Environmentalists and the global warming hoax - who needs facts?

When Senator Ted Cruz recently asked Sierra Club President Aaron Mair to explain how he can claim there is global warming when there has been almost zero temperature increase in the last 18 years, Mr. Mair could not provide an answer.  Instead he defaulted to the knee-jerk liberal claim that 97% of scientists have concluded that humans are the cause or source of the global warming, so therefore, there is nothing to debate.

In fact, of all the science that has debunked global warming, there was only one article that made the 97% claim, and the Sierra Club is only interested in that one article. That’s because if the 97% claim falls apart, the entire global warming narrative will prove to be false (just like 'global warming' scientists admitted a few years ago in a series of emails they didn't think anyone would see) and groups like Mr. Mair’s will no longer be able to raise money on the lie.

Here is an inconvenient truth that Mr. Mair and other environmental alarmists don’t want to hear:

The 97% ‘consensus’ study, Cook et al. (2013) has been thoroughly refuted in scholarly peer-reviewed journals, by major news media, public policy organizations and think tanks, highly credentialed scientists and extensively in the climate blogosphere. The shoddy methodology of Cook's study has been shown to be so fatally flawed that well known climate scientists have publicly spoken out against it.

The fact that Mr. Mair was not familiar with the article “97 Articles Refuting The ‘97% Consensus’ is an indictment of his entire testimony. He was over matched by Sen. Cruz and under-represented by truth itself.

Will any of this change the global warming narrative? No.

Liberals hate facts because they get in the way of their policy – and tax raising, human control - pursuits.