Global Warming Science and Public Policy - CO2 Report:
Edited by Christopher Monckton (expert, see him at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jzBWmpzifc )
SPPI's authoritative Monthly CO2 Report for July 2009 announces the
publication of a major paper by Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT,
demonstrating by direct measurement that outgoing long-wave radiation is
escaping to space far faster than the UN predicts, showing that the UN has
exaggerated global warming 6-fold.Report, Google it online, it's a PDF.
The UN exaggerated Global warming alarm 6-fold! The scare is over
Lindzen's paper on outgoing long-wave radiation shows the "global
warming" scare is over. Thanks to recent peer reviewed papers that have not
been mentioned in the mainstream news media, we now know that the effect of
CO2 on temperature is small, we know why it is small, and we know that it is
having very little effect on the climate. Page 3.
The IPCC assumes CO2 concentration will reach 836 ppmv by 2100, but,
for almost eight years, CO2 concentration has headed straight for only 570
ppmv by 2100. This alone halves all of the IPCC's temperature projections.
Since 1980 temperature has risen at only 2.5 °F (1.5 °C)/century, not
the 7 F° (3.9 C°) the IPCC imagines. Pages 7-9.
Sea level rose just 8 inches in the 20th century and has been rising
at just 1 ft/century since 1993. Sea level has scarcely risen since 2006.
Also, Pacific atolls are not being drowned by the sea, as some have
suggested. Pages 10-12.
Arctic sea-ice extent is about the same as it has been at this time of
year in the past decade. In the Antarctic, sea ice extent - on a 30-year
rising trend - reached a record high in 2007. Global sea ice extent shows
little trend for 30 years. Pages 13-15.
Hurricane and tropical-cyclone activity is at its lowest since
satellite measurement began. Page 16.
Solar activity has declined again, after a large sunspot earlier in
the month. The Sun is still very quiet. Pages 17-18.
The (very few) benefits and the (very large) costs of the
Waxman/Markey Bill are illustrated at Pages 19-21.
Science Focus this month studies the effect of the Sun on the
formation of clouds. IT'S THE SUN, STUPID! Pages 22-23.
As always, there's our "global warming" ready reckoner, and our
monthly selection of scientific papers. Pages 24-27.
A savvy pal of mine who researches said:
There is no such thing as global warming as claimed by the liars and
myth-makers. Period of hot and cold are cyclical, and have been since
the Earth began; the cycles have varying lengths and durations. In the
mid-1950's we had a freezing period with a lit of snow during the
winter times. A couple of hundred years ago it was so cold that the
River Thames froze over and people ice skated and had parties on the
river; around ten thousand years ago there was a global cold period
that lasted a few hundred years. This was confirmed by the remains of
a large city off the coast of India: roadways and buildings about 10
miles into the sea from the current shoreline; it was also a period
when most of Europe was covered in ice; the biblical flood was the
result of the freeze cycle becoming the next warm cycle, (global
warming again), when the frozen seas started to melt, raising sea
levels, which was also the story behind Noah's Ark.
There are scientists claiming that we are about to have another mini
ice age. Who is right? The politicians are not!
There are two fundamental causes for the Earth's cold and hot cycles:
our star the Sun and solar winds, both of which are cyclical in
operation; and those cycles are of varying duration from as short as
to 25 thousand years or more." And, he sent this:
Global Warming Or Global Freezing?
Is The Ice Really Melting?
By F. William Engdahl
Author of Full Spectrum Dominance:
Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order
Scare stories about melting Arctic ice make dramatic headlines but the
scientific truth is different...
President Obama just made a melodramatic appeal at the United Nations
for global measures to dramatically curb what he called "the climate
threat," current euphemism for what is more popularly known as Global
Warming, the theory that man-made CO2 emissions from cars, coal plants
and other man-made sources are causing the earth to warm to the point
the polar icecaps are irreversibly melting and threatening to flood a
quarter or more of the earth's surface. There's only one thing wrong
with Mr. Obama's dramatic scenario: it is scientifically utterly
wrong. Since 2007 the polar icecaps have been growing not melting and
the earth has been cooling, not warming.
