The cult of science. Scientism and its cult adherents are desirous like Hegel and his friends in the mid-19^th century, of power, money and control. Long gone is the tedious journey to knowledge and some variety of truth. More important is the billions of dollars – some $60 bn p.a. - which funds the cult of warm or the cult of mud-became-men. Every year some breathtaking 'news' is announced. The cult of warm issues dogma that 2014 was the 'hottest ever'. It actually ranks in the coldest 3 per cent since 1880, if not in the entire past 10.000 year period. In the world of Scientism, cold is hot; warm is hotter; mild is hot; stasis is the end-of-the-world – all due to plant food, a trace chemical 4/100 of 1 % atmospheric gas by weight, of which the human emits 5 %.....genius. The cult of warm is about fraud, distorted data, lies and propaganda. No science needed.

Source

“How valid is the 2014 claim? In the 10,000 – year context, it is significant because it is among the 3 percent coldest years, which is far more significant than the 100-year warm alarmists proclaim. There are two major reasons: Highest readings occur in the most recent years of a rising temperature record. Every alteration, adjustment amendment and abridgment of the record so far, was done to create and emphasize increasingly higher temperatures.

1. The instrumental data is spatially and temporally inadequate. Surface weather data is virtually non-existent and unevenly distributed for 85 percent of the world’s surface. There are virtually none for 70 percent of the oceans....

2. Most surface stations are concentrated in eastern North America and Western Europe...urban heat island effect (UHIE).

3. There is a consistent revision of the record to lower historic readings. This increases the gradient of supposed warming. [in other words they cool the past, warm the present]...”

So much money. So little time for the end-of-the-world due to the trace chemical plant food; now re-branded as a dangerous toxin. Complex climate convection systems do not lend themselves to such insipid and banal analysis, where all the changes in climate are the fault of one trace chemical, which by default must fall out of more primal and larger hydro-logical processes.