High Priest of Gaia: “What Global Warming?”

James Lovelock to be precise, author of the Gaia hypothesis so warmly embraced by the warmists.


‘Global warming? What global warming?’ says High Priest of Gaia Religion

By James Delingpole | The Telegraph

“Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth”, saith the Bible.

So let joy be unconfined that one of the archest of the world’s arch Greenies – James Lovelock, inventor of the Gaia hypothesis and therefore, more or less, founder of the world’s most powerful modern religion – has come clean and admitted that he got it wrong in his doomsday predictions about “Climate Change.”

Well, come almost clean.

I can’t say there has been quite as much wailing and lamentation and as breast-beating as I would have liked. Here’s what he has said in in his retraction in an interview with MSNBC.

“The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books – mine included – because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened,” Lovelock said.

“The climate is doing its usual tricks. There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now,” he said.

“The world has not warmed up very much since the millennium. Twelve years is a reasonable time… it (the temperature) has stayed almost constant, whereas it should have been rising – carbon dioxide is rising, no question about that,” he added.

Presumably, Professor Lovelock will now be donating all his royalties from his earlier alarmist bestsellers to help fund those proper, principled, decent scientists around the world – Fred Singer, Richard Lindzen, Bob Carter, Ian Plimer, Tim Ball et al – whose careers have been blighted and whose lives have been made misery for having said precisely what Lovelock is now admitting, only much, much earlier. And then, perhaps, using his cachet among his greenie co-religionists to make amends for his sins by calling for the abolition of the IPCC.


I’m shocked, shocked I tell you, to discover this has been deemed un-newsworthy on this side of the pond.  /Louis Renault Mode


Just remember, burning the heretic increases atmospheric CO2 levels.

Obama Loves America… When It Agrees With Him
"The patterns clearly show that the money went to the places the Democrats represented"
  • herddog505

    The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago.

    This is why “the science is settled!” was and is such an idiot phrase, and why people who utter it are either moronically ignorant or else completely dishonest.

    Or both.

    Now, think about how much money has been spent (wasted) on “green energy” boondoggles both here and abroad because of this damned nonsense.  I don’t think it’s cost as many lives as the crusade against DDT, but it’s got to go down in history as the one of the greatest frauds ever perpetrated on the human race (communism taking the palm for that dubious honor).

    • I vote for ‘completely dishonest’.

      There ARE certain things that are settled.  That gravity exists, even though we don’t really know what causes it.  Same thing with magnetism.  We understand quite a few things about chemistry, and engineering principles for making large-scale structures in a 1-G environment are pretty clear.

      But the attempt to stifle scientific debate about AGW with ‘The Science Is Settled!’ was just plain bogus.

  • Hank_M

    “This is why “the science is settled!” was and is such an idiot phrase,
    and why people who utter it are either moronically ignorant or else
    completely dishonest.”

    Agreed herddog. But if you follow the links to the interview, Lovelock explains the real reason the “science is settled” – money!

    “As “an independent and a loner,” he said he did not mind saying “All
    right, I made a mistake.” He claimed a university or government
    scientist might fear an admission of a mistake would lead to the loss of

  • Hank_M

    It’s also interesting that the left, so quick to disparage and denigrate religion, except for one –  the one they’re deathly afraid of –  have no trouble at all subscribing to the religion of global warming. 

    • It gave them a convenient lever to get a lot of things accomplished they couldn’t persuade people to fund or support otherwise.

  • John_LC_Silvoney

    James “Emily Litella” Lovelock :
    “Never mind!”

  • jim_m

    The science is settled for the postmodern left.  But then you have to understand what the postmodern left understands science to be.  To the postmodernist science is merely a subjective description of the world , entirely dependent upon the cultural biases of the observer and not in any way, shape or form empirical, objective or necessarily verifiable.

    In other words: science is just a political position; it is whatever someone claims it to be and it does not have to align with anything like “facts” because the left has dispensed with a belief that objective facts exist.

    So the science is indeed settled. The political position has determined what the science is and facts don’t exist so they simply do not matter.

  • Guest

    Hey Rodney, you forgot his part – the part where Lovelock says GW is real, man-made, and still causing problems.

    Asked if he was now a climate skeptic, Lovelock told msnbc.com: “It depends what you mean by a skeptic. I’m not a denier.

    He said human-caused carbon dioxide emissions were driving an increase in
    the global temperature
    , but added that the effect of the oceans was not well enough understood and could have a key role.

    “It (the sea) could make all the difference between a hot age and an ice age,” he said. He said he still thought that climate change was happening, but that its
    effects would be felt farther in the future than he previously thought.

    We will have global warming, but it’s been deferred a bit,” Lovelock said.

    Your welcome! Happy to help anytime.

    • jim_m

      In his book The Structure of Scientific Revolution  Thomas Kuhn, says that scientific theories do not often fall out of favor because they are proven wrong. Instead, older theories tend to die out along with their proponents, while new and creative theories attract the attention of younger scientists who, in turn, promote their theories over the older ones.

      In other words, warmists will never change their minds, they will, shall we say, “cling bitterly” to their disproven and outmoded beliefs and eventually be ignored by the world.  This is why they are so desperate to claim that everything is settled.  If they do not freeze scientific thought in the current state they will be obsoleted and relegated to the ash heap of history.

  • this guy was a hack decades ago and is still a hack today …  scientist my a** …  a con man is more like it …

  • jim_m

    I guess he’s just trying to get a head start on walking back this prediction: 

    “billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that
    survive will be in the Arctic where the climate remains tolerable” by
    the end of the 21st century.

    Or perhaps his prediction that “80% of humans will perish by 2100 AD,” 

    One presumes he meant Antarctic since the Arctic is without any land mass.
    I’m sure that the lefties here all deeply desire that 4.8 Billion people would be exterminated and the survivors live in some future dystopia, but it just isn’t happening

  • It would seem the new Disqus (Preview 2012) really dislikes our trolls…