GLOBAL WARMING:
MYTHS AND REALITY
by Jarret B. Wollstein
(no copyright that I am aware of)
According
to militant proponents of global warming theory, the earth is on the verge of a
runaway greenhouse effect that could destroy the human race and indeed most life
on the planet. The primary
culprit, they claim, is human emissions of green house gases - particuIarly
carbon dioxide (CO2), belching out of everything from our cars, to our
factories, to our barbecue grills.
We even emit CO2 when we breathe!
According
to this theory, increasingly presented as absolute fact, only radical
reductions in CO2 emissions can possibly save us. According to global warming proponents, "the time for
debate is over" . . . and global warming skeptics should be Òtreated like
Islamic terroristsÓ.
Global
warming true believers also insist that an international ÒconsensusÓ of
scientists agrees with this positionÉÓthe time for debate is overÓÉ and global
warming skeptics are either industry shills, incredibly misguided, or simply
evil and should be silenced.
Thus
British foreign secretary Jack Straw has said that Òskeptics should be treated
like advocates of Islamic terror and denied access to the media.Ó
Grist
Magazine has called for
Nuremberg-style Òwar crimeÓ trials for those who deny that human beings are
causing a global climate disaster.
(Read it yourself at http://epw.senate.gov/fact.cfmparty=rep&id=264568
and http://gristmill.grist.org/print/2006/9/19/
11408/1106show_comments=no)
George
Monbiot (author of the best selling book The Age of Consent: A Manifesto for
a New World Order) wrote in the Guardian paper that, ÒEvery time someone drowns as a result
of floods in Bangladesh, an airline executive should be dragged out of his
office and drownedÓ.
GLOBAL WARMING
PROPONENTS ARE DEMANDING TOTAL CONTROL OF OUR LIVES
"The only really
good technology is no technology at all"
John
Shuttleworth, Friends of the Earth.
To
combat global warming, militants say we must all accept drastic reductions in
our standard of living starting now, steadily increasing, year after year,
until much of industrial society is swept away. Only thus can the earth, and
perhaps mankind, be saved.
To
achieve this radical restructuring of human society, global warming proponents
demand that we give virtually unlimited power to the government to control what
we eat, how we travel, and how our industries operate, with no dissent or
resistance permitted.
Cars,
jet travel for the public, air conditioning, refrigeration, and indeed many if
not most of the conveniences of modem life will simply have to be abolished, as
quickly as politically feasible.
As one environmental activist puts it, "Everything modern has to
go!"
While
intoning these demands, often in the language of fanatical true believers, what
global warming militants seldom discuss is the real cost of their proposals -
both in terms of dollars and in terms of human lives.
Just
radically curtailing the use of refrigeration would result in millions of human
deaths from food spoilage and contamination. Restrictions on the use of cars,
airplanes and other means of transportation would wipe out much of the progress
of the last 100 years. And
drastically curtailing industrial activity would result in global depression,
disease and death.
Like
it or not, industrial society has made possible long lives and prosperity for
billions of people who otherwise would have died at a young age from poverty,
disease, and starvation.
Fortunately
for those of us who like regular meals, central heating, cars, and freedom,
virtually every claim of the global warming lobby is dead wrong, except for the
fact that the earth is warming.
But why is the earth warming and by how much?
GLOBAL WARMING
MILITANTS ARE WRONG ON JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING
According
to the UN Panel on Climate Change, the earth indeed has been warming. . . since
about 1650 AD - centuries before factories belching CO2 and other greenhouse
gases even existed. Even more
important, the earth is not "the warmest it has ever been." The same Panel makes clear that
the earth was much warmer during the Medieval Warm Period when human agriculture
flourished!
Our
climate is in fact continually changing, and the cause is not and could not be
CO2. CO2 accounts for less than 3%
of all greenhouse gases, and only 6% of atmospheric CO2 is produced by human
activity. That means that less
than 2/1,000 of all CO2 is produced by human activity.
So even if we wiped out every car, power
plant, jet liner, and human being from the face of the earth, there would be no
noticeable effect on global CO2 levels.
The
most important greenhouse gas by far is water vapor, which evaporates from
oceans, lakes and rivers.
Atmospheric water vapor levels - like natural CO2 emissions from
volcanoes and animals - rises and falls with changes in solar activity.
To
put it another way, the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere is the result of
changes in solar activity, not the cause of it. Climate change is natural, continuous, and caused by changes
in solar emissions. Over hundreds of thousands of years, the earth's average
surface temperature has varied within a narrow 4-degree temperature range. That
variation causes both "warm periods," like we are now living in, and
"cold periods' accompanied by ice ages, which periodically destroy most
life on earth.
