Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 10/04/2008 4:29:17 AM PDT by Delacon
So far in part 1 we've briefly had a look at the core arguments put forward by the Alarmists - whose who support the theory of man-made global warming - and the Realists - those who, at the moment , don't.
More accurate data needed before trends can be ascertained
What the Alarmists need to do is provide more compelling evidence to support their position. All they rely on at the moment is current data and compare it to climatic events since the 1890s when modern recording of temperatures began.
The major problems with this constricted approach are twofold:
Firstly, the instruments used today to measure such attributes as air temperature, sea temperature etc. are infinitely more accurate and sophisticated than those in use 50 years ago, never mind 110 years ago. So that begs the question - how accurate is any data older than say 10 years? The Alarmists have yet to clarify this point.
The second problem concerns the time period over which the current data has been collected. 110 years may provide a start, buy that's all it is, a start. Realistically though, 110 years in comparison to the scientifically recognized age of the earth being - 4.5 billion years - is statistically unsustainable.
To get a valid and meaningful understanding of recent changes in the worlds' temperature and the future trends in the area of climate change, the absolute minimum time frame to analyze such data should be no less than a thousand years.
As this is just not possible, the Alarmists are being too free and easy with the very limited information at their disposal. They're making a mountain out of a molehill, and the susceptible people in our societies are taking all this in and making the loudest noise.
The role of the UN in this deception
Recent reports issued by the UN's committee on climate change laid the blame for this perceived problem clearly at the feet of the industrial western world. Two reports made in early 2007 pointed to the damage being caused by industrial pollution leading to an increase in greenhouse gases, and an imbalance between the CO2 and oxygen in the worlds' atmosphere. The UN said quite clearly that this problem was caused by the ever-increasing expansion of industrial activity by the established western nations and the emerging industrial countries, notably China and India.
No mention was made of other factors that could be responsible for this atmospheric imbalance - factors that could have a profound influence.
Firstly no mention was made of the practice prevalent in third world countries of mass deforestation. ie the clearing of forests to enable land to be used for agriculture. As trees emit oxygen and take in CO2 they're able to keep in balance the relationship between these two gases. Trees help in controlling greenhouses gases.
The other factor the UN failed to mention was the explosion in the worlds' population over the past 50 years. In that time world population has grown from 2 billion to over 6 billion. As the human body is good at converting oxygen into CO2, the omission of this from the UN reports add suspicion to their motives.
So if man is responsible for any increase in greenhouse gases, then more than industrial pollution is the cause. If the UN were to take a more responsible attitude to this, then they'd be a whole lot more credible.
Why are the Alarmists deceiving Us?
Why? What have they got to hide?
Why do they continually tell the world that of the ten hottest years on record, six have occurred within the past 10 years? This has been seen to be false. NASA recently reported that these 10 hottest years occurred before 1950, with the hottest decade being the 30s.
What about the influence of volcanoes on the amount od CO2 in the air?
Why do they keep repeating the line that over 5,000 scientists have signed a document saying that man-made climate change is happening, and ignoring the fact that over 31,000 scientists, including more than 9,000 PhDs have said that this theory is rubbish?
Why do the Alarmists refuse to answer the basic question - what caused climate change in the 12 previous occasions it's occurred during the life of the earth?
After 12 periods of climate change caused by Mother Nature, or for the religious inclined, God, Allah, Jehovah, why should the activities of man be responsible for present events?
And this last point raises a very important issue - what gives the Alarmists the right to think they can reverse Mother Nature or God? What gives Al Gore and his ilk the right to play God?
And why are the worlds' religious leaders saying nothing about this?
This is the second part of an attempt to put some balance into the ongoing international controversy that is the theory of man-made climate change.
ping
And how about the fact that CO2 is a lagging indicator not a leading indicator of warming? Hmmmmm.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.