Posted on 10/19/2013 4:39:29 AM PDT by IbJensen
In 2007 advocates of global warming at the BBC wrote an article titled “Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’”[1] based on findings presented to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), a UN led body that assesses the state of the Earth's climate. While the public has been bombarded with false data supporting the CO2 green house gas scare, nature seems to be taking its own stand in favor of the world’s “skeptics.”
Inexplicably, an unpredicted frigid Arctic summer has covered an additional 533,000 square miles of ocean with ice resulting in an increase of twenty nine per cent in less than 12 months. To have an idea of the magnitude of this newly formed unbroken layer of ice, it is more than half the size of Europe. This change has prodded some eminent scientists to declare that the world has entered a period of cooling that might not end until the middle of the century. A new cooling cycle would expose the computer forecasts of imminent catastrophic warming as dangerously misleading.
But this has not prevented the IPCC from releasing its fifth assessment of the state of the global climate in which they conclude: “climate change has not stopped and man is the main cause.” The IPCC had downplayed the long-term significance of a slight shift in temperature stating that “due to natural variability, trends based on short records are very sensitive to the beginning and end dates and do not in general reflect long-term climate trends.” It is interesting to note that environmentalists only cite short-term studies such as the warming trend of the last sixteen years and conveniently forget to mention historical evidence prior to that period.
Arctic ice reached a record low in 2012 and seemed to give credence to what some environmentalists were claiming: human activity caused the ice caps to melt, the sea level would rise and the earth would become inhabitable. Of course, environmentalists never point to any data that might show that global warming and cooling are natural cycles occurring from time immemorial. One such evidence demonstrating that global temperature cycles have taken place for millennia can easily be seen by the examination of a tree’s medullar rings.[2]
Annual growth rings in trees give important testimony indicating how previous climate conditions occurred during their life. In the cold environment of the Finnish Lapland, trees often fall into one of the numerous frigid lakes when they die where they remain well preserved for thousands of years making it possible to accurately examine the effects of climate change over a long period of time.
In April of 1975, Newsweek ran an article titled “The Cooling World” in which the opening sentence read: “There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth.” Note the use of verbiage such as ominous, dramatic, drastic and serious all in the first sentence.
This article is even accompanied by a graph indicating that the average trend had warmed less than one degree Fahrenheit from 1880 to 1945, sixty-five years. This was followed by a cooling trend that coincided with the post war industrial boom that lasted until 1979. The warming trend that followed coincided with the economic slowdown of the 80s and 90s. Even if there were only accurate data that went back to 1880, it is still reasonably evident that cooling and warming are natural cycles. So why all the anti-civilization hype?
The entire world has heard all about the global warming myth ad nauseam—minus many inconvenient truths. Not least of which is that warming and cooling cycles take place irrespective of human activity. Perhaps radical environmentalists would do better to obsess less over the poor environment and focus on the dearth of morals in the world and apply some of their energy to, let’s say, the reckless spending by politicians instead of a .025-degree global temperature fluctuation. One inconvenient fact is that global warming alarmists are truly alarming.
Good article; thanks. The upper echelon of the environmental movement is comprised of “watermelons”. Where they do the most damage is in the school system, misleading and guilt-tripping our impressionable children with half-truths and outright falsehoods. God help us.
“Anyone who believes the nonsense that man creates a change in the climate is either an utter loon or a self-serving charlatan like Albert Gore, Jr..
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I spotted some flawsin that sentence so I rewrote it for you, it should read like this; “Anyone who believes the nonsense that man creates a change in the climate is an utter loon and self-serving charlatan like Albert Gore, Jr..”
There are real environmental problems that need research funding a lot more than “global warming.” I get a little tired of reading scientific papers and seeing every problem attributed to “global warming”—come on, scientists, you have PhDs, you should know better!
Yesterday, I read a scientific article about a new antiviral drug being researched. The paper was fine, the drug looks promising—but when the authors said that they are testing the drug against several viruses that are spreading “because of global warming and international travel”, I had to scratch my head. Seriously, weather causes viruses to spread now?
As a scientist, I vow never to use the words “because of global warming” as an explanation of observed scientific data. It would be nice for other scientists to do the same.
Come now, just what is the greatest thing any human could ever possibly do (multiple choice):
1)Be a soldier fighting for your country, performing heroic acts such as saving your buddies lives while under fire.
2) Be a whacko leftist global warming nut job thinking that you are personally saving the world by living like an idiot and worse yet, forcing this crap upon everyone you come in contact with.
The UN was never meant to try to take over the Sovereignty of countries and try to become the governing party of the world.
The Un has so swollen their mission that they are now a danger and should be removed.
” - - - you have PhDs, you should know better!”
The PhD is the problem, it has more to do with the level of brainwashing a person has experienced compared to the guy that has spent less time in our liberal places of higher education.
The thread noted below concerns continental drift, current drift.
The change in climate is not from global warming that is based on conjectured green house gasses. The climate change is the result of moving continental land masses and the resulting oceanic displacement. It cannot be proven otherwise
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3071026/posts
I well remember the 1975 era when we were told that, “We will die of the cold in the dark.”
Basically, the loons are now telling us that we’ll die of the heat in the sunlight.
Scare tactics make a lot of money for the creepy people who do it.
OK!! Everybody pay attention!
Lesson for today:
1. The sun is 1,300,000 times as big as the earth.
2. The sun is a ball of fire that controls our climates.
3. The earth is a rock.
4. The earth is a speck in comparison to the size of the sun.
5. Inhabitants of the earth are less than specks.
Study Question: How do less-than-specks in congress plan to control the sun?
it is their replacement for God.
If you were talking PhDs in subjects like sociology or anything with a "studies" in the name, I would be inclined to agree with you. However, science is not based on memorizing a party line and trying to pigeon-hole everything into that party line. Rather, science is based on observation, measurement, and controlled experimentation. Given that the purpose of science is to describe and understand the physical world as accurately as possible, there really is no room for leftist propaganda in a science curriculum.
While leftist kooks do not thrive in science, I have seen a few who are utterly wacky until they start talking about their research specialty--then they become as rational and logical as any conservative.
I, and most of the people I know professionally, have a PhD.
Here is a few more facts:
Carbon Dioxide is only 4% of green house gasses (water is #1)
Man made carbon dioxide is 3%, naturally occurring is 97%
If all man activity stopped the green house gasses would decrease by 0.12%
"Many bad weather events at historically low levels"
Tornadoes: 'lowest total in several decades'
Wildfires: 'On pace to be the lowest it has been in the past ten years'
Extreme Heat The number of 100 degree days may 'turn out to be the lowest in about 100 years of records'
Hurricanes: 'We are currently in the longest period (8 years) since the Civil War Era without a major hurricane strike in the US (i.e., category 3, 4 or 5)' (last major hurricane to strike the US was Hurricane Wilma in 2005)
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.