 |
Global Warming:
Myths and Reality
– by Jarret Wollstein –
Don't worry fella, a one degree rise in temperature is not going to melt the ice caps
According to militant proponents of global warming theory, Planet Earth is on the verge of a runaway greenhouse effect that could
destroy the human race and indeed most life on this little planet.
The primary culprit, they claim, is human emissions of greenhouse gases – particularly carbon dioxide (CO2), belching out of
everything from our cars, to our factories, to our barbecue grills. We even emit CO2 when we breathe!
According to this theory, increasingly presented as absolute fact, only radical reductions in CO2 emissions starting now, can possibly
save us.
According to global warming proponents, "the time for debate is over," and skeptics should be "treated like Islamic terrorists."
Global warming true believers also insist that an international "consensus" of scientists agrees with this position . . . "the time for debate is over" . . . and
global warming skeptics are either industry shills, incredibly misguided, or simply evil and should be silenced.
Thus British foreign secretary Jack Straw has said that "skeptics should be treated like advocates of Islamic terror and denied access
to the media."
Grist magazine has called for Nuremberg-style "war crime" trials for those who deny that human beings are causing a global
climate disaster. (Read it yourself here, here,
and here.
George Monbiot (author of the best selling book The Age of Consent: A Manifesto for a New World Order) wrote in Guardian
magazine that "Every time someone drowns as a result of floods in Bangladesh, an airline executive should be dragged out of his office and drowned."
*************
GLOBAL WARMING PROPONENTS
ARE DEMANDING TOTAL CONTROL
OF OUR LIVES
|
"The only really good technology is no technology at all."
John Shuttleworth, Friends of the Earth.
|
To combat global warming, militants say we must all accept drastic reductions in our standard of living starting now, steadily
increasing year-after-year, until much of industrial society is swept away. Only thus can the earth, and perhaps mankind, be saved.
To achieve this radical restructuring of human society, global warming proponents demand that we give virtually unlimited power to
government to control what we eat, how we travel, and how our industries operate, with no dissent or resistance permitted.
Cars, jet travel for the public, air conditioning, refrigeration, and indeed many if not most of the conveniences of modern life will
simply have to be abolished, as quickly as politically feasible. As one environmental activist puts it, "Everything modern has to go!"
While intoning these demands, often in the language of fanatical true believers, what global warming militants seldom discuss is the
real cost of their proposals – both in terms of dollars and in terms of human lives.
Just radically curtailing use of refrigeration would result in millions of human deaths from food spoilage and contamination.
Restrictions on use of cars, airplanes and other means of transportation would wipe out much of the progress of the last 100 years. And drastically curtailing
industrial activity would result in global depression, disease and death.
Like it or not, industrial society has made possible long lives and prosperity for billions of people who otherwise would have died at
a young age from poverty, disease, and starvation.
Fortunately for those of us who like regular meals, central heating, cars, and freedom, virtually every claim of the global warming
lobby is dead wrong, except for the fact that the earth is warming.
But why is the earth warming and by how much?
*************
GLOBAL WARMING MILITANTS ARE WRONG ON JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING
As the graph below shows, the earth indeed has been warming . . . since about 1650 AD – centuries before factories belching
CO2 and other greenhouse gases even existed.
Global Temperature Since 900 AD
Source: UN Panel on Climate Change, 1995 As this graph shows, our climate is in fact continually changing, and the cause is not and could not be CO2. CO2 accounts for less than
3% of all greenhouse gases, and only 6% of atmospheric CO2 is produced by human activity.
That means that less than 2/1,000 of all CO2 is produced by human activity. So even if we wiped out every car, power plant, jet liner,
and human being from the face of the earth, there would be no noticeable effect on global CO2 levels.
The most important greenhouse gas by far is water vapor, which evaporates from oceans, lakes and rivers. Water vapor accounts for up to 90% of the earth's greenhouse effect. Atmospheric water vapor
levels – like natural CO2 emissions from volcanoes and animals – rises and falls with changes in solar activity.
To put it another way, the amout of CO2 in our atmosphere is the result of changes in solar activity, not the cause of it.
Climate change is natural, continuous, and caused by changes in solar emissions. Over hundreds of thousands of years, the earth's
average surface temperature has varied within a narrow 4-degree temperature range. That variation causes both "warm periods," like we are now living in, and "cold
periods" accompanied by ice ages, which periodically destroy most life on earth.
