Global Warming ‘Greatest Scam in History’

[Extrafire]

Another myth is that we are experiencing weather extremes. Want an example of a real extreme? During the period of global cooling known as the “Little Ice Age” on the afternoon of August 3, 1562, a thunderstorm front several hundred kilometers in extent struck central Europe. After several hours of storming, it unleashed a downfall of hail that lasted until midnight, destroying crops and vineyards, farm birds and animals. Have we seen anything like that? Those who recorded the event said that such a storm hadn’t been seen for 100 years, and was so unusual that it had to be unnatural. So they took a precautionary response. They decided to execute the witches that were obviously responsible. It was all legal and was undertaken by the highly educated upper social strata. There were skeptics who spoke up, just as there are today, but they were threatened with accusations of also being sorcerers or in the service of Satan to shut them up. The deniers were silenced. Witchcraft was described as the most terrible problem facing mankind. Sound familiar? It was known that these storms were caused by witches. Skeptics were vilified just as they are today.


Here's another one. In Central Germany on May 24, 1626, a single storm dropped 1 meter of hail. Two days later an arctic front dropped down onto Europe, freezing rivers, exploding grape vines, destroying grain crops. Tree leaves blackened and fell to the ground; trees were as bare as in winter. I’ve been in Germany in the beginning of May. It was 25 degrees C. And they’re telling us that warming is bad??? Has the recent warming that we’re all so concerned about produced any extremes anywhere near half as severe as that? Not even close. Well, this had to be an unnatural event, after all nothing like this had ever happened before. The people were understandably upset, demanding to know why the authorities tolerated these sorcerers and witches who caused it, and so 4400 of them were executed as a result of this one single event.

We wouldn’t do anything like that today, but we are getting just as concerned and taking equally ineffective measures. Only this time, there have been no such disasters. This mass hysteria is over a prediction of something that might happen in the future, even though the science doesn't support it.
Back then Europe was a highly superstitious society. What's our excuse this time?

 

[eanassir]

If ... global warming myth,

Most countries and most people have practically noticed the general increased global warming. The most important factor of such warming (in addition to other known causes) is the decreased distance of the earth from the sun: i.e. the earth has become somewhat nearer or closer to the sun by some miles. And this may have led to increased heat allover the world.

See :
http://universeandquran.741.com/new_page_4.htm#Earth Approaches Sun
http://universeandquran.741.com/new_page_4.htm#World Heat
and our website:

http://universeandquran.741.com​

 

[Sparrow]

If man made climate warming exists will someone please send it up here, it's cold.

In the Ottawa Citizen, Tom Spears wrote a piece 'Frozen moccasin is oldest ever found in Canada': Found in southern Yukon, its ankle-high, tied by a drawstring and lightweight for summer wear, It is linked to Athapaskan people and dated to about AD560. Sorry no link because it was in the newspaper.

Arctic's tropical past uncovered
By Rebecca Morelle
Science reporter, BBC News

Fifty-five million years ago the North Pole was an ice-free zone with tropical temperatures, according to research. A sediment core excavated from 400m (1,300ft) below the seabed of the Arctic Ocean has enabled scientists to delve far back into the region's past.
An international team has been able to pin-point the changes that occurred as the Arctic transformed from this hot environment to its present cold status.
The findings are revealed in a trio of papers published in the journal Nature.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5034026.stm

There us more but no matter what proof we present some prefer to believe the scam.

 

[eanassir]

If man made climate warming exists will someone please send it up here, it's cold.

The Global Warming does not mean that the arctic and polar regions have become equatorial and very hot; and other regions have become boiling; but it means that the temperature in general has become more than its usual averages. The UN has recently announced that this is a serious global concern; as I read it few days ago in the Yahoo news.
In some countries, like Iraq, the temperature has become higher during the recent several years, than before 30-50 years ago; the winter here became warmer; so that in the later years, it may only be one day or so: that there is freezing: when the temperature becomes about zero centigrade. While before 30 or more years we remember a relatively colder winter. The summer also became hotter in the recent decade or two.
In case in other countries the temperature has become less, and there is more freezing, it may indicate that the axis of Earth has somewhat changed; so that some countries have become warmer while others have become colder.

