"When the United Nations insists that man-made global warming is now proved beyond doubt, it's practicing one of the few things it has proved itself good at: censorship of dissenting viewpoints."

IBD Editorial
The U.N.'s Global Warming Muzzle

BogueThe wasteful, corrupt, dictatorship-dominated U.N. may not be successful in fulfilling very many of its supposed objectives — world peace, the end of poverty, mutual understanding, etc. — but when it comes to suppressing contrarian points of view that interfere with official U.N. stances, the organization ranks with the best.

Take the attempts two years ago to tell the truth about the anti-Semitism of the Hamas terrorist organization, elected into power by Palestinians.

"Israel will exist and continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it," was just one of many quotes from Hamas' charter that were blocked by the U.N. from being delivered verbally to members by defenders of Israel.

Instead, the World Union for Progressive Judaism, a U.N. non-governmental organization, had to settle for submitting a written statement documenting Hamas' violent, extremist beliefs.

Now the U.N. is telling the world that only nuts on the fringe question dismantling the global economy to fight global warming. The U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change last year stated that warming was "unequivocal" and "caused by human activity."

Now, as 10,000 delegates and environmentalists meet in Poland to negotiate the successor to the Kyoto treaty, we hear complaints about demands that they prove warming is man-made.

"The skeptics are doing a good job," Lawrence Buja of the National Center for Atmospheric Research told the Associated Press, "because they are making us present ironclad proof."

(Buja mentioned the idea of injecting large amounts of sulfur into the atmosphere or scattering billions of refractors to reduce sunlight and reduce temperatures. Will climate change be the excuse for turning the world into Dr. Frankenstein's laboratory?)

Men and women of science are supposed to demand of themselves ironclad proof — not resent such challenges. Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, on Wednesday released a wealth of information contradicting the U.N. line.

Dissenting scientists on the subject now top 650. They include Nobel physics laureate Ivar Giaever, who calls global warming "a new religion," and Japanese chemist and IPCC member Kiminori Itoh, who calls warming alarmism the "worst scientific scandal."

New Zealand chemical engineering professor Geoffrey Duffy notes that "even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapor and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will."

Inhofe and minority committee members are about to release an updated report with the dissenting arguments of those 650-plus scientists. Many of them are or used to be with the IPCC but have come to oppose the U.N. on climate change.

"The report has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke out in 2007," Inhofe's office notes. They far outnumber the 52 U.N. scientists who authored the IPCC's 2007 Summary for Policymakers.

On top of this comes news of new research fueling the dissenters' skepticism. A peer-reviewed study focused on the Siberian Altai mountain region examined 750 years worth of the local ice core, with special emphasis on the oxygen isotope.

It found an apparently strong correlation between the concentration of this isotope and solar activity from the years 1250 to 1850. The findings indicate that about half of observed global warming in the last century can be explained by the activity of the sun.

It increasingly seems that ideology and a wish to see the industrialized free West reduced in economic status is what motivates U.N. climate policy, not science. But these hundreds of competent scientists dedicated to the truth are not about to let their mouths be covered — even by a United Nations olive branch.