More
CO2 actually has a beneficent effect on the environment. As the March 2007
issue of Civil Defense Perspectives explains, "Largely because of
increased CO2, the U.S. had nearly 200 billion cubic feet more standing timber
in 1990 than in 1950."
While
the earth's current, natural warming will have some negative effects on some
groups (such as island dwellers), it will also have lots of positive effects on
many more groups, including the expansion of the growing season. Besides, there
is nothing we can do to control the solar cycle which causes global warming.
Remember:
Our sun gives off more radiation in one second than all human activity produces
in 1,000 years!
Further,
even earth-bound natural forces are overwhelmingly more important in
determining atmospheric greenhouse gas levels than human activity. For example,
the explosion of Mt. Pinatubo in the Philippines on June 15, 1991, put more
greenhouse gases (including water vapor) into the atmosphere than all human
industrial activity in the preceding 78 years.
Yes,
the world has real environmental problems caused by man, including pollution of
the seas and destruction of rain forests. But the "global warming
crisis" caused by mankind is a myth.
LYING TO YOU
ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING
"We
have 25 or so years invested in the work. Why should I make the data available to
you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it."
Hockey
Stick co-creator Phil Jones, replying to an inquiring Warick Hughes.
Because
telling the truth about global warming wouldn't further militant
environmentalists' global warming crusade, which will give them enormous power
over our lives, they often resort to distortions, misrepresentations and
outright lies.
For
example, while the UN's 1995 "Global Temperature Chart" clearly
demonstrates that the earth was much warmer than today during the Medieval Warm
Period, more recent UN temperature charts have eliminated the Warm Period
altogether.
Instead
of accurate long-term temperature information - which shows the earth
periodically warming and cooling, militant environmentalists like Al Gore offer
us a "hockey stick" graph fallaciously showing a steady rise in the
earth's temperature for 1,000 years.
These
"continuous warming" graphs contradict thoroughly documented periods
when the earth was getting cooler, including the "little Ice Age" from
1450 to 1850, and a period of record cold from 1940 -1970.
In
fact, the 1940-1970 cooling period resulted in a frenzy in which the media
claimed that human industrial activity (particularly our old friend, CO2
emissions) was about to cause by
1995 a new ice age which
would threaten all life on earth.
Popular magazines, like Popular Science, even featured terrifying pictures on their covers
of major U.S. cities covered by ice.
Obviously,
the environmental alarmists were completely wrong then about the impending
"global cooling crisis," just as they are wrong today about the
"global warming crisis."
In
addition to omitting periods when the earth was cooling from their charts,
global warming alarmists also omit other data, which contradicts their disaster
claims, including such information as:
á
The southern hemisphere
of the earth has been generally cooling for the past fifty years,
á
Hundreds of years of
data show that temperature rises precede increase in CO2 levels, rather than
following them,
á
Ice cover at the North
and South Poles is growing, which results in more glaciers breaking away
á
Throughout the 20th
century, temperatures have been rising on other planets in our solar system -
including Mars, Jupiter, Pluto, and Triton, Neptune's largest moon where few
people drive SUVs. This clearly points to increased solar activity as the cause
of global warming on the Earth, rather than any human activity. This fact is supported by extensive
NASA satellite data.
CLIMATE IS
CONTINUALLY CHANGING
"The
bad news is that the climate model on which so much effort is expended are
unreliable because they still use fudge-factors rather than physics to
represent important things like evaporation and convection, clouds and
rainfall. "
Princeton Physicist Freeman
Dyson.
The
assertion that current global warming is "historically unprecedented"
is also false. The earth's climate
is continually changing, and there were periods in the past when it was much,
much warmer than it is today.
Cycles
that drive climate change include the Earth's 100,000-year elliptical orbit
around the sun, its 41,000year axial tilt cycle, and a 1,500-year solar cycle.
In the most elliptical phase of the Earth's orbit, the sun's rays must travel 3
percent farther to reach the planet. The Earth's axial tilt ranges from 22.1 to
24.5 degrees and is currently at 23 degrees.
Climate
on earth naturally and radically changes over time. For example, during one
warm period about 50 million years ago, the Arctic had a semi-tropical climate,
similar to Florida today. The Arctic Ocean was free of ice year-round, and was
populated by alligators and turtles. We know that fact because fossil remains
of seeds, plants and animals have been found buried deep in the Arctic.
