Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Global Warming is media fueled myth
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Science > Natural World
Pages: 1, 2, 3
Caesar
QUOTE(Mattshark @ Feb 11 2007, 09:10 AM) [snapback]1538573[/snapback]
No there have definatly been times when it has gotten considerably colder. The Earth was warmer when there was no land over the south pole and when there still existed the trans-American seaway.
It is not just groups of people who believe that human effects are to blame for global warming, but the majority of the scientific community and the vast majority of those who have studied the data agree that it is related to human effects.

A Gallup poll found that only 17 percent of the members of the Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Society think that the warming of the 20th century has been a result of greenhouse gas emissions - principally CO2 from burning fossil fuels.
Gallup poll
greggK
QUOTE(receivingendofsirens @ Jan 31 2007, 02:33 PM) [snapback]1524333[/snapback]
It is amazing that so many people believe global warming is real and is caused by humans. This myth has been largely promoted by the major media that gives much attention to those who support it and very little to those who debunk it.

For example, in December, U.S. Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma chaired a “Climate Change and the Media” meeting. He said that global warming is a hoax. The meeting received almost no major media attention.

At this meeting, Dr. David Deming, a geophysicist at the University of Oklahoma, stated, “I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.”

Deming also said that he received an astonishing e-mail from a major researcher in climate change that read, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” From about 800 A.D. to 1300 A.D. we had the Medieval Warm Period where the world was as warm or warmer than it is today. But it is an obstacle to those maintaining that the current warming is abnormal.

People who want to hear the other side can go to www.oism.org/pproject for a scientific debunking of global warming. Also, listed are the names of more than 17,000 scientists, meteorologists and other technical people who have signed a petition stating that there is no convincing scientific evidence to support global warming.

source
http://www.couleenews.com/articles/2007/01...ion/04gwlte.txt

Also there is a link in the article about how this is true as well... with 17,100 signatures from many scientist meteorologist etc.


THE MORE OIL WE TAKE FROM THE EARTH AND REPLACE IT IN OUR ATMOSPHERE, THE HOTTER IT IS GOING TO GET!
Is man doing this, you *EDIT* people!
greggK
QUOTE(receivingendofsirens @ Jan 31 2007, 02:33 PM) [snapback]1524333[/snapback]
It is amazing that so many people believe global warming is real and is caused by humans. This myth has been largely promoted by the major media that gives much attention to those who support it and very little to those who debunk it.

For example, in December, U.S. Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma chaired a “Climate Change and the Media” meeting. He said that global warming is a hoax. The meeting received almost no major media attention.

At this meeting, Dr. David Deming, a geophysicist at the University of Oklahoma, stated, “I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.”

Deming also said that he received an astonishing e-mail from a major researcher in climate change that read, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” From about 800 A.D. to 1300 A.D. we had the Medieval Warm Period where the world was as warm or warmer than it is today. But it is an obstacle to those maintaining that the current warming is abnormal.

People who want to hear the other side can go to www.oism.org/pproject for a scientific debunking of global warming. Also, listed are the names of more than 17,000 scientists, meteorologists and other technical people who have signed a petition stating that there is no convincing scientific evidence to support global warming.

source
http://www.couleenews.com/articles/2007/01...ion/04gwlte.txt

Also there is a link in the article about how this is true as well... with 17,100 signatures from many scientist meteorologist etc.


THE MORE OIL WE PULL FROM THE EARTH AND PUT IN OUR ATMOSPHERE, THE HOTTER IT IS GOING TO GET!
WITHOUT TAKING THE OIL FROM THE EARTH, WE MAY HAVE GAINED A FEW HUNDRED THOUSAND YEARS, BUT MY GOD, Y'ALL! HOW STUPID CAN THE SCIENTIST GET! CHINA HAS PROVEN BEYOND A SHADOW OF A DOUBT THAT THEY CAN BLAST ANY COMET OUT OF THE SKY THAT THREATENS OUR WORLD. SO WE DO NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE 12TH PLANET ANY LONGER. KISS ZECHARIAH SITCHIN AND TELL HIM 'NICE STUDIES.' BUT THE NEXT TIME YOU GET IN YOUR CAR TO GO TO THE GAS STATION TO FILL UP, THANK OPEC FOR OUR UNTIMELY DEMISE!
Mattshark
QUOTE(Caesar @ Feb 12 2007, 02:08 AM) [snapback]1539336[/snapback]
A Gallup poll found that only 17 percent of the members of the Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Society think that the warming of the 20th century has been a result of greenhouse gas emissions - principally CO2 from burning fossil fuels.
Gallup poll

That link is from a right wing political pressure group, has no dating and has no refence or link. Sorry that is completely invalid as evidence to your idea.
Caesar
QUOTE(Mattshark @ Feb 11 2007, 09:23 PM) [snapback]1539358[/snapback]
That link is from a right wing political pressure group, has no dating and has no refence or link. Sorry that is completely invalid as evidence to your idea.

This was on CNN some time ago, are they a right wing political pressure group too?
bornagainuhmanduh
QUOTE(IamsSon @ Feb 4 2007, 05:05 PM) [snapback]1529643[/snapback]
I know posi, I'm glad we can continue to be friends despite our different views.

I think it's funny that Al Gore is up for the Nobel Peace Prize for talking about something.. a lot, and doing, nothing, in fact with all his flying around and the SUVs he and his security team drive around in, isn't he contributing to global warming? What did he DO about global warming during those 8 years that Bill Clinton was diddling young interns in the Oval Office?

But, here's a link to an article I posted on another thread here.

LINK

Here are some of the highlights of the article:
As you can see, there are scientists who have evidence that indicates man does not play much of an impact.

It's not that I don't think there is some warming going on so much as I have serious doubts that man is having much of an impact on driving it, and may have very little impact in stopping it. Instead of wasting all this energy, research time, and money trying to place the blame on man (especially rich men) for a process which has been active on this planet since way before man could have been much of a variable, we should be researching and planning on how we are going to survive through a process that seems to be part of our planets natural cycle.



Hmmm...where are these "scientists" you speak of... the only scientist I noticed is someone named Dr. Shaviv, an astrophysicist. I can understand if he wants to put forth his ideas about global warming based on his expertise...which is astrophysics. He is not a climatologist, nor is he a paleoclimatologist.....to cite his ramblings about CO2 emissions and what he believes will or will not happen is questionable.
Mattshark
QUOTE(Caesar @ Feb 12 2007, 02:37 AM) [snapback]1539374[/snapback]
This was on CNN some time ago, are they a right wing political pressure group too?

The poll is unsourced, unless you can provide a source and some good scientific papers, then that graph is unsupporting.
bornagainuhmanduh
QUOTE(uhmanduh @ Feb 11 2007, 06:58 PM) [snapback]1539393[/snapback]
Hmmm...where are these "scientists" you speak of... the only scientist I noticed is someone named Dr. Shaviv, an astrophysicist. I can understand if he wants to put forth his ideas about global warming based on his expertise...which is astrophysics. He is not a climatologist, nor is he a paleoclimatologist.....to cite his ramblings about CO2 emissions and what he believes will or will not happen is questionable.


I was just telling my husband about this and he said "It's kind of like taking your computer to a hair dresser to see what's wrong with it"
Moondoggy
What? Don't we trust Al Gore who invented the internet? Michael Savage has some good info on the whole global warming hoax. You should check it out.
Robert M. Blevins
Well...
At Adventure Books of Seattle, we believe global warming is real enough.


Since last August, AB has been gathering submissions via an easy webform with comments about global warming. People send us their thoughts, comments, possible solutions, or changes in the weather where they live to The Global Warming Project.

A total of one thousand submissions are being published in a book titled 'A Thousand Voices - A Testament on Global Warming'. The book is edited by Adventure Books and Mr Geoff Nelder from Great Britain. Mr Nelder is a multi-published author, and wrote a reference book on the weather that is still in use today. He is a Post-Graduate Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society.

We have already received submissions from scientists, housewives, students, truck drivers, even a guy stationed at a research station in Antarctica.