More CO2 actually has a beneficent effect on the environment. As the March 2007 issue of Civil Defense Perspectives explains,
"Largely because of increased CO2, the U.S. had nearly 200 billion cubic feet more standing timber in 1990 than in 1950."
While the earth's current, natural warming will have some negative effects on some groups (such as island dwellers), it will also have
lots of positive effects on many more groups, including the expansion of the growing season. Besides, there is nothing we can do to control the solar cycle which causes
global warming. Remember: Our sun gives off more radiation in one second than all human activity produces in 1,000 years!
Further, even earth-bound natural forces are overwhelmingly more important in determining atmospheric greenhouse gas levels than human
activity. For example, the explosion of Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines on June 15, 1991, put more greenhouse gases (including water vapor) into the atmosphere than all
human industrial activity in the preceding 78 years.
Yes, the world has real environmental problems caused by man, including pollution of the seas and destruction of rain forests. But the "global warming crisis" is
largely a myth.
*************
THEY'RE LYING TO YOU ABOUT
GLOBAL WARMING
"We have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?"
Global Warming "Doomsday" Hockey Stick co-creator Phil Jones (replying to an inquiring Warick Hughes).
Jones removed all historical
data which clearly showed recent
periods of global cooling from his "Warming Doomsday Chart".
|
Because telling the truth about global warming wouldn't further militant environmentalists' global warming crusade, which will give them
enormous power over our lives, they often resort to distortions, misrepresentations and outright lies.
For example, while the UN's 1995 "Global Temperature Chart" clearly demonstrates that the earth was much warmer than today during the
Medieval Warm Period, more recent UN temperature charts have eliminated the Warm Period altogether.
Instead of accurate long-term temperature information – which shows the earth periodically warming and cooling, militant
environmentalists like Al Gore offer us a "hockey stick" graph fallaciously showing a steady rise in the earth's temperature for 1,000 years.
These "continuous warming" graphs contradict thoroughly-documented periods when the earth was getting cooler, including the "little Ice
Age" from 1450 to 1850, and a period of record cold from 1940-1970.
In fact, the 1940-1970 cooling period resulted in a frenzy in which the media claimed that human industrial activity (particularly our
old friend, CO2 emissions) was about to cause by 1995 a new ice age which would threaten all life on earth. Popular magazines, like Popular Science, even
featured terrifying pictures on their covers of major U.S. cities covered by ice.
Obviously, the environmental alarmists were completely wrong then about the impending "global cooling crisis," just as they are wrong
today about the "global warming crisis."
In addition to omitting periods when the earth was cooling from their charts, global warming alarmists also omit other data which
contradicts their disaster claims, including such information as . . .
- The southern hemisphere of the earth has been generally cooling for the past fifty years,
- Hundreds of years of data show that temperature rises precede increase in CO2 levels, rather than following them,
- Ice cover at the north and south pole is growing, which results in more glaciers breaking away
- Throughout the 20th Century, temperatures have been rising on other planets in our solar system – including Mars, Jupiter, Pluto, and Triton, Neptune's
largest moon – where few people drive SUVs. This clearly points to increased solar activity as the cause of global warming on the Earth, rather than any human
activity.
*************
CLIMATE IS CONTINUALLY CHANGING
"The bad news is that the climate model on which so much effort is expended are unreliable because they still use fudge-factors rather than physics to represent
important things like evaporation and convection, clouds and rainfall."
Princeton Physicist Freeman Dyson
|
The assertion that current global warming is "historically unprecedented" is also false.
The earth's climate is continually changing, and there were periods in the past when it was much, much warmer than it is today.
Cycles that drive climate change include the Earth's 100,000-year elliptical orbit around the sun, its 41,000-year axial tilt cycle,
and a 1,500-year solar cycle. In the most elliptical phase of the Earth's orbit, the sun's rays must travel 3 percent farther to reach the planet. The Earth's axial
tilt ranges from 22.1 to 24.5 degrees and is currently at 23 degrees.
Climate on earth naturally and radically changes over time. For example, during one warm period about 50 million years ago, the Arctic
had a semi-tropical climate, similar to Florida today. The Arctic Ocean was free of ice year-round, and was populated by alligators and turtles. We know that fact
because fossil remains of seeds, plants and animals have been found buried deep in the Arctic.
