Hot and Cold: The Greatest Deception

[MORTARDUDE]

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...7Deception.htm

Hot and Cold: The Greatest Deception

Geoff Metcalf
Etherzone
Thursday, February 8, 2007

?Paradox implies that stating a contradiction disposes of it.?
--Mason Cooley

Those of us who are not scientists (most of us) think that science yields facts based on experimentation and empirical evidence.

I am not an academic and I've even played one on TV but as I have 'tried' (and failed) to adequately explain for a very long time is, global warming, at least as it is being peddled in media, is not real.

Yes, the earth has and will go through periods of warming and cooling, but the overwhelming empirical scientific data indicates those cycles (and they ARE a process NOT an event) are a function of solar cycles...not greenhouse gases or your SUV.

The hypothesis of global warming (and it IS a 'what if' hypothesis) is your basic SWAG (Scientific Wild Ass Guess).

According to the recent grim report from a gaggle of usual suspect climate scientists and government wonks, global warming is so sever that it will "continue for centuries", significantly impacting the planet. Really?

Dr. S. Fred Singer is an atmospheric physicist at George Mason University. I have interviewed Dr. Singer in the past and referenced him in assorted columns. He remains a leading skeptic of the scientific consensus on global warming. Singer says that the scenarios are alarmist, computer models reflect real gaps in climate knowledge, and future warming will be inconsequential or modest at most.

Some people (fueled and supported by a complicit main stream media) hold that the threat of climate change is so great that we need to fundamentally change the way we produce and use energy. To fail to do so will result in a science fiction made real climactic holocaust.




Singer says, "Climate keeps changing all the time. The fact that climate changes is not in itself a threat..."

The big scare argument is that humans are the cause for climate change. Singer admits "there's no question in my mind that humanity is able to affect climate...on a local scale." Cities are warmer than suburbs or surrounding countryside...human beings, in producing energy, in just living, generate heat."

The big question of whether or not human beings can produce a global climate change is still unanswered. "This question is not at all settled. It can only be settled by actual measurements, data. And the data are ambiguous."

Despite the cries of 'Fire' in the crowded theater, facts in evidence still maintain more than 'reasonable doubt' for those not imprinted with the new religiousity of global warming.

? There is data that the earth has warmed since 1680.

? Then there was a cooling called LIA (Little Ice Age) that continued to now.

? The data show that the climate warmed between 1900 and 1940, long before humanity used much energy.

? Then the climate cooled between 1940 and 1975.

? Then it warmed again for a very short period of time, for about five years.

? But since 1979, best measurements show that the climate has been cooling just slightly.

Singer warns about ?surface temperature? readings."You have to be very careful with the surface record?It is taken with thermometers that are mostly located in or near cities. And as cities expand, they get warmer. And therefore they affect the readings." It is called ?the urban heat island effect? which is why he prefers to trust weather satellites."

From a statistical point of view, (we neophytes think) you get more credibility out of a longer record than a shorter record, don't you? Not really.

"A longer record, in general, will give you more statistical power, if there is a general overall trend." Ah-ha...the IF word. "But, in fact, the surface record also shows a cooling. So, which part of the surface record are you going to believe? The part before 1940, that shows a warming, or the part after 1940, that shows a cooling?" Therein may be the cause of the 'coming ice age' being replaced with 'epic global warming and melting ice caps followed by catacylsmic shifting of ocean currents."

I don't know. And YOU don't know. And more important, scientists are still searching for answers and data...in other words, they don't know.

Timothy Ball, another Ph.D with 32 years as a professor of climatology says, "Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist."

Ball says, "Global Warming is?the greatest deception in the history of science."

Ball, Singer and others may be attempting to debunk the global warming scare, however, they (and some would argue reason) are being shouted down by louder, better funded voices.

Several writers have observed that only 30 years ago global cooling was the big fear.

? In 1976 Lowell Ponte wrote, "It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years.?

? Time magazine warned readers on June 24, 1974 that, "Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age." Today, however, Time has changed its mind and joined the global-warming hysteria.

Despite the yelling, screaming, and effusive funding?we don?t know what we don?t know. The rest is ?sound and fury?.

[SparrowHawk62]

Teacher asked the class, "What's the greatest invention to come along in the past century?"
Little Sally, said "The phone. We can talk to people far away."
The Teacher replied, "That's good Sally, anyone else?"
Little Boby, said "The Space Program, it's let us see the world."
The Teacher again replied, That's good, anyone else?"
Little Johnny muttered but one word, "Thermos"
"Why the Thermos?" asked the Teacher.
Johnny: Cause it keeps things hot or cold.
The Teacher then told Johnny, "Yes, but surely that's not as great as the Phone or surely not as great as the Space Program."
Johnny: No, it's better, cause how does it know!"

[SuperScout]

Actually, that was originally an Aggie joke told about ten years ago!

