Global Warming: Has Anyone Noticed that it’s Over?

MensNewsDaily.com ^ | May 24, 2008 | Roger F. Gay

[RogerFGay]

The end of civilization as we know it, is not at hand. Dire warnings on climate change issued by Al Gore, based on an extreme set of computer predictions, are a dead issue. So is the credibility of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC); the UN committee that tried to bring credibility to the predictions with claims that its views represent a consensus among scientists on global warming.

The problem with the alleged scientific consensus is that it has always been a half-truth; or less than half, depending on how you calculate. We are in a natural warm period. That's true, but Gore, and other activists – including the IPCC – stepped over the boundary when giving the impression that scientific consensus supported a list of scary predictions intended to promote political action, as well as the claim that the primary cause of global warming is human pollution, especially in the form of carbon dioxide – CO2. Ice has been melting; but since a warm period is pretty much opposite an ice-age, that is what one would expect. Polar bears are still killing and eating seals, happily I suppose.

In the scientific debate, the straw that broke the camel's back was the last decade of real temperature data. Reality just hasn't held with the IPCC predictions. Not only has it not gotten hotter at an increasing rate, as Al Gore's presentations with absolute certainty predicted, it just hasn't gotten hotter. CO2 has been increasing but there's nothing to suggest that it's a dangerous substance. The evidence actually contradicts the idea that it is a major contributor to warming. There's more CO2 but it's not getting hotter. You don't have cause and effect if you don't get the predicted effect. The so-called “global warming skeptics” have won. Al Gore and the IPCC are wrong.

Data over the past decade is not in fact, the first to be out of sync with the IPCC models. Scientists have been pointing to cooling periods as well as data inaccuracies, poor analysis, and misrepresentations for years. These scientists simply weren't counted in Al Gore's idea of scientific consensus. It's been understood for decades; in order to matter in the politics of global warming, you had to get on-board. That of course, created a conspiracy rather than getting to the truth.

The IPCC's credibility has been shattered. The debate can no longer be thought of as involving two groups of well-intentioned scientists with different data, theories, and predictions. If that were so, the IPCC would be admitting the significance of new data and assuring the public that they have no real evidence that the climate future will be as scary as they had previously claimed. That is exactly what scientists have asked them to do (see related article) The IPCC instead claims their predictions have not been proven wrong; they have just not yet been proven right. Nature's expected behavior has been delayed, according to the IPCC. Why it has been delayed is another scientific mystery awaiting billions more in funding to solve. They've given reality another ten years to catch up with their predictions. If we have a very hot summer or two during the next decade – the sort of thing not unknown to human history – one might expect they'll claim vindication.

And what of Al Gore – self-appointed soothsayer and modern leader of the environmental movement, winner of a Nobel Peace Prize, an Emmy, and other awards for frightening school children with tales of doom? Publicly, he struggles to explain why there are so many determined detractors in discussions of his far-reaching and expensive vision for political action. But, reportedly making millions from his environmental activism, he should be able to contemplate this and other questions in luxury after this swan song of his political career has finally ended.

[RogerFGay]

I don't really understand why conservatives should know so much about sunspot counts, but there seems to be general agreement at freerepublic about the global warming political hoax.

Are those findings published somewhere?

[EGPWS]

I don't really understand why conservatives should know so much about sunspot counts, but there seems to be general agreement at freerepublic about the global warming political hoax.

There isn't a person alive who could know everything. Some are more focused on other concerning issues in life whether it be Lunar cycles and the like, where their legacy will leave them or where they will be tomorrow.

Every human totes the ability to reason however.

Reason in thought alone dictates the ability is available to see the promotion of global warming because of humans as a hoax for promotion.

Infomercials have apparently shown their impact placed upon us as a free society forever.

[Justa]

"Are those findings published somewhere?"

The link between solar intensity and the earth's climate is a "no-duh" logical relationship.

Daily solar data.

Quote source from my previous post.

But since you can't blame people for variations in solar output you can't tax or regulate them for it either; hence the Left pushes the preposterous Greenhouse Effect and Global Warming scam. ...By any means necessary.

[SomeCallMeTim]

yeah but NASA has shown that this was wrong very recently. Water vapor cools it doesn't heat.

Careful.... you're getting dangerously close to letting facts get in the way of a darn good theory.

[the anti-liberal]

"Are those findings published somewhere?"

You find it here: Space and Science Research Center: Press Release SSRC 2-2008

[the anti-liberal]

"Seems like you and I are the only 2 FReepers who actually realize this at this time."

Hopefully, with this post and the original posted thread, more and more of us will see this. Incidentally, this indication of cold times ahead only makes more critical the need for energy independence. We need to get government out of the way of our well-being if they're going to continue to insist on standing in our way, as they have.

Of course, this will mean ridding congress of Liberal Dems.

This chilling possibility only makes the need much more urgent.

[the anti-liberal]

[RogerFGay]

Reason in thought alone dictates the ability is available to see the promotion of global warming because of humans as a hoax for promotion.

Logic alone is not enough. I remember an event when my son was quite young, within the first week after he learned to ride a bicycle. We lived on a fairly quiet street without much traffic, and no sidewalk. I had explained to him clearly about the danger of riding in the street and stayed with him for days making sure he knew the rules. No sooner than I turned my back once, than he came to me with something exciting that he wanted to show me. I went to the front yard and watched him wait on the lawn with his bike. A car came by and he rode his bike from behind a parked car right into the path of the oncoming vehicle.

I rushed out and took him out of the street and asked what he was trying to show me. He grinned and said, "The car stopped."

It was a very logical conclusion based on too little information.

Now take the people who have been fooled by Al Gore and the IPCC. Follow the logic that's been taught to them. There's a greenhouse effect, right? CO2 is a greenhouse gas. So more CO2 makes it hotter. CO2 is produced by machines, especially cars. CO2 has been increasing during the 20th century, as industrial production and the number of cars increased. It's gotten hotter during the 20th century.

Pretend that's the only information that you have - no cheating. Now apply logic.

[Ditto]

Looks like Global Warming cracked your windshield. Al Gore said that would happen. ;~))

[dennisw]

This is why the eco-wackos now call it “climate change” instead of “global warming”....... They have been proven to be wrong about continual global warming

[RogerFGay]

They’re taxing us for the weather.

[chardonnay]

hey, EE, good to see you. I’m a sucker for these global warming stories.

the BB gang misses you.

[chardonnay]

HAHA, you noticed the crack in the picture? that’s funny.

[GodGunsGuts]

Why is the Digg keyword built into this post, but the link to Digg nowhere to be found???