In 1992 Al Gore was quoted as saying “I invented the internet.” Of course, Al Gore did no such thing, and he either has an exaggerated sense of his accomplishments, is delusional, or is dishonest. Gore has been the butt of jokes regarding this declaration ever since. And astoundingly, he made the statement with a completely straight face, the guy actually believed what he was saying.
In 2000 Al Gore, while running for president of the U.S. actually tried to manipulate the recount in Broward County, Florida. What he first tried to do is to tell the local election officials what votes to count, and what votes not to count, in order to throw the election for president his way. When that didn’t work, he went to court and convinced the Florida supreme court to count the votes his way, so he could win. Ultimately, George W. Bush had to go to the U.S. Supreme court to force a real recount, and count all the votes. Incredibly, Gore supporters have ever since accused Bush of stealing the election from Gore, when in fact it was Gore who attempted, but failed, to steal the election from Bush.
More recently, Gore took to the road visiting mostly elementary schools (those lacking sufficient education or knowledge to challenge his thesis) promoting his “An Inconvenient Truth” and displaying a power point presentation to lay out his theory about how the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere leads to global warming, and thus, a long list of dire consequences result, such as melting ice caps, polar bear demise, rising ocean levels, drought, increased hurricane activity, etc. The only problem is, most of his presentation is false, as has been pointed out by numerous experts in the field. Primarily, that CO2 has little if any bearing on weather or global temperatures. His list of dire consequences are also bogus.
At the Copenhagen Climate Conference in December 2009, the former vice president said new research showed that the Arctic could be completely ice-free in five years, and he quoted the scientist who did the research. However, the scientist who did the research contradicted Gore by saying, "It's unclear to me how this figure was arrived at," Dr. Maslowski said. "I did not estimate likelihood at anything as exact as this."
Gore obviously has difficulty telling the truth, yet government leaders and world figures continue to give him audience. Gore is guilty of exaggerating the truth, of fabricating the truth, of making up data, of falsely interpreting data, of putting words in the mouths of research scientists, of claiming credit for inventions he had nothing to do with, and the list goes on.
Regardless of the personality, the day that person’s dishonesty is revealed, who can then trust anything he says? We’re not talking about just being mistaken, or of having a differing opinion. Rather, Gore has a history of dishonesty, in a wide variety of venues. Why would he do this? He does it because he has an agenda, and he has a thirst for power. He believes the end justifies the means; say anything necessary to convince the public of his premises, and to elevate himself in the public view. His AGW campaign is only the latest of his charades to be exposed as a fraud. Amazingly the man is undeterred by his numerous failures, frauds and intellectual scams.
Monday, December 28, 2009
Friday, December 18, 2009
"Global Warming is a Religion"
The president of the Czech Republic made some surprising statements today, refreshing, but surprising. He began by saying, “Global warming is a "new religion," not a science, he said.”
"I'm convinced that after years of studying the phenomenon, global warming is not the real issue of temperature," said Klaus, an economist by training. "That is the issue of a new ideology or a new religion. A religion of climate change or a religion of global warming. This is a religion which tells us that the people are responsible for the current, very small increase in temperatures. And they should be punished."
Klaus says that many interested parties get "a lot of money and influence" by backing the idea of global warming and organizing the Copenhagen conference, as well as its predecessor the Kyoto conference. "Some of them are really just rent seekers who hope to get some money either for their businesses or for their countries," says Klaus. "Some of them are really true believers."
The president reckons that environmentalism, executed on the scale suggested by global warming adherents, is a "real way to stop progress, industrial progress…and this is something unfair."
"We'll be the victims of irrational ideology. They will try to dictate to us how to live, what to do, how to behave," Klaus said. "What to eat, travel, and what my children should have. This is something that we who lived in the communist era for most of our lives — we still feel very strongly about. We are very sensitive in this respect. And we feel various similarities in their way of arguing or not arguing. In the way of pushing ahead ideas regardless of rational counter-arguments." The man has a brain, can think, and has the courage to speak the truth. He has hit the nail on the head here.
"I lived in a communist world where politicians told us what to do," Klaus said. "I don't think politicians or presidents should suggest to firms what to do. That has always been a mistake."
Czech President Vaclav Klaus
Indeed. But there is some justice in this world. The Copenhagen conference, sponsored by the U.N., has the capacity to seat 15,000 people. There were 30,000 NGO (non governmental organizations) environmentalists, alone, credentialed for the conference. Fortunately only 300 got in during the key two day sessions where an “agreement” was to be voted on.
Does it really take 30,000 environmentalists to engage in a healthy discussion? Or, this mob needs to go get real jobs, and stop wasting taxpayer money. Still, further justice, not to mention irony, occurred at Copenhagen. The conference took place in mid-December, and while tens of thousands of delegates were waiting outside trying to obtain admission, the coldest weather in years descended on the city. How ironic, a global warming conference, but the weather refuses to cooperate, it’s just too dang cold, and many delegates gave up and went home...to warmer climes it is supposed. Like the science of global warming will not cooperate with this new relgion, neither will the weather–it just keeps getting colder.
