Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Global Warming theory up in Flames

Global Warming theory up in flames: Can increased solar activity expected in 2012 actually cool the earth?

October 07, 2010 09:37 PM EDT
views: 289 | person recommends this | comments: 1
The theory or Global Warming seems to be going up in flames as reports emerge which state that increased solar storms in 2012 and 2013 will actually coll the earth, not warm it.
The new research, which is based on a three-year snapshot of time between 2004 and 2007, suggests that the earth may cool as sun activity increases. This may prove to be ammunition for Global Warming sceptics.
As solar activity lessened at the end of one of the Sun's 11-year cycles, the new data shows that the amount of energy reaching the Earth at visible wavelengths rose rather than fell.  Scientists believe it may also be possible that during the next up-turn of the cycle in 2012, when sun activity increases, there might be a cooling effect at the Earth's surface.
If the new findings apply to long as well as short time periods, this could translate into a small degree of cooling rather than the slight warming effect shown in existing climate models. It would effectively take all of the knowledge we've been told about Global Warming and throw it out the window.
This brings to light the question of whether this whole Global Warming theory is real or fabricated to make money on things like electric cars and solar panels. Obviously, there is a need to conserve and help our planet - which we're pretty much killing slowly - but it seems as though the political talk of Global Warming may be one of the biggest scams of the century. So, who do we believe? The scientists who have done the research or the politicians trying to sell Global Warming as a new way of living in a warmer world?
According to Micheal Lockwood, a space physicist at the University of Reading, "All the evidence is that the vast majority of warming is anthropogenic. It might be that the solar part isn't quite working the way we thought it would, but it is certainly not a seismic rupture of the science."


Enhanced by Zemanta

Hal Lewis says it all about Global Warming SCAM!

0 OCTOBER 2010 | POSTED BY: TOM RICARDO | NO COMMENT

Here is one man from academia the activists will love. Hal Lewis, Professor Emeritus of the American Physical Society (APS) resigned in disgust over the ‘Global Warming Scam’. Lewis gave up his cushy job and stepped forth to reveal how the billions of dollars being pumped into the system had corrupted scientists.
Top physicist Hal Lewis said that the climate change scam is the biggest ” pseudoscientific fraud” he has seen in his illustrious career. The global warming brouhaha was to pull the wool over the people’s eyes, a rogue trend that had eaten into the integrity of the American Physical Society. He refered to the ClimateGate documents as proof of the billion dollar dupe, which has also been compiled in Montford’s book on the subject.
In a letter to the American Physical Society published by UK’s Telegraph, Hal Lewis reviles fellow physicists wedded to show me the money research, with lucre being the driving force , as Eisenhower has warned against.
Professor Lewis , in his letter, harks back to the glorious days when he chaired the Reactor Safety Study by the APS and scientists gave an impartial thesis under immense pressure and derision from corporate money-bags. He hailed the unimpeachable scholarly credentials of the erstwhile oversight committee which has eminent physicists like Pief Panofsky, Hans Bethe, and Vicki Weisskopf.
He branded the APS a sell-out ,saying it was a shame to be part of the corruption-ridden institution, and that he was forced to hand in a resignation, given the current situation.
Image Credit: global warming

