A CRISIS OF CREDIBILITY ‘Climate change nothing but a lie’


It’s not apostasy (abandonment of one’s religion) or treachery (betrayal of one’s country or cause); it’s probably just a change in strategy and tactics.

But I distrust crusaders and activists who blithely change the names and banners of the cause they champion when the facts won’t suit them and they cannot win the argument. I dumped population management when its advocates started to change the terms — from population control, to family planning, to planned parenthood to reproductive health.

Polluting factories, climate scientist John Coleman.

Polluting factories, climate scientist John Coleman.

I parted ways with Al Gore and other devotees in the church of global warming when they changed global warming to climate change, because it turned out that the earth was not warming but cooling.

Now, the Obama White House is market-testing the term “climate disruption” because climate change is not sexy enough.

No warming for 18 years

Earlier this month planet Earth quietly marked the 18th anniversary of the period when its temperature last rose.

This sentence is perfectly pedestrian, but it is pregnant with implications.

For example: if there has been no increase in temperature since 1996, then there is no global warming or climate change.

And if there’s no climate change, there are some inconvenient questions (to use Al gore’s vocabulary) for some Filipino compatriots to deal with, namely:

1. What was the point of the UN climate change Summit in New York City last month, and why did President Aquino rush to attend it and spend millions of people’s money just to get ignored there?

2. Why is climate change mitigation now a core component of national policy? Have our scientists made a discovery that scientists in western countries have not?

3. Why do we expend so much treasure in sending Filipinos to international climate change conferences, only to be embarrassed by our delegates who make a spectacle of themselves by fasting and weeping for publicity?

4. Why do we waste time and money on a Senate committee on
climate change, whose chief task is to monitor a lie?

5. Where does this development put the aggressive and foreign-funded lobby of environmentalists, who live off grants and other inducements and are gumming up the works in policymaking and project implementation?

I’m no climate scientist, but I do know how to put 2 and 2 together.

John Coleman, who is a climate scientist and one of the world’s leading meteorologists, has reached the conclusion that global warming or climate change is a lie, and he has expressed himself emphatically and forcefully to his fellow scientists and the media.

In a front-page report in London’s Daily Express this week (October 22), Jason Taylor narrated Coleman’s key ideas and findings on the issue.

He reported as follows:

“John Coleman, who co-founded the Weather Channel, has shocked academics by insisting that the theory of man-made climate change is no longer scientifically credible.

“In an open letter attacking the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Coleman wrote: “The ocean is not rising significantly.

“The polar ice is increasing, not melting away. Polar Bears are increasing in number.

“Heat waves have actually diminished, not increased.

“There is not an uptick in the number or strength of storms (in fact storms are diminishing).

“I have studied climate change seriously for years. It has become a political and environment agenda item, but the science is not valid.

“There is no significant man-made global warming at this time, there has been none in the past and there is no reason to fear any in the future.

“Efforts to prove the theory that carbon dioxide is a significant greenhouse gas and pollutant causing significant warming or weather effects have failed.

“There has been no warming in over 18 years.”

Other climate experts have come out to support Coleman’s claims.
Climate expert William Happer, from Princeton University, issued a statement in support, which said:

“The incredible list of supposed horrors that increasing carbon dioxide will bring the world is pure belief disguised as science.

“In 2010 a high-level inquiry by the InterAcademy Council found there was /little evidence. to support the IPCC’s claims about global warming.”

Where is the warming?

Equally compelling is the stand taken by Dr Benny Peiser of the Global Warming Policy Forum.

Peiser contends that we are now in the midst of a “crisis of credibility” because global warming — and its ‘Doomsday’ effects — has not happened.

Scientists from the IPCC once predicted a temperature rise of 0.2 degrees per decade – but are now baffled by the fact that Earth’s temperature has not increased for almost two decades.

Because of the “global warming hiatus,” Dr Peiser says climate change is not as pressing an issue as it once was.

“Climate change used to be a top priority but it has dropped quite significantly – other issues are more important for international meetings,” he said.

A number of world leaders gathered last month in New York for the UN Climate Change Summit.

At the summit, US President Barack Obama declared hyperbolically that climate change was an issue “that will define the contours of this century more dramatically than any other” — but more significant were the faces missing at the meeting.

A number of countries — including China, India and Canada — did not attend the summit.

Dr. Peiser says that the summit showed that there is no international agreement about what to do about climate change.

Worst scientific scandal in history

How about Al Gore, who won a Nobel prize for his alarmist talk about global warming?

Poor Gore has to deal with the inconvenient truth that temperatures aren’t rising, but falling. In fact, since the early 1990s we’ve had global cooling. It was because of this that Gore and his junk scientists started calling it “climate change.”