"I'm convinced that after years of studying the phenomenon, global warming is not the real issue of temperature," said Klaus, an economist by training. "That is the issue of a new ideology or a new religion. A religion of climate change or a religion of global warming. This is a religion which tells us that the people are responsible for the current, very small increase in temperatures. And they should be punished."
Klaus says that many interested parties get "a lot of money and influence" by backing the idea of global warming and organizing the Copenhagen conference, as well as its predecessor the Kyoto conference. "Some of them are really just rent seekers who hope to get some money either for their businesses or for their countries," says Klaus. "Some of them are really true believers."
The president reckons that environmentalism, executed on the scale suggested by global warming adherents, is a "real way to stop progress, industrial progress…and this is something unfair."
"We'll be the victims of irrational ideology. They will try to dictate to us how to live, what to do, how to behave," Klaus said. "What to eat, travel, and what my children should have. This is something that we who lived in the communist era for most of our lives — we still feel very strongly about. We are very sensitive in this respect. And we feel various similarities in their way of arguing or not arguing. In the way of pushing ahead ideas regardless of rational counter-arguments." The man has a brain, can think, and has the courage to speak the truth. He has hit the nail on the head here.
"I lived in a communist world where politicians told us what to do," Klaus said. "I don't think politicians or presidents should suggest to firms what to do. That has always been a mistake."
Czech President Vaclav Klaus
Indeed. But there is some justice in this world. The Copenhagen conference, sponsored by the U.N., has the capacity to seat 15,000 people. There were 30,000 NGO (non governmental organizations) environmentalists, alone, credentialed for the conference. Fortunately only 300 got in during the key two day sessions where an “agreement” was to be voted on.
Does it really take 30,000 environmentalists to engage in a healthy discussion? Or, this mob needs to go get real jobs, and stop wasting taxpayer money. Still, further justice, not to mention irony, occurred at Copenhagen. The conference took place in mid-December, and while tens of thousands of delegates were waiting outside trying to obtain admission, the coldest weather in years descended on the city. How ironic, a global warming conference, but the weather refuses to cooperate, it’s just too dang cold, and many delegates gave up and went home...to warmer climes it is supposed. Like the science of global warming will not cooperate with this new relgion, neither will the weather–it just keeps getting colder.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
How Wrong Can They Be?
Rising Sea Levels?
Al Gore and the global warming alarmists tout the “fact” that sea levels are rising, will rise much higher and flood many low lying major cities. “Professor Nils-Axel Morner, a geologist from Stockholm University, said sea-level rise has also been exaggerated by the "climate alarmists" using computer models. He said observational data from lake sediments, coast lines and trees show sea levels have remained stable.”
Rising Global Temperatures
“Professor Henrik Svensmark, a physicist at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen, who said the recent warming period was caused by solar activity.” Many other scientists agree with Svensmark. Charlie Perry is a research hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, and he agrees, as do many, more other scientists.
Record cold temperatures, record early cold temperatures, first snows in decades, largest snowfalls in decades have all been reported from South America, North America, Europe and Australia–and all during a period of global warming? One would expect to read of reports of record high temperatures, lack of snow, late arriving winters, and low snow packs. But no.
In New Zealand, “the site with the longest running warming trend just happens to be sitting in the middle of an Urban Heat Island. The car park asphalt at 6 meters away puts the station rating at CRN4, based on NOAA's site quality rating system used for their Climate Reference Network. I've found that the vast majority of historical stations in the USA have been affected this way:”
Polar Bears
“Polar bears are well-managed and their population has dramatically increased over 30 years as a result of conservation,” according to Alaska state officials.
According to the May 16, 2008 World Climate Report, polar bears do not drown, they are powerful swimmers and can swim for hours, and often do. Further, they never venture too far from the ice. The notion that retreating ice shelves leaves polar bears stranded hundreds of miles from the ice is ludicrous and false. Al Gore’s graphic depiction of a polar bear “stranded” on a small piece of floating ice, was a complete fabrication. And oft published reports about four drowned polar bears seen floating two miles from shore, because of global warming and the loss of ice, was another fabrication, and an act of sabotage. The four polar bears had been tranquilized by “conservationists” in an attempt to garner public sympathy, and to galvanize the nation to take action against the adverse effects of global warming.
CO2
“Unravelled records of atmosphere, temperature and ice-cap formation 33.6 million years ago, when the Earth cooled from a greenhouse without ice caps, into something quite similar to our present day…Pearson's work contains a couple of remarkable results. First the greenhouse atmosphere pre-cooling contained a CO2 concentration of 900 parts per million by volume, or more than three times that of the Earth in pre-industrial days… Second, while the cooling of the Earth took place over a time-span of around 200,000 years, the atmospheric CO2 rose to around 1100ppmv and remained high for 200,000 years while the Earth cooled further and remained in its new ice ages cycle. If the Earth started a cycle of ice ages 33.6 million years ago while having its very carbon-rich atmosphere, and if the Earth showed cycles of ice-age activity when atmospheric CO2 was four times the level that it was in humankind's pre-industrial times, what new information must we incorporate into our present climate models?” Paul Pearson, Cardiff University
CO2 has nothing to do with global warming, some of the highest rates of CO2 occurred during some of the earth’s coldest periods. Most of this century’s small temperature increase occurred before 1950. And water vapor is a far, far more significant greenhouse gas than is CO2.
