Saturday, January 2, 2010

The Science is Settled - What More Evidence Do We Need?

Sorry Al, there's no such thing as "settled" science. But there is such a thing as falsified data and faked research. And apparently, the global "warmists" are guilty of the preponderance of it. Enhanced reputations and juicy government and private grants are the temptations that have led these disreputable scientists over the cliff.

Is the Earth warming? Based on my personal anecdotal data gathered while sitting in a warm Pennsylvania house while a frigid blizzard rages outside, I'd say no. (more anecdotal data here) But the Earth has been warming and cooling in cycles since its formation, all on its own with no man-made interference needed.

I imagine a pot full of ants on a stove. Some disreputable scientist ants claim, based on false information, that the burner under them will be turned on. The ants start to panic. "What do we do to stop the heat?", they cry. The politician ants feel pressure to do something, anything to satisfy their ant constituents. "Let's collapse our economic system and tax our citizens into oblivion!" It doesn't matter if it doesn't do anything to relieve the problem, but it's better for their careers than appearing impotent and doing nothing. As a result, the ants destroy their civilization. "You see!" say some of the ants who have made pot warming a religion, "If we hadn't stopped civilization, someone would have turned on the burner!"

Do you want real evidence that this is what is happening to us?

1. A brand new study released last month shows conclusively that atmospheric CO2 (the primary "greenhouse" gas blamed for man-made global warming) is NOT increasing, and HAS NOT increased over the past 150 years.

The strength of the new study, published online in Geophysical Research Letters, is that it rests solely on measurements and statistical data, including historical records extracted from Antarctic ice, and does not rely on computations with complex climate models. (which have been shown to be falsely created with manipulated data - Ed. note)

2. Much has been made by the warmists of "peer-reviewed" data. Here's a peer-reviewed study released just last week that proves that any warming of the globe has not been caused by CO2, but by CFCs (which have already been banned) and natural cosmic rays. The study goes on to state that the Earth has been cooling since 2002 and will continue cooling for another 50 years.

3. A global temperature study including data showing the impact of the "Medieval Warming Period" and the "Little Ice Age" is published in the peer-reviewed journal Energy & Environment.

Note that this data does not indicate the faked "hockey stick" formation, unless you consider it a "broken hockey stick".

4. Finally, the "coup de gras". An article has been published in The Washington Post, providing convincing evidence that the Arctic ice is melting. Some of the text in the article is as follows:

The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul Ifft, at Bergen, Norway.

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.

Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared. Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts, which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.

Well, I'm convinced. However, this article was written in 1922, much earlier than the supposed increase in man-made CO2.

The bottom line is: Are we going to use common sense and impartially evaluate ALL of the data before we make some gigantic mistakes, or are we going to run around like a colony of panicked ants?


1 comment:

  1. Will the debunking of AGW cause Internet Al to go into bankruptcy? Were his green carbon credit IPOs started with his own $$s, or was it all financed with taxpayer grants? Basically, how much skin did he have in the game?
    Just looking for a silver lining in all of this and Internet Al being left penniless would sure put a smile on my face.