See :A remark about the heat wave that has recently overwhelmed the world​

http://universeandquran.741.com/new_page_4.htm#World Heat

It is not necessarily that such changes are man-made; there may be other factors like the earth becoming nearer to the sun by some miles. This is not unlikely; Moon has changed its distance away from the Earth.

See:The earth approaches the sun​

http://universeandquran.741.com/new_page_4.htm#Earth Approaches Sun

eanassir

http://universeandquran.741.com​

 

[mrmom2]

Seems to me GW theory is getting the sh%t kicked out of it as of late :lol:Funny how the temps stopped rising now isnit?:lol:

 

[Sparrow]

The Global Warming does not mean that the arctic and polar regions have become equatorial and very hot; and other regions have become boiling; but it means that the temperature in general has become more than its usual averages. The UN has recently announced that this is a serious global concern; as I read it few days ago in the Yahoo news.
In some countries, like Iraq, the temperature has become higher during the recent several years, than before 30-50 years ago; the winter here became warmer; so that in the later years, it may only be one day or so: that there is freezing: when the temperature becomes about zero centigrade. While before 30 or more years we remember a relatively colder winter. The summer also became hotter in the recent decade or two.
In case in other countries the temperature has become less, and there is more freezing, it may indicate that the axis of Earth has somewhat changed; so that some countries have become warmer while others have become colder.

See :A remark about the heat wave that has recently overwhelmed the world​

http://universeandquran.741.com/new_page_4.htm#World Heat

It is not necessarily that such changes are man-made; there may be other factors like the earth becoming nearer to the sun by some miles. This is not unlikely; Moon has changed its distance away from the Earth.

See:The earth approaches the sun​

http://universeandquran.741.com/new_page_4.htm#Earth Approaches Sun

eanassir

http://universeandquran.741.com​

Quoting me: If man made climate warming exists will someone please send it up here, it's cold.

Here is between the St Laurent River and the US border.

I agree things have change in many places which is has been part of the earth's cycle for eons.

 

[Tonington]

Seems to me GW theory is getting the sh%t kicked out of it as of late :lol:Funny how the temps stopped rising now isnit?:lol:

Stopped rising? When? 2005 was the hottest year globally, and 2007 is on pace to beat out previous temperature records in the Northern Hemisphere according to the NOAA. It hasn't stopped rising, it only takes a few years to analyze all the Global measurements to actually give the results for the time periods.

 

[Extrafire]

Stopped rising? When? 2005 was the hottest year globally, and 2007 is on pace to beat out previous temperature records in the Northern Hemisphere according to the NOAA. It hasn't stopped rising, it only takes a few years to analyze all the Global measurements to actually give the results for the time periods.

Hmmm, do Mann et al have anything to do with that? Seems similar.

I wonder, did they use information from sensors like this one? Wow, I bet that's accurate.

 

[Tonington]

No, it's not Mann. Believe it or not Extra there are many other paleo-climate researchers, whose independent studies have yielded similar results. This isn't even paleo-climate.

Still with the straw men eh?

 

[Extrafire]

An excellent paper that tells it like it really is.

A recent paper titled, The Greatest Scientific Scandal of our Time, written by
Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc., takes swath after swath out of the farce that has become the scientific underpinning of the Global Warming Myth.

Jaworowski's credentials are as good as any, so in the least, AGW believers should give Jaworowski some consideration. The paper is long, so settle in for a good read ... or save it until you've got some time.

Here's a taste of the political landscape, as Jaworowski sees it:

This obviously is not the case with the IPCC, which is stuffed with money, and in agreement with the UN politics, which are dominated by greens and misanthropic fanaticism. During the past six years, the President of the United States devoted nearly $29 billion to climate research, leading the world with its unparalleled financial commitment (The White House 2007). This was about $5 billion per year, more than twice the amount spent on the Apollo Program ($2.3 billion
per year), which in 1969 put man on the Moon. A side-effect of this situation, and of politicizing the climate issue, was described by meteorologist Piers Corbyn in the Weather Action Bulletin, December 2000: “The problem we are faced with is that the meteorological establishment and the global warming lobby research bodies which receive large funding are now apparently so corrupted by the largesse they receive that the scientists in them have sold their integrity.”