The
bottom line: Don't worry about global warming. It is not caused by human beings
or by our CO2 emissions. The amount of warming that is occurring is normal and
modest, and does not threaten the earth or human life. The estimated one-degree
increase in the next 100 years isn't going to melt the ice caps or put London
and New York ten feet under water.
Since
the modest global warming we have been recently experiencing is in reality
caused by a 50,000-year solar cycle interacting with the primary greenhouse gas
(water vapor produced from the oceans and seas), there is nothing we can do
about it even if we wanted to.
Our
sun - which is millions of times larger than the earth - emits more energy in a
minute than all human industrial activity in history, and there is nothing we
can do to change solar activity.
Further,
the moderate global warming we have been experiencing actually benefits human,
animal and plant life by making winters more moderate, decreasing deaths from
the cold, decreasing the need for heating, and increasing the global food
supply.
THE FAKE ÒCONSENSUS"
ON GLOBAL WARMING
"The
believers {in man-made global warming] are not only intolerant of dissent -
they are convinced that all skeptics must be motivated by greed or other evil
forces. "
Owen McShane, director,
Centre for Resource Management Studies and co-founder of the New Zealand
Climate Science Coalition.
If
global warming is not man-made, not an impending disaster, and actually good
for the earth, why are so many prominent people claiming the exact opposite?
The
answer is found in three words is: first fear, then money and power. Many in the environmental movement are
fearful, terrified of our modern society that moves so quickly and changes so
rapidly. This is indeed sad to
behold. It is encouraged, sadly,
by politicians and other forces that want to control the people of the planet.
They
reward those who promote the popular global warming disaster myth with
promotions, large grants, big book and video sales (like AI Gore's bestselling
"An Inconvenient Truth" video), and more political power. The
ideology of "impending global warming disaster" is indeed a very
convenient lie for would-be power-seekers.
Literally billions of
dollars (particularly from government and other globalist interests) are
pouring into the coffers of environmental groups, which repeat the "global
warming disaster" party line.
All
of this money has resulted in the public being constantly bombarded by
ever-more shrill forecasts of global warming doom and gloom. And it's getting
worse. Schools are now indoctrinating children as young as five about the
impending "global warming disaster." Posters in schools warn, "Your mommy and daddy are
destroying the
planet." This just creates
more fear.
"Global
warming" has become the new, politically-correct truth, and those who
question it are increasingly denied access to the media, refused jobs, or are
stigmatized as evil "destroyers of the earth."
In
fact, the claimed "scientific consensus on global warming," is
largely a fraud. One of the
largest polls of climatologists ever conducted found that just 34.7 percent
agreed with the contention that' global warming of a degree or two by the end
of the 21st Century is caused by human industrial activity.' Thousands of other scientists disagree
even with that mild projected warming.
Skeptics
include some of the world's foremost scientists: 85 climate experts who signed
the 1995 Leipzig Declaration. . . 4,000 scientists from around the world
(including 70 Nobel laureates) who signed the Heidelberg Appeal. . . and the
17,000 American scientists who signed the Oregon Petition denying that human
activity was the cause of global warming.
You can see a complete list at http://www.sepp.org/
or http://www.globalwarming
hysteria.com/.
In
any event, scientific fact is not established by opinion polls, but by
science. The entire process of
"scientific consensus building" cited by global warming militants is
largely a fraud created by a powerful political establishment to deceive the
public and intimidate any unsympathetic politicians and reporters.
Here,
as reported by Civil Defense Perspectives, is how the process of
"consensus building" works: "Consensus-building is carried
out by trained 'facilitators' who ask questions designed to elicit silence or
to force individuals who might be opposed to a policy to identify
themselves."
"If
the facilitator is unable to quiet his objections, the process can be delayed
until troublemakers are replaced by more cooperative individuals."
In
other words, anyone who doesn't support the "global warming doomsday"
hypothesis is simply not invited back to the next meeting, and so on, until all
opposition to the predetermined global warming claims is eliminated.
"The
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) declared that a consensus by
2,000 scientists had determined that global warming was caused by human
activity. The 'consensus' stands in public perception despite the vocal
disagreement of thousands of scientists."
"Head-to-head
debate is increasingly being characterized as 'childish' and as leading to
'gridlock.' [i.e., slowing down the global warming gang's power grab]. It is
frequently being replaced with the consensus process, which predetermines
outcomes and removes accountability to the people affected by it."
["Consensus v. Agreement," Civil Defense Perspectives, July 1997]
FALSE COMPUTER
MODELS: GARBAGE IN, GARBAGE OUT
"Scientist
Peter Doran confirmed in 2002 that the Antarctic has been cooling while climate
models all predict a strong warming."
