The Obamite Ministry of Truth has come up with a new term to sustain global hysteria (and the gravy-train) feeding what they once called "CO2-driven anthropogenic global warming".
It seems the old terms are not sufficiently scary anymore, so they have come up with newspeak terms they hope will set the matter straight, once and for all.
The new terminology is: Global Climate Disruption!
But in reality, it is more of the same old Global Climate Deception!
A review of basic scientific methods is in order:
The value and accuracy of a theory is most centrally determined by it's ability to predict how things go, its ability to predict the future.
The "CO2 warming" or "Anthropogenic Global Warming" (AGW) theory was originally proposed around 50 years ago, alongside other theories such as the "new Ice Age", and bore no overtly deceptive connotations. That was a time when climatologists still modestly confessed they did not know everything, allowed open discussion on all sorts of ideas. There was still a commitment to truth, and fact. After c.1970, political activists swamped the universities, and there was a general trend of intolerance for any theory which went against the typically Marxist-Socialist agendas of the new activism. CO2-driven global warming seemed like a great idea to pound the heads of capitalist governments, which were already by then self-reforming on issues of air and water pollution, through the efforts of both conservatives and liberals in government. (Socialist nations, by contrast, became cesspools of intensive pollution and environmental destruction.) By around 1990, the UN also got into the "climate" business, even while failures of CO2-greenhouse global-warming theory became increasingly apparent. However, by then the political-activist juggernaut of "Global Warming" was on a roll, and wasn't going to stop for any failures in its original premises.
"Top" climatologists pushing the warming theory by then had become heads of well-funded institutions, and became media celebrities where, in front of reporters and the public, they promoted overtly political agendas and condemned their critics as dangerous ignoramuses. Journal editors and department chairmen, always concerned about grant-money revenues and the political climate, increasingly required their faculty to teach the new warming catechism, which also appeared as dogma in textbooks, and new graduate students had to recite the correct global-warming prayers in order to graduate. All things related to weather catastrophe required expert commentary, and someone to blame also, even if weather science was very immature, and natural climate cycles could be identified.
So, how did the CO2 theory go? Did it predict the future, or not?
Where CO2-greenhouse theory predicted more hurricanes, eventually it became clear that fewer actually occurred. Where CO2 theory predicted non-stop global heating, only sporadic heating with cooler down-turns prevailed. The years between c.1940 to 1970 were cooling, and so have been the years following c.2000. Temperature data indicated the 1930s and the El-Nino year of 1998 were the hottest within the 20th Century, even while the UN IPCC was taken over by political operatives who pushed international tax scams and Climate Socialism, and promoted the fraudulent "hockey stick" graph. CO2 increases over millions of years always followed the ending of major Ice Ages by several hundred years, not preceding them as CO2 theory demanded, but no matter. Al Gore got a Nobel Prize for promoting a propaganda film composed of multiple falsehoods -- but nearly everyone who pointed out the Emperor Has No Clothes was either ignored, silenced or ridiculed.
CO2-greenhouse theory also predicted a global net loss of polar ice cover, but ice-caps expanded in the Antarctic over the same time floating sea ice cover in the Arctic reduced. So there was no net loss of polar ice cover. And whereas CO2 theory demanded that no significant global warming exist prior to the industrial revolution, the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) always stood out as a gigantic contradiction, being even warmer than today, and yet without the predicted "eco-catastrophes". Polar bears, penguins, whales, etc., survived the MWP quite handily. Biologists were then being excluded from conferences and publishing when their data showed increases in polar bear and penguin populations... but, none of the "people who mattered" paid attention to such details. New knowledge about the Little Ice Age (LIA), which developed after the MWP and lasted all the way down to c.1800, indicated the present warming trend was in actuality our coming out of the chilly depths of the LIA. The "hocky stick" fraud neatly ironed out all the bumps and dips in the global climate record, however, and oh well they are also now erasing the MWP and LIA from textbooks and internet websites, busy little bees in the Ministry of Truth.
Not one of the central predictions of CO2-greenhouse/AGW theory came true!
But oh my how popular it all became. Hollywood, Big Media, grade-school teachers and everyone under the age of 12 became sudden experts on "global warming" and the forthcoming "end of the world" -- hectoring parents and businessmen and farmers on their "carbon footprint", declaring how "climate deniers" (the guys in the rumpled suits, who still had some scientific integrity) were oh just like Hitler and so forth. Shut 'em up. Put 'em all in prison, yelled the socialist enviros, when they weren't yelling "death to Israel".
Ergo, Voila, comes now the "New Improved CO2 theory", with fancy new packaging, like some new laundry detergent. "CO2" won't even be mentioned anymore! Instead, "Global Climate Disruption" will now dazzlingly scrub clean all those prior predictive failures and dirty lies. They now will be able to predict warm or cold, wet or dry, violent or peaceful weather, drought or flood! No matter what happens, they've got it covered! Brighter and whiter! Scrub, scrub, erase, erase. Of course, this new theory cannot tell you where or when any of those weather catastrophes might occur, as it "predicts" both everything and nothing at the same time! So it is basically worthless as a theory, and that my friends is the hallmark of bad science, a theory which has no bearing upon how the real world actually functions.
This is all Scientific Methods 101. So is the principle, that bad scientific theory is invariably followed by social disasters.
James DeMeo, PhD
Meanwhile, and of much greater predictive significance for global weather and climate, mostly zero or only a few sunspots are typically occurring, when we should have over a hundred daily at this point in the cycle.
Surprise September Snow in Montana (today)
Texans Fighting Back...