[...]

We thus find ourselves in the situation that the entire theory of man-made global warming—with its repercussions inscience, and its important consequences for politics and the global economy—is based on ice core studies that provided a false picture of the atmospheric CO2 levels. Meanwhile, more than 90,000 direct measurements of CO2 in the atmosphere, carried out in America, Asia, and Europe between1812 and 1961, with excellent chemical methods (accuracy better than 3%), were arbitrarily rejected. These measurements had been published in 175 technical papers. For the past three decades, these well-known direct CO2 measurements,recently compiled and analyzed by Ernst-Georg Beck (Beck 2006a, Beck 2006b, Beck 2007), were completely ignored by climatologists—and not because they were wrong. Indeed, these measurements were made by several Nobel Prize winners, using the techniques that are standard textbook procedures in chemistry, biochemistry, botany, hygiene, medicine, nutrition, and ecology. The only reason for rejection was that these measurements did not fit the hypothesis of anthropo-genic climatic warming. I regard this as perhaps the greatest scientific scandal of our time.
​

Brought to our attention by CJunk

 

[Extrafire]

No, it's not Mann.

Wouldn't surprise me at all to find it's about as accurate as Mann.

 

[Tonington]

Not surprising at all that you would call a magazine article a paper. Not science.

 

[Tonington]

Wouldn't surprise me at all to find it's about as accurate as Mann.

So you didn't read it. Real objective Extra.

 

[Walter]

2005 was the hottest year globally, and 2007 is on pace to beat out previous temperature records in the Northern Hemisphere according to the NOAA.

People used to say that 1998 was the hottest then McIntyre had to stick his nose in it.

NASA Backtracks on 1998 Warmest Year Claim



NASA Corrects 120 Years Worth of Bad Data, Notes NCPA Expert DALLAS, Aug. 14 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The warmest year on recordis no longer 1998 and not because it has been overtaken by a recent heatwave. NASA scientist James Hansen's famous claims about 1998 being thewarmest year on record in the U.S. was the result of a serious math error,according to H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Centerfor Policy Analysis (NCPA). NASA has now corrected the error, anointing1934 as the warmest year and 1921 as the third warmest year, not 2006 aspreviously claimed.
http://prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/08-14-2007/0004645546&EDATE=

 

[Walter]

Stopped rising? When?

1998

 

[Tonington]

2005 was the hottest year Walter. It's funny that the global climate, which in the past has taken millenia to change half the magnitude that we've experienced this century, and some people are picking a nine year period as example that the change has stopped.

Further, lets look at the tired old mantra that climate warms 800 years before we see a change in carbon dioxide concentration. So why don't we look at the temperature record to find the rise 800 years ago that corresponds to our 30% increase in carbon dioxide. Well, it's not there.

 

[#juan]

Some people need you to draw a picture......

http://www.cpc.noaa.gov/products/assessments/assess_99/fig1.html

 

[Walter]

An op-ed from one of the shills of the AGW scam.
Bali: now the rich must pay



[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]A fair and global effort to tackle climate change needs wealthy states to take the lead in CO2 cuts[/FONT]

[FONT=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif]Nicholas Stern[/FONT]
[FONT=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif]Friday November 30, 2007[/FONT]
[FONT=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif]The Guardian[/FONT]