All Scientists Agree
“There are about 450 academic peer-reviewed journal articles questioning the importance of man-made global warming. The sheer number of scientists rallying against a major intervention to stop carbon dioxide is remarkable. In a petition, more than 30,000 American scientists are urging the U.S. government to reject the Kyoto treaty.” Al Gore’s deceitful lie “the debate is over,” is patently false, and he knows it.
Global Warming is Bad
“Many academics argue that higher temperatures are actually good. Higher temperatures increase the amount of land to grow food, increase biological diversity, and improve people's health. Increased carbon dioxide also promotes plant growth.” Dr. Sylvan Wittier, agronomist, and many other agricultural scientists agree with the “warmer is better” premise. The worst times in man’s history have come during “little ice ages” when disease, starvation, and death rates were at all time highs. Prosperity occurs when temperatures are higher. And you'd think liberals would want to do something about world food shortages; a warmer planet is how you do that.
Data Integrity
In light of recent revelations about “doctored data,” and the refusal by the climate change crowd to release the source of their research, or allow anyone outside their club to attempt to reproduce the data, it’s not surprising that much of that “research” is being challenged. “NASA also refuses to give out its data. NASA further refuses to explain mysterious changes in whether the warmest years were in the 1930s or this past decade. The British Met office, too, has been unable to release its data and just announced its plans to begin a three-year investigation of its data since all of its land temperatures data were obtained from the University of East Anglia”
Flawed Logic, Flawed Science
1. The earth is warming
2. Warming is bad
3. CO2 is causing the warming
4. Warming is harming the environment
5. Warming is causing species extinctions
6. Warming is causing ice to melt, and polar bears to die
7. Melting ice causes sea levels to rise
8. Rising sea levels will cause coastal cities to flood
9. Warming causes increased hurricane activity
10. Warming causes floods and droughts
11. Warming (AGW) is caused by man
12. Man must do something about the problem
13. Governments must legislate to stop CO2 pollution
14. Fossil fuel use must be curbed
15. Coal power plants must be eliminated
16. Automobile use must be curtailed and reduced
17. Americans must be heavily taxed to pay for the damage they’ve done to the planet
Each of the above positions is false, and can be proven. The earth is not warming, warming is not bad, CO2 does not cause global warming, sea levels are not rising, etc. It’s obvious that environmentalists have orchestrated an elaborate scheme to deceive the public, the voters, the politicians, the courts, and just about everyone else, in order to achieve their objectives, and those objectives have nothing to do with science. The recent revelations about doctored data is only the tip of the iceberg.
Research Secrecy
“Neither the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia nor the British Met are able to provide their raw data to other research scientists because of the confidentiality agreements that Professor Phil Jones at CRU entered into. Unfortunately, Jones did not keep records of those agreements and, according to the British Met, can neither identify the countries with the confidentiality agreements nor provide the agreements. Earlier this year the British Met wrote the following to Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit:
"Some of the information was provided to Professor Jones on the strict understanding by the data providers that this station data must not be publicly released and it cannot be determined which countries or stations data were given in confidence as records were not kept."
“However, professional meterologists are unimpressed by the claimed reasons for confidentiality. Research data used as the basis for scientific research needs to be disclosed if other scientists are to be able to verify the work of others," Mike Steinberg, Senior Vice President, AccuWeather.”
“It is not just the University of East Anglia that has been accused of massaging the data (what they called creating "value added" data). Recently, New Zealand has also had its temperature series from the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) challenged. Still the NIWA continues to insist that the "Warming over New Zealand through the past is unequivocal." Indeed, the institute claims that the New Zealand warming trend was 50 percent higher than the global average. But the difference in graphs between what NIWA produced after massaging the data and what the original raw data showed was truly remarkable and can be seen here. As the Climate Science Coalition of New Zealand charged: "The shocking truth is that the oldest readings have been cranked way down and later readings artificially lifted to give a false impression of warming."
Similar concerns have also been raised about Australian temperature data.” John R. Lott, Jr.is an economist and author of "Freedomnomics." “The temperatures are remarkably constant way back to the 1850s. Of course, the temperature still varies from year to year, but the trend stays level—statistically insignificant at 0.06̊C per century since 1850. We have discovered that the warming in New Zealand over the past 156 years was indeed man-made, but it had nothing to do with emissions of CO2—it was created by man-made adjustments of the temperature. It’s a disgrace.”
“Manipulation of raw data is at the heart of recent claims of corrupt scientific practice in climate science, with CRU’s Phil Jones recently claiming old temperature records collected by his organization were “destroyed” or “lost”, meaning researchers can now only access manipulated data.”
East Anglia University Emails
“I haven't read all the e-mails, but the most recent one is more than 10 years old.” Al Gore. “The most recent email, for the record, was Nov 12 this year [2009], and there were lots more of similar vintage.” Gore has been unable to tell the truth for at least the last ten years, and maybe his whole life. His “Inconvenient Truth” should more accurately be titled, “A Convenient Lie.” Can you imagine any other scientific discipline operating in this fashion, in secrecy, with obvious cover and with designed deceit?
