 2011 and carefully labeled an “opinion” piece on the site for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration- which is quick to distance itself from the conclusions reached by Landsea-- concludes that “the overall impact of global warming on hurricanes is currently negligible and likely to remain quite tiny even a century from now.”
Lansea is a supporter of the theory of man-caused global warming, but says the models for hurricanes are wrong.
In the rarefied atmosphere of climate politics this deviation was enough to get him labeled as a "climate skeptic," perhaps enough to get him excommunicated as a "climate denier." Landsea resigned from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2005 because he felt it had become politicized and was ignoring the science.
Yet somehow he remains the leading hurricane expert in the US, despite his "shoddy" science.
Landsea attacked three specific datasets that are often used by global warming alarmists to show that the warming of the earth will have terrible consequences for human-kind: 1) the frequency of storms; 2) the intensity of storms and; 3) the economic damage of storms.
In each data subset he showed that apparent increases in storm activity or effect can be ascribed to advances in technology or development that skew the data rather than a real increased frequency or effect of storms.
And that's exactly what you'd expect from CS Lewis's “Men without Chests”-- that is men without hearts.
You'd expect them to skew the data by using technology and development, and then shinning the light of perverted science upon it, with an assist by perverted media, to institute global change, whatever that ‘change’ happens to entail.
But you don’t need to worry about that, they say. They'll tell you what you need to know and when you need to know it,
Because now they have a website, just like they do for all of their other programs.
They still, however, don't have hearts.