Latest Entry: @ MarkLevinShow - Bull without a horn; 45 without bullets; Paul Revere without a horse     Latest Comments: Talk Back Here

« More On Weinergate, What We Know, And Why We Should Care About Congressman Weiner's Online Interactions with Underage Girls | Main | The Dalai Lama A "Marxist"? »

June 11, 2011

The "Anthropogenic Global Warming" Fraud And Those Kyoto Protocol "Nobel Prize Laureates" Supporting It (Updated)

Topics: Climategate, Global Warming

Some proponents of the "Anthropogenic Global Warming" myth (e.g., a commenter on this site who calls himself "banshee") advance the spurious argument that since some alleged eighty-four "Nobel Laureates" attached their signatures to the "Cap & Tax" Marxist global wealth redistribution scheme of the infamous Kyoto Protocol, that the fact that such "August Personages" have endorsed the myth of "Anthropogenic Global Warming" somehow gives it "scientific validity"; even though they ignore the fact that not all of those "Nobel Laureates" that attached their signatures to the Kyoto Protocol are physicists, climatologists, metereologists, oceanographers, paleoclimatologists, paleobotanists, or anyone even remotely associated with the study of climatology and or of climate patterns and changes in the past, or are even scientists at all (meanwhile, a majority of scientists do not support the man -made global warming theory ... and Al Gore is being sued by over 30.000 Scientists for Global Warming fraud)!

Or that, obviously, having been awarded a "Nobel Prize", for peace, literature, physiology, medicine, or economics - however brilliant you may be in your chosen field or great your contribution - does not automatically qualifies you as an "infallible expert" on climatic changes and or its causes; or makes the left-wing politically driven "Global Warming" myth any more credible, compelling, or scientifically factual, just because you happen to support it. Especially when so much of the data upon which the scientific community, as a whole, has based those conclusions, is now known to have been a collusion by some of the scientists most prominently pushing the "Anthropogenic Global Warming" agenda; who - as the recently exposed "Climategate" e-mails exchanged between them clearly suggests - conspired, colluded, manipulated, exaggerated, and even fabricated the warming data, fudging it, while destroying and disposing of data showing results contrary to their global warming assumptions and prejudices, while avoiding admission of critical flaws found in their testing methodology. Talk about a "hockey-stick graph" up our collective.... never mind.

Not to mention that since "Global Warming" is all the rave nowadays, anyone who wants to get some "grant money" for scientific "research" (and to support themselves), from the European Community, George Soros or some of the other left-leaning environmentalist-minded "Charitable Trusts" and "Foundations", and even from our own government, must tow the "Anthropogenic Global Warming" line, and worship before the "Gods of Global Warming" in order to get any funding....or starve to death with true, heroic, scientific integrity!

To begin with, being a "Nobel Laureate" has become more of a badge of recognition for global progressivism, and a political statement for man-centered, hedonistic, materialistic, left-leaning tendencies, than the recognition for outstanding achievement benefitting humanity that it was intended to be, in Alfred Nobel's own words, "for the greatest benefit on mankind"; even though it may be argued that from its inception the Nobel Prize was tainted by Nobel's own "pacifist" bias.

As a matter of fact, it can also be argued that from its very beginnings the Nobel committee's decisions have been influenced by politics, nationalistic nepotism, and marred by their interpretation of what they deemed the "Ideal Direction" stated in Nobel's will as "Lofty and sound Idealism" which many blame for the committee's rejection of such notable writers as Mark Twain, Emile Zola, Leo Tolstoy, and Anton Chekhov. Furthermore, many believe that, in the case of Tolstoy and Chekhov, Sweden's historic antipathy towards Russia was also a determining factor why neither was ever awarded the Prize.

Another apparent, rather blatant, politically motivated bias shown by the committee in the past, is how they persistently denied Argentinian writer, Jorge Luis Borges, the Prize, most likely because of his right-wing views, even though he was nominated for the Prize several times, to the point that once, upon hearing that the Nobel Prize committee had once again denied him the award, Borges despondently remarked: "Not granting me the Nobel Prize has become a Scandinavian tradition".