Conclusions
Nobel prize winning physicist Richard Feynman observed: "It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. Real science is never decided by a vote. In science, theories are put up and torn down, red in tooth and claw. If a theory is ultimately true, it survives. It doesn't matter if 9,999 climatologists vote in favour of global warming being man made and only one doesn't. If the 'outlier' happens to be correct - regardless of whether his colleagues listen to him or laugh at him - he is correct.”
Gerald Dickens, study co-author and professor of Earth Science at Rice University in Houston says, "There appears to be something fundamentally wrong with the way temperature and carbon are linked in climate models." Indeed.
Al Gore and the global warming alarmists tout the “fact” that sea levels are rising, will rise much higher and flood many low lying major cities. “Professor Nils-Axel Morner, a geologist from Stockholm University, said sea-level rise has also been exaggerated by the "climate alarmists" using computer models. He said observational data from lake sediments, coast lines and trees show sea levels have remained stable.”
Rising Global Temperatures
“Professor Henrik Svensmark, a physicist at the Danish National Space Center in Copenhagen, who said the recent warming period was caused by solar activity.” Many other scientists agree with Svensmark. Charlie Perry is a research hydrologist with the U.S. Geological Survey, and he agrees, as do many, more other scientists.
Record cold temperatures, record early cold temperatures, first snows in decades, largest snowfalls in decades have all been reported from South America, North America, Europe and Australia–and all during a period of global warming? One would expect to read of reports of record high temperatures, lack of snow, late arriving winters, and low snow packs. But no.
In New Zealand, “the site with the longest running warming trend just happens to be sitting in the middle of an Urban Heat Island. The car park asphalt at 6 meters away puts the station rating at CRN4, based on NOAA's site quality rating system used for their Climate Reference Network. I've found that the vast majority of historical stations in the USA have been affected this way:”
Polar Bears
“Polar bears are well-managed and their population has dramatically increased over 30 years as a result of conservation,” according to Alaska state officials.
According to the May 16, 2008 World Climate Report, polar bears do not drown, they are powerful swimmers and can swim for hours, and often do. Further, they never venture too far from the ice. The notion that retreating ice shelves leaves polar bears stranded hundreds of miles from the ice is ludicrous and false. Al Gore’s graphic depiction of a polar bear “stranded” on a small piece of floating ice, was a complete fabrication. And oft published reports about four drowned polar bears seen floating two miles from shore, because of global warming and the loss of ice, was another fabrication, and an act of sabotage. The four polar bears had been tranquilized by “conservationists” in an attempt to garner public sympathy, and to galvanize the nation to take action against the adverse effects of global warming.
CO2
“Unravelled records of atmosphere, temperature and ice-cap formation 33.6 million years ago, when the Earth cooled from a greenhouse without ice caps, into something quite similar to our present day…Pearson's work contains a couple of remarkable results. First the greenhouse atmosphere pre-cooling contained a CO2 concentration of 900 parts per million by volume, or more than three times that of the Earth in pre-industrial days… Second, while the cooling of the Earth took place over a time-span of around 200,000 years, the atmospheric CO2 rose to around 1100ppmv and remained high for 200,000 years while the Earth cooled further and remained in its new ice ages cycle. If the Earth started a cycle of ice ages 33.6 million years ago while having its very carbon-rich atmosphere, and if the Earth showed cycles of ice-age activity when atmospheric CO2 was four times the level that it was in humankind's pre-industrial times, what new information must we incorporate into our present climate models?” Paul Pearson, Cardiff University
CO2 has nothing to do with global warming, some of the highest rates of CO2 occurred during some of the earth’s coldest periods. Most of this century’s small temperature increase occurred before 1950. And water vapor is a far, far more significant greenhouse gas than is CO2.
All Scientists Agree
“There are about 450 academic peer-reviewed journal articles questioning the importance of man-made global warming. The sheer number of scientists rallying against a major intervention to stop carbon dioxide is remarkable. In a petition, more than 30,000 American scientists are urging the U.S. government to reject the Kyoto treaty.” Al Gore’s deceitful lie “the debate is over,” is patently false, and he knows it.
Global Warming is Bad
“Many academics argue that higher temperatures are actually good. Higher temperatures increase the amount of land to grow food, increase biological diversity, and improve people's health. Increased carbon dioxide also promotes plant growth.” Dr. Sylvan Wittier, agronomist, and many other agricultural scientists agree with the “warmer is better” premise. The worst times in man’s history have come during “little ice ages” when disease, starvation, and death rates were at all time highs. Prosperity occurs when temperatures are higher. And you'd think liberals would want to do something about world food shortages; a warmer planet is how you do that.
