Science is all about testing hypotheses with real-world data. ”Climate change” is not science. It started as an outright scam, an alarmist creed field-tested through various incarnations that sounded scary and indicted human activity, for the purpose of pulling down bigger research grants. Version 1.0, the “new Ice Age” global cooling scare of the Seventies, had the most actual science associated with it – we might indeed be heading into a new Ice Age – but it couldn’t be tied to human activity, and it was too difficult to frighten people in most of the Western world with the image of a gradual temperature reduction. ”Global warming,” in which smokestacks people could easily see were going to rip open the ozone layer and wipe out coastal cities with apocalyptic floods, sold better, but alas it was too specific, too easily disproved… so we got “climate change,” and when it turned out the climate hasn’t really been changing much over the past two decades, the final devolution to “climate disruption” was rolled out this year. ”Climate disruption” is perfect, because it’s literally impossible to disprove – no matter what happens, even if nothing very much happens, the con artists can claim human industry is severely disrupting the ordinary processes of nature.
POLL: Is Global Warming junk science with a political agenda or is it real?
Along the way, “climate change” metastasized into a malignant intellectual cancer, as it became infused with big-dollar politics. Socialist politicians realized it was the perfect vehicle for unlimited centralized power. Oppose their agenda and you want to murder the Earth!
“Climate change” also provides an intellectual framework for hysterical fantasy, because its adherents – including a number of heavily credentialed scientists – are willing to either actively or passively endorse all sorts of alarmist nonsense pumped out by their pop-culture allies. They justify this by saying that it’s important to “raise awareness,” so even the most absurd, anti-scientific doomsday horror story is defensible. This, again, is contrary to the principles of science, which relies upon clarity and honesty. Committed scientists don’t look at some Hollywood director’s pile of 99 percent absurd claptrap, shrug, and say “What the heck, close enough… as long as it gets people talking about global warming, it’s all good.”