Enhanced by Zemanta

Science Becoming Religion by Reasonmclucous

Tea Partiers Smarter than Democrats

The dumbest criticism the Democrats' media sheep make of Tea Party members is that Tea Partiers don't accept the global warming nonsense that most Democrats and their media sheep have fallen for. 
Most Tea Party members aren't climate experts, but they are smart enough to recognize a political con when they see one. In business cons, police warn that if something sounds too good to be true it probably is. In political cons, if something sounds too bad to be true it probably is too bad to be true.
Like most con artists, the people attempting to continue Enron's global warming scam try to oversell their claims. The global warming scammers are essentially saying that if we don't stop producing the "evil" gas carbon dioxide God will flood the world like he did in the time of Noah.
Supporters of Enron's global warming scam falsely claim that carbon dioxide (CO2) possesses some magical power to increase the temperature of the atmosphere by interacting with low energy infrared radiation (IR).
In the 90's Enron paid scientists and so called environmental groups to claim that an increase in atmospheric CO2 would cause significant temperature changes even though CO2 comprises less than 0.04% of the atmosphere. Enron even wrote the Kyoto Accords for the Clinton administration.
Enron wanted the opportunity to make a fortune by trading what the company called "carbon credits". Enron had previously made a fortune trading sulfur dioxide credits under a program set up to allow northeastern power plants to continue producing the pollution associated with acid rain.
People who are unfamiliar with science don't understand that western science has long been infected with con artists. In the Middle Ages "Alchemists" obtained money from wealthy nobles by claiming to be working on a method of turning a base metal like lead into gold.
Some of the more popular science scams today involve miraculous medical treatments and machines that use little or no energy.
Today's scientists don't trust each other to be truthful. Science journals require "peer review" of articles to discourage writers from publishing phony results that seem to support their theories. Attorneys in court often question whether a scientist witness has been paid to testify a certain way.
Scientists who have trouble getting money for legitimate research may feel they have no choice but to adjust their research and statements to conform to the desires of the businesses or political organizations that offer them money.
Many of the global warming "scientists" who call themselves "climatologists" lack the qualifications for making such claims. The only qualifications most of them have are for predicting short term weather.
Understanding the way climate changes over time requires a background in astrophysics and the operation of earth's complex energy system as well as an understanding of weather patterns.
The Milankovich cycles are the primary factors causing climate. Changes in the earth's tilt on its axis determine how temperatures change from one season to another. Changes in the sun's output affect short term changes in air temperature . 
Those familiar with thermodynamics know that physicist R.W. Wood disproved the claim that greenhouses and the atmosphere stayed warm by reflecting IR.
Those who support the claim if global warming don't talk like scientists.
Real scientists don't use terms like "settled science" or "consensus" when talking about their theories. "Consensus" is a political term not a scientific term Scientists don't rely on consensus because the consensus view has been wrong before. In 1895 the consensus among physicists was that atoms were the smallest particles of matter. The consensus was proved wrong when Sir J.J.Thomson reported his discovery of the electron.
Priests suggest their statements represent matters that are "settled". Real scientists qualify their claims and look for additional tests to make to see if they have missed something. Scientists who believe they may have an accurate model of the nucleus of atoms are using the Hadron Collider to determine if they might have missed something.
I learned in high school that when scientists conduct experiments, they should mention conditions that could reduce the accuracy of results. Those who claim global warming ignore the likelihood that the 0.25% change in temperature during the 20th Century might indicates nothing more than the use of different equipment.
Real scientists use mathematically rigorous methods. The people who claim global warming rely on the mathematically meaningless term called "average global temperature".
Priests use terms similar to "denier" and "contrarian" to describe heretics who question their statements. Scientists provide.the results of experiments and observations to refute critics.
Contrary to the statements of President Barack Obama and various energy companies, there is no such thing as clean energy. Large wind generators kill birds and many believe they are visual pollution. The companies that produce solar cells in China are heavy polluters. Using solar energy to heat water to produce electricity requires large amounts of water.
Carbon dioxide is the most essential molecule in the atmosphere. Plants need it to convert solar energy into the bonds that hold complex carbon molecules together. Humans and other animals then use those carbon molecules for food.
Animals than return part of the carbon to the atmosphere as CO2 to be used by plants to complete the carbon cycle. Unfortunately, humans remove large amounts of plant carbon from the cycle by using plant products for items like clothing and paper in which the carbon isn't returned to the atmosphere. Some unused portions of food products are put in landfills instead of the carbon being returned to the atmosphere. We actually need to use fossil fuels to replace the carbon that we remove from the carbon cycle. 
I have various posts on this blog exposing flaws in the global warming scam. I also have a Global Warming, Not Blog that primarily only has global warming type posts. 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Ken Buck is right about global warming (vote here in poll) | ken, buck, statewide - Opinion - Colorado Springs Gazette, CO

Ken Buck is right about global warming (vote here in poll) | ken, buck, statewide - Opinion - Colorado Springs Gazette, CO