Data Integrity
In light of recent revelations about “doctored data,” and the refusal by the climate change crowd to release the source of their research, or allow anyone outside their club to attempt to reproduce the data, it’s not surprising that much of that “research” is being challenged. “NASA also refuses to give out its data. NASA further refuses to explain mysterious changes in whether the warmest years were in the 1930s or this past decade. The British Met office, too, has been unable to release its data and just announced its plans to begin a three-year investigation of its data since all of its land temperatures data were obtained from the University of East Anglia”
Flawed Logic, Flawed Science
1. The earth is warming
2. Warming is bad
3. CO2 is causing the warming
4. Warming is harming the environment
5. Warming is causing species extinctions
6. Warming is causing ice to melt, and polar bears to die
7. Melting ice causes sea levels to rise
8. Rising sea levels will cause coastal cities to flood
9. Warming causes increased hurricane activity
10. Warming causes floods and droughts
11. Warming (AGW) is caused by man
12. Man must do something about the problem
13. Governments must legislate to stop CO2 pollution
14. Fossil fuel use must be curbed
15. Coal power plants must be eliminated
16. Automobile use must be curtailed and reduced
17. Americans must be heavily taxed to pay for the damage they’ve done to the planet
Each of the above positions is false, and can be proven. The earth is not warming, warming is not bad, CO2 does not cause global warming, sea levels are not rising, etc. It’s obvious that environmentalists have orchestrated an elaborate scheme to deceive the public, the voters, the politicians, the courts, and just about everyone else, in order to achieve their objectives, and those objectives have nothing to do with science. The recent revelations about doctored data is only the tip of the iceberg.
Research Secrecy
“Neither the Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia nor the British Met are able to provide their raw data to other research scientists because of the confidentiality agreements that Professor Phil Jones at CRU entered into. Unfortunately, Jones did not keep records of those agreements and, according to the British Met, can neither identify the countries with the confidentiality agreements nor provide the agreements. Earlier this year the British Met wrote the following to Steve McIntyre at Climate Audit:
"Some of the information was provided to Professor Jones on the strict understanding by the data providers that this station data must not be publicly released and it cannot be determined which countries or stations data were given in confidence as records were not kept."
“However, professional meterologists are unimpressed by the claimed reasons for confidentiality. Research data used as the basis for scientific research needs to be disclosed if other scientists are to be able to verify the work of others," Mike Steinberg, Senior Vice President, AccuWeather.”
“It is not just the University of East Anglia that has been accused of massaging the data (what they called creating "value added" data). Recently, New Zealand has also had its temperature series from the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) challenged. Still the NIWA continues to insist that the "Warming over New Zealand through the past is unequivocal." Indeed, the institute claims that the New Zealand warming trend was 50 percent higher than the global average. But the difference in graphs between what NIWA produced after massaging the data and what the original raw data showed was truly remarkable and can be seen here. As the Climate Science Coalition of New Zealand charged: "The shocking truth is that the oldest readings have been cranked way down and later readings artificially lifted to give a false impression of warming."
Similar concerns have also been raised about Australian temperature data.” John R. Lott, Jr.is an economist and author of "Freedomnomics." “The temperatures are remarkably constant way back to the 1850s. Of course, the temperature still varies from year to year, but the trend stays level—statistically insignificant at 0.06̊C per century since 1850. We have discovered that the warming in New Zealand over the past 156 years was indeed man-made, but it had nothing to do with emissions of CO2—it was created by man-made adjustments of the temperature. It’s a disgrace.”
“Manipulation of raw data is at the heart of recent claims of corrupt scientific practice in climate science, with CRU’s Phil Jones recently claiming old temperature records collected by his organization were “destroyed” or “lost”, meaning researchers can now only access manipulated data.”
East Anglia University Emails
“I haven't read all the e-mails, but the most recent one is more than 10 years old.” Al Gore. “The most recent email, for the record, was Nov 12 this year [2009], and there were lots more of similar vintage.” Gore has been unable to tell the truth for at least the last ten years, and maybe his whole life. His “Inconvenient Truth” should more accurately be titled, “A Convenient Lie.” Can you imagine any other scientific discipline operating in this fashion, in secrecy, with obvious cover and with designed deceit?
Conclusions
Nobel prize winning physicist Richard Feynman observed: "It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how smart you are. If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong. Real science is never decided by a vote. In science, theories are put up and torn down, red in tooth and claw. If a theory is ultimately true, it survives. It doesn't matter if 9,999 climatologists vote in favour of global warming being man made and only one doesn't. If the 'outlier' happens to be correct - regardless of whether his colleagues listen to him or laugh at him - he is correct.”
Gerald Dickens, study co-author and professor of Earth Science at Rice University in Houston says, "There appears to be something fundamentally wrong with the way temperature and carbon are linked in climate models." Indeed.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
How Weather Works
In all the hype about global warming and climate change hysteria, lost is information about how weather actually works. Environmental alarmists would have us believe that temperatures and weather are almost solely affected by CO2 and carbon fuel use. But such is simply not the case. So how does weather work, and how does the planet warm and cool? If we understand this, even a novice can make sense of the current climate change debate.
The atmosphere is a marvel of a self-regulating phenomenon. Almost all familiar weather phenomena occur in the troposphere (the lower part of the atmosphere). If the earth gets too cool, there are fewer clouds, and more radiation from the sun reaches the earth, and the surface of the earth warms. If the earth gets too warm, more clouds occur, and less radiation from the sun reaches the earth, and the surface of the earth cools. Additionally, if an area of the earth warms, the warm air rises, creating an atmospheric vacuum, and it pulls cool air from the arctic (or antarctic) into that vacuum and cools the surface of the earth, and the atmosphere. Even beyond the troposphere, stratospheric winds, and radiation, all affect the weather and subsequent surface temperatures of the earth.
