A recent report in Hindustan Times said,
The man blamed so far for the false alarm about the Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035 surfaced on Tuesday to say he never made such an exact assertion and, worse, he had been misquoted.
“On the basis of our research in 1999 I must have said that glaciers in the Central and Eastern Himalayas will lose mass during the next 40/50 years at their present rate of decline,” Hasnain told Hindustan Times.
And the hits just keep coming. I’ve seen Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, and I remember him mentioning that the Himalayan glaciers are going to melt down soon and cause a major shortage of water supply for all the surrounding areas. Isn’t it interesting that Al Gore went around the whole world giving his presentation and didn’t even bother to confirm what the theory of a melt down in the Himalayas was based on?
In fact, this isn’t the first time when some credible supporter of global warming has been caught with his pants down. If you see The Great Global Warming Swindle, you’ll see a lot of mess that’s happened with the IPCC’s report, which is the backbone of the green revolution. There were scientists whose names appeared on the report despite the fact that none of their statements did.
One scientist actually had to threaten the IPCC guys with legal action in order to have his name removed from the report, because they had mentioned his name among the contributors without actually including his views, thus falsely implying that he was in support of the report’s conclusions.
Another such example is Lawrence Solomon’s recent article in the National Post on “how Wikipedia’s green doctor rewrote 5,428 climate articles.”
For the benefit of those who think that there is some truth to anthropogenic global warming, I’ll relay one fact: the biggest “evidence” of a relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide and global temperature is the graph that spans 650,000 years highlighting the trend of carbon dioxide against global temperature. Both the factors do seem to have a correlation. However, the geniuses who use it to prove that carbon dioxide increases temperature seem to have forgotten how to read graphs. The correlation between these two factors is actually in reverse. Whenever the temperature increases, it causes an increase in carbon dioxide. In some cases, the increase in carbon dioxide following an increase in temperature is as pronounced as 800 years.
Therefore, even if you supported global warming out of some twisted logic like “even if things aren’t that bad, having a relatively CO2-free atmosphere is in our best interests,” you need to quit it.
Reducing CO2 will not cool the earth down. It might, however, bring in some complications that we aren’t yet aware of — such as a possible reduction in the growth rate of plants around the world (source).
And if you’re supporting the green revolution thinking that “we do need an alternative for fossil fuels anyway, and as long as we get that, it doesn’t matter what their intentions are”, try this for an argument: do the ends justify the means?
P.S.: Check this video out (ignore the first few seconds about Britain and the EU); perhaps that will give you some more food for thought about the intentions of all major bodies supporting global warming: