The shocking truth about the science of global warming is this: It is not due to hydrocarbon use. Fossil fuels have nothing to do with it, in spite of what the media and a Nobel prize winner, Al Gore, claim.
The BBC and Noel Sheppard's published article on Newsbusters.org reports this: "American Media are virtually guaranteed to not report: A British court has determined that Al Gore's schlocumentary "An Inconvenient Truth" (video) contains at least eleven material falsehoods."
1. Melting snows are not evidence of global warming
2. The co-relation of CO2 levels in ice samples and global warming is flawed. CO2 lagged 800 to 2000 years behind the warming.
3. Hurricane Katrina had no possible relationship to global warming
4. Drying up of Lake Chad was not related to global warming
5. Polar bears are not drowned because of global warming (a violent storm caused 4 to die)
6. The warming of the gulf stream will not produce an ice age in Europe
7. Coral reef losses and killing of species on them are not due to global warming
8. Greenland is not in eminent danger of flooding due to ice melt
9. Antarctica ice covering is not shrinking. Evidence shows it increasing.
10. Sea levels are not expected to rise over 20 ft in the next 800 years but rather possibly 16 inches
11. Evacuation of the South Sea islanders to New Zealand was not caused by sea level rises
Stay with me and I can show you scientific facts that clearly refute the notion that hydrocarbon fuels...coal, oil, gas...cause global warming.
A firestorm of controversy arose and the United States was shamefully accused of selfish interests when they did not sign the Kyoto Accord. Actually, both the U.S. and Australia were the most significant countries to refuse signing the Accord. Enormous polluters like China and emerging countries were exempted from compliance until they "catch up" with productions.
It is interesting that arguably the greatest polluter on earth is China. It is so bad there that recently a marathoner died and several other runners were hospitalized due to the toxic pollution. Some long distance runners refused to participate in the 2008 Olympics held in China.
What was the Kyoto Accord? It was basically a meeting of world leaders of whom the majority signed an agreement in Japan. The accord said we should limit, reduce, tax and control the use of hydrocarbons worldwide...due to global warming.
The information furnished to leaders was greatly flawed and should be considered "junk science", totally without scientific facts or truth. The discussion and the real reason of warming and cooling of the earth were not even allowed at the conference.
Here are some quotes from International authorities on the subject:
1. Professor Richard Lindzen, Dept. of Meteorology, M.I.T. says the global warming movement is really about getting money. "Funding of from 170 million to 2 billion (2000 million) for climate and climate related issues." (has occurred) Other scientists believe it is purely politicalin order to get fundinga lot of jobs now depend upon the global warming myth.
2. "Anyone who goes around and says that CO2 is responsible for most of the global warming in the 20th century has not looked at the basic numbers."Professor Patrick Michaels, Dept. of Environment Sciences, University of Virginia.
3. "Polar ice caps are always expanding and contracting"Professor Syun-Ichi-AkasofuDirector of International Arctic Research Center. Gore published data on Arctic ice melt. Since the time Gore reported polar ice shrinkage, the polar caps have recovered the lost ice and then some.
4. Two scientists point out flaws about scientists embracing global warming. Professor Paul Reiter, Pasteur Institute, Paris: "The claim of top 1000 or 2000 scientists (endorsing global warming) is wrongif you look at the bibliography of them." Professor Richard Lindzen of M.I.T. says: "to build up to 2,500, they have to be reviewers and government people and so on".
5. The IPCC (the U.N. International Panel on Climate Change) like any U.N. body, is politically driven. The final conclusions are politically driven, the evidence offered was that "a consensus of scientists agreed that planet earth was warming and it was due to the proliferation of hydrocarbons." The perpetrators of this false information claimed that over 600 scientists agreed that the cause was "increased hydrocarbon usage". The scientific facts do not support this.
A piece of information that refutes the whole notion that there was an international consensus of scientists was a survey done by scientist Art Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. He polled and received responses of over 22,000 of the scientists. Twenty two thousand disagreed that the global warming was caused by increased hydrocarbon usage. The more recent tally is over 31,000.
Scientist Art Robinson, at the request of the president, first did a report which was published in the Wall Street Journal. There was such a backlash of protest that he then did the survey of more than 22,000 scientists. President Bush then refused to sign the Kyoto Accord, much to the criticism of other world leaders.
The most high profile person who furnished flawed evidence was Al Gore. Unfortunately few people questioned his reporting, based on the information that he presented. He provided a movie, "An Inconvenient Truth", that "demonstrated" that glaciers were melting so fast that the islanders in the South Pacific were flooded out and had to move to New Zealand.