Gore is exhausted dealing with the skeptics, whom he calls “denialists,” as in denying the Holocaust. What frustrates Gore and the climate-change industry is that the skeptics can no longer be shut out of the conversation.

“We can expect the climate crisis industry to grow increasingly shrill, and increasingly hostile toward anyone who questions their authority,” says Kenneth P. Green, a former member of the UN panel.

Another former panelist, Dr. Kimimori Itoh, a Japanese physical chemist, calls the phenomenon “the worst scientific scandal in history. When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.”

Yolanda/Haiyan and the lie

I don’t want to jinx my home region of Eastern Visayas and province of Leyte with this column and invite another catastrophe.

But it’s no sacrilege against Mother Nature to say that Typhoon Yolanda/Haiyan was not a demonstration of the reality of climate change. The findings of climate scientists are incontrovertible:

“The oceans are not rising. The frequency and strength of storms is not increasing but diminishing. But indubitably, Yolanda/Haiyan set a bar of deadliness and devastation.”

Our 11/8 is as historic as America’s 9/11. So there.



Please follow our commenting guidelines.


  1. Alvin Valeriano on

    The World Bank, US State Department/US Defense Department, Price-Cooper Waterhouse (global insurance), Bloomberg News, and numerous recognized institutions and personalities (including AFP COS General Catapang) share something in common, which is: Climate change, induced by man-made global warming, will be a major factor causing future disruptions which will greatly affect the world’s economy, security, and state of wellbeing in ways that will seriously challenge governments capability to deal with it (translation: it will be a disaster causing massive death, suffering and destruction). This column is so full of BS, as if the science of climate change is a plaything of 6-year olds. When 97% of climate scientists form a consensus that climate change is a serious problem, only deluded persons will deny that it is a grave matter.

  2. The fact is, if John Coleman (and the dubious Daily Express) are wrong (i.e. global warming IS a reality), what are the consequences of being wrong? And how do they (and Yen Makabenta) explain the causes of Typhoon Haiyan?

  3. this thingy, the coined word global warming, then climate change, then climate disruption is all about getting monies for the funding of research and developmental studies on climate behavior. the vested interest groups are using prominent politicians, movie stars, business people to drum up the need to fund the scientist to produce the data and information (manipulated to suit certain groups) that will be used to market their technology and products.

    just take a look at the solar & wind power technology. those who are the largest manufacturers of these products do not even use them extensively in their respective countries to replace their polluting power plants and industrial plants -but conveniently dump their products to developing countries who are gullible enough to take their marketing and sales promotions, pseudo calculation and extrapolations on the benefits hook, line & sinker.

  4. US Congress agrees with the major US climate scientists conclusion that climate change is a natural phenomena, global cooling then global warming. This is not a problem at all. It’s just a waste of money, time and effort, worst it will just bring economic disaster, shutting down cheap sources of fuels to be replaced by undependable very expensive renewable energies more than 15 times the fossil fuels, will further drive people to miserable living condition, how can filipinos afford for 10 to 15 times their current electricity cost now plus the domino effect of increasing as well the prices of all basic commodities, after government are duped by unscientific environmentalism which are showing only its intention to close down industries killing jobs breeding poverty… better to spend national treasury to more pressing problems like building more industries, solving MRT, traffic, flood control infrastructure similar to the belgian project unfortunately cancelled by Aquino. God help philippines from government who seem to be having no attention for important needs of the country but rather wasting nation’s money and time and efforts to non-sense, non-events, politics, vindictiveness, instead of solving the nation’s problems, it is adding more problems..

  5. It’s was not Al Gore and other global warming advocates who changed the terms
    “global warming” to “climate change.” While it was NASA scientist James E. Hansen’s
    testimony in Congress that global warming became the dominant popular term, it was the U.S. Global Change Research Program changed the term global warming to a more scientifically accurate term, “Global Climate Change,” since it encompasses
    the rise in global temperature and changes to precipitation patterns and sea levels.

    Earth’s surface average temperature is not rising as fast as it did in the 1990s, even
    though the amount of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are steadily increasing.

    Since about 2000, the average atmospheric temperature have indeed increased at a slower pace than in the preceding decades.

    The following deniers (mentioned in this article) are not experts on climate change:

    John Coleman – American TV weatherman – not a climate scientist

    Benny Peiser – a social anthropologist – not a climate scientist

    William Happer – a physicist specializing in study of atomic physics, optics
    and spectroscopy – not a climate scientist

  6. It is always entertaining to see the agents of the Matrix rush to the defense of “climate disruption”.

    There are more “adjustments” to the raw dataset than actual data. That is then fed into computer models that have been proven to be goofy innumerable times.

    Get a clue. Climate on Earth is driven by the Sun and the Space it floats in.

    Global Warming, Climate Change, Climate Disruption are all a fraud. Judge the tree by the fruit it bears. Look at the proposed solutions.