Submission to the book is easy, asks no personal questions, and all submissions will be published that are not off-topic or spam. You can even win a free book and other prizes.
There is also a video onsite explaining why we're doing the book on the AB Videos page. cool.gif
Mattshark
QUOTE(Moondoggy @ Feb 12 2007, 03:56 AM) [snapback]1539466[/snapback]
What? Don't we trust Al Gore who invented the internet? Michael Savage has some good info on the whole global warming hoax. You should check it out.

Savage is politically motivated and not a climatologist, he is a medical biologist. He is not a reliable source of information on the subject, you should maybe check some reliable sources, actually scientific work, rather than listen to Michael Alan Weiner.
Reincarnated
QUOTE(Moondoggy @ Feb 12 2007, 03:56 AM) [snapback]1539466[/snapback]
What? Don't we trust Al Gore who invented the internet? Michael Savage has some good info on the whole global warming hoax. You should check it out.
He didn't invent the internet and he didn't invent global warming. He just feels he should be a spokesperson for climate change since he realized it needs some much needed attention. He might also be using it to boost his image but he is not the one creating the evidence or facts. He is just a messenger. And you shouldn't kill the messenger. no.gif
bornagainuhmanduh
QUOTE(Moondoggy @ Feb 11 2007, 07:56 PM) [snapback]1539466[/snapback]
What? Don't we trust Al Gore who invented the internet? Michael Savage has some good info on the whole global warming hoax. You should check it out.


lol...I never mentioned Al Gore.....but I would never base my opinion on what a single person thinks, just because they have "Dr." before their name.
Caesar
I don't see any facts that humans are causing global warming
carini
QUOTE(Caesar @ Feb 11 2007, 11:21 PM) [snapback]1539505[/snapback]
I don't see any facts that humans are causing global warming



I dont see any facts that we arent.
Caesar
QUOTE(carini @ Feb 11 2007, 11:23 PM) [snapback]1539509[/snapback]
I dont see any facts that we arent.

I'm not the person making the claim that humans are causing global warming!
Mattshark
Journal Paper 1
Journal 2
Journal 3
Journal Paper 4

All far more relible than Mr Savage.
Celumnaz
President of Czech Republic Calls Man-Made Global Warming a 'Myth' - Questions Gore's Sanity
Mon Feb 12 2007 09:10:09 ET

Czech president Vaclav Klaus has criticized the UN panel on global warming, claiming that it was a political authority without any scientific basis.

In an interview with "Hospodárské noviny", a Czech economics daily, Klaus answered a few questions:

Q: IPCC has released its report and you say that the global warming is a false myth. How did you get this idea, Mr President?•

A: It's not my idea. Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment. Also, it's an undignified slapstick that people don't wait for the full report in May 2007 but instead respond, in such a serious way, to the summary for policymakers where all the "but's" are scratched, removed, and replaced by oversimplified theses.• This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians. If the European Commission is instantly going to buy such a trick, we have another very good reason to think that the countries themselves, not the Commission, should be deciding about similar issues.•

Q: How do you explain that there is no other comparably senior statesman in Europe who would advocate this viewpoint? No one else has such strong opinions...•

A: My opinions about this issue simply are strong. Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice.

• Q: But you're not a climate scientist. Do you have a sufficient knowledge and enough information?•

A: Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable and this fact scares me. The second part of the sentence should be: we also have lots of reports, studies, and books of climatologists whose conclusions are diametrally opposite.• Indeed, I never measure the thickness of ice in Antarctica. I really don't know how to do it and don't plan to learn it. However, as a scientifically oriented person, I know how to read science reports about these questions, for example about ice in Antarctica. I don't have to be a climate scientist myself to read them. And inside the papers I have read, the conclusions we may see in the media simply don't appear. But let me promise you something: this topic troubles me which is why I started to write an article about it last Christmas. The article expanded and became a book. In a couple of months, it will be published. One chapter out of seven will organize my opinions about the climate change.• Environmentalism and green ideology is something very different from climate science. Various findings and screams of scientists are abused by this ideology.•

Q: How do you explain that conservative media are skeptical while the left-wing media view the global warming as a done deal?•

A: It is not quite exactly divided to the left-wingers and right-wingers. Nevertheless it's obvious that environmentalism is a new incarnation of modern leftism.•

Q: If you look at all these things, even if you were right ...•

A: ...I am right...•

Q: Isn't there enough empirical evidence and facts we can see with our eyes that imply that Man is demolishing the planet and himself?•

A: It's such a nonsense that I have probably not heard a bigger nonsense yet.•

Q: Don't you believe that we're ruining our planet?•

A: I will pretend that I haven't heard you. Perhaps only Mr Al Gore may be saying something along these lines: a sane person can't. I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing. Look: you represent the economic media so I expect a certain economical erudition from you. My book will answer these questions. For example, we know that there exists a huge correlation between the care we give to the environment on one side and the wealth and technological prowess on the other side. It's clear that the poorer the society is, the more brutally it behaves with respect to Nature, and vice versa.• It's also true that there exist social systems that are damaging Nature - by eliminating private ownership and similar things - much more than the freer societies. These tendencies become important in the long run. They unambiguously imply that today, on February 8th, 2007, Nature is protected uncomparably more than on February 8th ten years ago or fifty years ago or one hundred years ago.• That's why I ask: how can you pronounce the sentence you said? Perhaps if you're unconscious? Or did you mean it as a provocation only? And maybe I am just too naive and I allowed you to provoke me to give you all these answers, am I not? It is more likely that you actually believe what you say.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm
Mattshark
QUOTE(Celumnaz @ Feb 12 2007, 05:42 PM) [snapback]1540091[/snapback]
President of Czech Republic Calls Man-Made Global Warming a 'Myth' - Questions Gore's Sanity
Mon Feb 12 2007 09:10:09 ET

Czech president Vaclav Klaus has criticized the UN panel on global warming, claiming that it was a political authority without any scientific basis.

In an interview with "Hospodárské noviny", a Czech economics daily, Klaus answered a few questions:

Q: IPCC has released its report and you say that the global warming is a false myth. How did you get this idea, Mr President?•

A: It's not my idea. Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment. Also, it's an undignified slapstick that people don't wait for the full report in May 2007 but instead respond, in such a serious way, to the summary for policymakers where all the "but's" are scratched, removed, and replaced by oversimplified theses.• This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians. If the European Commission is instantly going to buy such a trick, we have another very good reason to think that the countries themselves, not the Commission, should be deciding about similar issues.•

Q: How do you explain that there is no other comparably senior statesman in Europe who would advocate this viewpoint? No one else has such strong opinions...•

A: My opinions about this issue simply are strong. Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice.

• Q: But you're not a climate scientist. Do you have a sufficient knowledge and enough information?•

A: Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable and this fact scares me. The second part of the sentence should be: we also have lots of reports, studies, and books of climatologists whose conclusions are diametrally opposite.• Indeed, I never measure the thickness of ice in Antarctica. I really don't know how to do it and don't plan to learn it. However, as a scientifically oriented person, I know how to read science reports about these questions, for example about ice in Antarctica. I don't have to be a climate scientist myself to read them. And inside the papers I have read, the conclusions we may see in the media simply don't appear. But let me promise you something: this topic troubles me which is why I started to write an article about it last Christmas. The article expanded and became a book. In a couple of months, it will be published. One chapter out of seven will organize my opinions about the climate change.• Environmentalism and green ideology is something very different from climate science. Various findings and screams of scientists are abused by this ideology.•

Q: How do you explain that conservative media are skeptical while the left-wing media view the global warming as a done deal?•

A: It is not quite exactly divided to the left-wingers and right-wingers. Nevertheless it's obvious that environmentalism is a new incarnation of modern leftism.•

Q: If you look at all these things, even if you were right ...•

A: ...I am right...•

Q: Isn't there enough empirical evidence and facts we can see with our eyes that imply that Man is demolishing the planet and himself?•

A: It's such a nonsense that I have probably not heard a bigger nonsense yet.•

Q: Don't you believe that we're ruining our planet?•

A: I will pretend that I haven't heard you. Perhaps only Mr Al Gore may be saying something along these lines: a sane person can't. I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing. Look: you represent the economic media so I expect a certain economical erudition from you. My book will answer these questions. For example, we know that there exists a huge correlation between the care we give to the environment on one side and the wealth and technological prowess on the other side. It's clear that the poorer the society is, the more brutally it behaves with respect to Nature, and vice versa.• It's also true that there exist social systems that are damaging Nature - by eliminating private ownership and similar things - much more than the freer societies. These tendencies become important in the long run. They unambiguously imply that today, on February 8th, 2007, Nature is protected uncomparably more than on February 8th ten years ago or fifty years ago or one hundred years ago.• That's why I ask: how can you pronounce the sentence you said? Perhaps if you're unconscious? Or did you mean it as a provocation only? And maybe I am just too naive and I allowed you to provoke me to give you all these answers, am I not? It is more likely that you actually believe what you say.

http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm


Because he is a better source of information than the general scientific community isn't he.
Im posted peer reviewed scientific papers above that all implicated humans involvement in global warming.
Celumnaz
It is my opinion that he raises good points to the questions posed that I don't see many consider. I wasn't addressing you specifically, or your post. Why'd you have to re-quote the whole thing? It's right there in the post above yours.... not that I have anything against anyone reading it twice...

