Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 07/23/2008 10:30:22 AM PDT by FocusNexus
A former global warming alarmist and creator of the model that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol says that while global warming is real, there is no evidence that the main cause is carbon emissions. David Evans says that C02 emissions play - at most - a minor role.
Evans writes in The Australian newspaper that if global warming was caused by C02, scientists would have found hot spots about six miles up in the earth's atmosphere over the Tropics. Evans describes those hot spots as the signature of the greenhouse effect. He says scientists have been trying to locate them for years using thermometers attached to weather balloons.
But he says years of research "show no hot spot - whatsoever" adding that "an increased greenhouse effect is not the cause of global warming."
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
"I DEVOTED six years to carbon accounting, building models for the Australian Greenhouse Office. I am the rocket scientist who wrote the carbon accounting model (FullCAM) that measures Australia's compliance with the Kyoto Protocol, in the land use change and forestry sector.
FullCAM models carbon flows in plants, mulch, debris, soils and agricultural products, using inputs such as climate data, plant physiology and satellite data. I've been following the global warming debate closely for years.
When I started that job in 1999 the evidence that carbon emissions caused global warming seemed pretty good: CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the old ice core data, no other suspects.
The evidence was not conclusive, but why wait until we were certain when it appeared we needed to act quickly? Soon government and the scientific community were working together and lots of science research jobs were created. We scientists had political support, the ear of government, big budgets, and we felt fairly important and useful (well, I did anyway). It was great. We were working to save the planet.
But since 1999 new evidence has seriously weakened the case that carbon emissions are the main cause of global warming, and by 2007 the evidence was pretty conclusive that carbon played only a minor role and was not the main cause of the recent global warming. As Lord Keynes famously said, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" "
Unfortunately, facts will not change the mind of the loony left. They will cling to man-made global warming until they can drown out their error with a bigger cause. Then, they’ll simply hope we all forget that they tried to push this BS on us.
ping
Here in north central West Virginia we are enjoying a rather mild summer after a rather cool spring. The lawn and garden are doing excellent.
But this takes humility, and I think most people proceed along the lines of Tolstoy's observation:
"I know that most men, including those at ease with problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to admit the falsity of conclusions which they have delighted in explaining to colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives".
“Unfortunately, facts will not change the mind of the loony left.” Facts don’t count and the minds envolved really don’t want to change.
The world will end before Al Gore holds a press conference and admits that he was wrong about global warming.
hm, can a class action suit be filed against Gore to force refunds on carbon offsets? :)
I highly recommend reading the actual article by David Evans, the link to which I posted in my post 1, but here it is again. When I posted it, I just scanned, it, but after reading it carefully, I recommend reading and bookmarking it.
David Evans: No smoking hot spot.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24036736-17803,00.html
“There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming. None.
The satellites that measure the world’s temperature all say that the warming trend ended in 2001, and that the temperature has dropped about 0.6C in the past year (to the temperature of 1980).
The world has spent $50 billion on global warming since 1990, and we have not found any actual evidence that carbon emissions cause global warming.
What is going to happen over the next decade as global temperatures continue not to rise? The Labor Government is about to deliberately wreck the economy in order to reduce carbon emissions.
The onus should be on those who want to change things to provide evidence for why the changes are necessary. The Australian public is eventually going to have to be told the evidence anyway, so it might as well be told before wrecking the economy. “
No different than when the belief that the earth was the center of the cosmos was refuted by scientific evidence. Those who fanatically held to the earth centered universe declared those who proved that was not true to be heretics and silenced them with the Inquisition or even burning them at the stake. The global warming cultists similarly are seeking to silence those who question the validity of their man made global warming belief and label any reputable scientist who disagrees with their supposed consensus to be “deniers”.
Well, the most tightly held beliefs are the results of the combination ignorance and personal agrandizement. Gore, being of tiny intellect, is eminently suited for it.
What possible knowlege (and resulting authority) does a failed divinity student have discussing science he is obviously ignorant about?
I can discuss the causes of the monstrous changes in every Godzilla movie. That doesn't make me a science expert.
Just saying.
Media Flocks to Gore Speech on Energy; Mostly Ignore His Use of Gas-Guzzlers to Get There
Lord Monckton of Brenchley is Global Warming Skeptic
Should Oil Executives Be Strung Up?
environMENTALists oppose new CO2 Scrubber Idea
Inhofe Opening Statement: An Update on the Science of Global Warming and its Implications
Global Warming on Free Republic
BTTT
Gems. Both of these.
Hall Monitor
Some members of Congress have been told that they have to get rid of their tributes to fallen soldiers, because they are cluttering the halls.
Congressional Quarterly reports that a group of lawmakers — headed by Republican Congressman Walter Jones of North Carolina — is imploring House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to change a new policy that bars free-standing flags, furniture and easels because they are considered hazards.
Jones has easels outside his office depicting the faces of constituents killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. But, like many of his colleagues, he has been told that he must get rid of the display by August 2. Jones says, "We're going to just have an ongoing contest of me putting them up and them taking them down."
They are "imploring" Pelosi???
What is a matter with Republicans? She sets up this rule because she hates the military, she hates military success, and she has absolutely no respect for our fallen. Why in hell do the #@?*&% Republicans bend over for this? Why are they not out on the steps of the capital holding news conferences on this? They ought to be sticking this up her butt in a big way (metaphorically, of course).
It is absolutely no wonder they lost congress.
Somebody needs to get this to Newt Gingrich, before he mandates tax credits to eliminate Carbon from the atmosphere for the “good of the world”.
A real scientist - pursue the hypothesis agressively and when the facts change or are more complete, pursue the resulting new hypothesis.
Yet even in the face of the giant deficit, Mr. Schwarzenegger and the Democrats want to pass a new $9 billion water bond, a $14 billion state-run health insurance program, AND THE MOST EXPENSIVE CLIMATE-CHANGE PROGRAM IN THE COUNTRY.
ie greenhouse effect isn't happening.
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.