14
POPSNASA: 70% of climate change due to Pacific oscillations, not CO2 What this means is no matter how much you change your CO2 footprint, how much you try to be CO2 green, no matter how much liberal governments tax you - you cannot save the planet from its natural cycles. Say they reduced the CO2 25%. Say the CO2 is the driver for the remaining 30% of Global Warming (which it cannot be, but let’s just be only half as ridiculous as the IPCC), then all that effort would only impact 7.5% of the forces driving the global climate. The other 92.5% would roll on, impervious to the effort. And since CO2 is not 100% of the remaining 30% of the equation (more like 10%), a more realistic expectation is that all the suffering that would go into dropping CO2 levels by 25% would result in a less than 1% change in the forces driving our climate.
14
POPSPrediction: More alarmism in 2008 “In the last few months,” Mr. Gore said, “it has been harder and harder to misinterpret the signs that our world is spinning out of kilter.” But he was being too modest. Thanks to availability entrepreneurs like him, misinterpreting the weather is getting easier and easier.
7
POPS“Scientific Consensus” That Paves The Road To Nowhere Now maybe all of this - and there’s lots more - isn’t enough for Gore, but it is producing results, many of which could be important for anti-pollution, oil-conserving purposes beyond any possible curtailing of global warming, and we have meanwhile learned from the Kyoto Protocol that ill-considered grandiosity doesn’t produce anything but braggadocio about good intentions that pave the road to nowhere. Supposedly, there’s a “scientific consensus” that human-induced warming will deliver a series of enormous catastrophes if left untreated, but the extent of concurrence has never been what it has mostly been made out to be. Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) recently released a list of 400 of the growing number of reputable scientists from all over the world who have voiced serious doubts about one aspect or another of the thesis.
6
POPSClimate models vs reality Lead author David Douglass elaborates: The observed pattern of warming, comparing surface and atmospheric temperature trends, does not show the characteristic fingerprint associated with greenhouse warming. The inescapable conclusion is that the human contribution is not significant and that observed increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases make only a negligible contribution to climate warming.
11
POPSIce sheets growing, temps cooling These findings led him to conclude that the meteorological record "shows that the observed variations in air temperature in the real Arctic are in many aspects not consistent with the projected climatic changes computed by climatic models for the enhanced greenhouse effect," because, in his words, "the temperature predictions produced by numerical climate models significantly differ from those actually observed."
4
POPSDissidents Against Dogma "A geologist has a much longer perspective. There are several salient points about our earth that the greenhouse theorists overlook (or are not aware). The first of these is that the planet has never been this cool. There is abundant fossil evidence to support this--from plants of the monocot order (such as palm trees) in the rocks of Cretaceous Age in Greenland and warm water fossil in sedimentary rocks of the far north. this is hardly the first warming period in the earth's history. The present global warming is hardly unique. It is arriving pretty much "on schedule." One thing, for sure, is that the environmental community has always spurned any input from geologists (many of whom are employed by the petroleum industry). No environmental conference, such as Kyoto, has ever invited a geologist, a paleontologist, a paleoclimatologist. It would seem beneficial for any scientific investigatory to include such scientific disciplines.
Newest Clips
see Newest Clips
2
Latest Pops
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Tags
Print
Save
Turn on live update