3 July 2009
The Real Story on Global Warming
Posted by Joy Bischoff under: Constitution in Peril; Environment .
The following selection from an article by Joel Skousen, sent me by Peter Anderson is long but I felt that there are some people who want a better grasp of the issue of global warming. I think this does a good job of putting things in perspective. Cap and Trade is in my opinion, a political move and not an environmental one.
CAP AND TRADE: BAD MEDICINE FOR A SICK ECONOMY
What the Obama administration has rammed through Congress in the name of saving the environment is not only a hoax of draconian proportions (that Carbon Dioxide is a harmful pollutant, responsible for Global Warming) but also a means to mandating government control over all forms of energy production. By implementing an arbitrary and restrictive cap on the production of Carbon Dioxide (17 percent by 2020, compared to 2005 levels), and then forcing high CO2 producers to buy carbon credits from zero or low CO2 producers this bill will alter and distort the current cost structure of the markets and not actually change the amount of CO2 put into the atmosphere at all. In essence this is a massive wealth transfer scheme from efficient energy producers to inefficient producers, and energy users everywhere will pay for this multi-billion dollar boondoggle.
MSNBC interviewed Pat Buchanan who was quick to point out the fraudulent basis of this package in Congress:
MSNBC’s Witt: “Why doesn’t anyone want to call it a climate bill?
Buchanan: “Well, because the science is suggesting that maybe all of this [global warming] isn’t really happening or it’s not really dangerous or it’s not really man made. Barack Obama, the President is right when he said we shouldn’t be afraid of the future. [But] That is exactly how this bill got passed–through fear. [Obama is saying:] ‘We’re all going to change. The climate’s going to change. The oceans are going to rise. Our cities are going to be under water.’
“But more and more scientists are coming forward to say this is a hoax and a scam which is designed to transfer wealth and power from the private sector to the government sector and from the government of the United States to a world government. Which is what we’re going to get in Copenhagen when we get this Kyoto two agreement.”
One of the growing number of defectors from the Global Warming camp of propagandists is Dr. David Evans, of the Australian Greenhouse Office, (now Office of Climate Change), a top consultant who no longer believes Carbon Dioxide has any major impact on global warming. Here are excerpts from his recent article in The Australian.
“I devoted six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I’ve been following the global warming debate closely for years. When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.
“The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. There has not been a public debate about the causes of global warming and most of the public and our decision makers are not aware of the most basic salient facts:
“1. The greenhouse signature is missing. We have been looking and measuring for years, and cannot find it.
“Each possible cause of global warming has a different pattern of where in the planet the warming occurs first and the most. The signature of an increased greenhouse effect is a hot spot about 10km up in the atmosphere over the tropics. We have been measuring the atmosphere for decades using radiosondes: weather balloons with thermometers that radio back the temperature as the balloon ascends through the atmosphere. They show no hot spot. Whatsoever.
“If there is no hot spot then an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming. So we know for sure that carbon emissions are not a significant cause of the global warming. If we had found the greenhouse signature then I would be an alarmist again.
“When the signature was found to be missing in 2007 (after the latest IPCC report), alarmists objected that maybe the readings of the radiosonde thermometers might not be accurate and maybe the hot spot was there but had gone undetected. Yet hundreds of radiosondes have given the same answer, so statistically it is not possible that they missed the hot spot.
“Recently the alarmists have suggested we ignore the radiosonde thermometers, but instead take the radiosonde wind measurements, apply a theory about wind shear, and run the results through their computers to estimate the temperatures. They then say that the results show that we cannot rule out the presence of a hot spot. If you believe that you’d believe anything.
“2. There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None. There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations by anyone that implicate carbon emissions as a significant cause of the recent global warming.
“3. The satellites that measure the world’s temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980). Land-based temperature readings are corrupted by the “urban heat island” effect: urban areas encroaching on thermometer stations warm the micro-climate around the thermometer, due to vegetation changes, concrete, cars, houses. Satellite data is the only temperature data we can trust, but it only goes back to 1979. NASA reports only land-based data, and reports a modest warming trend and recent cooling. The other three global temperature records use a mix of satellite and land measurements, or satellite only, and they all show no warming since 2001 and a recent cooling.
“4. The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect.
“None of these points are controversial. The alarmist scientists agree with them, though they would dispute their relevance. The last point was known and past dispute by 2003, yet Al Gore made his movie in 2005 and presented the ice cores as the sole reason for believing that carbon emissions cause global warming. In any other political context our cynical and experienced press corps would surely have called this dishonest and widely questioned the politician’s assertion.
“Until now the global warming debate has merely been an academic matter of little interest. Now that it matters, we should debate the causes of global warming. So far that debate has just consisted of a simple sleight of hand: show evidence of global warming, and while the audience is stunned at the implications, simply assert that it is due to carbon emissions.
“In the minds of the audience, the evidence that global warming has occurred becomes conflated with the alleged cause, and the audience hasn’t noticed that the cause was merely asserted, not proved. If there really was any evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming, don’t you think we would have heard all about it ad nauseam by now?
“The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990, and we have not found any actual evidence that carbon emissions cause global warming. Evidence consists of observations made by someone at some time that supports the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. Computer models and theoretical calculations are not evidence, they are just theory.
“What is going to happen over the next decade as global temperatures continue not to rise? The Labor Government [of Australia] is about to deliberately wreck the economy in order to reduce carbon emissions. If the reasons later turn out to be bogus, the electorate is not going to re-elect a Labor government for a long time. When it comes to light that the carbon scare was known to be bogus in 2008, the ALP [Australian Labor Party] is going to be regarded as criminally negligent or ideologically stupid [not if the media continues to suppress the truth] for not having seen through it. And if the Liberals support the general thrust of their actions, they will be seen likewise.
“The onus should be on those who want to change things to provide evidence for why the changes are necessary. The Australian public is eventually going to have to be told the evidence anyway [not so--even as the world cools, they keep blaming any changes in any direction on Global Warming], so it might as well be told before wrecking the economy.”
Dr. Evans doesn’t understand that there are other hidden agendas at work here that have nothing to do with solving any real problems. This is not about saving the planet but all about creating a false crisis that allows for government intervention and control of energy. The same forces that have foisted this massive hoax upon the public will use their ample resources and control of the media to ensure that the truth never gets out. The PTB have very imaginative ways of explaining away almost anything to a dumbed-down populace with marginal abilities to analyze.
http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com/pdfbrief/World%20Affairs%20Brief%203%20July%202009.pdf
Mail this post
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
