These thoughts are so similar to mine on the subject of global warming that I wanted to share them.
Those who have heard my global warming presentation have heard me ask the rhetorical question, "Once a university sets up an 'interdisciplinary center for global warming' at a cost of tens of millions and total salaries in the millions, what do they do if the science indicates global warming is not much of a problem? Say, 'never mind'?"
Here are David Evans' thoughts on the same subject:
The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess that was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong, the governments, and their tame climate scientists, now outrageously maintain the fiction that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant.
The following statement is scientifically correct:
Weather balloons had been measuring the atmosphere since the 1960s, many thousands of them every year. The climate models all predict that as the planet warms, a hot spot of moist air will develop over the tropics about 10 kilometres up, as the layer of moist air expands upwards into the cool dry air above. During the warming of the late 1970s, ’80s and ’90s, the weather balloons found no hot spot. None at all. Not even a small one. This evidence proves that the climate models are fundamentally flawed, that they greatly overestimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide.
The entire, easy-to-read article is here.