All the scare-talk about 'global warming' is nothing more than (1) a pseudo-scientific scam devoted to finding more money for their already flawed research, (2) an anti-capitalist Trojan horse designed to weaken or destroy the American way of life, and (3) a topic that Algore will ride as long as there are enough stupid people around to listen to him.

[MORTARDUDE]

You are right on Brice !!!

Larry

[SuperScout]

President of Czech Republic Calls Man-Made Global Warming a 'Myth' - Questions Gore's Sanity

Czech president Vaclav Klaus has criticized the UN panel on global warming, claiming that it was a political authority without any scientific basis. In an interview with "Hospod?rsk? noviny", a Czech economics daily, Klaus answered a few questions:

Q: IPCC has released its report and you say that the global warming is a false myth. How did you get this idea, Mr President??

A: It's not my idea. Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment. Also, it's an undignified slapstick that people don't wait for the full report in May 2007 but instead respond, in such a serious way, to the summary for policymakers where all the "but's" are scratched, removed, and replaced by oversimplified theses.? This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians. If the European Commission is instantly going to buy such a trick, we have another very good reason to think that the countries themselves, not the Commission, should be deciding about similar issues.?

Q: How do you explain that there is no other comparably senior statesman in Europe who would advocate this viewpoint? No one else has such strong opinions...?

A: My opinions about this issue simply are strong. Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice.

? Q: But you're not a climate scientist. Do you have a sufficient knowledge and enough information??

A: Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable and this fact scares me. The second part of the sentence should be: we also have lots of reports, studies, and books of climatologists whose conclusions are diametrally opposite.? Indeed, I never measure the thickness of ice in Antarctica. I really don't know how to do it and don't plan to learn it. However, as a scientifically oriented person, I know how to read science reports about these questions, for example about ice in Antarctica. I don't have to be a climate scientist myself to read them. And inside the papers I have read, the conclusions we may see in the media simply don't appear. But let me promise you something: this topic troubles me which is why I started to write an article about it last Christmas. The article expanded and became a book. In a couple of months, it will be published. One chapter out of seven will organize my opinions about the climate change.? Environmentalism and green ideology is something very different from climate science. Various findings and screams of scientists are abused by this ideology.?

Q: How do you explain that conservative media are skeptical while the left-wing media view the global warming as a done deal??

A: It is not quite exactly divided to the left-wingers and right-wingers. .?

Q: If you look at all these things, even if you were right ...?

A: ...I am right...?

Q: Isn't there enough empirical evidence and facts we can see with our eyes that imply that Man is demolishing the planet and himself??

A: It's such a nonsense that I have probably not heard a bigger nonsense yet.?

Q: Don't you believe that we're ruining our planet??

A: I will pretend that I haven't heard you. . I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing. Look: you represent the economic media so I expect a certain economical erudition from you. My book will answer these questions. For example, we know that there exists a huge correlation between the care we give to the environment on one side and the wealth and technological prowess on the other side. It's clear that the poorer the society is, the more brutally it behaves with respect to Nature, and vice versa.? It's also true that there exist social systems that are damaging Nature - by eliminating private ownership and similar things - much more than the freer societies. These tendencies become important in the long run. They unambiguously imply that today, on February 8th, 2007, Nature is protected uncomparably more than on February 8th ten years ago or fifty years ago or one hundred years ago.? That's why I ask: how can you pronounce the sentence you said? Perhaps if you're unconscious? Or did you mean it as a provocation only? And maybe I am just too naive and I allowed you to provoke me to give you all these answers, am I not? It is more likely that you actually believe what you say.

[English translation from Harvard Professor Lubos Motl]

[Robert Ryan]

then why heck is 35 degrees at night here in California if it suspose to be warming up.

[SuperScout]

HOUSE HEARING ON 'WARMING OF THE PLANET' CANCELED AFTER ICE STORM

The Subcommittee on Energy and Air Quality hearing scheduled for Wednesday, February 14, 2007, at 10:00 a.m. in room 2123 Rayburn House Office Building has been postponed due to inclement weather. The hearing is entitled ?Climate Change: Are Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Human Activities Contributing to a Warming of the Planet??

The hearing will be rescheduled to a date and time to be announced later.

DC WEATHER REPORT:

Wednesday: Freezing rain in the morning. Total ice accumulation between one half to three quarters of an inch. Brisk with highs in the mid 30s. North winds 10 to 15 mph...increasing to northwest 20 to 25 mph in the afternoon. Chance of precipitation near 100 percent.

Wednesday Night: Partly cloudy. Lows around 18. Northwest winds around 20 mph

[Jerry D]

I remember in the 1970's we were being told by these scientist types that we were headed for another Ice Age (Global Cooling)and they banned Freon now we are being told the dangers of Global Warming and the dangers of Cow farts (methane gas) and we will get new regulations and stuff now. hmmmmmm.