The bottom line: Don't worry about global warming. It is not caused by human beings or by our CO2 emissions. The amount of warming that is occurring is normal and
modest, and does not threaten the earth or human life. The estimated one degree increase in the next 100 years isn't going to melt the ice caps or put London and New
York ten feet under water.
Since the modest global warming we have been recently experiencing is in reality caused by a 50,000-year solar cycle interacting with
the primary greenhouse gas (water vapor produced from the oceans and seas), there is nothing we can do about it even if we wanted to.
Our sun – which is millions of times larger than the earth – emits more energy in a minute than all human industrial activity in history, and there is
nothing we can do to change solar activity.
Further, the moderate global warming we have been experiencing actually benefits human, animal and plant life by making winters more
moderate, decreasing deaths from the cold, decreasing the need for heating, and increasing the global food supply.
*************
THE FAKE "CONSENSUS" ON
GLOBAL WARMING
"The believers [in man-made global warming] are not only intolerant of dissent – they are convinced that all skeptics must
be motivated by greed or other evil forces."
Owen McShane, director, Centre for
Resource Management Studies and co-founder of
the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition.
|
If global warming is not man-made, not an impending disaster, and actually good for the earth, why are so many prominent people
claiming the exact opposite?
The answer in two words is: money and power.
Those who promote the popular global warming disaster myth are rewarded with promotions, large grants, big book and video sales (like
Al Gore's bestselling "An Inconvenient Truth" video), and more political power. The ideology of "impending global warming disaster" is indeed a very convenient lie for
would-be power-seekers.
Literally billions of dollars (particularly from government) are pouring into the coffers of environmental groups which repeat the
"global warming disaster" party line.
All of this money has resulted in the public being constantly bombarded by ever-more shrill forecasts of global warming doom and gloom.
And it's getting worse. Schools are now indoctrinating children as young as five about the impending "global warming disaster." Posters in schools warn, "Your mommy and
daddy are destroying the planet."
"Global warming" has become the new, politically-correct truth, and those who question it are increasingly denied access to the media, refused jobs, or are stigmatized
as evil "destroyers of the earth."
In fact, the claimed "scientific consensus on global warming," is largely a fraud.
One of the largest polls of climatologists ever conducted found that just 34.7 percent agreed with the contention that 'global warming
of a degree or two by the end of the 21st Century is caused by human industrial activity.'
Thousands of other scientists disagree even with that mild projected warming.
Skeptics include some of the world's foremost scientists: 85 climate experts who signed the 1995 Leipzig Declaration . . . 4,000
scientists from around the world (including 70 Nobel laureates) who signed the Heidelberg Appeal . . . and the 17,000 American scientists who signed the Oregon Petition
denying that human activity was the cause of global warming.
You can see a complete list at www.sepp.org or www.globalwarming hysteria.com
In any event, scientific fact is not established by opinion polls, but by science.
"Studies" purporting to unmistakably "prove" that global warming is caused by human activity (particularly CO2 emissions) are simply
computer projections weighted heavily with false assumptions (like "increases in atmospheric CO2 are caused by human beings") while science reveals that it is not caused
by anything of the kind.
The entire process of "scientific consensus building" cited by global warming militants is largely a fraud created by a powerful
political establishment to deceive the public and intimidate any unsympathetic politicians and reporters.
Here, as reported by Civil Defense Perspectives, is how the process of "consensus building" works:
"Consensus-building is carried out by trained 'facilitators' who ask questions designed to elicit silence or to force individuals who might be opposed to a policy to
identify themselves."
"If the facilitator is unable to quiet his objections, the process can be delayed until troublemakers are replaced by more cooperative individuals." In other words,
anyone who doesn't support the "global warming doomsday" hypothesis is simply not invited back to the next meeting, and so on, until all opposition to the predetermined
global warming claims is eliminated.
"The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) declared that a consensus by 2,000 scientists had determined that global warming was caused by human activity. The
'consensus' stands in public perception despite the vocal disagreement of thousands of scientists."
"Head-to-head debate is increasingly being characterized as 'childish' and as leading to 'gridlock.' [i.e., slowing down the global warming gang's power grab]. It is
frequently being replaced with the consensus process, which predetermines outcomes and removes accountability to the people affected by it." ["Consensus v. Agreement,"
Civil Defense Perspectives, July 1997].
