Alarmists evaluate the health of Arctic ice, by the minimum extent of the year. They go ballistic if you try to use any other measure. They demand that you don’t average over the entire year.
So I did something very similar with heat. I determined that 2014 was the coolest year in the US, because it had the smallest coverage of hot weather. In this case, they demand that you do average over the entire year.
What a bunch of frauds. They cherry pick whatever statistic based on tampered data best suits their needs, and insist that everyone else complies.
Criminal is the right word. This cabal will burn in hell for their fraud, non science and immorality. Men without souls, brains, and scruples.
Climate criminal is my new favourite term. It aptly describes what they doing.
But ice is independent of temperature …at least that’s what the climate criminals allege
.
They are not climate criminals, they are crimatologists.
This is what a clerisy class does. It is what they have done for thousands of years. They create the justification for the ruling class to rule. To do what it wants to do. In exchange for this they get a comfortable life.
There is of course another factor involved in the modern world. The powers that be also set what the proper outlook on things is. Then people naturally socially conform to that outlook to advance their careers. They may not even be aware of what they are doing because they only see what they expect to see.
The rest of the population doesn’t want to be see as kooky or out of step. They don’t want to be alone so they too go along to get along.
And with all of this, well most everyone falls in line. Most everyone sees it as just the way things are.
It’s only criminal to those who can step outside and look at the way humanity is organized objectively.
“It’s the world, not the US” is a favorite talking point for alarmists. My answer is “why should the US be doing so much better than the rest of the world, especially if we are the epitome of greed and evil as alarmists claim?”
It will be very interesting to see what these people eventually get charged with.
The other great thing will be to hear all the excuses from those who have profited so much by lying about the science, when they are asked to pay for the cost of their bad advice.
If you give advice portraying yourself to be authoritative and stating that governments much follow it, then you must also accept that if that advice is wrong, then you and your organisation must pay for the costs government incur because of your failure of due diligence.
So, don’t academics work for their universities, and doesn’t that mean that th $1trillion will have to be recovered by closing down and selling of the assets of these universities? And won’t government have a legal duty to recover that money?
In the criminal cases, there will be a whole lot of “I WAS JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS OR ELSE MY FAMILY WOULD SUFFER” emanating from the defense side.
RTF