1.a story or account of events, experiences, or the like, whether true or fictitious.
A narrative is a story, true or not. The narrative of man made global warming was always, as the lawyers might say, based on facts not yet in evidence. The creation of that evidence has been one of the greatest scams and injustices in world history. Like all good stories the man made global warming theory was always based on a fact, this being that extra CO2 introduced into the atmosphere by industrialization was causing the Earth to warm. That is a fact which few serious people deny.
Where the story became a narrative is when proponents of "catastrophic" global warming began to seek out and embellish reality in order to make the so called problem worse than it ever really was. is, or ever will be.
The narrative has become the foundation for the theory rather than the evidence.
Basically how this is done is that some scientific study is done showing an extreme or possible extreme reult of global warming. This narrative will take hold and be widely publicized until it becomes accepted by the public and policy makers. Later studies might disagree or even disprove the original hyped study or studies but by then the premise of the original study has become the "mainstream" and accepted narrative.
Recently yet another aspect of this narrative has begun to untangle, the Himalaya glacier drip has sprung yet another leak. The first leak happened two years ago when it was revealed that claims by the IPCC that the Himalaya glaciers would melt by 2035 was totally fabricated. The Daily mail pulls few punches in it's explanation
The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders.This and subsequent revelations of the IPCC blatant misrepresentations, not to mention the two series of Climategate revelations should have destroyed this drag on human progress called climate science. but the torture of common sense and reason continued and continues still.
Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.
In an interview with The Mail on Sunday, Dr Lal, the co-ordinating lead author of the report’s chapter on Asia, said: ‘It related to several countries in this region and their water sources. We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action.
‘It had importance for the region, so we thought we should put it in....’
Using just the Himalaya Glacier melting meme of the Global warming narrative foisted on society as an example, lets look back at some of the drips that were used to torture ...well... the truth.
Back in 2002 the once esteemed National Geographic Magazine informed a trusting world that:
Melting Himalayan Glaciers May Doom TownsThere you have it back in 2002 due to global warming we were informed by reliable sources that:
Dozens of mountain lakes in Nepal and Bhutan are so swollen from melting glaciers that they could burst their seams in the next five years and devastate many Himalayan villages, warns a new report from the United Nations.
It's hardly news that the world's glaciers are melting—a phenomenon widely attributed to gradually rising global temperatures. But the possible consequences in terms of human deaths and loss of property have reached greater urgency in light of the findings of the new study.
Himalayas could experience intense flooding as mountain lakes overflow with water from melting glaciers and snowfields.They knew this and the world believed them because trusted scientist said it was so and they had the goods to back it up:
The lives of tens of thousands of people who live high in the mountains and in downstream communities could be at severe risk as the mud walls of the lakes collapse under the pressure of the extra water. Major loss of land and other property would aggravate poverty and hardship in the region.
...based on three years of research involving site visits and studies of topographical maps, satellite images, and aerial photography. The scientists assessed the conditions of about 4,000 glaciers and 5,000 glacial lakes in Nepal and Bhutan.Yes the glaciers are melting, lives are in danger, catastrophic consequences are not five years away, the scientist told us so.
In 2005 we learned from the always reliable BBC that it was even worse than was previously thought. After the flooding would come the droughts:
Himalayan glaciers 'melting fast'So after the floods come the droughts, "massive eco and environmental problems" are in the future or as the story points out in bold quotes half way through 'Catastrophe' awaits us. And how do we know this?
The world's highest mountains hide vast glaciers. Melting glaciers in the Himalayas could lead to water shortages for hundreds of millions of people, the conservation group WWF has claimed.
In a report, the WWF says India, China and Nepal could experience floods followed by droughts in coming decades.
".... in a few decades this situation will change and the water level in rivers will decline, meaning massive eco and environmental problems for people in western China, Nepal and northern India."
a study commissioned for the WWF indicated that the temperature of the Earth could rise by two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels in a little over 20 years.So it must be true and concerned individuals from the halls of power to the halls of schools around the world spread the alarm and begin implementing policies to stave off the coming 'catastrophe".
In 2007 the narrative goes full orbital
The Himalaya, the "Roof of the World" source of the seven largest rivers of Asia are, like other mountain chains, suffering the effects of global warming. To assess the extent of melting of its 33 000 km2 of glaciers, scientists have been using a process they have been pioneering for some years.Throughout the article though, there is a sense of caution, perhaps because the Journal has the word science in it's masthead rather than just being a propaganda tool for the "cause", They inform us that the "study" though confirming that which we all should "believe" has some hurdles to conquer.
