Posted on 05/01/2005 10:18:50 AM PDT by GMMAC
Kyoto already a big failure
SCIENTISTS SUGGEST MAN-MADE EMISSIONS HAVE NO IMPACT
By PETER WORTHINGTON
TORONTO SUN
Sunday, May 1, 2005
FOR THOSE uneasy about the Kyoto Protocol -- which all Canadian political parties endorse and the media tend to go along with -- a wake-up call is being issued by an impressive array of scientists. In fact, it is more than that. It is a categorical refutation of the whole concept that SUVs and man-made emissions, especially carbon dioxide, have any discernible effect on the climate.
In other words, global warming is a myth. A political ploy.
The $10 billion that Canada supposedly will have to invest to live up to its pledge to reduce emissions 6% lower than they were in 1990, is not only unnecessary, but folly if we go through with it.
A 23-minute video has been prepared by the University of Calgary in co-operation with the non-profit Friends of Science Society that deserves to be seen by all Canadians.
Prof. Tim Patterson, a paleoclimatologist from Carleton University, speaks for some 50 scientists who've contributed to the research. He puts it succinctly: "In the eight years since the Kyoto Protocol was introduced, there has been a revolution in climate science. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would not exist because we would have concluded it was not necessary."
A succession of scientists in Canada, the U.S., Germany, New Zealand, Finland, Russia, Norway, etc., all involved with environment issues and climatology, insist there is "absolutely no convincing scientific evidence that human-produced greenhouse gases, specifically carbon dioxide, is having a significant impact on global climate."
To the contrary, carbon dioxide is essential for life, is not toxic, and comprises barely 4% of greenhouse gases.
Since the U.S. rejects Kyoto and the protocol doesn't apply to India or China, Kyoto is already a failure, even if the science were true.
Instead, Kyoto is a blunt political instrument to redistribute wealth from rich to poor countries in the guise of saving humanity.
The video starts out showing an almost hysterical Jean Chretien shouting in the Commons that unless Kyoto is adopted, Canadians will be dying in 30 years because of bad air. His environment minister, David Anderson, calls global emissions the world's most severe problem -- "more severe even than terrorism."
David Suzuki waves his arms and says Kyoto is needed because "rich countries use more than their share of the atmosphere."(?) Opposition environment critic Bob Mills demands quick adoption, as do the NDP's Jack Layton, Finance Minister Ralph Goodale, and present Environment Minister Stephane Dion, whose passion verges on frenzy.
Then, in the video, scientists take over, and point out that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is more political than scientific, and that its graphs and themes depicting greenhouse gases as a potential "climate catastrophe" can't be supported.
Scientifically, we know little about climate, which is always changing. We can't even predict the weather more than 10 days ahead, much less changes in climate.
The skeptical scientists argue the IPCC is a political body set up to supply evidence to support the theory that disaster lies ahead unless Kyoto is adopted. Canada doesn't question IPCC findings.
ADAPT CLIMATE CHANGE
These scientists say we shouldn't fight climate change, but adapt it. A collective letter spelling out their concerns was sent to then-PM Chretien in late 2002, and to Paul Martin a year ago; both to no avail.
I asked Dr. Doug Leahey, president of Friends of Science, if there are plans to put the video on TV. He said TV people have said its quality isn't up to broadcast standards -- which is ridiculous.
Instead, copies have been sent to journalists, influential individuals and every member of Parliament.
Fine, but why not buy air time?
"We haven't the money," says Dr. Leahey, bluntly.
To me, this is nuts. Surely companies or foundations that would benefit by saving the billions that Canada proposes to waste on Kyoto, could contribute to ensure a mass audience for this vital video?
It's one thing for people like me to scratch the surface, but quite another to see a succession of scientists cite evidence that Kyoto is folly and fable -- all in one 23-minute documentary. I'd argue that this is the most important video Canadians could see.
Finally, one positive if an election is called soon is that provisions in the coming budget to fight global warming would, as a Toronto Star editorial put it, "disappear into the ozone layer."
If so, that's another reason to have an election as soon as possible and save overtaxed citizens billions of wasted dollars.
Thanks for the vid link
The sky is falling!!
Ahh!! We need to take your money so that China and the 3rd world can keep polluting at an accelerated rate!!!!
Pay now or else!
What a bunch of garbage.
To be read later.
Red6
Swift Boat Vets got their message out by private donations. So can they. Maybe Rush will help.
Bookmark to watch later on faster computer
>>> As a worst possible case, we will need to be able to move some of the excess water off the planet back into space where it came from and that will require control over gravity (which the USAF and Boeing are presently working on and call GRASP, or Gravity Reduction and Advanced Space Propulsion). Fifty years from now, we should be capable of that sort of thing. <<<
You are a nut.
Are you feeling OK today? Maybe forgot a pill or two this morning? Yours was one of the strangest posts I've seen on FR in a long, long time.
I know, but note (if I understand it correctly) that he didn't sign this until after he'd supported Kyoto for some years. I'll credit this guy with at least recognizing facts at last and correcting his original mistake of believing the hysteria.
It was the best, but since John died last year, it has not been maintained all that well. John was a mathematical genius and had an ability to immediately spot the flaws in the fear-mongers studies and models. A study would come out one day and John would rip huge holes in it the very next day. Most stuff gets published today as scientific with only a very causual non-critical peer review. I miss his insight.
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.