The jet stream operates at between 20,000 and 40,000 feet altitude, and is about two miles thick. The strong temperature contrast between polar and tropical air gives rise to the jet stream. The jet stream is two to four thousand miles in length, and affects weather in a variety of ways. There are actually several jet streams that function similarly around the globe. For example, if it moves south, it allows colder arctic air to move south also, if it moves north, it creates a high pressure area to its south and keeps colder air from moving south. Like the Gulf Stream, it is a huge mass of moving air that affects weather globally, and to date, no one has been able to predict the actions of the jet stream beyond a day or two.
Radiation from the sun is the biggest factor that effects weather. In it’s 100,000 year cycle through the Milky Way, the sun moves from a closer position to the sun, to a more distant position. At the earth’s more distant location, the earth experiences an ice age, and yes, those occur about every 100,000 years. Guess which end of the cycle the earth is at currently? That’s right, at it’s closest point, so temperatures are a bit higher. Over thousands to hundreds of thousands of years, changes in Earth's orbital parameters affect the amount and distribution of solar energy received by the Earth and influence long-term climate. And sunspots, which are also cyclical, dramatically affect earth’s weather, and temperatures. As sunspots increase, temperatures on the earth increase, when they decrease, earth’s temperatures also drop. Radiation from the sun is the single greatest, and by far most significant contributor to the earth’s weather, and global temperatures.
Volcanoes affect weather when they erupt by spewing millions of tons of ash and dust into the atmosphere. Winds aloft, including the jet stream, circulate these volcanic particles around the globe in a matter of days. These particles reflect and/or block the suns rays, causing the earth to cool. Large eruptions can affect global weather for several years, most last two to three years before the particles succumb to the pull of gravity, the effects of rain and barometric pressure changes, and fall back to earth. Temperatures then return to normal.
The oceans also affect the weather in a multitude of ways. If the water heats up sufficiently, it can cause such things as the El Nino effect. El Nino affects weather, not only in the eastern Pacific and the western U.S., but to a lesser degree, world wide. Warm, moist air moving over cooled land in coastal areas will cause fog to form, which reflects the suns radiation and cools the earth further. Clouds that form over the oceans and move over land will cause night time temperatures to be warmer than if the skies are clear. To a large degree, the oceans create the majority of the earth’s weather.
The Gulf Stream is a large mass of warm water originating in the Gulf of Mexico, that moves up the Atlantic coast of North America, across the North Atlantic, and past Iceland, England and Europe. The Gulf Stream influences the climate of the east coast of North America from Florida to Newfoundland, and the west coast of Europe. The climate of Western Europe and Northern Europe is warmer than it would otherwise be; and that this is due to the North Atlantic drift, one of the branches from the tail of the Gulf Stream. It’s likely that portions of Northern Europe would be uninhabitable were it not for the Gulf Stream, it simply tempers the natural coldness of Northern Europe. Iceland, England, Scandinavia, possibly Germany, Denmark and other areas of Europe would be unattractive to live in, and unproductive agriculturally without the effect of the Gulf Stream.
Inspite of what some global alarmists claim, CO2 does not affect weather, or even local or regional temperatures to any appreciable degree, and its affect cannot be separated from all the other gases in the atmosphere, including water vapor. All the atmospheric gases (including water vapor) act in concert, all have similar properties, but water vapor is by far the largest contributor to atmospheric temperature fluctuations, dwarfing the effect of all the other gases, including CO2. The only reason CO2 is “picked on” is because it is a by product of burning carbon fuels. And carbon fuels are the bad boy of environmentalists, and the primary target of environmental policy. But at .003 percent of the atmosphere it’s almost comical to see environmentalists attempt to make intellectually sustainable arguments concerning CO2 and its affect on global temperatures.
It is theoretically impossible to make useful day-to-day weather predictions more than about two weeks ahead, imposing an upper limit to potential for improved prediction skill. And if you follow weather forecasts closely, it is rare for a two week forecast to go unchanged. “Updated” forecasts will usually occur more than once during that two week forecast period. Often, the two week forecast is completely wrong, inspite of all we know about the weather, satellites, monitoring stations, and highly educated weather scientists working to predict the weather. Thus pretending to predict weather years, decades, or centuries into the future is intellectually dishonest, it simply cannot be done. And anyone who claims to know what the weather will be in the future, beyond a couple of weeks, is being deceitful.
The atmosphere is a marvel of a self-regulating phenomenon. Almost all familiar weather phenomena occur in the troposphere (the lower part of the atmosphere). If the earth gets too cool, there are fewer clouds, and more radiation from the sun reaches the earth, and the surface of the earth warms. If the earth gets too warm, more clouds occur, and less radiation from the sun reaches the earth, and the surface of the earth cools. Additionally, if an area of the earth warms, the warm air rises, creating an atmospheric vacuum, and it pulls cool air from the arctic (or antarctic) into that vacuum and cools the surface of the earth, and the atmosphere. Even beyond the troposphere, stratospheric winds, and radiation, all affect the weather and subsequent surface temperatures of the earth.
The jet stream operates at between 20,000 and 40,000 feet altitude, and is about two miles thick. The strong temperature contrast between polar and tropical air gives rise to the jet stream. The jet stream is two to four thousand miles in length, and affects weather in a variety of ways. There are actually several jet streams that function similarly around the globe. For example, if it moves south, it allows colder arctic air to move south also, if it moves north, it creates a high pressure area to its south and keeps colder air from moving south. Like the Gulf Stream, it is a huge mass of moving air that affects weather globally, and to date, no one has been able to predict the actions of the jet stream beyond a day or two.
