Global warming an unproven hypothesis
Breaking News:

Global warming an unproven hypothesis

Anna Marshall

This is a brief outline of how the global warming controversy started and where it is going. The warmists claim that there is scientific consensus on global warming. But science is not based on consensus. Advancements in science are based on the application of the scientific method.

 Although there are some variations, it is generally accepted that  the scientific method consists of four distinct steps.

In the first stage, a scientist notes a natural phenomenon.

In the second stage, the scientist puts forward an hypothesis to explain the phenomenon.

In the third stage, various scientists make predictions based on the hypothesis and carry out experiments to look for empirical evidence that will support or disprove the hypothesis. 

Finally, after rigorous testing with no empirical evidence found to disprove it, the hypothesis is accepted and advances to the status of a theory and becomes generally accepted.

In the case of global warming, around 30 years ago some scientists noticed that global temperatures were gradually increasing over time. They also noticed that a trace gas essential to plant life, carbon dioxide, was increasing in the atmosphere due in part to industrial output.

Carbon dioxide, along with other gases such as methane and water vapour are greenhouse gases in that they trap some of the heat given off by the planet that would otherwise escape into space. Life on earth is totally dependent upon the greenhouse gases.  Their combined effect  is to warm the planet by around 15 degrees Celsius. Without these greenhouse gases the surface of the planet would just be an uninhabitable ice-sheet.

In accordance with the scientific method, the scientists put forward the hypothesis that global warming was taking place and that it was due to man-made emissions of carbon dioxide.

This hypothesis attracted the interest of groups of vested interests who saw it as ideal vehicle to advance their agendas.

The Greens saw an opportunity to use the hypothesis in their quest to de-industrialise the Western world and send us back to the caves, and embraced anthropogenic (man-made) global warming, or AGW for short, with the enthusiasm of zealots.

A group of powerful elites, including Henry Kissinger, George Soros and Jacques Chirac have long pursued an agenda of promoting the concept of a world government controlled and operated under the auspices of the United Nations. They dressed up the concept and gave it names such as "new world order" and "global governance". Kissinger tied the issue of AGW with the election of President Obama, saying "A new world order can be created".

At a speech to the VIth Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, then President of France, Jacques Chirac, let the cat out of the bag when he said," For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance".

A group of large multinationals and hedge funds saw a lucrative opportunity to cash in on the trading of carbon credits. The giant multinational, Enron poured millions into lobbying to make carbon dioxide a tradable commodity. When it went belly-up in in 2002 owing $6 billion, its role was taken over by various Wall Street trading houses. Today most of the major US investment banks are on the AGW bandwagon.

Western governments, particularly in the EU, salivated at the prospect of raising a giant new tax to offset their massive budget deficits, and began ladling out grants to scientists, consultants and advisers to study, model and produce reports on the already accepted AGW hypothesis. For thousands of scientists and consultants, lucrative new careers suddenly opened up, provided of course that they went along with the hypothesis. There were predictions of 100 metre sea level rises, coral reef destruction and global violent weather patterns.

Apart from a few lone voices, the media abandoned its traditional role of enquiry and reporting and has become strong advocates and even propagandists for AGW. Armageddon stories are always good for circulation.

Soon the global warming hypothesis took on a life of its own. Evangelism and hysteria have taken over. Sceptical scientists are defamed and prevented from presenting their research. High-profile sceptic, Lord Monckton has recently been banned from a number venues on his speaking tour of Australia.

What has been overlooked is that the scientists and modellers are only at step 3 of the scientific method. They are still at the prediction stage. The predictions cannot be tested for at least 30 years. Computer models are not empirical evidence, they are just models based on assumptions.

Man-made global warming cannot even be called a theory, it is still an hypothesis.


  1. Joseph23 May 2013

    Thissays it all

To add a comment register here