[SuperScout]

Claude Allegre, one of France's leading socialists and among her most celebrated scientists, was among the first to sound the alarm about the dangers of global warming. "By burning fossil fuels, man increased the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere which, for example, has raised the global mean temperature by half a degree in the last century," Dr. Allegre, a renowned geochemist, wrote 20 years ago in Cles pour la geologie.." Fifteen years ago, Dr. Allegre was among the 1500 prominent scientists who signed "World Scientists' Warning to Humanity," a highly publicized letter stressing that global warming's "potential risks are very great" and demanding a new caring ethic that recognizes the globe's fragility in order to stave off "spirals of environmental decline, poverty, and unrest, leading to social, economic and environmental collapse."

In the 1980s and early 1990s, when concern about global warming was in its infancy, little was known about the mechanics of how it could occur, or the consequences that could befall us. Since then, governments throughout the western world and bodies such as the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have commissioned billions of dollars worth of research by thousands of scientists. To his surprise, the many climate models and studies failed dismally in establishing a man-made cause of catastrophic global warming. Meanwhile, increasing evidence indicates that most of the warming comes of natural phenomena. Dr. Allegre now sees global warming as over-hyped and an environmental concern of second rank.

His break with what he now sees as environmental cant on climate change came in September, in an article entitled "The Snows of Kilimanjaro" in l' Express, the French weekly. His article cited evidence that Antarctica is gaining ice and that Kilimanjaro's retreating snow caps, among other global-warming concerns, come from natural causes. "The cause of this climate change is unknown," he states matter of factly. There is no basis for saying, as most do, that the "science is settled."

Dr. Allegre's skepticism is noteworthy in several respects. For one, he is an exalted member of France's political establishment, a friend of former Socialist president Lionel Jospin, and, from 1997 to 2000, his minister of education, research and technology, charged with improving the quality of government research through closer co-operation with France's educational institutions. For another, Dr. Allegre has the highest environmental credentials. The author of early environmental books, he fought successful battles to protect the ozone layer from CFCs and public health from lead pollution. His break with scientific dogma over global warming came at a personal cost: Colleagues in both the governmental and environmental spheres were aghast that he could publicly question the science behind climate change.

But Dr. Allegre had allegiances to more than his socialist and environmental colleagues. He is, above all, a scientist of the first order, the architect of isotope geodynamics, which showed that the atmosphere was primarily formed early in the history of the Earth, and the geochemical modeller of the early solar system. Because of his path-breaking cosmochemical research, NASA asked Dr. Allegre to participate in the Apollo lunar program, where he helped determine the age of the Moon. Matching his scientific accomplishments in the cosmos are his accomplishments at home: Dr. Allegre is perhaps best known for his research on the structural and geochemical evolution of the Earth's crust and the creation of its mountains, explaining both the title of his article in l' Express and his revulsion at the nihilistic nature of the climate research debate.

Calling the arguments of those who see catastrophe in climate change "simplistic and obscuring the true dangers," Dr. Allegre especially despairs at "the greenhouse-gas fanatics whose proclamations consist in denouncing man's role on the climate without doing anything about it except organizing conferences and preparing protocols that become dead letters." The world would be better off, Dr. Allegre believes, if these "denouncers" became less political and more practical, by proposing practical solutions to head off the dangers they see, such as developing technologies to sequester C02. His dream, he says, is to see "ecology become the engine of economic development and not an artificial obstacle that creates fear."

Claude Allegre received a Ph D in physics in 1962 from the University of Paris. He became the director of the geochemistry and cosmochemistry program at the French National Scientific Research Centre in 1967 and in 1971, he was appointed director of the University of Paris's Department of Earth Sciences. In 1976, he became director of the Paris Institut de Physique du Globe. He is an author of more than 100 scientific articles, many of them seminal studies on the evolution of the Earth using isotopic evidence, and 11 books. He is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the French Academy of Science.

[Seascamp]

Jerry mentions some interesting history about Freon. By the early 90?s Freon was the alleged culprit in ripping holes in the ozone layer and sun UV was going to cook our buns. Open and semi closed Freon parts cleaning tanks were banned within US industry and the replacement parts cleaning system was and is still based on a citric acid solution.

Along the way, Freon was going to get the boot from all closed loop refrigeration systems but the replacement was anhydrous ammonia based. Boy howdy, of a sudden someone figured out that if the closed loop refrigeration system were ruptured, the immediate area became very lethal due to the pressurized ammonia gas being released to surrounding atmosphere. In essence, every refrigerator or air conditioner, large or small could become absolutely deadly. Wiser minds prevailed and at last check, it appears that Freon is still used to charge refers and air conditioners and I haven?t heard about being cooked by UV for ages. This was around the same time that CTCs were banned, but that was a good move and very solid science backing up the ban.

Scamp