The technique is still experimental, but it has been validated in the Alps and could prove highly effective for watching over all the Himalayan glacier systems. However, the procedure for achieving a reliable estimate must overcome a number of sources of error and approximation inherent in satellite-based observations.drip
As pointed out earlier, these concerns did not prevent the foremost science organization in the world dealing with climate change from releasing a report that boldly stated:
Glaciers in the Himalayas are receding faster than in any other part of the world and, if the present rate continues, the likelihood of them disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high if the Earth keeps warming at the current rate.drip
Its total area will likely shrink from the present 500,000 to 100,000 square kilometres by the year 2035
As previously pointed out, this was not only not verifiable, it was a deliberate misrepresentation designed to intentionally deceive policy makers (and everyone else) "We thought that if we can highlight it, it will impact policy-makers and politicians and encourage them to take some concrete action." Knowing full well that the conclusion they were inserting into the report was not scientifically "robust",‘We knew the WWF report with the 2035 date was “grey literature” [material not published in a peer-reviewed journal].
All of this would be bad enough and indeed in of itself reason for any thinking person to doubt the validity of anything coming from the IPCC in particular and the entire "climate change" community in general, but it is worse than that.
In the past month a new study has shown that all of these claims are not only exaggerated but simply not true.
New sat data shows Himalayan glaciers hardly melting at allWhat? There is not going to be any flooding? Or droughts? Hundreds of thousands of people are not being jeopardized by catastrophic "eco and environmental problems" ? Well it would seem not based on current science.
New scientific analysis of satellite gravity measurements has shown that ice is melting from glaciers around the world much less quickly than had been thought. The new research is important as worldwide glacier melt is thought to be one of the main factors which could drive rising sea levels in future....
...In particular, it appears that glaciers in the high Asian mountain ranges - the Himalayas, the Pamir and the Tien Shan - have been losing much less ice than was previously thought. Researchers visiting the region on the ground have previously suggested that the Asian mountain ice was depleting at rates as high as 50 billion tons per year, but Wahr and his colleagues' results show losses in the area of just 4 billion tonnes annually. They give the error in this figure as plus-or-minus 20 billion tons, so this much the same as saying that the Asian mountain ice - the planet's "third pole" - was unaffected.
So what of those previous studies trumpeted over the past decade? They were either totally wrong or to be more accurate they were incomplete but "sold" as if they were authoritative, Why? Well because when a narrative is the foundation for science rather than facts it becomes totally acceptable to "rush to judgement" with "facts that are not yet in evidence." The narrative must be maintained because once the narrative is questioned the foundation begins to crumble and when billions of dollars are at stake this is not an acceptable outcome for those with a vested interest.
For years to come people who do not keep up with the "shape shifting" nature of the climate change narrative will continue to believe that the Himalaya glaciers are melting away due to global warming when in fact there is now absolutely no scientific evidence to support it, But there once was, the National Geographic, the BBC, The WWF, the IPCC and a host of "scientist" said so. So it must be true...right?
The rest of this particular article is interesting in that it ties this development to the even bigger climate change scare tactic of rising sea levels and explains how they are corrupted science as well.
The IPCC says that "no long-term acceleration of sea level has been identified using 20th-century data alone" but says that if limited 19th-century data is included then the rate of sea level rise can be shown to have started speeding up in 1870. However, recent research on tide-gauge readings indicates that the rate of rise is steady at the 20th-century rate of 1.7mm annually, or may even be decreasing slightly.This may seem like mundane scientific squabbling over details, but it is far more than that. An entire generation has been subjected to this Chinese water torture. Drip,drip,drip these tales of impending doom have been inflicted upon us, not by some cartoon villains but rather inflicted upon us and our children by peoples and institutions that we ought to be able to trust.
Since the early 1990s satellites have been used to monitor global sea levels. In contrast to tide gauges they have shown a steady, unchanged rate of rise of 3.2mm annually. This line is often added to the tide-gauge record up to 1990, showing a sharp upward curve.
If the rate of sea level rise remains steady at a few millimetres annually, there is probably no need to be much concerned about it: it would take centuries to rise by amounts comparable to the variations (tide, floods etc) which occur all the time anyway....
But we can not. Not because of some conspericy theory but by their own admission of their own hyperbole, incompetence and worst of all purposeful fraud.
They have shown themselves to be worthy of only scorn and the judgment of history on those who have perpetrated this fraud on mankind will and should be one of absolute disdain..