Edit: from your response I'm wondering if you read it once?
IamsSon
QUOTE(Mattshark @ Feb 11 2007, 10:11 PM) [snapback]1539487[/snapback]
Savage is politically motivated and not a climatologist, he is a medical biologist. He is not a reliable source of information on the subject, you should maybe check some reliable sources, actually scientific work, rather than listen to Michael Alan Weiner.

And Al Gore is a better source of information than Michael Savage!? w00t.gif

Too bad the President of the Czech Republic can't run for the office of President in the U.S.
IamsSon
The REAL scientists will continue to come out of the woodwork and prove that "politicized" science is BUNK!

QUOTE
An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change
Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, says the orthodoxy must be challenged

When politicians and journalists declare that the science of global warming is settled, they show a regrettable ignorance about how science works. We were treated to another dose of it recently when the experts of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued the Summary for Policymakers that puts the political spin on an unfinished scientific dossier on climate change due for publication in a few months’ time. They declared that most of the rise in temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to man-made greenhouse gases.

The small print explains “very likely” as meaning that the experts who made the judgment felt 90% sure about it. Older readers may recall a press conference at Harwell in 1958 when Sir John Cockcroft, Britain’s top nuclear physicist, said he was 90% certain that his lads had achieved controlled nuclear fusion. It turned out that he was wrong. More positively, a 10% uncertainty in any theory is a wide open breach for any latterday Galileo or Einstein to storm through with a better idea. That is how science really works.

Twenty years ago, climate research became politicised in favour of one particular hypothesis, which redefined the subject as the study of the effect of greenhouse gases. As a result, the rebellious spirits essential for innovative and trustworthy science are greeted with impediments to their research careers. And while the media usually find mavericks at least entertaining, in this case they often imagine that anyone who doubts the hypothesis of man-made global warming must be in the pay of the oil companies. As a result, some key discoveries in climate research go almost unreported.

Enthusiasm for the global-warming scare also ensures that heatwaves make headlines, while contrary symptoms, such as this winter’s billion-dollar loss of Californian crops to unusual frost, are relegated to the business pages. The early arrival of migrant birds in spring provides colourful evidence for a recent warming of the northern lands. But did anyone tell you that in east Antarctica the Adélie penguins and Cape petrels are turning up at their spring nesting sites around nine days later than they did 50 years ago? While sea-ice has diminished in the Arctic since 1978, it has grown by 8% in the Southern Ocean.
Background

So one awkward question you can ask, when you’re forking out those extra taxes for climate change, is “Why is east Antarctica getting colder?” It makes no sense at all if carbon dioxide is driving global warming. While you’re at it, you might inquire whether Gordon Brown will give you a refund if it’s confirmed that global warming has stopped. The best measurements of global air temperatures come from American weather satellites, and they show wobbles but no overall change since 1999.

That levelling off is just what is expected by the chief rival hypothesis, which says that the sun drives climate changes more emphatically than greenhouse gases do. After becoming much more active during the 20th century, the sun now stands at a high but roughly level state of activity. Solar physicists warn of possible global cooling, should the sun revert to the lazier mood it was in during the Little Ice Age 300 years ago.

Climate history and related archeology give solid support to the solar hypothesis. The 20th-century episode, or Modern Warming, was just the latest in a long string of similar events produced by a hyperactive sun, of which the last was the Medieval Warming.

The Chinese population doubled then, while in Europe the Vikings and cathedral-builders prospered. Fascinating relics of earlier episodes come from the Swiss Alps, with the rediscovery in 2003 of a long-forgotten pass used intermittently whenever the world was warm.

What does the Intergovernmental Panel do with such emphatic evidence for an alternation of warm and cold periods, linked to solar activity and going on long before human industry was a possible factor? Less than nothing. The 2007 Summary for Policymakers boasts of cutting in half a very small contribution by the sun to climate change conceded in a 2001 report.

Disdain for the sun goes with a failure by the self-appointed greenhouse experts to keep up with inconvenient discoveries about how the solar variations control the climate. The sun’s brightness may change too little to account for the big swings in the climate. But more than 10 years have passed since Henrik Svensmark in Copenhagen first pointed out a much more powerful mechanism.

He saw from compilations of weather satellite data that cloudiness varies according to how many atomic particles are coming in from exploded stars. More cosmic rays, more clouds. The sun’s magnetic field bats away many of the cosmic rays, and its intensification during the 20th century meant fewer cosmic rays, fewer clouds, and a warmer world. On the other hand the Little Ice Age was chilly because the lazy sun let in more cosmic rays, leaving the world cloudier and gloomier.

The only trouble with Svensmark’s idea — apart from its being politically incorrect — was that meteorologists denied that cosmic rays could be involved in cloud formation. After long delays in scraping together the funds for an experiment, Svensmark and his small team at the Danish National Space Center hit the jackpot in the summer of 2005.

In a box of air in the basement, they were able to show that electrons set free by cosmic rays coming through the ceiling stitched together droplets of sulphuric acid and water. These are the building blocks for cloud condensation. But journal after journal declined to publish their report; the discovery finally appeared in the Proceedings of the Royal Society late last year.

Thanks to having written The Manic Sun, a book about Svensmark’s initial discovery published in 1997, I have been privileged to be on the inside track for reporting his struggles and successes since then. The outcome is a second book, The Chilling Stars, co-authored by the two of us and published next week by Icon books. We are not exaggerating, we believe, when we subtitle it “A new theory of climate change”.

Where does all that leave the impact of greenhouse gases? Their effects are likely to be a good deal less than advertised, but nobody can really say until the implications of the new theory of climate change are more fully worked out.

The reappraisal starts with Antarctica, where those contradictory temperature trends are directly predicted by Svensmark’s scenario, because the snow there is whiter than the cloud-tops. Meanwhile humility in face of Nature’s marvels seems more appropriate than arrogant assertions that we can forecast and even control a climate ruled by the sun and the stars.


SOURCE
Mattshark
QUOTE(IamsSon @ Feb 12 2007, 05:54 PM) [snapback]1540109[/snapback]
And Al Gore is a better source of information than Michael Savage!? w00t.gif

Too bad the President of the Czech Republic can't run for the office of President in the U.S.

I have not quoted Al Gore once I post links to legitimate scientific papers. I left politics out of the discussion. I said I trust scientific papers more than a radio DJ.
SilverCougar
So here it is... not even the middle of FEBURARY... and the frogs in the pond are out in force, chirping and ribbiting away in the day.

I don't live in a warm winter climate... I live in the north. Frogs don't normaly start up till the end of May.

The Geese and summertime birds have even returned. THEY don't normaly come back till about May either.

Well I guess if you don't pay attention to the natural habbitates... everything will seem fine to you. But these things should *not* be happening... we should not be hearing frogs, and the migratory birds should not be be back this early... Those are considered red flags to something being wrong.
Mattshark
QUOTE(Celumnaz @ Feb 12 2007, 05:52 PM) [snapback]1540104[/snapback]
It is my opinion that he raises good points to the questions posed that I don't see many consider. I wasn't addressing you specifically, or your post. Why'd you have to re-quote the whole thing? It's right there in the post above yours.... not that I have anything against anyone reading it twice...

