An Atlas of Climate Change

July 25, 2008 RSS Feed Print

Tags:: global warming,; energy policy and climate change,; environment

Reader Comments Read all comments (44)

Add Your Thoughts Comment Name State Email

Please enter the two words below into the text field underneath the image.

Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

"Does anybody around here ever cite peer reviewed scientific journals in support of their claims?"
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=010405M
Some of the main pointers:
--450 million years ago, the world was in a very severe ice age, yet CO2 concentrations were 15 times as high as they are today (around 5,700 ppm compared to 380 ppm).
--There is no correlation between the amount of CO2 in the Atmosphere and temperature fluctuations
--Past rises in CO2 which were prematurely assumed to 'cause' warming were in fact the result of it-as a warmer world allows new habitats to open up and thus more life-and CO2 from respiration, decay and so fourth
--The activity of the sun drives all climate changes, as a more active sun not only means more radiation is directed towards earth, however it reduces the amount of Cosmic Rays from hitting the earth, the cosmic rays producing low-level clouds which reflect sunlight and thus cause cooling
--Water vapor is the primary greenhouse gas, resulting in over 90% of the greenhouse effect
--The past 10,000 years have been 'unusually stable' climatically
Oh, you don't see that many natural cause reports because it is bad for business for the alarmists, who make their money promoting the alarm caused by humanity. If that were to be proven false, than they would loose their funding, jobs and influence, as would politicians who supported them. This report being from Canada with no ties to 'big oil,' not that it matters, as any scientist accepting 'green funds' is just as likely to lie or distort information as someone who gets their money from 'big oil,' they both have an incentive to.

Stephen of WI 1:40PM August 02, 2009

In 1988 James Hansen testified before congress to scare us about global warming. See his predictions on page 7 of this PDF from NASA’s website:
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1988/1988_Hansen_etal.pdf
All satellite data, including this from the University of Alabama at Huntsville proves that he was wrong. The predicted warming never occurred:
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/HANSEN_AND_CONGRESS.jpg
2008 was even colder than 1988. Had he predicted what actually happened, no one would have seen the need to waste hundreds of billions of dollars. Now the politicians are threatening to burden the economy with their Cap-and-Trade scheme, which amounts to a massive tax increase on all conventional energy usage, to be paid for by you every time you buy something manufactured or transported using energy, which includes everything you spend your money on. It’s ironic how they claim to be protecting the children from doomsday, when they are really impoverishing your children’s future with this additional burden. Here is more background on this deliberate hoax from 1988:
http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/hansens_anniversary_testimony/
31,478 scientists signed a petition opposing the man-made global warming theory. Their reasoning is outlined in a peer reviewed journal article detailing the evidence that disproved the theory. Please follow this link:
http://www.petitionproject.org/
We are being forced to pay for less economical sources of energy while being told they are viable alternatives. This is a lie. All of the so-called ‘alternative’ sources of energy, including wind and solar, equal less than one percent of mankind’s needs. Meanwhile our far more economical access to hydrocarbon energy and nuclear energy is being throttled for no good reason. Obviously Gore wouldn't mind impoverishing the rest of us to enrich himself with his ‘carbon trading’ scheme. With the size of his utility bills and the cost of jet fuel for his private jet flying him all over the world, he needs all the money he can get. If he was really worried about CO2, wouldn’t he act like he was worried about his own emissions, and energy consumption? Of course he is received like a hero in Hollywood; he makes hypocrisy fashionable.

Barry of CA 2:14PM June 22, 2009

Had you followed the links I already provided, you would have found these two peer-reviewed articles:
This first peer-reviewed article shows the failed Global Warming prediction from 1988:
http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/docs/1988/1988_Hansen_etal.pdf
This second peer-reviewed article explains why the prediction failed:
http://www.petitionproject.org/gw_article/GWReview_OISM150.pdf
The second of these two peer-reviewed articles cites 132 references, most of which are also peer-reviewed. As a part of the petition project, the article’s conclusions were also read and endorsed by the 31,478 scientists who signed the petition. The satellite data I cited from the last twenty years comes from the Atmospheric Science Department at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, and has been confirmed by all other available satellite data measuring the same thing. You, on the other-hand have cited noting, peer-reviewed or otherwise. Your failure to notice this obvious fact shows you are either too lazy to read what I have made available to you, or you are just dishonestly trying to mischaracterize my sources cited, without being able to address the compelling arguments they contain. I suspect some combination of the two.

Barry of CA 2:13PM June 22, 2009

An Atlas of Climate Change

Related Articles

Reader Comments Read all comments (44)

Science Discoveries

Subscribe

Editor's Picks