Here are the facts. In the last 50 years sea levels have risen 3 inches. I cannot imagine any sane person building a home that could be flooded out by only a 3 inch increase of water levels in a 50 year period.
It is true that glaciers in many places are melting. They have been melting for the past 200 years. (Interestingly, they are growing on California's Mt. Shasta) There is no co-relation of increased melt due to hydrocarbon usage. It started over 200 years ago, long before the large increase of hydrocarbon usage of the past 50 to 100 years.
Scientist Art Robinson says people were "lied to". There is recorded a 7 inch average annual shrinkage of glaciers in the past 50 years. This rate is not significantly greater than the previous 150 years. In fact, since Gore's report, the Antarctic polar ice cap has more than recovered.
Al Gore also claimed that the global warming has increased hurricanes...not so according to the U. S. Weather Service records. The records show that basically there is no significant increase in the last 100 to 150 years. Increases and decreases yes, but not a significant trend. Once again Art Robinson says, "a flat out lie".
What then is the cause of global warming? Scientific evidence supports the fact that solar storms are responsible for the earth's temperature changes. The earth waxes and wanes in temperature. One thousand years ago the earth was actually 1 degree warmer than it is now. In George Washington's time it was 1 degree cooler. The average variation over a 3,000 year period is 3 degrees. Over a long period of time there is as much as a 10 degree fluxion in temperatures. Anyone who studies history knows there was a very destructive ice age at one time.
Actually alarmists and nay-sayers who "champion" the environment were successful in stopping construction of nuclear facilities (for power generation) here in the U.S. in the past 30 years. (no new ones developed in 30 years) Japan (the only victim of nuclear bombing) now produces 40% of its power from nuclear plants. France generates over 70% of their power from nuclear. Source: The Oil & Energy Investment Report. (Other reports say 80%. is the figure.) The environmentalists predicted an ice age would again occur due to nuclear proliferation. They have now flip-flopped and claim that global warming will destroy the earth.
Worldwide there are now over 320 nuclear power plants under construction. None are in the U.S.A. China alone has dozens under construction and dozens and dozens more on the drawing board for future construction. Demand for crude oil has skyrocketed throughout the world, while the supply of new crude is diminishing. Worldwide recession has depressed the price of oil but the demand still exceeds supply.
The point is this. The influential media and inaccurate reporting by high profile people scare the populace into believing lies and misrepresentations. Why is this so? It seem clear, it is for perceived economic or political advantage by selfish interests.
The Canadian Minister of Transportation now says that Canada needs to "pull out" of the Kyoto Accord that they signed. He says that in order for Canada to comply it would mean banning all cars and buses from the roads.
It would seem that the U.S. would be even worse off, economically. The typical U.S. urban dweller has multiple cars which would be heavily taxed (if even allowed)... if compliance were made for the Kyoto Accord. It would be disastrous for our civilization in many ways. Do you realize that computers alone use 9% of our electricity? The majority of our electricity comes from hydrocarbons...fossil fuels.
According to Art Robinson the life we live would come to a screeching halt. There would be no travel allowed and there would be a shut down of energy dependent activities...which is almost everything modern.... (assuming the U.S. adopted and complied with the Kyoto Accord)
It is easy to see how modern society would be completely destroyed; plus, this would have little if any effect on global warming. It would not solve the perceived global warming problem. Taxing hydrocarbons would accelerate its demise.
Another flawed premise of global warming was "the huge increase of destructive carbon dioxide". One of the primary increases of CO2 by man is hydrocarbon combustion. According to U.S. Government statistics, atmospheric concentrations of CO2 have risen 36% since 1750. There is no direct co-relation to hydrocarbon combustion and subsequent co-relation to global warming. The industrial revolution, with high hydrocarbon usage, came in the last 100 years...over 150 years after significant CO2 increases were observed. Likewise global temperatures have only increased slightly since 1750.
According to scientist Art Robinson the earth produces 40,000 giga-tons of CO2 per year. (That's 40 million tons per year) Mankind produces only 8 giga-tons per year. While this seems like a huge amount, it is only 0.54% of all atmospheric gasses, a minor atmospheric gas. Scientists tell us ninety five percent of the green house gasses are water vapor.
The one fifth of the earth's CO2... which is that produced by man... is not likely to overwhelm the planet, it has not in the past. In addition to that, the earth needs CO2 because plants use it to produce oxygen. Plants proliferate in a CO2 rich environment because it is their chief raw material. All plants, animals and humans ultimately get their (organic) carbon from CO2.
