AGW Today: Come On, There’s Not Really Warming, Is There?
Posted on March 20, 2009
Alan Deegan isn’t buying the AGW kool aid
An invitation to global warming alarmists: “Please offer objective scientific proof of man’s influence on global warming.”
Never mind. There is none because true scientific debate has never occurred among experts; Al Gore wisely refuses to publicly debate his biased creed.
Activists ignore declining solar irradiance, volcanic eruptions and other major factors that have bearing on climate change.
Unless we wake up to the fact that the global warming train is fueled mostly by calamitous opinions based on selective, self-supportive data, the world’s economy will be fractured by the huge regulatory costs inflicted by draconian ecologists.
Although both are anecdotal, alarmist “evidence” that drought, tornadoes, tsunamis, hurricanes, melting ice caps, etc. result from man’s influence becomes less credible when compared to recently reported record low temperatures across the world.
Denier! Was this peer reviewed? What is his degree in? Best I can find is that he is a dentist. So, how dare he discuss this subject, when he should be listening to his betters!!!
- Al Gore: B.A. in government
- Barack Obama: B.A. political science with a specialization in international relations. Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude
- U.N. Secretary Ban Moon-Ki: bachelor’s degree in international relations. Master’s degree in public administration
- U.N Climate Change Chief Yvo de Boer: technical degree in social work
- James Hansen: B.A. in Physics and Mathematics. M.S. in Astronomy. Ph.D. in Physics
So, these are some of the big shots we are supposed to listen to, none of whom have a degree in climatology, or even meteorology. But, since they believe in anthropogenic global warming, You. Must. Take. Their. Words. As. Holy. Writ.
Atmospheric carbon dioxide increases have long been offered as proof of anthropogenic greenhouse warming. The U. S. Dept. of Energy (www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/ggrpt/carbon.html) offers some facts about CO2 emissions in this country: in 1995 they totaled 5,348.4 metric tons, rising 16 percent to 6021.8 metric tons in 2007. If the alarmists are right, one would expect a corresponding increase in earth’s temperature in 12 years. It has not happened.
Yeah, what happened to that continued warming?
Arctic sea ice growth finished the year in 2008 at the same level as 1979.
The oceans have been cooling since 2003.
Sea ice is growing at the fastest pace on record.
Greenland’s glaciers are stabilizing.
There are growing fears of a coming freeze worse than the ice age.
Alaskan Sea Glaciers are advancing for the first time in 250 years.
And, for the second straight year the Earth is, in fact, cooling… not warming.
PS: I do believe that the Earth has warmed since the end of the Little Ice Age, with Mankind having a small piece of the pie. That’s what happens: the climate goes one way, then it goes another, and, every once in a while, it really goes one way. But AGW is not about science, it is about money, fame, politics, and control.
» Filed Under AGW hyposterics, Global Warming, News, Science/pseudo-science
Trackback URL
Comments
5 Responses to “AGW Today: Come On, There’s Not Really Warming, Is There?”
Leave a Reply
GREENPEACE is for the extremly stupid i mean only a competly idiot would go around in some garbage scows and try to stop oil tankers or run around to airports and stuff unfurling stupid bannrs with stupid slogans printed on them I mean GREENPEACE IS STUPID THEY SHOULD REALY REPLACE THE DOVE WITH A HEADLESS CHICKEN BECUASE THATS HOW THEY BEHAVE
Gooniebird–Your argument is moot since you are not the brightest person around. If you are going to call others stupid, you should at least have a high-school education yourself. Your grammar is atrocious (look it up!). Have you ever heard of a period? It looks like this: “.”. It goes at the end of a sentence. Also, wtf is a “competly idiot”? I think you mean a “complete idiot”, which in this case would be you. You’re not helping your cause. I suggest you shut up and learn a bit before you condemn others. Just some helpful advice.
Dear Sir,
I applaud your call for objective proof of man’s influence on global warming, but that herald has already been answered. Earth’s atmospheric CO2 concentrations have risen by 35% since the beginning of the industrial age, most significantly in the last 100 years. Since there hasn’t been any other source of increased greenhouse gases other than increased combustion from human activity, along with a loss of sequestration sinks (forest land), I believe man’s culpability is apparent.
You can argue that there have been some changes in the trends of global warming, such as upper ocean cooling, but that cooling trend you’ve cited is just a small fluctuation in the overall warming trend.
By the way, gooniebird–go back to school and learn how to write.
That is interesting, Jason. But, you are missing a few points.
First, science has shown that temperature goes up prior to an increase in CO2.
Second, CO2 has continued to increase over the last 10 years, yet, the temps are actually staying flat or going down. If there is a direct correlation between temp and co2, how can temps go down.
And, interestingly, there are actually more trees in America then there were several hundred years ago.
So, are you saying that nature has nothing to do with it?
Anyone who has an aquarium and is trying to manage dissolved co2 concentrations (for optimum plant growth) will know, without any fancy degrees, that the higher the temperature of the water, the less co2 that can be dissolved. If the water temp rises, co2 leaves the water and goes into the atmosphere.