This parable has some eerily familiar themes to the present day dogma so often preached regarding “man-made climate change” or “man-made global warming.” Man-made climate change, with every passing year looks more like intrusive religion parading as science albeit naked of conclusive or compelling data. In fact, the prophets of man-made climate change sound no different than zealots who walk our streets decrying the impending apocalypse on cardboard cutouts. The main difference is that for decades climate prophets have prophesied doom within a few years of their predictions, but are never held accountable when their prophecies don’t become reality. These prophets may be "scientists" but their false prophesying is not science.
Science is comprised primarily of suggestions based upon conclusive and compelling data. That definition forces two truths. First, where there is no conclusive data, there is no compelling science. Second, where the data repeatedly suggests a contradictory conclusion, the tested hypothesis should be rejected. Sadly, neither truth is honored in the debate regarding man-made climate change. Rather, in this debate, the lack of confirming data coupled with mounting opposing data are ignored and the original hypothesis is worshipped with reckless abandon, all at the expense of the assets, privacy, freedom and livelihoods of others.
There are two central tenets commonly preached by climate prophets. The first is that climate change is advancing to a level that will destroy most if not all human life and/or the planet in short order. The second tenet is that this apocalyptic climate change can be averted because it is being caused primarily by mankind, especially those in developed nations. Both tenets remain largely unsupported by conclusive data, especially the second tenet. This in essence resembles faith not science. Such “faith” parading as science without conclusive data is no less naked than the vain Emperor.
The journal, Nature Climate Change, recently published a report that compared 117 climate predictions (prophecies) to the actual amount of warming that occurred in the years predicted. Out of 117 prophecies, the study found that 3 were roughly accurate and 114 overestimated the amount of warming. On average, the prophecies forecasted two times more global warming than actually occurred. For example, in 1989, the Associate Press reported this prophecy: "Using computer models, researchers concluded that global warming would raise average annual temperatures nationwide 2 degrees by 2010." But according to NASA, global temperature has increased by less than half that (about 0.7 degrees Fahrenheit). And in 1972, the Christian Science Monitor reported this prophecy: "Arctic specialist Bernt Balchen says a general warming trend over the North Pole is melting the polar ice cap and may produce an ice-free Arctic Ocean by the year 2000." That prophecy was also proven false by actual outcomes. Then, in 2006, Vice President Al Gore narrated the famous documentary, “An Inconvenient Truth,” about which he prophesied, with the approval of the scientific community at large, that the world had ten years or less to avert imminent destruction (i.e. climate Armageddon by early 2016). As I write this post just 2 years from the apocalypse, the Emperor seems naked to me.
Before we get to the religious agenda of today’s climate prophets, let’s examine the currently mounting scientific data that proves them false. In August 2013, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) released its “State of the Climate in 2012” report, which states that “worldwide, 2012 was among the 10 warmest years on record.” But the report fails to mention that 2012 was one of the coolest of the decade. That data also suggests a cooling trend. Further, the NOAA report noted that the Antarctica (South Pole) sea ice “reached a record high of 7.51 million square miles” in September, 2012. What does that data suggest? And the latest figures for this year show that there’s been a slowdown of melting this past summer as well, with temperatures at the North Pole well below normal for this time of year. Meteorologist Joe Bastardi calls it “the coldest ever recorded.” Is there any good reason this conclusive opposing data is being ignored?
A 2007 BBC report prophesied that the Arctic could be ice free in 2013 -- a theory NASA and Al Gore still echo today. However, Arctic sea ice averaged 2.35 million square miles in August 2013, as compared to 1.32 million square miles recorded in September, 2012, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center. About a million more square miles of ocean are covered in ice in 2013 than in 2012, a whopping 60 percent increase -- and a dramatic deviation from prophecies of an "ice-free Arctic.”