Radiation from the sun is the biggest factor that effects weather. In it’s 100,000 year cycle through the Milky Way, the sun moves from a closer position to the sun, to a more distant position. At the earth’s more distant location, the earth experiences an ice age, and yes, those occur about every 100,000 years. Guess which end of the cycle the earth is at currently? That’s right, at it’s closest point, so temperatures are a bit higher. Over thousands to hundreds of thousands of years, changes in Earth's orbital parameters affect the amount and distribution of solar energy received by the Earth and influence long-term climate. And sunspots, which are also cyclical, dramatically affect earth’s weather, and temperatures. As sunspots increase, temperatures on the earth increase, when they decrease, earth’s temperatures also drop. Radiation from the sun is the single greatest, and by far most significant contributor to the earth’s weather, and global temperatures.
Volcanoes affect weather when they erupt by spewing millions of tons of ash and dust into the atmosphere. Winds aloft, including the jet stream, circulate these volcanic particles around the globe in a matter of days. These particles reflect and/or block the suns rays, causing the earth to cool. Large eruptions can affect global weather for several years, most last two to three years before the particles succumb to the pull of gravity, the effects of rain and barometric pressure changes, and fall back to earth. Temperatures then return to normal.
The oceans also affect the weather in a multitude of ways. If the water heats up sufficiently, it can cause such things as the El Nino effect. El Nino affects weather, not only in the eastern Pacific and the western U.S., but to a lesser degree, world wide. Warm, moist air moving over cooled land in coastal areas will cause fog to form, which reflects the suns radiation and cools the earth further. Clouds that form over the oceans and move over land will cause night time temperatures to be warmer than if the skies are clear. To a large degree, the oceans create the majority of the earth’s weather.
The Gulf Stream is a large mass of warm water originating in the Gulf of Mexico, that moves up the Atlantic coast of North America, across the North Atlantic, and past Iceland, England and Europe. The Gulf Stream influences the climate of the east coast of North America from Florida to Newfoundland, and the west coast of Europe. The climate of Western Europe and Northern Europe is warmer than it would otherwise be; and that this is due to the North Atlantic drift, one of the branches from the tail of the Gulf Stream. It’s likely that portions of Northern Europe would be uninhabitable were it not for the Gulf Stream, it simply tempers the natural coldness of Northern Europe. Iceland, England, Scandinavia, possibly Germany, Denmark and other areas of Europe would be unattractive to live in, and unproductive agriculturally without the effect of the Gulf Stream.
Inspite of what some global alarmists claim, CO2 does not affect weather, or even local or regional temperatures to any appreciable degree, and its affect cannot be separated from all the other gases in the atmosphere, including water vapor. All the atmospheric gases (including water vapor) act in concert, all have similar properties, but water vapor is by far the largest contributor to atmospheric temperature fluctuations, dwarfing the effect of all the other gases, including CO2. The only reason CO2 is “picked on” is because it is a by product of burning carbon fuels. And carbon fuels are the bad boy of environmentalists, and the primary target of environmental policy. But at .003 percent of the atmosphere it’s almost comical to see environmentalists attempt to make intellectually sustainable arguments concerning CO2 and its affect on global temperatures.
It is theoretically impossible to make useful day-to-day weather predictions more than about two weeks ahead, imposing an upper limit to potential for improved prediction skill. And if you follow weather forecasts closely, it is rare for a two week forecast to go unchanged. “Updated” forecasts will usually occur more than once during that two week forecast period. Often, the two week forecast is completely wrong, inspite of all we know about the weather, satellites, monitoring stations, and highly educated weather scientists working to predict the weather. Thus pretending to predict weather years, decades, or centuries into the future is intellectually dishonest, it simply cannot be done. And anyone who claims to know what the weather will be in the future, beyond a couple of weeks, is being deceitful.
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Climate Tribalism at Heart of AGW Deception
"The scientists who developed the data on which EPA is basing its work have all but admitted that their data was corrupted and they have admitted to corrupting the very scientific process needed to ensure the integrity of the computer models on which climate predictions are based,” said Jim Sims, President and CEO of the Western Business Roundtable.
This revelation exposes only the tip of the iceberg of the great environmental coverup regarding global warming, from which governments, including this one, make policy, draft bills, and extract taxes from a deceived public.
Penn State’s Michael Mann told Reuters that “colleagues often speak in a language they understand and is often foreign to the outside world," And according to this privileged group, only those whose work has been published in select scientific journals, can be relied on to critique the science. And sure enough, any challenges from critics outside this clique are dismissed and disparaged.
Judy Curry is a weather scientist who broke from the politically correct, and politically controlled AGW (anthropomorphic global warming) stranglehold, to expose other nefarious practices of the environmental crowd. She writes: Tribalism is defined here as a strong identity that separates one’s group from members of another group, characterized by strong in-group loyalty. In the context of scientific research, tribes differ from groups of colleagues that collaborate and otherwise associate with each other professionally. As a result of the politicization of climate science, climate tribes circle the wagons and point the guns outward in an attempt to discredit all critics.
