• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Greens Frustrated by America’s Lack of Panic

    Why has American’s concern with global warming dropped to dead last among issues surveyed (even dead last among environmental issues)? Because a great deal of their concern was based on projections that have been dramatically toned down or exposed as outright fraud. The hysteria is unsupportable and people have caught on.

    The very active 2005 hurricane season, underscored by hurricanes Rita and Katrina, put the national psyche in a receptive mood for Al Gore’s inaccurate portrayal of 2005 as the base of an exponentially growing hurricane horror story. Subsequent quiet years and research showing a likely decline in the number of hurricanes took the panic out of that hysteria for many people.

    And there is more. The unconscionable exaggeration of the glacial melting in the Himalayas was exposed, which eliminated another panic button.

    Wash, rinse, repeat, and repeat, and repeat:

    • It turns out the projected loss of rain forest due to warming-induced drought is bogus.
    • Where are the missing weather stations in China?
    • Where are the missing weather stations in Russia?
    • Why are we using so many sub-standard weather stations in the U.S?
    • The sub-standard sources (for instance, interviews in a hiking magazine) for melting glaciers in Africa, South America, and the Alps mock the peer-reviewed-only standard at the IPCC.
    • Where is Holland?
    • Glacier problems arise again in the form of a 40 percent measurement error for Alaska.

    Further, “hide the decline” was not some innocent slip of the tongue. By hiding the decline, the researchers hid the fact that these tree-ring proxy data were unfit for documenting significant temperature spikes. That is, since the tree rings in question failed to pick up known recent temperature increases (they actually indicated a temperature decline, hence the need to hide something), the lack of similar findings in the past is hardly proof that current world temperatures have no precedent. (Think: Medieval Warm Period)

    If that’s not enough, blizzards in Georgia (the U.S. state, not the country) are blamed on global warming. People remember the story of the boy who cried wolf.

    Apologists for the hysterics claim that the basic science is still intact. Since the basic science depends fundamentally on the questionable data, that’s hard to swallow. But even if the basics are there, it’s not enough to get people worked up.

    The temperature might go up two more degrees? Hey, why do you think so many people left the Snow Belt for the Sun Belt? Sea levels might rise 6-23 inches in the next 100 years? It rose six inches in the past 100 years and nobody even bothered to mention it.

    Will two or three more degrees, if the rise should be that high, impose some net adaptation costs (don’t forget higher temperatures have benefits as well as costs)? It’s possible, but it’s not a catastrophe. Same goes for the 23 inches of possible sea-level rise over a 100-year span.

    Cross posted at National Journal

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    12 Responses to Greens Frustrated by America’s Lack of Panic

    1. Mike Haseler says:

      Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf! Wolf!

    2. Brad, Chicago says:

      I can't believe that none of these people will even speak about the problems with the data. They just try to brush aside any criticism without considering it. If the problems really are trivial, it should be simple to show, but every time they give nothing more than, "Your concerns are unfounded." On one hand, you can't let individual inconsistencies shake your premise, but there are more than 1 or 2 questions about the integrity of the data the "scientists" are using to corroborate their hypotheses.

    3. Henno says:

      There are so many errors in this article it is not even funny. Please make sure of your facts before righting garbage.

      Global warming is real. Just look at the real facts.

    4. Matt, Fresno says:

      Henno, which facts should we look at? The ones that were published or the ones that were hidden?

    5. Moira, Toronto says:

      Another frustration for AGWs must be that real scientists are really, really good communicators and don't need to hire global marketing agencies to help them spread the truth.

    6. Liz, United States says:

      Ah, well, looks like the Greenies are going to have to search for another fake crisis to hook their agenda to. How inconvenient for them. The only problem is that many people are so sensitized and completely skeptical now that it's unlikely that anyone is going to believe anything they say anytime soon.

    7. Charles Ridge, Jacks says:

      I agree with the comment about substandard weather stations in the U.S. I served as the Chief, Regional Cooperative Branch, NWS Southern Region Headquarters. That entire branch was dissolved in all six regions shortly after my retirement 24 years ago. Now there are now no rules. There is now no entity responsibility for the quality of data. There are no skilled people designated for keeping up these networks. There are no standards to follow.

      I, with support from a number of state Climatologists, have fought to reverse this crime perpetrated against our national database. Likewise, there is no validation of the reports going into the NCDC, Ashevile, N.C. Thus, bad data continues to flow into the national database. All my efforts have fallebn on deaf ears.

      Garbaghe in, garbage out!!!

    8. Dave, Notre Dame says:

      This article admits the possibilities of 2 to 3 degree temperature changes but proceeds to disregard it's relevance. While individual geographic regions have drastically changing temperatures everyday, if the Earth's overall average temperature changes 2 to 3 degrees, it actually is a problem.

      This lack of concern from my fellow conservatives disturbs me. If we care about protecting our Businesses and Industries then that's we must do. Protect them. Businesses can't operate if the city is underwater, farms can't grow and sell crops if it doesn't rain there anymore, our best minds can't innovate the best new products of the 21st century if there isn't any support or incentive to innovate.

      2 to 3 degrees effects everything, believe it or not. It's a massive cyclical chain. If water doesn't freeze where it's supposed to, if water currents don't move where they should, if clouds don't form where they should have – the weather in the world will change in unexpected ways. Our goal should be to sustain the world we value. We want it to stay as it has been so our agriculture, business, and industry can flourish.

      Lastly, value discussion over rhetoric. Changing your opinion because of information doesn't mean you are weak, it means you have an open mind. Respect those who change their minds if they change it for a good reason.

    9. Steve Case says:

      "Don’t forget higher temperatures have benefits as well as costs"

      Yes they do, on the whole, a warmer world would be a better world.

    10. Steve Wahls Nebraska says:

      Our planet will receive more energy in the next 24 hours than all of humanity on the planet will use and waste in the next year. It will also shed all that energy to space in the same 24 hours. By the same measure, the planet will have received more energy from the sun in the next six months that are in all proven fossil fuel reserves. Now we want to worry about increasing the mean temperature of the earth 5 degrees in the next 50 years? Let’s get real. We could worry about something more pressing like, Do the prisoners in our prisons get to pay the fines on not paying for their health insurance after they get out of prison? What about those that are in for life? There are 2,500,000 prisoners in the US owing a $2000.00 fine that’s $5 billion in fines not paid per year. How many IRS agents will it take, to take care of that?

    11. Bob A says:

      Look, we’re not blind to the fact that the greens changed their mantra of “Global Warming” to “Climate Change”. This was not done by accident.

      It makes every weather related anomaly available to greens as “proof” of climate change.

    12. Space Doc, Westport, Massachusetts says:

      Mr. Ridge, (Jackson, MS), I feel your pain. Used to be, the climatological record (station data) was backed up by a mountain of paper resting in a warehouse somewhere – now everything is digitized, therefore vulnerable to “artful manipulation”. Not all change is necessarily good.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.