Cap and Trade Explained

Funy stuff, if it weren't so bad for the economy.

I love the part where he mentions that the effects are not measurable! Of course, this assumes there is an anthropogenic cause to global warming, which there isn't.

Best Anthropogenic Global Warming Debunking Article Yet

Check out this article on why anthropogenic global warming is a fallacy. Like me, the author asserts that temperature has changed and will continue to change. In Mr. Ambler's words, "So, no one needs to say the words "climate" and "change" in the same breath -- it is assumed, by anyone with any level of knowledge, that climate changes." Proof of this is seen in the Vostok ice core data, where cyclical patterns of temperature change are obvious.

And so, the all important answer the question, "If not carbon dioxide, what does "drive" climate?" The article points to a short term answer (ocean cycles) and a long term answer, the Sun. This will surprise no one who really studied the global warming issue in depth.

And why do I continue to rail against this fake crisis of anthropogenic global warming? Because there are so many other things we can focus on. I will let Mr. Ambler provide the best reason.

"To be told, as I have been, by Mr. Gore, again and again, that carbon dioxide is a grave threat to humankind is not just annoying, by the way, although it is that! To re-tool our economies in an effort to suppress carbon dioxide and its imaginary effect on climate, when other, graver problems exist is, simply put, wrong." (emphasis in the original)

Hat Tip - Hot Air.

CNN Disses Global Warming?

Well, finally the news media is turning against the myth of anthropogenic global warming. Check out this video.



One statement that rings true, based on all of my research, is the quote, " It is the sun that does it [global climate change], not man." Truer words were never spoken.

Anthropogenic Global Warming is a Fallacy-part 2 of many

Okay, this is taking a little longer than I thought. However, the research has been pretty enlightening.

Last time, we looked at some of the problems with the IPCC model, which Gore uses to predict the weather changes that will cause catastrophic events across the globe. Today, we will look at the second piece of evidence. The linchpin of his argument, the Vostok Ice Core charts. He shows a chart that covers the past 420,000 years and looks like this.

We can clearly see the rise and fall of temperature and CO2 for thousands of years. Looking at this chart, one would expect this rise and fall to continue, since that is what has happened in the past. It's like the rising and setting of the sun. There is some time variation, but it happens regularly. Those who argue that there is anthropogenic global warming, however, seem to think the sun will not rise tomorrow. They assume the cycle is broken because of CO2 levels.

There is a relation between temperature and CO2 levels. Notice the correlation between CO2 and temperature changes in the chart. As the temperature gets warmer, we see an increased level of CO2. As the temperature change goes down, we see a decrease in CO2. Gore and his climate scientists have chosen to state that CO2 has enough influence on our temperature to cause havoc over the next 50 to 100 years.

Well, unfortunately the above chart has too wide of a data spread to show whether CO2 really has that much of an effect on temperature. Instead, lets look at a smaller segment of the chart. Since modern times have provided more accurate information, lets look at information from just the last 18,000 years. This gives us enough time to see historic trends, yet still see more about the actual relationship.

Notice a couple of things from this chart. It fits with the initial chart data, showing a correlation between CO2 and temperature change. It also fits the trend displayed for modern times in the original chart. However, when we look closer, we see something interesting. Look specifically around 14,000, 11,000, 8,000, 7,500, 4,500 and our modern times. Notice anything?

What you're seeing are multiple places where temperature changes and CO2 changes do not react in direct correlation with each other. In 14,000, temperature rises before CO2. A similar phenomenon happens around 11,000, with temperature spiking and falling, followed by a much shallower rise and fall in CO2. Around 8,000, temperature changed rapidly with no movement of CO2. In 7,500 CO2 falls and rises with no change in temperature. In 4,500, we see another temperature spike that last a bit longer. Again, though, there was no change in CO2. Only a little later do we see CO2 levels rise.

The Modern data is another indicator that shows the weak relationship between CO2 and climate change. CO2 is rising at a faster rate, and to higher levels, than ever. This is a fact. However, where is the corresponding climate change? Remember, Gore stated that CO2 was causing the massive changes and rising temperatures of modern times. Based on the data, though, this doesn't seem to be true.

So, if the model isn't accurate, and Gore's hypothesis about CO2 is not correct, what can be causing global warming? More to come next time about relationships between the sun, our global temperatures and temperatures of other planets in our solar system.

Anthropogenic Global Warming is a Fallacy-part 1 of many

Bare with me, as this may be a long post. I think I'll actually break this into two parts to present all of the information.

Now, we have to define our terms and set the record straight. There is undeniable evidence that the Earth has been getting warmer. This is not in doubt. What is in doubt is man's role in global climate change. Currently, according to Al Gore and the group of 1200 UN scientists, global warming is caused by CO2. This means, in simple terms, a rise in CO2 will lead to a direct rise in temperature. This is Gore's whole premise. No other possibilities seem to be discussed, at least none that made it to any of the larger news sources.

Gore offers two major items as his evidence: the Vostok ice core data charts and the IPCC temperature models. Based on these two pieces of evidence, Gore suggests that there will be "catastrophic consequences" from global warming. So, to combat these consequences and slow or reverse global warming, we (humans) have to change our habits.

However, there are a few holes in Gore's hypothesis.

First is the weakness of the IPCC temperature model. Apparently, the models were not calibrated to our current conditions. This means the models were compromised. In addition, the weakness of the interpretation of the model information, specifically the 7th chapter dealing with "atmospheric processes and feedback" that affect global temperatures.

Interesting that the model has some weaknesses. It's almost like they wanted the model to predict bad tidings for some reason.

More to come later.