See Comments down arrow

Aargh, what's this, scientific debate?

05 May 2021 | OP ED Watch

For those who like to make fun of historians with opinions on climate, we again offer up Brian Fagan’s very thorough and interesting 2000 book The Little Ice Age: How Climate Made History 1300-1850. Which alarmists could immediately burn, if you bought appropriate carbon offsets, or actually read and blow out the match on discovering that he’s a true believer in man-made climate change. Only to strike another when they hit this passage (on p. 216): “Recently, James Hansen and a group of his colleagues have argued that the rapid warming of recent decades has in fact been driven mainly by non-CO2 gases such as chlorofluorocarbons.” What? The James Hansen? Raising other possibilities than “carbon pollution”? Somebody cancel that man.

Now to be fair Fagan is not actually a historian, at least if you have a diploma fetish. He is an anthropologist who commits the cardinal academic offence of having a wide range of interests. Including the way in which historical climate change impacted the societies that archeologists study, which is exactly like doing history except for the PhD.

As Wikipedia puts it, “Fagan is an archaeological generalist, with expertise in the broad issues of human prehistory. He is the author or editor of 46 books, including seven widely used undergraduate college texts.” Which sounds impressive. But if any alarmists reading this item haven’t already struck that match, they should prepare to do so.

You see, Fagan’s book doesn’t just say the Little Ice Age and the Medieval Warm Period existed. It claims that extreme weather increased dramatically as the planet cooled from the latter into the former, thus violating orthodoxy. And because it mentions that June 16, 2000 paper by Hansen and four others, which it might take an archeologist to unearth today, containing the heresy we’re focused on here, namely that “Fossil fuel burning CO2 and aerosols have both positive and negative climatic forcing effects, which tend to cancel each other out. Hansen and his team point out that the growth rate of non-CO2 gases has declined over the past decade and could be reduced even further. This, combined with a slowing of black carbon and CO2 emissions, could lead to a decline in the rate of global warming. Much more research is needed to confirm this hypothesis.”

More research? Surely the science is settled and always was. And what’s this business about negative forcing effects? Is this person funded by the Koch brothers?

Now again you might want to blow out the match because Fagan was not optimistic in 2000. He said with six billion people on Earth climate change would cause hunger in poor countries and then the rising seas would force mass migrations while drought ravaged the Sahel and so on. All predictions still struggling to be born, of course. But then climate is uncertain and more research is needed. Or so some lunatics say.

Why, even the mighty James Hansen questioned the role of CO2 in warming, and thought perhaps it would taper off. Man, they’re going to run out of matches.

2 comments on “Aargh, what's this, scientific debate?”

  1. John. your rmarks must be intended for non-believers, because they do not persuade the reader to change his reverence for the IPCC; they are merely satire that only non-believers can understand. I would hope for better debate, which is what is really needed.

  2. Hello John,
    Thanks for trying but you have literally no chance of fighting this madness.
    I remember listening to the BBC World Service Radio maybe eight or so years ago.They reported that Rothschild were ditching all carbon investments and going into renewables and green energy.
    What did that mean? Lies in the media and bribes to the scientific community to further their investment profits.
    Even I ,as a layman,knew that Britain was doomed to the folly of huge investment in wind farms and solar.For goodness sake,years before Gordon Browns' last act as Prime Minister was to sign a contract of £30 billion pounds for wind turbines with the stipulation that it could not be cancelled.This at a time when Britain was already in deep debt.
    You and your many supporters are merely witnesses to the theft of billions of pounds,dollars ,francs etc. and more importantly Freedom by these specious 'Saviours' of the World.
    You cannot shout loud enough.You do not have the resources and those who should be telling the truth do not have the backbone to refuse the bribes and or intimidation.
    The Great Reset is backed by the same fraudsters who are entirely insulated from the devastation their hubris (at best) but lunacy in my opinion will wreak upon Western society.
    When 30 years from now nothing catastrophic has actually happened to the climate (unless naturally)the claim will be that it was only because our 'Saviours' forced us to make the difference.
    I know you will keep trying and I applaud you but I'm sorry to say it's a done deal,
    Dave Kenny

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *