The Hottest Hoax In The World

An article has appeared in the print edition of India’s Open magazine with the headline,The Hottest Hoax In The World. Remembering that the head of the IPCC is an Indian, the Indian media is now pressuring that leader, Dr.Pachauri, to resign, citing conflicts of interest and outright deception.

The article tells us that
Never have so few fooled so many for so long, ever.

The gist of the story is that the world’s public have been conned by one of the most fraudulent ‘science’ scams in history. The author suggests that the reputation of science has been badly tarnished and that true environmental concerns will be swept under the carpet by a public made sceptical because of untruths and outright lies, published by a complicit media. After so many cries of “wolf”, it will now very hard to get people to listen to what’s really important.

I would like to see people like Mr. Gore, Dr.Pachauri, IPCC, et al… Taxed / Fined for all their carbon footprints they added - in promoting this scheme. Plus returns of Govenment monies given to them.

I know it will never happen…but…

How about humiliated?
It seems the head of the IPCC has sunk to a new low. He has just had published a lurid sex novel and is gloating over its contents.
Pachauri has been described as being in Bizzaroland.

Anthony Watts, from Watts Up With That, presents what he likens to a Smoking Gun on how climate change scientists adjust data sets. Using raw data from stations in Northern Australia, he steps through the processes of adjusting the data for anomolies and shows just how the final IPCC figures are skewed.

Where the original data shows a cooling trend, the ‘adjusted’ data shows a massive warming trend.

He concludes with the Latin dictum “Falsus in unum, falsus in omis” (false in one, false in all)

Now Mr Obama wants a USA Panel Overseen by Mr K. of NOAA

I am sceptical that global-warming is man-made.

However, the wording of this post is suggestive of a larger problem with the overall debate: wording.

The phrase ‘have been conned’ suggests a fact. We have been conned, not may have been conned.

Later, in a more accurate summation, we see ‘the author suggests…’, a much more accurate phrase than ‘we have been conned’.

Small point, I know…! But small differences in phrasing can make a big difference.


This issue needs to get more publicity.

A complicit media has for years published, uncritically, all the headline grabbing statements the global warming alarmists have deigned to utter. In fact, for many years anyone who came up with a contradictory notion of AGW was mercilessly howled down and labeled a “denier”. Only now, in the aftermath of ‘Climate Gate’, has the MSM decided that there is more to this debate than what the pro AGW lobby has declared.

Here’s an example, with a BBC jounalist grilling Britain’s Chief Scientist from the Department of the Environment, Dr. Robert Watson. It is interesting to see him provaricate, particularly on the subject of the Himalayan glaciers.

Watch it here on You Tube.

Fox News treats Al Gore with a degree of disrespect in the midst of heavy and record snowfalls. Only a little while ago, Gore was lauded as the planet’s saviour by the MSM and awarded a Nobel Peace prize for his efforts. The scepticism now on open display in the MSM was unthinkable only a year ago. Watch the Fox News clip right here

So then, just so we are clear about this, what is the ‘hoax’ part?

Is everyone afraid that a ‘Global Warming’ prevention program is going to cost them money?

The hoax part is that this is “Global Warming” is supposed to be based on real science.

But we are finding one scandal after another in which the science has been faked.

The revelations of the scandals started with the cherry-picking of tree ring data.

And now we are up to the 11th or 12th scandal.

It is extremely clear now that the entire global warming “science” is based on utterly false and fabricated data and analysis.

Every day there is a new revelation of people who do know better getting caught faking scientific data.

There are other aspects to this:

For example, the publicity people keep changing the terminology. First it was “global warming”, then it was AGW … anthropogenic global warming. Which is Man-made global warming. Then it was “climate change”.

So, these people have already showed themselves to be very slippery characters because they deliberately choose to change the language every few months.

Then there is the idea of people who are “alleged scientists” who are corrupting something that people used to respect. They are corrupting science.

THEN, there is the money.

Follow the money:

In Latin: Cui bono? Who benefits.

In the United States alone, we spend almost two billion dollars per year on climate research. And now we know that the money has been wasted on producing false data and false science.

AND, then there are certain politicians who are using “man-made climate change” as the excuse for imposing HUGE taxes and shutting down whole industries and throwing hundreds of thousands of people out of work. Even President Obama stated, “cap and trade would necessarily cause the cost of electricity to skyrocket”. His words.

Not a small amount. He said “skyrocket”.

I agree with you.

Wording is a big deal.

The choice of the words we use changes the way we perceive things.

[Off topic: the news media were referring to the Christmas airliner “panty bomber” as the “alleged bomber”. There was nothing ALLEGED about it: he was caught red-handed setting himself on fire by all the other passengers. It was only by sheer luck and quick action by the passengers that he was stopped. Nothing alleged about it. But that’s how the numb-brained news readers and news writers decided to report it.]


How about this:

Is there a Global Warming Prevention Program?
Will Carbon Credits stop climate change?
Is the Climate Change man made?
Where’s the proof ?

It is a theory only. Promoted at the cost of scientist who disagreed with a selected hand-full of Climatologists. The dissenters were gagged and muzzled and just now able to come to light.

Is there even a degree in Climatology? I’m a Climatologist, to some extent - and so are you.

I hope this helps

I disagree. It’s proper form to use “alleged” unless or until he is proven guilty in a court. Even if the accused admits something, technically he is still “alleged” until proven guilty… the thought being that the confession MAY have been forced, he was covering for someone, etc… also, without using “alleged” you run a greater risk of contaminating the jury pool, which is supposed to be impartial. Hard to be impartial when you’re referring to someone, definitively, as a “bomber”, “murderer”, etc.

African crops yield another catastrophe for the IPCC

An article by Britain’s Telegraph on what it has labelled as “Africagate”; The 2007 IPCC report stated that Africa’s crops would be cut by around 50% in some countries. Now it has come to light that the 50% figure was cherry picked from a report done by a Moroccan academic who is payed to advise on selling carbon credits.

As his primary sources he cited reports for three North African governments. But none of these remotely supported what he wrote. The nearest any got to providing evidence for his claim was one for the Moroccan government, which said that in serious drought years, cereal yields might be reduced by 50 per cent. The report for the Algerian government, on the other hand, predicted that, on current projections, “agricultural production will more than double by 2020”. Yet it was Agoumi’s claim that climate change could cut yields by 50 per cent that was headlined in the IPCC’s Working Group II report in 2007.

The plot then thickens, with it becoming obvious that the IPCC’s Chairman is complicit in spreading untruths about what is real science. He has already had his reputation tarnished by the Himalayan glaciers fiasco and by his close association with environmental programs which have ben heqavily funded by governments around the world.

What made this even odder, however, was that the group’s
co-chairman was a British agricultural expert, Dr Martin Parry, whose consultancy group, Martin Parry Associates, had been paid £75,000 by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) for two reports which had come to totally different conclusions. Specifically designed to inform the IPCC’s 2007 report, these predicted that by 2020 any changes were likely to be insignificant. The worst case they could come up with was that by 2080 climate change might decrease crop yields by “up to 30 per cent”.

British taxpayers poured out money for the section of the IPCC report for which Dr Parry was responsible. Defra paid £2.5 million through the Met Office, plus £330,000 for Dr Parry’s salary as co-chairman, and a further £75,000 to his consultancy for two more reports on the impact of global warming on world food supplies. Yet when it came to the impact on Africa, all this peer-reviewed work – including further expert reports by Britain’s Dr Mike Hulme and Dutch and German teams – was ignored in favour of a prediction from one Moroccan activist at odds with his own cited sources.

However, the story then got worse when Dr Pachauri himself came to edit and co-author the IPCC’s Synthesis Report (for which the IPCC paid his Delhi-based Teri institute, out of the £400,000 allocated for its production). Not only did Pachauri’s version again give prominence to Agoumi’s 50 per cent figure, but he himself has repeated the claim on numerous occasions since, in articles, interviews and speeches –such as the one he gave to a climate summit in Potsdam last September, where he boasted he was speaking “in the voice of the world’s scientific community”.

So now ask yourself, have we been conned, or have we been possibly conned?

The article finishes by saying -

Not only is the reputation of the IPCC in tatters, but that of its chairman appears irreperably damaged. Yet the world’s politicians cannot afford to see him resign because, if he goes, the whole sham edifice they have sworn by would come tumbling down.

And therein lies the crux of the problem. So many leading politicians in the UK, Australia and the United States won office on the back of the AGW scare and did so with promises of rectifying the problem. They have staked their reputations on a what is looking more and more like fear campaign, driven in part by vested interests.