This, while the Nobel committee seemed not to have any problems whatsoever with awarding the Prize to Gabriel Garcia Marquez - the communist-sympathizing Colombian novelist, "buddy" of Cuban tyrant Fidel Castro, admirer of murderous Che Guevara, and advocate of South American radicals and "Revolutionaries" - even though Borges, by far, is the more accomplished writer!

Again, ironically, the Nobel committee may not have ever awarded the Nobel Prize for literature to Jorge Luis Borges, on account of, as his biographer, Edwin Williamson, put it:

" ...his support of certain Argentine and Chilean right-wing military dictators, including Pinochet."
Yet, as with Garcia Marquez, the Nobel committee seems not to have had any qualms in honoring writers who openly supported brutal left-wing dictatorships such as that of the murderous Soviet butcher of the "Gulags", Joseph Stalin, as in the case of "Nobel Laureates" Jean-Paul Sartre, and the Chilean communist radical, Pablo Neruda!

Anti-Catholic bias, such as that shared by the left and many of the ardent secularist supporters of this "Anthropogenic Global Warming" political agenda of today, also seems to have been a factor influencing some of the Nobel Prize committee's decisions; such as when they awarded the Prize to Italian artist Dario Fo in 1997 for what, in the view of most critics, was initially considered a lackluster, "rather lightweight" performance, apparently for no greater merit than having been censured by the Catholic Church. By the same token, however, they would not extend the honor of awarding the Nobel Prize to controversial Muslim writer Salman Rushdie for his "Satanic Verses" apparently lest they would "offend Muslim sensitivities", as is wont to be done by the left nowadays in their "politically correct" dhimmitude!

Indeed, if being a "Nobel Laureate" has not become but a badge of recognition for progressivist, globalist, leftists, and Marxist ideologues, how else can anyone explain that such as Al Gore, and or Barack Obama, would have ever possibly been awarded the Prize? For what merit, or on account of bestowing what "greatest benefit on mankind", or what "lofty idealism"?

Was it, in Al Gore's case, for not only having invented, but created, "Global Warming" with all the "hot air" he's been spewing from his mouth about it, while lining his pockets with this scam?

Or in Obama's case, was Obama's "contribution to the betterment of humanity" in the view of the committee, that he got elected president of the United States though his skin is "black"? Was that the qualifier for Obama, in the discretion of the Nobel committee, or was it maybe all his empty, "lofty", rhetoric?

If it was, then in that case, it is the American people who deserved the Nobel Prize for having elected, without bias or prejudice, this incompetent Marxist scion of a Kenyan "Anti-Colonialist" now bankrupting our country and driving our economy down the road of perdition off the cliff of insolvency, with all of his anti-business, big-government regulation, and socialist policies; while all the "Hope" he pandered has become but the hopelessness of millions of unemployed Americans, and all the "Change" he has brought about is but the decline of our nation, not only at home, but abroad; and who, for all the irony of being awarded a "Nobel Peace Prize", he neither earned nor deserved, has not only perpetuated the existing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, but has gotten us involved in more war and conflict in Libya, and has made the world more unstable and prone to bloody conflicts, and political upheavals, on account of his indecisiveness and lack of leadership!

All in all, and for what the Nobel Prize has become, there's little practical reason to consider the input of those 'Laureates' any more important than Sheryl Crow, laughably suggested that we use only "one sheet" of toilet paper at a time. Perhaps we should take the Nobel Prize Diplomas of all those "Laureates" supporting Anthropogenic Global Warming, and do likewise.

Related:
Where's the warming?
Al Gore sued by over 30.000 Scientists for Global Warming fraud
The Great Global Warming Swindle (Trailer)
Do most scientists really believe in global warming?

Posted by Althor at June 11, 2011 1:56 PM



Articles Related to Climategate, Global Warming: