The Great Global Warming Swindle

Politicized climate debate restricts the opportunity to dissent

Stefan Hlouschko, MSc. '08
Stefan Hlouschko, MSc. '08

Hardly a day goes by without the declaration that our propensity to burn fossil fuels has resulted in the Earth’s heating.

The mainstream media consistently stresses that scientists have confirmed this staggering conclusion, and that we must act quickly in order to save the planet from our irresponsibility.

Emotionally laden images of polar bears and Hollywood’s aggrandizement of doomsday scenarios have rallied the best-intentioned of us to the front lines.

The clock is ticking!

We must act now!

The man-made global warming mantra has become so pervasive that raising reasonable doubt is tantamount to heresy.

Those who question the official version of events are vilified, as seen in Ellen Goodman’s tasteless op-ed in the Boston Globe on Feb. 9 in which she said: “Let’s just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.” It’s truly remarkable the debate of a scientific issue has been stifled in this manner. Science is about testing theories and observing evidence, not about reaching a democratic consensus.

This politicized climate of fear-mongering has resulted in the production of numerous resources to let the other side be heard.

Enter the “The Great Global Warming Swindle,” available on Google Video.

This documentary brings together a plethora of top scientists, professors, climatologists and weather experts to question the ideas about climate change that have circulated in the popular press.

The documentary explores how Al Gore’s film, An Inconvenient Truth, deliberately reverses Antarctic ice-core sample data to claim CO2 causes temperature change.

According to the scientists in “The Great Global Warming Swindle,” the opposite is the case: ice-core samples show that CO2 levels are lagging indicators of temperature change.

Why does this happen?

The Google documentary explains that when temperatures rise, the oceans become warmer, allowing carbon dioxide to dissolve into the atmosphere. The lag is attributed to the fact that the Earth’s oceans require approximately 800 years to respond to changes in surface temperature.

The scientists in the Google documentary do acknowledge that global warming is occurring, but point to the huge ball of burning gas, one million times the size of our planet: the sun.

They contend that solar activity very precisely matches the plot of temperature change over the last 100 years, and correlates well with the anomalous post-war temperature dip, when global carbon dioxide levels were rising.

This type of warming is corroborated with evidence that warming exists on other planets due to solar activity. National Geographic’s February edition reports that Mars, too, appears to be enjoying more mild and balmy temperatures.

In the February issue, Habibullo Abdussamatov, the head of space research at St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory, said the Mars data that changes in the sun are causing the current global warming on Earth.

“The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars,” he said.

The Google documentary goes further to investigate the “scientific consensus” put forward by the UN, whose much-vaunted Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report was heralded as closing the case on the argument of man-made global warming.

However, as the documentary explains, the IPCC’s conclusion was politically driven and they deliberately censored any dissenting scientists while still listing them as participants.

The IPCC has a history of publishing misleading reports. For example, in a 1996 report, it edited out these two statements, according to Fred Singer, founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project.

“None of the studies cited has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases,” and “No study to date had positively attributed all or part of the climate changes ... to man-made causes.”

If the IPCC conclusions are accepted by governments as being based on solid science and lead to global controls on energy use and generation, drastic economic consequences would follow, mainly impacting the world’s poor.

No society should be made to live in a climate of fear based on false premises.

Irrespective of your personal views on global warming, it’s unjust to persecute those who dare to question and learn.

We are being swindled of the opportunity to dissent.

All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s)-in-Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to

When commenting, be considerate and respectful of writers and fellow commenters. Try to stay on topic. Spam and comments that are hateful or discriminatory will be deleted. Our full commenting policy can be read here.