Politically Incorrect Guide
to Global Warming, p. 127.
The
world's best meteorologists using the most advanced computers cannot predict local
weather two weeks in the future.
So how can global warming proponents predict the entire world's climate
50 or 100 years in the future? The
answer is that they can't. Long-term, "global climate models" can't
predict cloud formation, evaporation of water from the oceans, the effect on
climate of particulate matter in the atmosphere, or a thousand other variables
that would have to be understood in detail - as well as the
complex interaction between
all of these factors - to predict global climate even a few months in the
future, much less 50 or 100 years in the future.
In
fact, global warming computer disaster models are self-serving games, whose
disastrous outcome is the predictable result of unproven (and often false)
assumptions about the importance of CO2 and how the earth's climate behaves.
Look
at it this way: To prove that a model of what will happen 50 years in the
future is accurate, the model would have had to be made 50 years ago, and shown
to be correct today. There are no such computer models.
Indeed,
the exact opposite is true: Computer models from the 1970s predicted that by
the year 2000, increasing CO2 would cause a new ice age.
KYOTO
PROTOCOLS: THE IMPOSSIBLE DREAM
"In
short, if we can rise to the challenge, the permanent abolition of the wheel
would have the marvelously synergistic effect of creating thousands of new jobs
- as blacksmiths, farriers, grooms, and so on - at the same time as it
conserved energy and saved the planet from otherwise inevitable devastation.
"
Catherine
Bennett, The Guardian (UK),
In
Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, 10,000 representatives, spectators and
journalists from dozens of nations met at a UN-led meeting, and created a
document now known as the "Kyoto Protocols," calling for the
"rich" countries of the world to reduce their emission of
"greenhouse gases," particularly CO2.
A
series of subsequent international meetings fleshed out the details of Kyoto,
cumulating in a July 2001 conference in Bonn, Germany. To date, some 178
nations have signed or ratified the Kyoto Protocols. President Clinton of the
U.S. also signed the Protocols.
However the U.S. Senate rejected ratification 96-0 due to Kyoto's flaws.
In
the final Kyoto document, some 39 "rich" Western nations were called
upon to reduce their emission of six greenhouse gases by the year 2012, to at
least 5% below their 1990 levels of emissions. More importantly, these called-for reductions would mean
that the 39 rich western nations would have to cut emissions by some 20% below
projected 2012 levels.
The
only known way to achieve this would be by radical reductions in industrial
activity in the west, including draconian curtailment of the use of cars and
airplanes, drastic reductions in heating and air conditioning, and perhaps
closing all factories one day a week.
Such
cutbacks would almost certainly trigger a global depression that would cripple
poor countries as well as rich countries.
However, such costs are virtually never mentioned by supporters of
Kyoto. Also proposed were new global carbon taxes, emissions permits, and
enforcement through UN "monitors" and police to be stationed in every
western nation.
However
even such drastic sacrifices to "save the earth" would in reality
have little effect on greenhouse emissions or the global climate, even if
militant environmentalists are right about the effect of industrial emissions
on climate.
The
reason is that most of the world's nations - containing at least 70% of the
world's population - are not covered by the Kyoto Protocols.
That
includes billions of people in rapidly-industrializing nations like China (1.2
billion people) and India (1.1 billion people), as well as the nations of South
America, Africa and most of Asia. These countries are increasing their
greenhouse gas emissions at record rates, yet because they are
"poor," the only way most countries would sign the Kyoto accords was
by being exempted from them!
As a result, even Kyoto's
supporters admit that even if the Kyoto Protocols were fully implemented in all
39 western nations, at best the effect on global climate would be tiny.
However, even this result is unlikely.
The
more likely result of Kyoto would be the closing of industrial plants in the
west and the opening of new plants in nations like China, Indonesia and India,
which have far more lax environmental laws. For example, China is powering much of its new industrial
revolution with coal-fired power plants, which emit 5-10 as much CO2 and other
greenhouse gases as do cleaner plants in the U.S. and Western Europe.
So
the net effect of Kyoto would likely be the destruction of industry in the
west, while actually increasing total global emissions of greenhouse gases.
In
reality, signatories to Kyoto have not reduced their emissions of greenhouse
gases and show little sign that they will in the future. For instance in 2003-2004,
"Emissions from 40 industrial nations [including the U.S.] climbed 1.6%
overall to 17.8 billion tons of carbon dioxide - mainly from power plants,
factories and cars." (Alister Doyle, "Rich Nations' Greenhouse Gases
Up, Despite Kyoto," Environmental News Network, 9-1-06.)