The Bali summit on climate change, which starts next week, will seek to lay the foundations for a new global agreement on reducing the greenhouse gas emissions that cause rising temperatures and climate change. Ambitious targets for emission reduction must be at the heart of that agreement, together with effective market mechanisms that encourage emission trading between countries, rich and poor. The problem of climate change involves a fundamental failure of markets: those who damage others by emitting greenhouse gases generally do not pay. Climate change is a result of the greatest market failure the world has seen.
The evidence on the seriousness of the risks from inaction is now overwhelming. We risk damage on a scale larger than the two world wars of the past century. The problem is global and the response must be collaboration on a global scale. The rich countries must lead the way in taking action. And in thinking about global action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, we must invoke three basic criteria.
The first is effectiveness: the scale of the response must be commensurate with the challenge. This means setting a target for emission reduction that can keep the risks at acceptable levels.
The overall targets of 50% reductions in emissions by 2050 (relative to 1990) agreed at the G8 summit in Heiligendamm last June are essential if we are to have a reasonable chance of keeping temperature increases below 2C or 3C. While these targets involve strong action, they are not overambitious relative to the risk of failing to achieve them.
The second criterion is efficiency: we must keep down the costs of emission reduction, using prices or taxes wherever possible. Emission trading between countries must be a central part of the story. And helping poor countries cover their costs of emission reduction gives them an incentive to join a global deal.
Third, we should be concerned about equity. Our starting point is deeply inequitable with poor countries certain to be hit earliest and hardest by climate change. But rich countries are responsible for the bulk of past emissions: US emissions are currently more than 20 tonnes of CO2 equivalent per annum, Europe's are 10-15 tonnes, China's five or more tonnes, India's around one tonne, and most of Africa much less than one.
For a 50% reduction in global emissions by 2050, the world average per capita must drop from seven tonnes to two or three. Within these global targets, even a minimal view of equity demands that the rich countries' reductions should be at least 80% - either made directly or purchased. An 80% target for rich countries would bring equality of only the flow of current emissions - around the two to three tonnes per capita level. In fact, they will have consumed the big majority of the available space in the atmosphere.
Rich countries also need to provide funding for three more key elements of a global deal. First, there should be an international programme to combat deforestation, which contributes 15-20% of emissions. For $10bn-$15bn per year, half the deforestation could be stopped.
Second, there needs to be promotion of rapid technological advance to mitigate the effects of climate change. The development of technologies must be accelerated and methods found to promote their sharing. Carbon capture and storage for coal (CCS) is particularly urgent since coal-fired electric power is currently the dominant technology around the world, and emerging nations will be investing heavily in these technologies. For $5bn a year, it should be possible to create 30 commercial-scale coal-fired CCS stations within seven or eight years.
Finally, rich countries should honour their commitment to 0.7% of GDP in aid by 2015. This would yield increases in flows of $150bn-$200bn per year. The extra costs that developing countries face as a result of climate change are likely to be upwards of $80bn a year, and it is vital that extra resources are available. This proposed programme of action can be built if rich countries take a lead in Bali on their targets, the promotion of trading mechanisms and funding for deforestation and technology. With leadership and the right incentives, developing countries will join.
The building of the deal, and its enforcement, will come from the willing participation of countries driven by the understanding that action is vital. It will not be a wait-and-see game as in World Trade Organisation talks, where nothing is done until everything is settled.
The necessary commitments are increasingly being demonstrated by political action and elections around the world. A clear idea of where we are going as a world will make action at the individual, community and country level much easier and more coherent. These commitments must, of course, be translated into action. There is a solution in our hands. It will not be easy to build. But the alternative is too destructive to accept. Bali is an opportunity to draw the outline of a common understanding, which will both guide action now and build towards the deal.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2219534,00.html

 

[#juan]

Friday, November 30, 2007

Canadians should brace for coldest winter in almost 15 years: forecast

Michael Oliveira, THE CANADIAN PRESS

TORONTO - After years of warmer-than-normal winters that spurred constant talk of global warming, winter this year is expected to be the coldest in almost 15 years and should remind everyone of what real Canadian cold feels like, Environment Canada said Friday.

With the exception of only small pockets of northern Canada and southwestern Ontario, this December through February is forecast to be one of the harshest winters in recent memory across the country, said senior climatologist David Phillips.

http://www.mytelus.com/ncp_news/article.en.do?pn=canada&articleID=2830954

The climatologists did say we would get extremes of weather at both ends of the scale.

 

[Walter]

The climatologists did say we would get extremes of weather at both ends of the scale.

No matter what happens it's proof of AGW.