Edit: from your response I'm wondering if you read it once?


Yes and i think he is full of crap.
He also outright lies when he says every serious person and scientists say global warming is a myth. The majority of science does not think it is a myth.
Mattshark
QUOTE(IamsSon @ Feb 12 2007, 06:02 PM) [snapback]1540122[/snapback]
The REAL scientists will continue to come out of the woodwork and prove that "politicized" science is BUNK!
SOURCE

Nigel calder left New Scientist in 1966. He is a science journalist and writer not a real scientist and certainly not a research scientist. See my links from REAL scientific Jouranls (Nature is one of the most respected scientific journals) by people whos field is climate study.
SilverCougar
EO/NASA has a couple of good articles to read on this.

One about climate change in fossilized horse teeth from the US Yes.. horses were develouping here in the americas long before the ice age...

A call for not just mitigation but adaption to the changing climate

IamsSon
QUOTE(SilverCougar @ Feb 12 2007, 12:47 PM) [snapback]1540168[/snapback]
So here it is... not even the middle of FEBURARY... and the frogs in the pond are out in force, chirping and ribbiting away in the day.

I don't live in a warm winter climate... I live in the north. Frogs don't normaly start up till the end of May.

The Geese and summertime birds have even returned. THEY don't normaly come back till about May either.

Well I guess if you don't pay attention to the natural habbitates... everything will seem fine to you. But these things should *not* be happening... we should not be hearing frogs, and the migratory birds should not be be back this early... Those are considered red flags to something being wrong.

I'm sure there are no frogs chirping or doing anything else in New York or Illinois, or Colorado, or most of the northern part of the country.

QUOTE(Mattshark @ Feb 12 2007, 12:59 PM) [snapback]1540182[/snapback]
Nigel calder left New Scientist in 1966. He is a science journalist and writer not a real scientist and certainly not a research scientist. See my links from REAL scientific Jouranls (Nature is one of the most respected scientific journals) by people whos field is climate study.

If you read the articles he is talking about the research of a research scientist.
SilverCougar
QUOTE
I'm sure there are no frogs chirping or doing anything else in New York or Illinois, or Colorado, or most of the northern part of the country.


Nope.. they're just getting hit by harder storms then normal. Which again, is a red flag marker.

People hear "Global warming" and think that it's warm all the time. Not.. really the case. The seasons go to their extreams. Extra crispy summers... and harsh winters with huge storms.

Again, it's paying attention to the natural habbitats.
Mattshark
QUOTE(IamsSon @ Feb 12 2007, 07:33 PM) [snapback]1540235[/snapback]
I'm sure there are no frogs chirping or doing anything else in New York or Illinois, or Colorado, or most of the northern part of the country.
If you read the articles he is talking about the research of a research scientist.

The article only refers to specific areas, it ignores world average temperatures and the majority of the southern hemisphere has actually warmed up over all and that the heating of the northern hemisphere is occuring at a record rate outside of mass extinction events. The temperatures in UK have already out done those of the Medieval warm period and bouts of severity in winter are consistant with global warming. Can you actually offer any actual scientific reports supportting you view?
I have but they have been convienantly ignored. The reports are not politicised either. Unlike the newspaper article you posted and the interview with Czech PM.
Celumnaz
QUOTE(SilverCougar @ Feb 12 2007, 12:47 PM) [snapback]1540168[/snapback]
Well I guess if you don't pay attention to the natural habbitates... everything will seem fine to you. But these things should *not* be happening... we should not be hearing frogs, and the migratory birds should not be be back this early... Those are considered red flags to something being wrong.

I'm all on board and always have been before I even came to these forums that there is climate change, and it may be rapid and it may be detrimental. The only point of contention is that Man is the Primary and Major Cause or can do anything substantive about it if we wanted to.

If it's bad as all get out, we will need to adapt, like the eskimos, people who live in jungles, or american indians... building igloos and whatnot haha, instead of adapting the environment to Us... like air conditioners and roads and such. If we rely on any govt, state local or federal, we're dead.
IamsSon
I have some questions for those of you who believe Man is a Main/Major cause of global warming:

Why is it so important to you that man be held responsible for this? How will that make it any better or worse, especially now that some global warming "experts" are saying it's too late to reverse the process?

Also, what are you doing to insure that China, India, and most of Africa are lowering their levels of pollution?
Mattshark
QUOTE(IamsSon @ Feb 12 2007, 10:04 PM) [snapback]1540432[/snapback]
I have some questions for those of you who believe Man is a Main/Major cause of global warming:

Why is it so important to you that man be held responsible for this? How will that make it any better or worse, especially now that some global warming "experts" are saying it's too late to reverse the process?

Also, what are you doing to insure that China, India, and most of Africa are lowering their levels of pollution?

What exactly can we do to ensure China, India, and African nations lower their levels of polution? Personally invade them? That is rather a facetious question isn't it.
It is not about who is held responsible, it is about analysing the information of those whom actually study this field. I don't personally think it is irreversible.
archer95446
All I know is that the environment is not what it should be.....There are reports all over the world that bears have not hibernated. We just got some much need rain, which started about a week ago, before that the birds started nesting, the trees started spewing pollen all over everything, the critters that live on the hill directly behind my house were acting like they do in spring, and one more weird thing.... I live in a wooded area and the trees never changed to their Fall colors and they didn't shed their leaves, they are all still full and green, they should be bare, like every year before. This whole thing is weird.
IamsSon
QUOTE(Mattshark @ Feb 12 2007, 04:29 PM) [snapback]1540482[/snapback]
What exactly can we do to ensure China, India, and African nations lower their levels of polution? Personally invade them? That is rather a facetious question isn't it.
It is not about who is held responsible, it is about analysing the information of those whom actually study this field. I don't personally think it is irreversible.

I did not intend it to be facetious. When I learn of a problem I try to see if there is something I can do about it, I would imagine that most people are the same, so the people who believe man is causing global warming should, to my way of thinking, be trying to do something to stop China from destroying the world through global warming.

Although for you it may not be about holding someone responsible, there are many global warming alarmist who blame man, although usually only the U.S., for global warming and all you have to do is read some of the posts on threads like this one to realize that some people who agree with this view hee on UM, so maybe the questions were not for you.
SilverCougar
China and India will have their own issues. Soon as their populations hit the oversaturation point, their enviroment will be unable to support them and crash. Thus wipeing out a few hundreds of thousands if not millions of people. Problem solved.
Noelozzy
And how many here have the open mind to ponder that the Weather is also manipulated by 21st Century technology?

To create hail and frost so frequently is Summer warmth, to create a permanent EL Nino, to create and withhold rain, steering tornados, etc etc

Perhaps the blame is being foisted on "mans pollution" to deflect suspicion from the guilty.

Have a read of "How to wreck the environment" written in the 1950's before we had the ability to put Tesla inventions into fruition!
receivingendofsirens
this "global warming" things will only result into one thing... an ice age.....

every abnormally warm period that scientists have been able to study has then lead to an ice age..... when the ice metls it raises sea levels, reducing the salinity of the ocean from all the freshwater in the ocean which slows down the gulf stream which cools down the earth. then with the cooling effect, all the Co2 in the atmoshpere will drive us colder and acts as kind of a fire entinguisher of sorts....

yes this climate change is abnormal by far, but the earth will have its way of healing itself like it always does and back to normal.... unfortunatly for us humans weather we survive it or not is not in the earth's plans for healing but we might survive if it happens again.... because when it does happen again it will be quick and to our blind side of how fast this will change....

but yes there is a major climate shift occuring right now i will agree to that....
STARSPHERE1
QUOTE(receivingendofsirens @ Jan 31 2007, 08:33 PM) [snapback]1524333[/snapback]
It is amazing that so many people believe global warming is real and is caused by humans. This myth has been largely promoted by the major media that gives much attention to those who support it and very little to those who debunk it.

For example, in December, U.S. Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma chaired a “Climate Change and the Media” meeting. He said that global warming is a hoax. The meeting received almost no major media attention.

At this meeting, Dr. David Deming, a geophysicist at the University of Oklahoma, stated, “I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.”