Dr. Pius Corbyn Climate Forecaster, Weather Action (He instituted a far more accurate weather forecasting paradigm based on sun storms and sun spot changes) Quote: "None of the major climate changes in the past 1000 years can be explained by CO2."
The same conclusion is echoed by Dr. Ian ClarkDept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa: You "cannot say CO2 causes climate changes: it has not in the past."
Carbon dioxide is essential to plants and you ultimately get all of your organic carbon atoms from it. CO2 plus chlorophyll plus sunlight produces oxygen...essential to man. Plants need CO2 and animals and humans consume the plants for food. Increases of carbon dioxide actually increase the growth of oxygen producing plants on the earth.
A major premise for Al Gore's contention that dangerous global warming was occurring proceeded from core ice samples taken from the Artic. They represented hundreds of years by various layers. Entrapped within the ice layers was CO2.
The flaw was this. While CO2 increases were found associated with warming trends, they came after the warming trendas much as 800 to 2000 years later. The CO2 was a result of the warming trend, not the cause of it. CO2 came after the warming occurred.
Indeed as warming of the earth occurs, the sea spews out CO2. (95% of greenhouse gases come in the form of water vapor from the oceans anywayaccording to scientists who research the subject)
Carl Wunsch, oceanographer professor at M.I.T and author of 4 major text books on oceanography explained it: "When you heat the ocean surface it tends to emit CO2when you cool the surface it absorbs CO2."
There were periods in our history when we had three times as much CO2 as we do nowor periods when we had even ten times as much CO2.
"The IPCC (International Panel on Climate Changes) like any U.N. body is politically driven. The final conclusions are politically driven." Professor Philip Stott, Dept. of Biogeography, University of London.
Co-founder of Greenpeace, Patrick Moore, says this: "I don't even like to call it the environmental movement anymore cause really it is a political activist movement. (the environmental movement against global warming) has evolved into the strongest movement there is for preventing development in developing countries."
"Climate scientists need there to be a problem in order to get funding." Dr. Roy Spencer, Weather Satellite Team Leader NASA (space program)
You may be wondering why there can be a 800 year lag before the increased CO2 shows up. It is because of the vast area and enormous depth of the oceans.
Here is a summary of the facts and truth that refutes the lies and misrepresentations about global warming:
* Global warming is not occurring because of hydrocarbon usage. Solar disturbances (sun storms) clearly are related to the changes in global temperatures.
* The earth's temperature has only increased 1 degree in the last 3,000 years.
* The recent temperature increase, and the rate of increase, does not correspond to the increase of hydrocarbon usage. (since 1940, there was a 6 fold increase of hydrocarbons...yet no related increase in global warming)
* The number and quality of hurricanes has not co- related to the increase in global warming.
* Glacial melt does not correspond to hydrocarbon usage.
* Reducing hydrocarbon usage would not stop or change global warming.
* Reducing hydrocarbon usage could destroy our modern society.
* Carbon dioxide produced by man does not destroy our earth, it is not shown to cause global warming.
* The "consensus of 600 scientists" is a fabrication...a lie. This group of 600 was not allowed to comment on the report, nor was discussion at the Kyoto Accord allowed. Some scientists only agreed "that more research was needed" on the subject.
* Over 22,000 scientists agreed that global warming was not caused by hydrocarbon usage.
Don't misunderstand me. I am not against a clean environment but I see no rationale for limiting hydrocarbon usage. What I see as more important is the control of reckless and unnecessary pollution of toxic wastes into the environment. The U.S. is already addressing this problem with stringent regulation in many areas. Polluters like China should be regulated, not exempted. More can be done, but shutting down U.S. factories and stopping electrical generation will not solve the "perceive global warming problem!
Update 2008: In Stephen Leeb's Energy World (an investment newsletter) he reports this: "...man-made warming is a hoax. It is simply the biggest farce ever foisted upon mankind in the name of science."
His newsletter goes on to point out that worldwide the winter 2007-2008 was one of the coldest years since records were kept. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, (NOAA), reports that the ice cover shrunk from 5 million square miles in January 2007 to only 1.5 million square miles by October of 2007. In spite of this, it is now almost back to its original size...all within a year.
Did reduction of hydrocarbon usage cause this? No way! According to Dr. Leeb, the 1997 Kyoto Protocol so incensed scientists at the hijack, in the name of science, by Gore and "authoritative sources", that they reacted vehemently". I quote his newsletter again: "To date, 31,072 degreed scientists (9,021 with PhD's) have signed a petition firmly denying the idea of manmade global warming."