A leaked copy of the world’s most authoritative climate study reveals scientific prophecies of imminent doom were drastically wrong. The final draft of a report is to be published by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the ultimate watchdog who’s massive, six-yearly “assessments” are accepted by environmentalists, politicians and experts as the “gospel” of climate science. The report makes the extraordinary concession that over the past 15 years, recorded world temperatures have increased at only a quarter of the rate of IPCC prophesied when it published its last assessment in 2007. In addition, a prophecy in the 2007 report that hurricanes would become more intense has simply been removed, without update. This omission is probably because 2013 has been one of the quietest hurricane seasons in history and the US is currently enjoying its longest-ever period – almost eight years – without a single hurricane of Category 3 or above making landfall. What does that suggest?
With regards to whether mankind is causing climate change, the IPCC report also admits that large parts of the world (the parts we can measure) were as warm as they are now for decades between 950 and 1250 AD – centuries before the Industrial Revolution, and when the population and carbon dioxide levels were both much lower. We all admit that data exists that supports climate change to some degree. However, the data suggests that the changes we have experienced are no different from what we should expect from recurring historic solar-driven climate cycles. And, there is practically no data supporting the hypothesis that mankind is to any significant degree responsible for it. Despite the many scientific uncertainties disclosed by the report, it nonetheless draws familiar, apocalyptic conclusions as falsely prophesied before. Their agenda of world control has not been slowed by the facts.
You may be asking, “How is man-made climate change like religion?” First of all, due to the obvious failures of its prophets and prophecies, the central tenets of man-made climate change are therefore based upon faith and not the preponderance of facts. Second, man-made climate change dictates a way of life that others must follow or they are judged as deniers without care for killing their fellow man. Third, man-made climate change is the most activist religion of all as its prophets lobby governments to intrude on the privacy, freedom and lifestyles of others, judge others' individual behaviors as immoral and punish them through taxes and fees for their climate-affecting ways. Man-made climate change by every measure is probably one of the worst of all faiths by seeking to control the lives of everyone. Ironically, those preaching man-made climate change also typically support abortion on demand citing rights to privacy, opposing government intrusion, and avoiding legislation of morality. This is one of the worst examples of a double standard.
Speaking of faith, for Christians wrestling with this issue, God has actually weighed in. Genesis 8:22 clearly says, “While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, day and night, shall not cease.” We should all think twice before believing false prophets over God. Regarding man’s responsibility for the Earth, in Genesis 1:28 God commanded mankind to be stewards of the planet. But, there is no conclusive data that suggests that our carbon dioxide emissions are resulting in poor stewardship. Further, we should never allow environmentalism to become a form of idolatry, where the “rights” of an inanimate planet and its non-human creatures are held in higher esteem than God (Romans 1:25) and man (created in God’s image). Colossians 2:8 says, “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” In contrast, some Christians have argued that Revelation 16:8 speaks of an apocalyptic solar event, “The fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and it was allowed to scorch people with fire.” However, this is not describing a man-induced event. The book of Revelation is describing an angel-induced event. In fact, isn’t it arrogant of man to think we are able to cause the sun to destroy our planet?
A very informative book on this subject is “The Great Global Warming Blunder: How Mother Nature Fooled the World’s Top Climate Scientists” by Roy W. Spencer. This book reports more scientific evidence that exposes as naked the conventional dogma on man-made climate change. In fact, this book reshapes the man-made climate change debate as we know it. Spencer, a former senior NASA climatologist, reveals how climate researchers have mistaken cause and effect when analyzing cloud behavior, solar irradiation, oceans and volcanoes. In fact, volcanoes have long been known as the single greatest cause of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. That is an assertion for which there is more than enough data. In essence the false climate prophets have been duped into believing the Earth’s climate system is far more sensitive to human activities and carbon dioxide than it truly is. And, they in turn are attempting to dupe the rest of us.
On that note, I have many young nephews and nieces. Whenever we adults discuss man-made climate change around them, they look at us and laugh with incredulity. It is as if they can’t believe adults are buying this rubbish. And, adults like me side with them yet for more educated reasons. The climate prophets are quick to judge deniers like me with insults and name-calling. But, if man-made climate change were told through the analogy of “The Emperor’s New Clothes,” who is truly playing the part of the naked Emperor and who is truly playing the part of the child extoling common sense?