Deming also said that he received an astonishing e-mail from a major researcher in climate change that read, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” From about 800 A.D. to 1300 A.D. we had the Medieval Warm Period where the world was as warm or warmer than it is today. But it is an obstacle to those maintaining that the current warming is abnormal.

People who want to hear the other side can go to www.oism.org/pproject for a scientific debunking of global warming. Also, listed are the names of more than 17,000 scientists, meteorologists and other technical people who have signed a petition stating that there is no convincing scientific evidence to support global warming.

source
http://www.couleenews.com/articles/2007/01...ion/04gwlte.txt

Also there is a link in the article about how this is true as well... with 17,100 signatures from many scientist meteorologist etc.



I think that anyone who denies it is of corporations that profit from the destruction of the Earth, or paid off in money, favors or promises from them.

Most Sincerely, STARSPHERE1
crystal sage
http://politicaldishonesty.com/blog/2007/0...hoax-mars-data/

"the only thing Global Warming can factually and realistically be linked to is political and financial gain."


http://www.moneyfiles.org/weather.html

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1034077.cms
Almost as soon as the Kyoto Protocol on global warming came into effect on February 15, Kashmir suffered the highest snowfall in three decades with over 150 killed, and Mumbai recorded the lowest temperature in 40 years. Had temperatures been the highest for decades, newspapers would have declared this was proof of global warming. But whenever temperatures drop, the press keeps quiet.


http://denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm

" Here is the text of Newsweek’s 1975 story on the trend toward global cooling. It may look foolish today, but in fact world temperatures had been falling since about 1940. It was around 1979 that they reversed direction and resumed the general rise that had begun in the 1880s, bringing us today back to around 1940 levels. A PDF of the original is available here."

A fine short history of warming and cooling scares has recently been produced. It is available here. — D.D.
RamboIII
I have a problem with global warming. Supposedly the rays of sun come into our atmosphere and hit gas...blah...blah and are unable to leave. If they can't leave, how the hell did they get in? huh.gif
Normal Person
QUOTE(receivingendofsirens @ Jan 31 2007, 01:33 PM) [snapback]1524333[/snapback]
It is amazing that so many people believe global warming is real and is caused by humans. This myth has been largely promoted by the major media that gives much attention to those who support it and very little to those who debunk it.

For example, in December, U.S. Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma chaired a “Climate Change and the Media” meeting. He said that global warming is a hoax. The meeting received almost no major media attention.

At this meeting, Dr. David Deming, a geophysicist at the University of Oklahoma, stated, “I was contacted by a reporter for National Public Radio. He offered to interview me, but only if I would state that the warming was due to human activity. When I refused to do so, he hung up on me.”

Deming also said that he received an astonishing e-mail from a major researcher in climate change that read, “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.” From about 800 A.D. to 1300 A.D. we had the Medieval Warm Period where the world was as warm or warmer than it is today. But it is an obstacle to those maintaining that the current warming is abnormal.

People who want to hear the other side can go to www.oism.org/pproject for a scientific debunking of global warming. Also, listed are the names of more than 17,000 scientists, meteorologists and other technical people who have signed a petition stating that there is no convincing scientific evidence to support global warming.

source
http://www.couleenews.com/articles/2007/01...ion/04gwlte.txt

Also there is a link in the article about how this is true as well... with 17,100 signatures from many scientist meteorologist etc.

God, im so sick of people trying to say global warming isnt happening, open your damn eyes, the top scientists have already said its too late, and its not so much about the heating of the earth, its about WHATS heating it, its about the health of the earth, when the earth naturally heats up on these ups and downs, its natural heat, not cancerous smoke filled tar dust chemical smoke lol, the simple fact is that it is real and it is happening and theres nothing you can do to change that. mad.gif
joc
QUOTE(Normal Person @ Apr 5 2007, 03:42 AM) [snapback]1614003[/snapback]
God, im so sick of people trying to say global warming isnt happening, open your damn eyes, the top scientists have already said its too late, and its not so much about the heating of the earth, its about WHATS heating it, its about the health of the earth, when the earth naturally heats up on these ups and downs, its natural heat, not cancerous smoke filled tar dust chemical smoke lol, the simple fact is that it is real and it is happening and theres nothing you can do to change that. mad.gif


Then why get all in a tizzy about it? If there is nothing anyone can do about it why be angry?

The fact is that Earth is a volatile planet...it always has been...and humans are relative newcomers...and I don't give a bloody damn about the Top Scientists...what the hell is a top scientist anyway? Many 'top scientists' say it is a myth. The truth is neither you or I know or anyone for that matter can possibly know whether the Earth is in a heating or cooling cycle...without analyzing data over thousands of years it just isn't possible. Global Warming is nothing more than a tool of the Communist Ideology to take your freedoms.
Normal Person
QUOTE(joc @ Apr 4 2007, 08:49 PM) [snapback]1614020[/snapback]
Then why get all in a tizzy about it? If there is nothing anyone can do about it why be angry?

The fact is that Earth is a volatile planet...it always has been...and humans are relative newcomers...and I don't give a bloody damn about the Top Scientists...what the hell is a top scientist anyway? Many 'top scientists' say it is a myth. The truth is neither you or I know or anyone for that matter can possibly know whether the Earth is in a heating or cooling cycle...without analyzing data over thousands of years it just isn't possible. Global Warming is nothing more than a tool of the Communist Ideology to take your freedoms.

Although i dont see the point of arguing a topic that is clearly already been decided, Global warming is a FACT, nothing is going to change it, and its already too late to stop it, like i said its not about the heating and cooling cycles, its about the goddam stuff thats heating it, the toxic gases that are killing the delicate ecosystems of the earth. if the earth were heating up from more exposure to the sun or something it would be different, its the gases killing the ozone layer, which will cause uv rays to get more harmful, which will kill plankton in the ocean, which will kill tons of marine life along with killing our best source for oxygen. You sound very uneducated about the subject... disgust.gif
positron
QUOTE(IamsSon @ Feb 12 2007, 06:04 PM) [snapback]1540432[/snapback]
I have some questions for those of you who believe Man is a Main/Major cause of global warming:

Why is it so important to you that man be held responsible for this? How will that make it any better or worse, especially now that some global warming "experts" are saying it's too late to reverse the process?

Also, what are you doing to insure that China, India, and most of Africa are lowering their levels of pollution?


If we helped by 20% it would help and others are actually looking into this! Do some more reading !
joc
QUOTE(Normal Person @ Apr 5 2007, 03:55 AM) [snapback]1614026[/snapback]
Although i dont see the point of arguing a topic that is clearly already been decided, Global warming is a FACT, nothing is going to change it, and its already too late to stop it, like i said its not about the heating and cooling cycles, its about the goddam stuff thats heating it, the toxic gases that are killing the delicate ecosystems of the earth. if the earth were heating up from more exposure to the sun or something it would be different, its the gases killing the ozone layer, which will cause uv rays to get more harmful, which will kill plankton in the ocean, which will kill tons of marine life along with killing our best source for oxygen. You sound very uneducated about the subject... disgust.gif


You cannot prove any of that. You are just spouting what the Media has been spouting. It isn't a fact. Your saying or believing it is doesn't make it so. The ecosystems of the Earth are NOT delicate! That is ludicrous...think about it...where on this planet does life NOT exist? Life is found at the deepest depths of the oceans....life is found in the hottest, most inhabitable deserts on the planet...life is found in the bitter cold of Antartica...virtually every square millimeter of this planet contains some life form....that gases from cars and such are going to destroy it all is just plain dumb...this planet will destroy us before we can ever destroy it!
Normal Person
QUOTE(joc @ Apr 4 2007, 09:00 PM) [snapback]1614031[/snapback]
You cannot prove any of that. You are just spouting what the Media has been spouting. It isn't a fact. Your saying or believing it is doesn't make it so. The ecosystems of the Earth are NOT delicate! That is ludicrous...think about it...where on this planet does life NOT exist? Life is found at the deepest depths of the oceans....life is found in the hottest, most inhabitable deserts on the planet...life is found in the bitter cold of Antartica...virtually every square millimeter of this planet contains some life form....that gases from cars and such are going to destroy it all is just plain dumb...this planet will destroy us before we can ever destroy it!

