From Melanie Phillips comes a great short article
Dirty Work At The Green Crossroads

As is habitually the case, the media seems to have missed the real story of the IPCC’s fourth report on climate change, which has been universally reported as predicting that the imminent global apocalypse is going to be even worse than previously anticipated and so it’s Even More All Our Fault Than Ever.

What has been largely overlooked is that what has been published is merely the summary for policymakers, while the actual science on which that summary is allegedly based will not be published — extraordinarily — for a further three months. As with previous IPCC reports, the summary is a political document written not by scientists but by officials. And now, various folk who have read the draft scientific material for the fourth report are saying that the IPCC summary bears little relation to the IPCC science which tells a very different story indeed — namely, that previous IPCC forecasts of the climate change apocalypse were exaggerated and wrong and that accordingly current forecasts have been drastically scaled back.

And she points to Christopher Monckton’s great summary of the lack of scientific evidence, but here’s even one more One pdf file; two parts. Print them out, hold onto them, distribute! This is from the second one; go over to Melanie’s to read some of the excerpts from the first.

Apocalypse Cancelled I

In summary, Christopher Monckton is pointing out that global warming is the worst market failure ever. Climate change is less about saving the planet than what Jacques Chirac pointed out is the real agenda behind the environmental movement and global warming: ‘creating world government’.

James Hansen, a climatologist, told Congress in 1988 that the temperature would rise .35C by the end of the century (it rose .1C), and that sea level would rise several feet by 2100 (one inch by 2000). The UN set up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change to further bolster the hysterics of the environmental fascists.

The UN implies that CO2 ended the last four ice ages. Two 450,000-year graphs - a sawtooth curve of temperature and a sawtooth of airborne CO2 that’s scaled to look similar is the evidence. Similar curves are usually superimposed for comparison, but the UN’s report didn’t do that. If it had, the truth would have been known: the changes in temperature preceded the changes in CO2 levels.

The UN then abolished the mediaeveal warming period. In 1995, David Deming, geoscientist at the University of Oklahoma, wrote an article resconstructing 150 years of North American temperatures from borehole data. He later wrote: “With the publication of the article in Science, I gained significant creidiblity in the community of scientists working on climate change. They thought I was one of them, someone who would pervert science in the service of social and political causes. One of them let his guard down. A major person working in the area of climate change and global warming sent me an astonishing email that said, “We have to get rid of the Mediaeval Warm Period.”“

So, they did! The UN’s second assessment report of 1996, had a 1,000-year graph showing that temperatures in the Middle Ages were warmer than today’s. But the 2001 report contained a new graph showing no mediaeval warm period. It falsely concluded that the 20th century was the warmest for 1,000 years.

He goes into how they forced their conclusion into the models.

In some places it was warmer now in the Bronze age than in Roman times, but the important thing of note is- it wasn’t carbon dioxide that caused those warming trends, it was the Sun. Not to be deterred from that minor detail, the UN adjusted the math and all but extinguished the Sun’s role in today’s warming!

If that’s not enough, the UN slashed the natural greenhouse effect by 40% from 33C in the climate-pys textbooks to 20C,making the man-made additions appear bigger than they really are.

The constant repetition of wrong data doesn’t make it right.

Apocalypse Cancelled II

All artificial government intervention advocated by climate change ‘consensus’ will be futile without the consent of the Third World’s fast-growing nations. That consent will be withheld until the UN produces soundly-based, scientifically-honest, fair and realistic projections.

But…don’t hold your breath for them.

See “Global Warming: Do ALL Scientists really agree on this?”

Junk Science dot Com further illustrates there is little scientific evidence behind the IPCC’s recommendations for more government with the draft report itself.

With a hearty tip o’ me tam and a thank you to Rotty Pup for the tip.

Thanks to: The Virtuous Republic, Perri Nelson’s Website, The Random Yak, basil’s blog, Shadowscope, The Bullwinkle Blog, Conservative Cat, Jo’s Cafe, Pursuing Holiness, Conservative Thoughts, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, The HILL Chronicles, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, and Gone Hollywood