If the fear of death from a fictitious Swine Flu were not enough, the
scare stories on world media such as BBC or CNN, showing melting
icebergs are dramatic enough to cause one sleepless nights. The
Secretary General of the UN, Ban Ki-Moon even made a recent appeal
while standing on an Arctic ice-flow, claiming that man-made CO2
emissions were causing "100 billion tons" of polar ice to melt each
year, so that in 30 years the Arctic would be "ice-free". One
organization, the WWF, claimed that the Arctic ice was melting so fast
that in eighty years sea-levels would rise by 1.2 meters, creating
"floods affecting a quarter of the world." Wow! That's scary. Goodbye
Hamburg, New York, Amsterdam...
The publicity stunt of Ban Ki-Moon was carefully orchestrated. It was
not said that his ship could only come within 700 miles of the North
Pole owing to frozen ice. Nor that he made his stunt in the summer
when Arctic ice always melts before refreezing beginning September.
The reality about Arctic ice is quite different. Although some 10
million square kilometres of sea-ice melts each summer, each September
the Arctic starts to freeze again. The extent of the ice now is
500,000 sq km greater than it was this same time last year ? which
was, in turn, 500,000 sq km more than in September 2007, the lowest
point recently recorded (see Cryosphere Today of the University of
Illinois, http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/ ).
By next April, after months of darkness, it will be back up to 14
million sq km or likely more. As British science writer Christopher
Booker remarks, "even if all that sea-ice were to melt, this would no
more raise sea-levels than a cube of ice melting in a gin and tonic
increases the volume of liquid in the glass."
Sunbeams from cucumbers?
The current global warming propaganda scare is being hyped by
politicians and special interests such as Goldman Sachs and other Wall
Street financial firms that stand to reap billions trading new carbon
credit financial futures. They are making an all-out effort to scare
the world into a deal at the December Copenhagen Global Warming
summit, the successor to the Kyoto agreement on CO2 emission
reduction. It's been estimated that the Global Warming bill supported
by Barack Obama and his Wall Street patrons, passed by the House of
Representatives but not by the more conservative US Senate, would cost
US taxpayers some $10 trillion.
In the UK, where Prime Minister Gordon Brown is fully on the global
warming bandwagon, the BBC, the Royal Society are proposing wild
schemes for "climate engineering," including putting up mirrors in
space to keep out the sun's rays, or lining the highways with
artificial trees to suck CO2 out of the air, to be taken away and
buried in holes in the ground. Perhaps it would provide make-work for
a few thousand Britons unemployed by the ravages of the recent
financial collapse, but it would do nothing else than waste taxpayer
money already stretched to the limits in bank bailouts. The entire
farce has been compared to satirist Jonathan Swift's Gulliver who
meets a fictional character trying to extract sunbeams from cucumbers.
A major new study published in the respected Journal of Geophysical
Research of the American Geophysical Union, Influence of the Southern
Oscillation on tropospheric temperature, by scientists J. D. McLean,
C. R. de Freitas of the School of Geography, Geology and Environmental
Science, University of Auckland in New Zealand and R.M. Carter
that over the past fifty years, since 1950, fully 81% of tropical
climate change can be linked to the Pacific weather phenomenon known
as El Nino. And the remaining 19% they linked to increased solar
radiation. No man made emissions played a role.
Solar flares and not man-made CO2 emissions are the major factor
influencing world climate.
El Ninos, termed by scientists El Nino Southern Oscillations or ENSOs,
are believed by climatologists and astrophysicists to be related to
eruptions in solar activity which occur periodically.
Dr. Theodor Landscheidt of Canada's Schroeter Institute for Research
in Cycles of Solar Activity, says ENSO is the "strongest source of
natural variability in the global climate system. During the severe
ENSO event 1982/1983, when the sea surface off Peru warmed by more
than 7? C, it was discovered that there are strong links to weather in
other regions as, for instance, floods in California and intensified
drought in Africa."
Landscheidt adds, "El Ni?o and La Ni?a are subjected to external
forcing by the sun's varying activity to such a degree that it
explains nearly all of ENSO's irregularities and makes long-range
forecasts beyond the 1-year limit possible. This is no mere theory. My
forecasts of the last two El Ni?os turned out correct and that of the
last one was made more than two years ahead of the event" (Solar
Activity Controls El Ni?o and La Ni?a, in
http://www.john-daly.com/sun-enso/sun-enso.htm.). Even James Hansen,
one of the outspoken protagonists of the Global Warming idea admits,
"The forcings that drive long-term climate change are not known with
an accuracy sufficient to define future climate change...The natural
forcing due to solar irradiance changes may play a larger role in
long-term climate change than inferred from comparisons with general
circulation models alone."
El Ninos are linked to floods, droughts and other weather disturbances
in many regions of the world. In the Atlantic Ocean, effects lag
behind those in the Pacific by 12 to 18 months. They tend to occur
every three to eight years. La Ninas are the associated cooling phase
of the Pacific Ocean cycles.
According to the US National Oceans and Atmospheric Administration, in
North America, El Ni?o creates warmer-than-average winters in the
upper Midwest states and the Northeast. California and the
southwestern US become significantly wetter, while the northern Gulf
of Mexico states and northeast Mexico are wetter and cooler than
average during the El Ni?o phase of the oscillation. In Asia and parts
of Australia El Nino causes drier conditions, increasing bush fires.
This sounds remarkably like what the Global Warming scare chorus
claims is the result of manmade CI2 emissions or as they now slyly
term it, "climate change."
Warmer 1000 years ago?
In Sweden a new study (in published by Haakan Grudd of the University
of Stockholm's Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology
confirms that the Arctic today is not warmer than in previous
historical periods centuries ago before coal power plants or
automobiles. Grudd's study concludes that "The late-twentieth century
is not exceptionally warm in the new record: On decadal-to-centennial
timescales, periods around a.d. 750, 1000, 1400, and 1750 were equally
warm, or warmer. The 200-year long warm period centered on a.d. 1000
was significantly warmer than the late-twentieth century and is
supported by other local and regional paleoclimate data." (H. Grudd,
Tornetr? tree-ring width and density ad 500?2004: a test of climatic
sensitivity and a new 1500-year reconstruction of north Fennoscandian
summers, Climate Dynamics, Volume 31, Numbers 7-8 / December, 2008, in
?p=fcd6adbe04ff4cc29b7131b5184282eb&pi=0. ) Put simply, the earth was
warmer one thousand years ago than today. And there were no records of
SUVs or coal plants belching CO2 into the atmosphere back then.
The only problem with these serious scientific studies is that
mainstream media entirely ignores them, preferring dramatic scare
story scenarios such as Barack Obama presented in his UN speech or the
UN's Ban Ki-Moon in his staged Arctic ice drama.
Strangely enough, none of the Global Warming proponents that I am
aware of have tried to correlate ENSO activity with global temperature
changes. Should we instead be proposing to outlaw El Ninos or forbid
solar eruptions? It makes as much scientific sense as banning or
capping CO2 emissions. Global Warming as a new religion is one thing,
but we should be clear that the high priests are the same Gods of
Money who brought us Peak Oil religion a few years ago and the current
trillion dollar financial meltdown known as asset securitization. The
reality is that Global Warming like Peak Oil and other scares are but
another attempt by powerful vested interests to convince the world to
sacrifice that they remain in control of the events of this planet.
It's a thinly veiled attempt to misuse climate to argue for a new
Malthusian reduction of living standards for the majority of the world
while a tiny elite gains more power.
Hey it's NOT GETTING HOTTER or wetter. Do not panic. CITIES are toxic, that's all
CEMENT is a heater-upper. Use your intuition. COMMUTE from a rural area nearby is all.
<===BACK TO THE FUTURE INDEX