Global Warming myth collapsing?

It looks like the CRU email hacking set off a chain of events that are proving to be cataclysmic for the Global Warming alarmists.  Two back to back reports have not only confirmed what many skeptics have been thinking, but threaten to unravel long held beliefs that have been accepted by some as gospel.  Still, even to this day many cling on to the idea that human caused Global Warming is rooted firmly in science and some politicians like Howard Dean/Al Gore go far as to disparage and insult those individuals who believe that global warming is nothing more than a political ploy to garner more power and influence. 

So for those people who still insist that humans are the cause of global warming due to science, for you consideration is the following:  Phil Jones admits that there has been no global warming since 1995.  This is rather critical not only because Phil Jones played a crucial role as part of the scientific team to research GW, but because the IPCC (a political panel for climate change) raised significant hysteria a decade ago upon discovering that the 90s were hotter than any other previous decade in their data pool.  This gave rise to Michael Mann's famous "hockey stick" which plotted average earth temperatures over a long course of time eventually culminating in a massive spike thereby shaping a hockey stick.   Now apparently the data used in forming this 'hockey stick' has mysteriously vanished and with the CRU scandal alleging data manipulation, the hockey stick incident has gained more infamy than fame.  No wonder Phil Jones stepped down, because the fragile concept of human induced global warming stems more from politicians than actual scientists and it should be no surprise that such a politically charged topic has come under significant scrutiny because the heavy hand of government is powerful enough to bend science.  There is also considerable debate as to whether our spike in global warming is as unprecedented as the politically charged scientists once alleged:

He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.

He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no ‘statistically significant’ warming, although he argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend.

Another major piece of evidence from the global warming camp is the supposed harm being done by the warming in crucial areas like Africa.  Rapidly changing sea levels can have great impact on rivers, transportation and coastal life.  With that in mind, about seven years ago the IPCC raised a big alarm suggesting that global warming could have dire consequences on food production in Africa.  Apparently this claim proved to be as prescient as the suggestion that the 1990s was the hottest decade on record, baseless.  The Telegraph suggests that the prediction is completely at odds with scientific evidence and accuses the IPCC of outright propaganda. 

One of the most widely quoted and most alarmist passages in the main 2007 report was a warning that, by 2020, global warming could reduce crop yields in some countries in Africa by 50 per cent. Dr Pachauri not only allowed this claim to be included in the short Synthesis Report, of which he was co-editor, but has publicly repeated it many times since

What made this even odder, however, was that the group's co-chairman was a British agricultural expert, Dr Martin Parry, whose consultancy group, Martin Parry Associates, had been paid £75,000 by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) for two reports which had come to totally different conclusions. Specifically designed to inform the IPCC's 2007 report, these predicted that by 2020 any changes were likely to be insignificant. The worst case they could come up with was that by 2080 climate change might decrease crop yields by "up to 30 per cent".

This should be extremely disconcerting for anyone who relies on science as the basis behind global warming.  Political campaigns, books and university courses are forged and run based on this evidence or evidence that comes from this organization!  While proponents continually claim that individual or isolated pieces do not disprove the entire concept it becomes increasingly difficult to take anything that comes out of the IPCC seriously.  How many lies are you willing to swallow before you sever the relationship?   Furthermore, allegations that a majority of scientists concur on the issue of human induced global warming is nothing more than propaganda as it appears that scientists with a political agenda or are backed by state run money reach a far different conclusion than scientists in the private sector.

Ultimately the lesson to take away from this extends beyond global warming, but rather as a warning that any time a government is involved in promoting a 'crisis' the motivation should always be questioned.  Historically the largest expansions of federal and state governments occurred during so-called times of crisis and it should not surprise you that most of the time the crisis was induced by the government itself.  Whether it is a war emergency or a Great Depression the result is always the same.  Benevolent politicians take upon themselves the reigns of central planning and attempt to accomplish the impossible.  This of course always ends in dismal failure as there is never enough intelligence in the world to outsmart the market, but tragically this failure has not prevented our politicians from even greater ambitions - outsmarting mother nature.