As the Obama administration and Senate Democrats feverishly stoke up hellfire and brimstone global warming alarm to promote a Climate Action Plan, leading voices in green choir robes have abandoned the climate crisis hymnal.
Testifying on February 25 before the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, Moore took issue with the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) claim that, “Since the mid-20th century it is ‘extremely likely’ that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming.”
Moore pointed out “There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years,” arguing that “perhaps the simplest way to expose the fallacy of extreme certainty is to look at the historical record.”
He told the committee: “When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time. Then an ice age occurred 450 million years ago when carbon dioxide was 10 times higher than today.”
Moore also noted that “The increase in temperature between 1910 and 1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970 and 2000. Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910–1940 to human influence.” Why then, he asks, “does the IPCC believe that a virtually identical increase in temperature after 1950 is caused mainly by human influence, when it has no explanation for nearly identical increase from 1910 to 1940?”
Moore emphasized that there is no reason to believe that a warmer climate would be anything but beneficial for humans and the majority of other species. On the other hand, there is ample reason to believe that a sharp cooling of the climate would bring disastrous results for human civilization.
Dr. Fritz Vahrenholt, a prominent Socialist and a father of Germany’s environmental movement, has become another strong critic of the IPCC’s alarmist global warming doctrine. His lack of trust began while serving as an expert reviewer for an IPCC renewable energy report as the renewable energy division head of Germany’s second largest utility company.
Upon discovering and pointing out numerous factual inaccuracies to IPCC officials, they simply brushed them aside. Stunned by this, he began to wonder if IPCC reports on climate change were similarly sloppy. After digging into the IPCC’s climate report he was horrified to find similar incompetency and misrepresentations, including climate models that were fudged to produce exaggerated temperature increases.
Dr. Vahrenholt concluded: “The facts need to be discussed sensibly and scientifically, without first deciding on the results.” And although CO2 may have some warming influence, he believes that the sun plays a far greater role in the whole scheme of things.
James Lovelock, a highly respected scientist, predicted in 2006 that: “Before this century is over billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive will be in the Arctic where climate remains tolerable.”
More recently, however, he admitted to MSNBC: “We don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books . . . mine included . . . because it looked clear cut . . . but it hasn’t happened.”
The 92-year-old Lovelock went on to note, “The climate is doing its usual tricks . . . there’s nothing much happening yet even though we were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now.” He added, “Yet the temperature has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising . . . carbon dioxide has been rising, no question about that.”
Moore, Vahrenholt, and Lovelock are but three within an expanding multitude of scientists who are cooling on climate alarm.
When previously asked on Fox Business News who is responsible for promoting unwarranted fear and what their motives are, Moore said: “A powerful convergence of interests. Scientists seeking grant money, media seeking headlines, universities seeking huge grants from major institutions, foundations, environmental groups, politicians wanting to make it look like they are saving future generations. And all of these people have converged on this issue.”
Moore warns that, “The alarmism is driving us through scare tactics to adopt energy policies that are going to create a huge amount of energy poverty among the poor people. It’s not good for people and it’s not good for the environment. In a warmer world we can produce more food.”
Nobel Laureate physicist Dr. Ivar Giaever has referred to global warming ideology as a “pseudoscience” that begins with an emotionally appealing hypothesis, and “then only looks for items which appear to support it,” while ignoring ample contrary evidence.
Tragically, that pseudoscience does greatest injustice to those who can least afford it.
A version of this article first appeared in Newsmax.com.