Its obvious that there is no convincing you, i guess you just keep thinking the way you think because obviously you smarter than thousands of geniuses who spend every day recording this data, obviously the small fraction of time you have spent utilizing information about this subject is more significant than those of the scientists, i really dont care what you think, but know this, global warming is happening, and it doesnt require you to belive it to happen, so id advise not posting again, because i doubt anyone will take you seriously, obviously your just mad at the world and you use the "media making stuff up" as an escape from your anger inside. And as for not proving it, what are all these calculations made by scientists? insignificant nothings? i think not, your wrong my friend. And if the ecosystems of earth are not delicate, why is it that when you add a species to a different enviroment then its own, it starts to kill off the species that are in there natural habitat, that must be media influenced to eh? its clear that you have no education on the subject.
Theodore
QUOTE(Normal Person @ Apr 4 2007, 08:55 PM) [snapback]1614026[/snapback]
Although i dont see the point of arguing a topic that is clearly already been decided, Global warming is a FACT, nothing is going to change it, and its already too late to stop it, like i said its not about the heating and cooling cycles, its about the goddam stuff thats heating it, the toxic gases that are killing the delicate ecosystems of the earth. if the earth were heating up from more exposure to the sun or something it would be different, its the gases killing the ozone layer, which will cause uv rays to get more harmful, which will kill plankton in the ocean, which will kill tons of marine life along with killing our best source for oxygen. You sound very uneducated about the subject... disgust.gif


There is no stopping global warming. Humans did not start it, and we cannot stop it. The Sun is the reason for worldwide climate change. Always has been and always will be.

What we humans can do is to improve the quality of life on this planet by reducing the amounts of toxic chemicals that ruin the air, land and sea quality. Air pollution among them. For all the yelling and screaming about "global warming" many of the same so-called environmentalists don't seem to be able to find it within themselves to actually wash their children's diapers and re-use them, rather than throwing away the millions upon millions of plastic diapers that is the reason for the number #3 cause of pollution ~ over 18 billion diapers buried in landfills with a life of thousands of years because the plastics do not degrade.
joc
QUOTE
Its obvious that there is no convincing you, i guess you just keep thinking the way you think because obviously you smarter than thousands of geniuses who spend every day recording this data, obviously the small fraction of time you have spent utilizing information about this subject is more significant than those of the scientists


Dude, these geniuses can't even accurately predict local weather. Let me explain the whole Global Warming thing again, just humor me a moment okay:

Keep in mind that Communism is an ideology...geography has nothing to do with it...also keep in mind that Communism is a 'bad' word, not really politically correct. In America these 'Communists' are called Liberals. They are known by different names in different countries but make no mistake...their ideology is the same. They want power and will do anything to get it and keep it. The liberals in America...AlGore and his crowd...are indeed Communists in their ideologies. They don't think you or I are as smart as they are. This entire Global Warming frenzy was created by Communists as a vehicle for acquiring power. The entire Kioto Treaty was nothing more than a power grab by these 'Communists'. They have thrown many a 'trial scam balloon' into the mix and finally they have something that sticks...do you know the end result of Global Warming? It isn't destruction of the planet at all...it is destruction of your and my personal freedoms. They aren't about to stop with this thing either...now Congress wants to pass legislation that will make the regular old incandescent light bulb illegal. They are going to eventually regulate every aspect of your entire life...will this help good old Earth...no, but you won't have any freedoms left and they will have achieved their age old goal...Domination of the Globe! The Russian communists of old have not evaporated...they are as much a part of this Global Warming Scam as the LoudMouthLiberals in Washington...they are just in the background...but they want their power back too. So, if you are still with me, in summary, Global Warming is a scam perpetrated by Modern Day 21st Century Slick as Grease Liberals who have as their ideology Communism. They want their power back and don't believe you and I are smart enough to take care of our own lives by ourselves. By accepting the Global Warming premise and by believing their doomsday predictions and their 'geniuses' data, you are making yourself their patsy and eventually a One World Government will indeed Rule over you and it sure as hell won't be George W. Bush heading it up!
Theodore
QUOTE(Mattshark @ Feb 12 2007, 12:51 PM) [snapback]1540257[/snapback]
The article only refers to specific areas, it ignores world average temperatures and the majority of the southern hemisphere has actually warmed up over all and that the heating of the northern hemisphere is occuring at a record rate outside of mass extinction events. The temperatures in UK have already out done those of the Medieval warm period and bouts of severity in winter are consistant with global warming. Can you actually offer any actual scientific reports supportting you view?
I have but they have been convienantly ignored. The reports are not politicised either. Unlike the newspaper article you posted and the interview with Czech PM.


Global Warming: Why The Sun Is The Cause, Not People
By Theodore White, Astrometeorologist

As the worldwide hype over man-made climate change peaks with the advent of Al Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth and the 2007 climate change report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) there continues to be little evidence that humans are the cause of worldwide climate change, or, global warming.

The stated claims of the IPCC, which was created by the United Nations in 1988 was to assess what was called scientific information relevant to "human-induced climate change" and the "impacts of human-induced climate change" to develop "options for adaptation and mitigation."

What is often missed is that all the scientific data does not support man-made climate change, but rather ~ the opposite ~ solar forced climate change.

Meaning that the Sun is the cause of what is known as "global warming."

Back in the 1980s, when climate scientists began to notice that sea-surface temperatures were rising, speculation developed that suggested that perhaps the release of carbon into the atmosphere was the cause.

This came about in part because of climate research that showed that the Earth's ozone layers at the poles were showing signs of stress. We now know that the reasons for this was due to the increased magnetic activity of the Sun, which caused intense radiation storms just above the Earth's atmosphere ~ resulting in gaps observed in the Earth's ozone layers.

Several years ago over 17,000 scientists signed a petition about the Kyoto Protocol that stated that "there is no credible evidence that harmful man induced climate change (global warming) is occurring."

They also maintained this about the Earth's ozone layer ~

"The ozone holes in the atmosphere in the Arctic and Antarctic regions are naturally occurring due to meteorological effects, expanding and contracting with the change of season. The meteorological effects consist of high velocity stratospheric level winds that peak during local winter and act to destroy ozone. Also there is less ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the Sun due to the inclination of Earth's axis during hemispheric Winter.

Another variability impacting ozone layer density is the +/- 11 year sunspot cycle. When solar activity is intense at a peak of a solar cycle the ozone layer density increases due to increased UV radiation, just the opposite occurs at the bottom of solar cycle when the Sun is relatively quiet. Changes in ozone layer density is a normal occurrence."


Back in the late 1980s, the majority of mainstream climate scientists didn't even acknowledge global warming, much less man-made climate change, and laughed at the mention of "global warming" ~ that is ~ until the millions of federal and international dollars to study climate change started filling their coffers.

The myth of man-made global warming took off in the early 1990s, and continued throughout the decade as sea-surface temperatures and world temperatures continued to rise to record levels. Clearly, the Earth was warming, but the question remained: what was causing it?

One can match the increase in climate science funding to the increasingly shrill calls blaming global warming on man-made emissions. The more monies devoted to global warming ~ the more mainstream scientists and the media began pushing this myth onto the worldwide public stage.

Even in the scientific world ~ the dollar is king.

When the tens of multi-millions (almost billion) in federal and international dollars start to dry up on man-made climate change, just watch how many scientists drop the premise of man-made climate change like a bad habit.

They will go back to doing what they were doing before ~ and that was laughing at man-made climate change, and they were laughing before the money shut them up and they filled their pockets with money they did not deserve in the first place on man-made climate change.

Why?

Because man-made global warming does not exist.

It never did.

In classical scientific astrology, there are known celestial cycles ranging from months, to years, and over many decades that repeat themselves and correlate to events, including climate and weather. Astrometeorology is one of the oldest branches of classical scientific astrology, as Kim Farnell notes ~

"The forecasting of weather was considered to be part of natural astrology, which encompassed a geocosmic relationships between celestial phenomena and the natural environment of the Earth. It was considered a unified, reputable body of knowledge and formed an important part of natural philosophy. The study of natural astrology reflected the view of the universe that everything is connected. All earthly forms were seen as bound to the power of the Sun, Moon, stars, planets, and other phenomena of celestial or atmospheric origin, such as meteor showers, comets, aurora borealis, lightning, and precipitation."

"Johannes Kepler (1571-1630) noted that certain magnetic angles among the planets had a major bearing upon weather patterns. He discovered further harmonic or magnetic angles of planetary configurations and also observed that certain types of terrestrial weather patterns coincided with certain magnetic angles forming among the planets. Before he conceived his laws of planetary motion, Kepler's initial recognition came through his accurate long-range weather forecasting in predicting the bitterly cold winter in Austria in 1593. Kepler published his observations from June 28 1618 to August 9 1629."

One such astrological cycle is one that lasts 36 years. We are currently in what is called the Cycle of the Sun (1980-2016) ~ and during the first 26 years of this cycle, the Sun has been witnessed to have doubled its magnetic field activity, causing intense radiation storms over the Earth's atmosphere which caused gaps in the Earth's ozone layers during the late 1980s and continued into the 1990s.

We are currently in the 27th year of solar forcing of the Earth's climate. The Sun has just recently reached its minimum phase and is expected to peak once again at maximum sometime in the years 2010-2012.

Some of the hottest years on record of the 20th century have taken place between 1980 to 2005 ~ among the hottest years being 1988, 1991, 1995, 1998 & 2005, when the Sun was recorded having some of its most powerful magnetic field activity.

Those years witnessed record high temperatures, powerful storms and hurricanes during the El Nino years of 1997/1998 when record heavy rains drenched the west coast of the U.S. and Canada, while heavy floods from hurricanes ravaged regions in Central America, where devastating storms resulted in the loss of thousands of lives.

Back in the year 1995, hundreds of people in the Midwest of the United States died because of oppressive summer heat. Global warming was highlighted again in Europe in 2003, when over 35,000 Europeans died because of the stifling summer heat.

Since the hottest years of the last century have taken place in the last 15 years, the calls blaming global warming on human Co2 emissions have risen as fast as the media and political pressures to "reverse" it.

But how can anyone reverse climate change on Earth that is caused directly by that star in the skies we call the Sun?

Temperature records over the last 27 years can be matched exactly to solar forcing of the Earth's climate. My argument for Solar Forcing is backed up by scientific evidence. Paleo-climatologists, climate scientists, astrophysicists and geophysicists have continue to maintain that the Sun is the cause of climate change ~ both global warming and global cooling.

The scientific evidence clearly shows that what is called man-made global warming is indeed a myth.

Moreover, many people who support the man-made global warming seem to ignore that some of the coldest winters in recorded history have also taken place during this time of global warming.

Climate scientists have noted that ~

"The record cold of the decades of the 1890's, 1940's, 1970's, 1980's and most recently the bitter northern hemisphere winters of 2000-2001, 2001-2002, 2002-2003 argue against the occurrence of harmful man induced climate change (global warming).

Also the Winters of 2000/2001 and 2004/2005 in Siberian Russia, as well as Winter 2005/2006 in Antarctica were among some of the [i]coldest
in recorded history.

In January 2004, Boston, MA recorded one of the coldest month of January in 111 years. Grand Forks, ND set an all time record low of -44 degrees below zero and Fosston, MN saw also temperatures at -50 deg. below zero F and in Saskatchewan, Canada, saw record low temperatures fell to -62 deg. below zero F ~ all happening in the Winter of 2003/2004."[/i]

Below are more anomalous cold weather events that took place during the winters of 2004, 2005, 2006, and this past winter of 2007, that clearly depict that the Earth's climate is not only warming worldwide, but becoming increasingly colder as well.

In fact, astrological long-range climate forecasts continue to indicate that the Earth is transitioning from global warming to global cooling.

These anomalous colder events to come have already been taking place as a retired paleoclimatologist living in Florida has noted from news reports around the world during the years 2004 to 2007~

.....March 12, 2007 a North Pole expedition meant to bring attention to global warming was cancelled after one of the explorers got frostbite. The explorers, Ann Bancroft and Liv Arnesen, called off what was intended to be a 530-mile trek across the Arctic Ocean after Arnesen suffered frostbite on three of her toes. The extremely cold temperatures drained the batteries in their electronic equipment. Then there was the cold, quite a bit colder, Atwood said, then Bancroft and Arnesen had expected. One night they recorded the temperature inside their tent at 58 degrees below zero. Outside temperatures were exceeded 100 below zero at times, Atwood said. They were experienced temperatures that were not expected with global warming.....

.....The minimum temperature on Mt. Mansfield, VT on March 6, 2007 was -28 deg. F, breaking the old record of -25 deg. F set in 1955. On March 7, 2007 numerous minimum temperature records fell across Vermont at lower elevations. Missisquoi River at an elevation of 410 feet saw a minimum temperature of -37 deg. F. Island Pond at an elevation of 1201 feet saw a minimum temperature of -35 deg. F.....

.....The minimum temperature on Mt. Washington, NH on March 7, 2007 was -30 deg. F, breaking the old record of -21 deg. F set in 1937.....

.....The minimum temperature on Mt. Washington, NH on March 6, 2007 was -37 deg. F, breaking the old record of -23 deg. F set in 1950. The -37 deg. F reading fell short by one degree of the all time coldest March temperature of -38 deg. F set in 1950.....

.....In Toronto, Ontario, Canada, February 2007 was the coldest since February 1912.....

....On January 15, 2007 Lancaster, CA broke their monthly record, coming within one degree of their all-time record low temperature. LANCASTER TEMPERATURE OF 03 DEGREES TODAY SET A NEW MONTHLY RECORD FOR JANUARY. THE COLDEST ALL TIME RECORD FOR LANCASTER WAS 02 DEGREES SET DECEMBER 24 1984.....

.....In Boston, MA, USA, the minimum temperature dropped to 6 degrees on March 6, 2007, the coldest March minimum temperature since March 10, 1984.....

.....March 2006, New England, USA suffered through an unusually cold late season Arctic airmass. The Northeast on March 6, 2007 was the coldest March 6th since 1950.....

.....On June 1, 2005 measurable snow fell for the first time in recorded history in tropical Somalia. Falling at an elevation of 1000 feet at Puntland in the NE part of the country. Ironically, the freak snowstorm was blamed on man induced global warming....

.....The BBC reported that during the week of February 12, 2007 snow fell in Nepal's capital, Katmandu for the first time since 1944.

.....During the week of February 19, 2007 snow fell in portions of Argentina that have never seen snow so early in the season (late summer). A comparison would be snow in Philadelphia, PA on August 19th.....

.....On February 17, 2007 a minimum temperature of 18.6 deg. F was observed at Holder in Citrus County (the west central peninsula) of Florida. This temperature was the coldest ever observed so late in the winter season.....

.....On February 15, 2007 snow fell in Pensacola, Florida for the 4th time this winter season in this southern state.....

.....Snow showers fell across portions of the central peninsula of Florida on November 21-22, 2006, including the Orlando metro area. The snow showers were the earliest ever observed on the central peninsula and state and reported since European settlers arrived. On the morning of November 22, 2006 Archbold which is located on the south central peninsula region observed a minimum temperature of 28 deg.....

.....It snowed in downtown Los Angeles for the first time in modern times on Saturday February 18, 2006.....

.....During the first two weeks of February 2006 all of Alaska with the exception of the panhandle region was in the grip of extreme below zero temperature. Inland area temperatures repeatedly dropped into the -50 to -65 deg. F below zero range.....

.....During the first week of December 2005 the coldest minimum temperatures ever observed so early in the season chilled the lower 48 states, with the exception of the Florida Peninsula. Below zero daytime readings dipped deep into Colorado and Kansas, with night time sub zero readings into west Texas. Frozen precipitation fell at Corpus Christi and Brownsville, TX and into northern Mexico S-SW of Brownsville and Del Rio. Some north and central Plains region areas saw minimum temperatures in the -20 to -30 deg. below zero range.....

.....November 2005 was the coldest in the last 30 years in the northern Great Plains, Mid West and Great Lakes regions.....