*************
FAKE COMPUTER MODELS:
Garbage In, Garbage Out
"Scientist Peter Doran confirmed in 2002 that the Antarctic has been cooling while climate models all predict a strong warming."
"Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming," p. 127.
|
The world's best meteorologists using the most advanced computers cannot predict local weather two weeks in the future. So how can
global warming proponents predict the entire world's climate 50 or 100 years in the future?
The answer is that they can't. Long-term, "global climate models" can't predict cloud formation . . . evaporation of water from the
oceans . . . the effect on climate of particulate matter in the atmosphere . . . or a thousand other variables that would have to be understood in detail – as
well as the complex interaction between all of these factors – to predict global climate even a few months in the future, much less 50 or 100 years in the future.
In fact, global warming computer disaster models are self-serving games, whose disastrous outcome is the predictable result of unproven
(and often false) assumptions about the importance of CO2 and how the earth's climate behaves.
Look at it this way: To prove that a model of what will happen 50 years in the future is accurate, the model would have had to be made
50 years ago, and shown to be correct today. There are no such computer models.
Indeed, the exact opposite is true: Computer models from the 1970s predicted that by the year 2000, increasing C02 would cause a
new ice age.
KYOTO PROTOCOLS:
The Impossible Dream
"In short, if we can rise to the challenge, the permanent abolition of the wheel would have the marvelously synergistic effect
of creating thousands of new jobs – as blacksmiths, farriers, grooms, and so on – at the same time as it conserved energy and saved the planet from
otherwise inevitable devastation."
Catherine Bennett, "The Guardian" (UK)
|
In Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, 10,000 representatives, spectators and journalists from dozens of nations met at a UN-led meeting,
and created a document now known as the "Kyoto Protocols," calling for the "rich" countries of the world to reduce their emission of "greenhouse gases," particularly CO2.
A series of subsequent international meetings fleshed out the details of Kyoto, cumulating in a July 2001 conference in Bonn, Germany.
To date, some 178 nations have signed or ratified the Kyoto Protocols. President Clinton of the U.S. also signed the Protocols, however the U.S. Senate rejected
ratification 96-0 due to Kyoto's flaws.
In the final Kyoto document, some 39 "rich" western nations were called upon to reduce their emission of six greenhouse gases by the
year 2012, to at least 5% below their 1990 levels of emissions. More importantly, these called-for reductions would mean that the 39 rich western nations would have to
cut emissions by some 20% below projected 2012 levels.
The only known way to achieve this would be by radical reductions in industrial activity in the west, including draconian curtailment
of the use of cars and airplanes, drastic reductions in heating and air conditioning, and perhaps closing all factories one day a week.
Such cutbacks would almost certainly trigger a global depression that would cripple poor countries as well as rich countries. However,
such costs are virtually never mentioned by supporters of Kyoto. Also proposed were new global carbon taxes, emissions permits, and enforcement through UN "monitors"
and police to be stationed in every western nation.
However even such drastic sacrifices to "save the earth" would in reality have little effect on greenhouse emissions or the global
climate, even if militant environmentalists are right about the effect of industrial emissions on climate.
The reason is that most of the world's nations – containing at least 70% of the world's population – are not covered by the
Kyoto Protocols.
That includes billions of people in rapidly-industrializing nations like China (1.2 billion people) and India (1.1 billion people), as
well as the nations of South America, Africa and most of Asia. These countries are increasing their greenhouse gas emissions at record rates, yet because they are "poor,"
the only way most countries would sign the Kyoto accords was by being exempted from them!
As a result, even Kyoto's supporters admit that even if the Kyoto Protocols were fully implemented in all 39 western nations, at best
the effect on global climate would be tiny. However, even this result is unlikely.
The more likely result of Kyoto would be the closing of industrial plants in the west and the opening of new plants in nations like
China, Indonesia and India, which have far more lax environmental laws. For example, China is powering much of its new industrial revolution with coal-fired power
plants, which emit 5-10 as much CO2 and other greenhouse gases as do cleaner plants in the U.S. and western Europe.
So the net effect of Kyoto would likely be the destruction of industry in the west, while actually increasing total global emissions of
greenhouse gases.