The motivation of scientists in the pro AGW tribes appears to be motivated by politics and their professional ego. After becoming more knowledgeable about the politics of climate change, I became concerned about some of the tribes pointing their guns inward at other climate researchers who question their research or don’t pass various loyalty tests.
Particularly on a topic of such great public relevance, scientists need to consider carefully skeptical arguments and either rebut them or learn from them. Trying to suppress them or discredit the skeptical researcher is not an ethical strategy. All relevant and available data and metadata [should be] made publicly accessible.” Indeed.
So if climate change data has been manipulated and falsified to support a particular political agenda, how much other scientific data needs to be brought into question? How much other “research” has been closely guarded, doctored, and let out only to those who support their theories? A few scientific “tribal” research topics I have challenged for years come quickly to mind: 1) the theory of evolution, 2) the big bang theory, 3) dinosaurs, 4) carbon dating, 5) the age of the earth itself, 6) the entire body of environmental science, to mention just a few.
There is much about this expose that reminds me of Marxism, fascism, and other extreme controlling forms of government who attempt to hide the truth, manipulate reality and force a pre-determined outcome.
Geologists and archeologists push the age of all things so far into the past that no one is able to dispute their data, except of course, those of that “tribe.” The theory of evolution has effectively silenced all critics, not to mention attempts to have other theories taught or even discussed in public schools and universities. How’s that for an educational posture? The big bang theory has so many unanswered questions, failures of logic, and other issues, one has to wonder what “tribal” group manipulated this data.
Carbon dating has long been questioned by almost everyone, except of course, those “tribal” leaders who control and manipulate that data. Although carbon dating is accurate back in time
for only about 200 years, still, carbon dating is given credibility for dating bones, rocks, and other items back in time hundreds of millions of years. Yeah, right!
And there’s the entire body of so-called environmental research, everything from “carbon pollution,” global warming, water quality, forests, oceans, and mining issues environmentalists have fooled the public on for decades. I could probably think of several stronger terms than “tribalism,” to call what environmentalists are doing to the public, but Judy Curry coined that phase, and it certainly applies. Tribalism is alive and well in environmental research.
This revelation exposes only the tip of the iceberg of the great environmental coverup regarding global warming, from which governments, including this one, make policy, draft bills, and extract taxes from a deceived public.
Penn State’s Michael Mann told Reuters that “colleagues often speak in a language they understand and is often foreign to the outside world," And according to this privileged group, only those whose work has been published in select scientific journals, can be relied on to critique the science. And sure enough, any challenges from critics outside this clique are dismissed and disparaged.
Judy Curry is a weather scientist who broke from the politically correct, and politically controlled AGW (anthropomorphic global warming) stranglehold, to expose other nefarious practices of the environmental crowd. She writes: Tribalism is defined here as a strong identity that separates one’s group from members of another group, characterized by strong in-group loyalty. In the context of scientific research, tribes differ from groups of colleagues that collaborate and otherwise associate with each other professionally. As a result of the politicization of climate science, climate tribes circle the wagons and point the guns outward in an attempt to discredit all critics.
The motivation of scientists in the pro AGW tribes appears to be motivated by politics and their professional ego. After becoming more knowledgeable about the politics of climate change, I became concerned about some of the tribes pointing their guns inward at other climate researchers who question their research or don’t pass various loyalty tests.
Particularly on a topic of such great public relevance, scientists need to consider carefully skeptical arguments and either rebut them or learn from them. Trying to suppress them or discredit the skeptical researcher is not an ethical strategy. All relevant and available data and metadata [should be] made publicly accessible.” Indeed.
So if climate change data has been manipulated and falsified to support a particular political agenda, how much other scientific data needs to be brought into question? How much other “research” has been closely guarded, doctored, and let out only to those who support their theories? A few scientific “tribal” research topics I have challenged for years come quickly to mind: 1) the theory of evolution, 2) the big bang theory, 3) dinosaurs, 4) carbon dating, 5) the age of the earth itself, 6) the entire body of environmental science, to mention just a few.
There is much about this expose that reminds me of Marxism, fascism, and other extreme controlling forms of government who attempt to hide the truth, manipulate reality and force a pre-determined outcome.
Geologists and archeologists push the age of all things so far into the past that no one is able to dispute their data, except of course, those of that “tribe.” The theory of evolution has effectively silenced all critics, not to mention attempts to have other theories taught or even discussed in public schools and universities. How’s that for an educational posture? The big bang theory has so many unanswered questions, failures of logic, and other issues, one has to wonder what “tribal” group manipulated this data.
Carbon dating has long been questioned by almost everyone, except of course, those “tribal” leaders who control and manipulate that data. Although carbon dating is accurate back in time
for only about 200 years, still, carbon dating is given credibility for dating bones, rocks, and other items back in time hundreds of millions of years. Yeah, right!
And there’s the entire body of so-called environmental research, everything from “carbon pollution,” global warming, water quality, forests, oceans, and mining issues environmentalists have fooled the public on for decades. I could probably think of several stronger terms than “tribalism,” to call what environmentalists are doing to the public, but Judy Curry coined that phase, and it certainly applies. Tribalism is alive and well in environmental research.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)