    1.) Create a fiat value system based on carbon, let the high finance geeks trade it. Give exemptions to anointed insider crony interests.

    2.) Tax and regulate small business out of business. Drive more demand to the very same “select partners”.

    3.) Take the land away from the people. Lease it to the “systemically important institutions”.

    4.) Dictate to the people how much they keep from what they create. How many children they can have. Where they live. What they eat. What they drink. What they breathe. Just like you would any other breed of livestock.

    5.) And because our appointed Messiahs and the enforcers are so venerated they are exempt from the justice inflicted on the rest of us.

    You really want to address the way we treat our planet?

    Go after the real polluters. The ones that develop and push products that poison the soil, the flora and fauna, the human race. Go after the big finance with their counterfeit substitute for wealth. Fiat currency. Go after the rotten political/legal monarchy that codifies the current global slavery. Go after the faux educational system that enshrines this behavior.

    For the first time in our history as a species, we have the ability to communicate with each other instantly. This is more profound than the invention of the Gutenberg Press.

    We could forge a society based on equality, freedom, independence, and creativity. Or we can hide our souls in terror and slide back into the re-branded…

  7. Whether scientists around the.world agree or disagree
    about the Climate Change Hoax,
    Let’s just take care of our environment, for sure it is
    harmless, no need to be a
    Scientist or an expert in

  8. Claro Apolinar on

    So, does this mean we should dismantle all the barangay level DRRM structures?
    Not that all barangays have set up. What Mar Roxas has set up are political groups, branches of his LP campaign.

    • DRRM is disaster risk reduction and management. Disasters happen regardless of climate change being a lie or not.

      The Climate Change Commission though, is another matter – a government body monitoring a lie, as it turns out according to the article.

  9. Part 3 from snopes.com

    Skepticism is, of course, the core value of scientific inquiry. But the essay that Coleman published would have more properly been termed rejectionism. Coleman wasn’t arguing against the integrity of a particular conclusion based on careful original research — something that would have constituted useful scientific skepticism. Instead, he went after the motives of the scientists themselves. Climate researchers, he wrote, “look askance at the rest of us, certain of their superiority. They respect government and disrespect business, particularly big business. They are environmentalists above all else.”

    Critics of Coleman who do study and work in the field of climate science have produced detailed line-by-line rebuttals of his arguments against global warming.

    Read more at http://www.snopes.com/politics/science/coleman.asp#a77kIzZJV7A5WevF.99

  10. In November 2007 Coleman penned a widely-reproduced essay in which he labeled global warming “the greatest scam in history” and “a manufactured crisis,” and he delivered a speech in that same vein (the text of which is reproduced above) to the San Diego Chamber of Commerce in June 2008.

    Although this item is superficially “true” in the sense that the words quoted above were indeed written by John Coleman, the statement that they “refute” global warming (i.e., prove it to be false) is something of an exaggeration. As Coleman’s critics have noted, he does not hold a degree in climatology or any related discipline, nor has he studied or conducted any research in that field; he merely parrots arguments advanced by others. Moreover, much of his criticism of climate change deals with impugning the motives of those engaged in that discipline rather than refuting the science behind their work:
    For the many Americans who don’t understand the difference between weather — the short-term behavior of the atmosphere — and climate — the broader system in which weather happens — Coleman’s professional background made him a genuine authority on global warming. It was an impression that Coleman encouraged. Global warming “is not something you ‘believe in,'” he wrote in his essay. “It is science; the science of meteorology. This is my field of life-long expertise.”

    Except that it wasn’t. Coleman had spent half a century in the trenches of TV weathercasting; he had once been an accredited meteorologist, and remained a virtuoso forecaster. But his work was more a highly technical art than a science. His degree, received fifty years earlier at the University of Illinois, was in journalism. And then there was the fact that the research that Coleman was rejecting wasn’t “the science of meteorology” at all — it was the science of climatology, a field in which Coleman had spent no time whatsoever.

    Skepticism is, of course, the core value of scientific…

  11. fly on the wall on

    Labels/names/ID may not be accurate but the increasing frequency and intensity of natural phenomena cannot be ignored or brushed off because they do not fit perfectly. Labels are progressive attempts to define or identify such natural events.

    Science always does not get it right all at once. It is a continuous study and is never stop, or is satisfied. There will always something that will come up over previous discoveries or theories. It is a process not a product.

  12. P. Akialamiro@yahoo.com on

    I go for the taking care of our planet such as maintaining our waters and the air clean, but I believe that when it comes to global warming or cooling, I am one of those skeptics. These phenomena are too grand that human beings cannot do anything to check; they natural supernatural natural phenomena. By the same token, there’s no amount of prevention and medical research can prevent a global epidemic brought about by supernatural causes..