In reality, signatories to Kyoto have not reduced their emissions of greenhouse gases and show little sign that they will in the future.
For instance in 2003-2004, "Emissions from 40 industrial nations [including the U.S.] climbed 1.6% overall to 17.8 billion tons of carbon dioxide – mainly from
power plants, factories and cars." (Alister Doyle, "Rich Nations' Greenhouse Gases Up, Despite Kyoto," Environmental News Network, 9-1-06.)
However, their own lack of compliance with Kyoto has not stopped leaders and the media in other countries from condemning the U.S and
President Bush for "not signing Kyoto."
For example, French foreign policy expert Guillaume Parmentier remarked: "[T]he vast majority of Europeans would be delighted if
President Bush fails to win re-election (on November 2, 2004). European animosity toward the incumbent began with his administration's rejection of the Kyoto Treaty."
In reality, the Kyoto calls for reducing greenhouse gases are unrealistic and irrelevant to climate change, since these emissions
aren't causing climate change. Further, if the Kyoto Protocols could somehow be implemented, the result would be a global economic disaster, harming poor as well as
rich nations.
In brief, Kyoto is not only an impossible, but an undesirable dream.
REJECT GLOBAL WARMING TYRANNY
"You'll find more dissent at a North Korean political rally than in this program"
Dave Shifflett review for Bloomberg News of Tom Brokaw's "Global Warming" special, July 16, 2006.
|
The "global warming doomsday" theory is in fact fraught with error and bad science. It is little more than a politically-motivated
power grab by politicians and extreme environmentalists, who have benefited and will continue to benefit by getting more money and more power to "save us" from ourselves.
While human industrial activity is not causing climate change, that has not stopped money-hungry bureaucrats from proposing new carbon
taxes, emissions permits, and police-power over every business – from your corner dry cleaner, to the largest industrial plants.
The new extreme global warming disaster agenda is in fact that old "back to the earth" socialism, which longs for a simpler time, when
the king's word was law, people seldom ventured beyond the village in which they were born, and heated their homes with animal dung.
To some that sounds romantic and "eco-friendly," but for billions it would mean poverty, slavery, disease, and premature death.
Only modern industrial capitalism can provide affluence and freedom of choice for all, and only the mass consumption of energy can make
modern industrial capitalism possible. By seeking to make us all feel guilty about our wealth and our consumption of energy, the global warming doomsday lobby is
actually seeking to repeal the 20th Century, and, in the process, to condemn billions to needless suffering and death.
If environmental extremists wish to live in 15th Century primitivism, let them move to Somalia or Madagascar, and leave the rest of
us alone.
DEBUNKING GLOBAL WARMING NONSENSE
"Kyoto is 'the first' component of an authentic global governance."
Former French President Jacques Chirac
|
As voices demanding that we surrender our freedom and prosperity to prevent a non-existent climate disaster grow ever-louder, so too do
those with the courage to speak out against this fraud.
Among those who deserve a place in the global warming truth hall of fame are . . .
The Heartland Institute for their "Instant Expert's Guide to Global Warming", the Environment and Climate News
monthly tabloid/magazine, their dedicated global warming website . . . and
other publications.
The Heartland Institute
19 South LaSalle #903
Chicago, IL 60603
British Channel 4 which produced the excellent film, The Global Warming Swindle, which you can view or
download . . . here
ISIL's Kenyan Rep James Shikwati was featured in this documentary. He stated that attempts by the West to saddle developing countries
with pathetically inadequate "green" technology like solar and wind power amounted to an attempt to block industrialization. The left's mantra he stated is: "Don't touch
your oil, don't touch your coal." He went on to say that you can't operate a steel plant with solar collectors. In the same program Patrick Moore, co-founder of
Greenpeace, who resigned because of the outlandish demands and claims of green extremists, said that depriving developing countries of essential energies was "anti-human."
The Competitive Enterprise Institute and Regnery Publishing, which
produced and distributed The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming by Christopher Horner.
You can earn your own place in the global warming truth hall of fame by distributing this article . . . learning more of the truth
behind global warming . . . and speaking out whenever you can – at public forums, on radio talk shows, in newspaper editorials, and elsewhere – to expose
the truth and myths of global warming.
|
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed – and thus clamorous to be led to safety – by menacing
it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
H.L. Mencken
|
|
|
