Trigger warning:

This site may, in fact always will contain images and information likely to cause consternation, conniptions, distress, along with moderate to severe bedwetting among statists, wimps, wusses, politicians, lefties, green fascists, and creatures of the state who can't bear the thought of anything that disagrees with their jaded view of the world.

Feb 17, 2009

John Coleman: The Story Behind the Global Warming Scam

HT: The Republitarian.

There is another great article from John Coleman, who is a vocal critic of anthropogenic Global warming who in 2007 described the current concern over global warming "a fictional, manufactured crisis, and a total scam." I previously reported on Coleman and a group of scientists attempting to sue Al Gore. In this one he goes into the history of the GW cult right back to its beginnings shortly after WW2.

The following are some extracts from the article.

Roger Revelle served with the Navy in World War II. Afterwards he became the Director of the Scripps Oceanographic Institute in La Jolla in San Diego, California. He greatly expanded the Institute's areas of interest. Revelle co-authored a scientific paper with Suess in 1957—a paper that raised the possibility that the atmospheric carbon dioxide might be creating a greenhouse effect and causing atmospheric warming. The thrust of the paper was a plea for funding for more studies. Funding is where Revelle's mind was most of the time. …….

Back in the 1960s, this global warming research came to the attention of a Canadian born United Nation's bureaucrat named Maurice Strong. He was looking for issues he could use to fulfill his dream of one-world government. Strong organized a World Earth Day event in Stockholm, Sweden in 1970. From this he developed a committee of scientists, environmentalists and political operatives from the UN to continue a series of meetings.

Strong developed the concept that the UN could demand payments from the advanced nations for the climatic damage from their burning of fossil fuels to benefit the underdeveloped nations—a sort of CO2 tax that would be the funding for his one-world government. But he needed more scientific evidence to support his primary thesis. So Strong championed the establishment of the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC). …..

At the same time Maurice Strong was busy at the UN, things were getting a bit out of hand for the man who is now called the grandfather of global warming, Roger Revelle. He had been very politically active in the late 1950's as he worked to have the University of California locate a San Diego campus adjacent to Scripps Institute in La Jolla. He won that major war, but lost an all important battle afterward when he was passed over in the selection of the first Chancellor of the new campus.

He left Scripps finally in 1963 and moved to Harvard University to establish a Center for Population Studies. It was there that Revelle inspired one of his students. …. The student described him as "a wonderful, visionary professor" who was "one of the first people in the academic community to sound the alarm on global warming." That student was Al Gore. He thought of Dr. Revelle as his mentor and referred to him frequently, relaying his experiences as a student in his book “Earth in the Balance,” published in 1992.

So there it is. Roger Revelle was indeed the grandfather of global warming. His work had laid the foundation for the UN IPCC, provided the anti-fossil fuel ammunition to the environmental movement and sent Al Gore on his road to his books, his movie “An Inconvenient Truth,” his Nobel Peace Prize and a hundred million dollars from the carbon credits business. ………
After retirement Revelle began to rethink his position:

In 1988 he wrote two cautionary letters to members of Congress. He wrote, "My own personal belief is that we should wait another 10 or 20 years to really be convinced that the greenhouse effect is going to be important for human beings, in both positive and negative ways." He added, "…we should be careful not to arouse too much alarm until the rate and amount of warming becomes clearer."

And in 1991 Revelle teamed up with Chauncey Starr, founding director of the Electric Power Research Institute and Fred Singer, the first director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service, to write an article for Cosmos magazine. They urged more research and begged scientists and governments not to move too fast to curb greenhouse CO2 emissions because the true impact of carbon dioxide was not at all certain, and curbing the use of fossil fuels could have a huge, negative impact on the economy, jobs, and our standard of living. ….

Did Roger Revelle attend the summer enclave at the Bohemian Grove in Northern California in 1990 while working on that article? Did he deliver a lakeside speech there to the assembled movers and shakers from Washington and Wall Street in which he apologized for sending the UN IPCC and Al Gore on this wild goose chase about global warming? Did he say that the key scientific conjecture of his lifetime had turned out wrong? The answer to those questions is, "Apparently.” People who were there have told me about that afternoon, but I have not located a transcript or a recording. People continue to share their memories with me on an informal basis. More evidence may be forthcoming.

Roger Revelle died of a heart attack three months after the Cosmos story was printed. Oh, how I wish he were still alive today. He might be able to stop this scientific silliness and end the global warming scam. He might well stand beside me as a global warming denier.

Al Gore has dismissed Roger Revelle’s mea culpa as the actions of a senile old man. The next year, while running for Vice President, he said the science behind global warming is settled and there will be no more debate. From 1992 until today, he and most of his cohorts have refused to debate global warming and when asked about us skeptics, they insult us and call us names.
I is interesting to note that Revelle was prepared to look back on what was essentially his lifes work, see where it was leading and warn against it. This to me does not seem to be the action of a "senile old man," rather that of a man of principle. If he were rambling and obviously not with it, I feel that the people the author spoke to on the subject would have mentioned it, or at least some.

The full article is at KUSI News.


  1. Suggest you to provide link to

    and encourage your readers to use the Energy Environment Forum and get a link back !
    energyenvironmentforum at gmail dot com

  2. Hi Active; It looks like you have put up the link anyway with your comment. Looking over the site gives me the impression that it is mainly for those committed to the concept of GW, which I am far from convinced of. Solar and wind energy are fine with me if they are able to stand alone economically, but will always need baseload generation to back them up. Still, they are great for reducing the need for generation from other sources.

    The use of by-product or waste oil to run motors or whatever is fine as well, however I totally oppose turning food crops into bio-fuels, and consider it to be environmental vandalism writ large and with government support.

    Bio-diesel is one of the worst as it is causing the wholesale destruction of vast areas of tropical rain-forest in order to grow oil palms.

    Having said that, you are quite welcome to the link in the comment.