Donna Laframboise, above, is from Canada. [photo HT: The Climate Sceptics Party]
We’ve written about the intellectual trick being played on the civilized part of the world about the issue of whether climate change is caused by mankind, so won’t repeat ourselves here, but we do recommend an article by Donna Laframboise in the WSJ, published Sept. 14. Here’s an excerpt:
Rajendra Pachauri, the IPCC’s chairman since 2002, has repeatedly said that the IPCC bases its conclusions solely on peer-reviewed source material. Yet many of the sources cited by the 3,000-page 2007 IPCC report were press releases, news clippings, discussion papers and unpublished master’s and doctoral-degree theses. The IPCC’s highly embarrassing, since-retracted claim that the Himalayan glaciers could disappear by 2035 came from a 2005 World Wildlife Fund publication.
Sad, but true.
James Delingpole got it right when he wrote in the Sept. 26 Daily Telegraph:
On Friday the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change delivers its latest verdict on the state of man-made global warming. Though the details are a secret, one thing is clear: the version of events you will see and hear in much of the media, especially from partis pris organisations like the BBC, will be the opposite of what the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report actually says.
N.B. From the Free Dictionary: Partis pris: a preconceived opinion. [literally: side taken]
Many people believe that man-made climate change supporters are academic hacks and/or greedy grant grabbers, but that may not be entirely true.
Back in January 2012, IFO attended a meeting of the Oregon chapter of the American Meteorological Society (of which she is a proud member) on the topic of climate change, featuring three highly qualified scientists who showed in several different ways that there may not be any global warming and if there is it is highly unlikely that the warming is caused by mankind.
We highly recommend that interested readers look at the material in the link provided. It contains video, slides and pictures.
Near the end of the meeting video, which was hugely entertaining except for the talk by the physicist, which was hugely mind-numbing, a very sincere academic supporter of MCGW (man-caused global warming), came to the microphone (at about 2:24:27) to challenge the opinion of George Taylor, a long-time climate scientist. Both had spent years at Oregon State University. It was a very telling moment.
What does this have to do with investing? It teaches that we must do as much research as we can, evaluate the opinions and findings of the researchers, then make up our own minds.