However,
their own lack of compliance with Kyoto has not stopped leaders and the media
in other countries from condemning the U.S and President Bush for "not
signing Kyoto."
For
example, French foreign policy expert Guillaume Parmentier remarked: "The
vast majority of Europeans would be delighted if President Bush fails to win
re-election on November 2 [2004].
European animosity toward the incumbent began with his administration's
rejection of the Kyoto Treaty."
In
reality, the Kyoto calls for reducing greenhouse gases are unrealistic and
irrelevant to climate change, since these emissions aren't causing climate
change. Further, if the Kyoto
Protocols could somehow be implemented, the result would be a global economic
disaster, harming poor as well as rich nations.
In
brief, Kyoto is not only an impossible, but an undesirable dream.
REJECT GLOBAL
WARMING TYRANNY
"You'll
find more dissent at a North Korean political rally than in this program".
Dave
ShifflettÕs review for Bloomberg News of Tom Brokaw's "global warming" special, July 16,2006.
The
"global warming doomsday" theory is in fact fraught with error and
bad science. It is little more than a politically-motivated power grab by
politicians and extreme environmentalists, who have benefited and will continue
to benefit by getting more money and more power to "save us" from
ourselves.
While
human industrial activity is not causing climate change, that has not stopped
money-hungry bureaucrats from proposing new carbon taxes, emissions permits,
and police power over every business - from your comer dry cleaner, to the
largest industrial plants.
The
new extreme global warming disaster agenda is in fact that old "back to
the earth" socialism, which longs for a simpler time, when the king's word
was law, people seldom ventured beyond the village in which they were born, and
heated their homes with animal dung.
To
some that sounds romantic and "eco-friendly," but for billions it
would mean poverty, slavery, disease, and premature death.
Only
modem industrial capitalism can provide affluence and freedom of choice for
all, and only the mass consumption of energy can make modem industrial
capitalism possible. By seeking to make us all feel guilty about our wealth and
our consumption of energy, the global warming doomsday lobby is actually
seeking to repeal the 20th century, and, in the process, to condemn billions to
needless suffering and death.
If
environmental extremists wish to live in 15th Century primitivism, let them
move to Somalia or Madagascar, and leave the rest of us alone.
DEBUNKING
GLOBAL WARMING NONSENSE
"Kyoto
is the first component of an authentic global governance." - former
French President Jacques Chirac.
As
voices demanding that we surrender our freedom and prosperity to prevent a
non-existent climate disaster grow ever louder, so too do those with the
courage to speak out against this fraud.
Among
those who deserve a place in the global warming truth hall of fame are:
1) The Heartland
Institute for their "Instant
Expert's Guide to Global Warming", the Environment and Climate News
monthly tabloid/magazine and other publications. . .
http://www.heartland.org/archives/studies/
ieguide.htm
The Heartland Institute
19 South LaSalle #903
Chicago, IL 60603
2) British Channel 4 which produced the excellent film, The Global
Warming Swindle, which you can view
or download at . . .
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4499562022478442170.
ISIL's
Kenyan Representative James Shikwati was featured in this documentary. He stated that attempts by the West to
saddle developing countries with pathetically inadequate "green"
technology like solar and wind power amounted to an attempt to block
industrialization. The left's mantra he stated is: "Don't touch your oil,
don't touch your coal."
He
went on to say that you can't operate a steel plant with solar collectors. In the same program Patrick Moore,
co-founder of Greenpeace, who resigned because of the outlandish demands and
claims of green extremists, said that depriving developing countries of
essential energies was "anti-human."
3) The Competitive
Enterprise Institute and Regnery
Publishing, which produced and distributed The Politically Incorrect Guide
to Global Warming by Christopher
Homer.
You
can earn your own place in the global warming truth hall of fame by
distributing this article, learning more of the truth behind global warming and
speaking out whenever you can - at public forums, on radio talk shows, in
newspaper editorials, and elsewhere - to expose the truth and myths of global
warming.
The
whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed - and thus
clamorous to be led to safety - by menacing it with an endless series of
hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
H.L. Mencken
This
aritlce was only slightly changed from: Freedom Network News, May-June 2007, #75, published by The International Society for
Individual Liberty, 836-B Southampton
Road, #299, Benicia, California 94510-1960 Tel: (707) 746-8796. Fax: (707)
746-8797. E-mail: isil@isil.org. World Wide Web: www.isil.org www.free-market.net.
Home * Hair Analysis * Saunas * Books * Articles
Detoxification Protocols
* Courses * About Dr. Wilson