....During the Southern Hemisphere Winter of 2005 Russia's Vostok base on the ice cap of East Antarctica set the new all time coldest minimum temperature on Earth of -132 deg. below zero. The previous record was -129 deg below zero......The high of -101 degrees was fully 25 degrees below average for early May. The low was -104 degrees, or about 15 degrees below average.....

.....April 25, 2005 a 31.9 deg. minimum temperature observed in central Florida. Two other locations observed 32 deg.

.....Sunday-Monday April 24-25, 2005. A record breaking late season snowfall has occurred in parts of Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania. Snowfall totals of up to 12-24" have been measured.

.....Sunday April 17, 2005 a 31.8 deg. minimum temperature is observed in central Florida.....

.....Greater Havana, Cuba, dawned rather chilly Monday morning April 4, 2005. At the Jose Marti international airport south of the city's center, the temperature dipped to 50 degrees whereas the average daily low during April is 70. A minimum temperature of 31.6 deg. was also observed in central Florida.....

.....Late season chill has descended on southeast Europe. At the same time, moisture streaming in from the Mediterranean has produced snow over parts of Turkey. The mountainous terrain over central Turkey has had a few inches of snow. Even in the capital city, Ankara, the snow managed to accumulate as temperatures were just below freezing and the snow was briefly heavy.....

.....The snowfall at Cleveland Hopkins airport for the day is 6.4 inches. This brings the snowfall total for the 2004-2005 season to 105.3 inches, which breaks the all time record for the snowiest season at Cleveland Hopkins airport, which was 101.1 inches in 1995-1996.....

.....The coldest night on record occurred across the Netherlands in March 2005. Sub-zero readings were recorded across the country. Marknesse fell to an overnight low of -5F. Such cold weather capped a week of heavy snows which buried some parts of the country under 20 inches. This winter has been the snowiest in the past 50 years for the Netherlands. In some parts of Holland snowfall was up to 20 inches, the highest levels recorded for March in the past 20 to 25 years, the Dutch meteorological institute said.....

.....Snow-covered palm trees in the Mediterranean, travel chaos on the continent and a rise in heating costs are the results of an unusual European cold snap.....

.....In Winter 2005/2006 Italy's port city of Genoa was paralyzed by a blanket of rare late winter white stuff that caused traffic chaos as far away as Milan, in one of the coldest starts to March on record, meteorologists said. Authorities closed Genoa airport, shut city schools and ordered buses off the roads as a blizzard blanketed the Liguria coastline. Milan also got a rare covering of snow during the morning, as did the nearby cities of Turin and Parma. In Turin, the thermometer fell to a record 17 Fahrenheit overnight, while Rome suffered its coldest March for 18 years.....

.....Heavy snowfall and below-freezing temperatures across most of northern and central Greece in winter 2005/2006 cut off dozens of mountain villages, blocked roads and led authorities to close some schools. In Spain, renowned for its warm winter sunshine in parts, palm trees in the Mediterranean city of Barcelona have been topped with snow and Madrid has seen its heaviest snowfall for about 15 years.....

One of the worst winters in decades in 2005/2006 brought heavy snows and cold air to Afghanistan and Pakistan. In Pakistan, over 300 people have died from the series of heavy snowfalls in the past few weeks. The heavy snows have stranded over hundreds of thousands of people in Kashmir.....

That same winter of 2005/2006 brought bitter cold in much of central Quebec, Canada. At Lac Benoit, for example, the early morning low was -48 degrees. Near Manouane, -46 degrees was registered early Monday, and the -43 degrees registered at Bonnard was a full 30 degrees below average.....

.....Heavy snowfall in Indian-controlled Kashmir has claimed more than 100 lives, and dozens were still missing Monday, the BBC reported. The snow created avalanches over villages south of Srinagar, destroying homes and killing about 70 people. Indian soldiers and medical personnel were searching for survivors Monday in the region, where 15 feet of snow has fallen since Friday.....

.....Snow even fell in northernmost Africa. In Algeria, the city of Constantine laid under seven inches of snow. A few weeks prior the same region was hit with 24-26" of the white stuff.....

.....In northern Norway, the town of Kautokeino set consecutive lows of -27 and -26 degrees Monday and Tuesday. These were followed by afternoon highs of -12 and -10 degrees. In February, an average day here would have a low of 0 and a high of 13 degrees, so the weather has been considerably colder than usual.....

.....An impressive cold wave persisted over much of the Balkan Peninsula that same winter. In Serbia, Sjenica registered consecutive lows of -17, -21, -21, -19 and -20 degrees F, whereas February's mean daily low is 23. Bitola, Macedonia, dipped 11 to 14 degrees below zero each of these five mornings.....

.....Cold rains and mountain snows fell along the eastern shores of the Mediterranean Sea. The latest bout of wet weather boosted rainfall at Beirut, Lebanon, to about six inches since the start of the month. Snow fell low enough to blanket ground down to at least 1000 feet, thereby whitening the hills from Lebanon south into Israel and the West Bank, and also to Amman, Jordan.....


Those newsworthy and numerous anomalous weather events taken from around the world is proof that the Earth's climate is indeed in transition from global warming towards global cooling, that is solar-forced. All climate and weather starts in space, and end up as weather on Earth.

This global cooling is expected to pick up pace in the 2010s, and 2020s, and will peak around the year 2034/2035. This will mean less El Ninos and increasing La Nina climate conditions, along with much colder storms of the future. All this is forced by the Sun's activity. See ~

http://www.nexialinstitute.com/climate_el_nino.htm

According to my estimation, we are in the 27th year of Solar Forcing of the Earth's Climate. This global warming began in earnest in the year 1980, and according to my calculations, will come to an end in the year 2016.

While the world will continue to witness and experience the results of solar-forced global warming in rising sea-levels, excessive precipitation and powerful storms into the 2010s and 2020s, my astrological calculations shows that the Earth is headed for a colder cycle that will peak in the mid-2030s.

Until that time, we all will be living with what I call "extremes of weather" ~ in the form of increasingly anomalous climate conditions and weather events such as floods, strong tropical storms, hurricanes and cyclones, droughts, windstorms, heavy precipitation of continuing rains and significant snows, while the Earth transitions between warmer than average and colder than average temperatures.

See ~ http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm

See ~ http://www.john-daly.com/index.htm

http://www.geo.arizona.edu/palynology/geos...0climsolar.html

Although I am sure Al Gore and those who believe in man-made climate change mean well, but the evidence they present is just not proof of man-made global warming. However, it is proof of just plain GLOBAL WARMING ~ which has been ongoing since 1980 and continues today.

Remember the facts ~ that during the height of human industrial production worldwide, the Earth's climate actually COOLED. This was also due to the Sun.

Most people who push the myth of man-made climate change do not seem to fully appreciate just how powerful the Sun truly is, and how the Sun forces all climate change, not just on Earth, but on other planets as well, where there is no human Co2 production and emissions.

Those who want to force everyone else to accept climate change as "man-made" mindlessly are only fooling themselves, and in denial about astrophysical and geophysical laws of the cosmos and of nature on Earth.

No amount of negative environmentalistic mantras like "only that corporations and man is the cause of global warming" ~ is going to change the facts that the Sun forces the Earth's climate.

Those who fail to see that the Sun is the direct cause should have a reality check and stop cease blaming humans for what they are not doing, and never did, and that is cause global climate change through Co2 production.

Carbon is natural to the Earth, we are also made of it, and the oceans and mountains emit much more carbon into the Earth's atmosphere than we humans ever could.

There is no reason to deny less developed countries, like those in Africa, the means to have electricity, or to demand that they use solar energy when developed countries do not widely use solar-energy.

Using the resources of the Earth cleanly is good for business, and good for the world. To deny less developed nations the means to develop and grow by using the falsity of "man-made global warming" is a crime because it is not true. It never was and never will be.

It is the Sun that is the cause of all climate changes on the Earth ~ both global cooling AND global warming. Humans are not able to either cool and warm the earth, and there is NOTHING we can do to stop the activity of the Sun. All we can do is adapt to climate changes, while learning how to not pollute our air, and sea water.

As for global warming and climate change ~ only the SUN can accomplish this, and that is exactly what that star in the skies has been doing since the Earth was created ~ forcing climate change ~ worldwide.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.