I waited a few years to publish my book, The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science, because the public was not ready for it. I now believe scientists and the public are ready for the truth, but that also means the questions are different. They want to know who orchestrated the deception and how it was achieved, but most important they want to know the motive for this effort at mass deception.
If you want to understand what really has been behind the debate over global warming and climate change, consider this.
I have a Ph.D. in historical climatology from the University of London, England, and I studied meteorology and weather forecasting during nine years in the Cana- dian Air Force. I taught university climate courses for 25 years, published many peer-reviewed articles, authored the climatology half of a university-level textbook, and continue to publish peer-reviewed material.
Yet I am constantly under attack, including lawsuits by two leading members of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) who claim I am unqualified and don’t know what I am talking about. The attacks are coming because I am qualified, and because I can explain the science in a way the public can better understand. I am a high-profile threat to the climate deception—the use of climate scares for a political agenda.
I waited a few years to publish my book, The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science, because the public was not ready for it. A majority (80 percent) don’t understand the current state of science; they can’t believe a small group could influence and fool the world, or that scientists would be so subjective and political. Even scientists have been fooled. Consider this comment by Klaus-Eckart Puls:
Ten years ago I simply parroted what the IPCC told us. One day I started checking the facts and data—first I started with a sense of doubt but then I became outraged when I discovered that much of what the IPCC and the media were telling us was sheer nonsense and was not even supported by any scientific facts and measurements. To this day I still feel shame that as a scientist I made presentations of their science without first checking it.
I now believe scientists and the public are ready for the truth, but that also means the questions are different. They want to know who orchestrated the deception and how it was achieved, but most important they want to know the motive for this effort at mass deception.
A review by William M. “Bill” Gray, emeritus professor of atmospheric science at Colorado State University (CSU) and head of the Tropical Meteorology Project at CSU’s Department of Atmospheric Sciences, notes the importance of identifying the motives behind the climate change hysteria:
This book is a remarkable fact-filled tour-de-force discussion of the global warming topic. It gives much background and behind-the-scenes information of the vast chicanery and lies that have been perpetrated by a small and organized cabal of global warming propagandists. Probably nobody has followed this evolving global warming scandal more closely or has a better background to interpret the data than does Tim Ball. He paraphrases Churchill, “Never have so many been deceived by so few at so great a cost.”
A review by Marita Noon, executive director of Energy Makes America Great, Inc., notes the way the climate alarmists have changed the terms of the debate in order to keep the deception going when the facts of the past two decades proved them wrong:
It is not that Ball doesn’t believe in climate change. In fact, he does. He posits: “Climate change has happened, is happening and will always happen.” Being literal, Obama’s cheese comment is accurate. No scientist, and no one in Congress, denies climate change. However, what is in question is the global warming agenda that has been pushed for the past several decades that claims that the globe is warming because of human caused escalation of CO2. When global warming alarmists use “climate change,” they mean human-caused. Due to lack of “warming,” they’ve changed the term to climate change.
Nor is he against the environment, or even environmentalism. He says: “Environmentalism was a necessary paradigm shift that took shape and gained acceptance in western society in the 1960s. The idea that we shouldn’t despoil our nest and must live within the limits of global resources is fundamental and self-evident. Every rational person embraces those concepts, but some took different approaches that brought us to where we are now.”
Mahatma Gandhi reportedly said, “First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.” I’ve experienced all phases so far in the climate debate, or more accurately the lack of debate, and I believe we’re in the “fight” stage.
A frequent comment after I make a public presentation is, “I had my suspicions, but I didn’t know enough to know.” The creators of the global warming deception effectively exploited people’s fear and lack of knowledge. People sense there is something wrong with it, and they are asking questions and raising concerns. My book takes a journalistic approach to provide answers. Who did it and why? How was it done? How could a small group of people literally deceive most of the world? The evidence shows they used scientific credentials to browbeat the opposition into submission. They didn’t succeed, and now the fight is definitely on.