[Al Gore, the Nobel Peace Prize winner for 2007, displaced Nobel candidate, Irena Sandler, who rescued over a thousand Jewish children during the Holocaust.
Al Gore was influenced by the writings of the Russian émigré and radical libertarian philosopher Ayn Rand. Two decades after her death, she remains the darling of right-thinking Americans and sales of her novels, paeans of praise to unbridled capitalism, are even outselling The Da Vinci Code. She was the literary pied piper of Wall Street.
Rand’s credo is summed up by the title of a collection of her essays, The Virtue of Selfishness, which have circulated in an almost samizdat fashion among enthusiasts of capitalism red in tooth and claw.
She projects a totally wrong, skewed, & highly limited understanding of reality,
a vicious clique which wants to destroy mankind’s spirituality.
Her creepy philosophy of Objectivism, places the self at the centre of the moral universe. One of the characters in Atlas Shrugged summarizes her philosophy with the following oath: “I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another human being, or ask another human being to live for mine.”
Her whole philosophy is based on lies, distortions, misrepresentations, half-truths, quarter-truths, and ludicrous circular reasoning.
To want to be a social worker, to address the issue of other people’s pain, to be a humanitarian - for Ayn Rand - necessarily comes from an individual’s “inability to deal with reality ".
The Biblical description of Creation is described in the Book of Job. “thick darkness a swaddling band” (v. 9), is presumably the protective ozone layer, surrounding the earth.
Job 38
1Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said,
2Who is this that darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge?
3Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me.
4Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.
5Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?
6Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;
7When the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy?
8Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?
9When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddling band for it,


Fox News treats Al Gore with a degree of disrespect in the midst of heavy and record snowfalls. Only a little while ago, Gore was lauded as the planet’s saviour by the MSM and awarded a Nobel Peace prize for his efforts. The scepticism now on open display in the MSM was unthinkable only a year ago. Watch the Fox News clip right here

Actually, this isn’t true. There are two that are much older and have fooled many more people:

  1. Evil doesn’t exist.

  2. You can have a free lunch.

Hoax’s have been around for years…many times to just make a cottage industry…as in the Monkey trial…the science teacher never did teach evolution and Byran never had a chance to debate but it makes money for the town. The Cardiff giant was another hoax when two famers carved and buried a large statue and later in the spring made money by exhibiting a ‘giant of old’ to the neighbors. Y2K was a hoax…recall that on midnite 1999 all of the worlds computers were going to go bananas because they could not ‘read’ the zeros…! really,I still have the headlines…why even on that nite around 9:30pm I have a taped recording of an announcer proclaiming that some 35,000 bodybags have just been delivered to madison square garden in anticipation of the food riots at midnite…really! and of course we have the absurd earth warming hysteria of Gore ,what with the worst winter in decades there are not too many earth warming buttons being sold…but still he did get the money for a nobel prize on this tipic…madness…oops,just got hit on the head by something…oh gee,the sky is falling…the sky is falling…Pas

As there is belief in the Trinity GODHEAD to begin creation with the Big Bang theory, you should also believe to the END of this CYCLIC AGE. We may not live to see the end of this age, but, it IS in FACT cycling to that conclusion…as there is a beginning so too there is an end…how can this FACT be a HOAX…how arrogant…it implies lack of FAITH in the belief of GOD and his cyclic CREATION of ALL the UNIVERSE…ALL is CREATED and is subject to the LAWS OF DISSOLUTION. What we are experiencing is dissolution of our EARTH and UNIVERSE as the NATURAL END of this CYCLE.

The Cover Up

Another con - Wind Farms in America.

From the article -

In early 2009 the Socialist government of Spain reduced alternative energy subsidies by 30%. Calzada continues:

"At that point the whole pyramid collapsed.  They are firing thousands of people.  BP closed down the two largest solar production plants in Europe.  They are firing between 25,000 and 40,000 people...."
"What do we do with all this industry that we have been creating with subsidies that now is collapsing?  The bubble is too big.  We cannot continue pumping enough money.  ...The President of the Renewable Industry in Spain (wrote a column arguing that) ...the only way is finding other countries that will give taxpayers' money away to our industry to take it and continue maintaining these jobs."

That “other country” is the United States of America.

Waxman-Markey seems dead, and Europe’s southern periphery is bankrupt. But the wind-subsidy proposals being floated in Congress suggest that American political leaders have yet to understand that “green power” means generating electricity by burning dollars.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit