The mainstream statement is this:
Climate change is happening!
Our Earth is warming. Earth's average temperature has risen by 1.5°F over the past century, and is projected to rise another 0.5 to 8.6°F over the next hundred years.
Global warming refers to the recent and ongoing rise in global average temperature near Earth's surface. It is caused mostly by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
President Obama's EPA ruled in 2009 that CO2 was a pollutant that needed to be regulated.
Recent climate changes, however, cannot be explained by natural causes alone. Research indicates that natural causes do not explain most observed warming, especially warming since the mid-20thcentury. Rather, it is extremely likely that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming.
A report published today has determined what climate scientists already suspected: 2014 was the warmest year since such records have been kept.
The baseline temperature in the NOAA report, for example, is the average temperature of all the years from 1981 through 2014. The report compares the global average temperature from each year from the 1880s through last year. While there is a lot of variation looking at the whole set of data, it's blatantly obvious how quickly temperatures have risen in recent decades.
Antarctic Ice Sheet is melting which will cause a disaster.
Our Earth is warming. Earth's average temperature has risen by 1.5°F over the past century, and is projected to rise another 0.5 to 8.6°F over the next hundred years.
Global warming refers to the recent and ongoing rise in global average temperature near Earth's surface. It is caused mostly by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
President Obama's EPA ruled in 2009 that CO2 was a pollutant that needed to be regulated.
Recent climate changes, however, cannot be explained by natural causes alone. Research indicates that natural causes do not explain most observed warming, especially warming since the mid-20thcentury. Rather, it is extremely likely that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming.
A report published today has determined what climate scientists already suspected: 2014 was the warmest year since such records have been kept.
The baseline temperature in the NOAA report, for example, is the average temperature of all the years from 1981 through 2014. The report compares the global average temperature from each year from the 1880s through last year. While there is a lot of variation looking at the whole set of data, it's blatantly obvious how quickly temperatures have risen in recent decades.
Antarctic Ice Sheet is melting which will cause a disaster.
............................
Climate change is happening!
Nobody denies that! But it is a nonsensical statement as we know that the climate is changing all the time and it always has.
The exact formulation of the words in a statement is of importance as one sentence can be used in a questionnaire for the purposes of a survey or statistical study and this one is a precise statement that nobody can deny.
Nobody denies that! But it is a nonsensical statement as we know that the climate is changing all the time and it always has.
The exact formulation of the words in a statement is of importance as one sentence can be used in a questionnaire for the purposes of a survey or statistical study and this one is a precise statement that nobody can deny.
Our Earth is warming. Earth's average temperature has risen by 1.5°F over the past century,
This is true and nobody denies it. Temperature is always swinging up and down and has always done so. It is natural and it follows rather well known cycles.
Around 1600 temperature was very low (Little Ice Age) and we are still on the way up from this cold downperiod. The temperature curve is quite normal.
President Obama's EPA ruled in 2009 that CO2 was a pollutant that needed to be regulated.CO2 is not a pollutant as it is what nature "inhales" to produce oxygene for us and the mammals. We breathe out what the forests breathe in and the forests breathe out what we breathe in.
If the CO2 in the air is higher we can blame it on human activity. Yes, but why not blame it on the deforestation of earth? Humans are taking away all the forests that should use this CO2 for growing and producing oxygene. We could reverse this by planting new forests all over the globe and also by creating "green energy" by cultivating algea, which consume CO2. From algae we can make both food (proteins and minerals) and fuel (oil and gasoline) so a global focus on algae could maybe solve the problems of both CO2, energy and food. More about algae.
Here is an inteview with him.
Maps and diagrams
Start with the diagrams because they form the basic for any discussion. Everyone refers to "science" and these diagrams are the base for what science is saying.
Around 1600 temperature was very low (Little Ice Age) and we are still on the way up from this cold downperiod. The temperature curve is quite normal.
and is projected to rise another 0.5 to 8.6°F over the next hundred years.
Projected by whom? Meteorologists usually say that it is not possible to say in advance if temperature will rise or fall. Hot and cold periods are much governed by the amount of sunspots and compared to the effects of the sun the atmospheric CO2-level has almost nothing to do with global temperature. The effect exists but it is too small to be of any importance. They also say that warming cause rise of CO2 and not the opposite.
There is reason to believe that this projection is made by politicians and other people in power, who have their own interests in keeping this alarmistic belief alive and the reason for that is political and economical.
Global warming refers to the recent and ongoing rise in global average temperature near Earth's surface.
Yes, nobody denies that.
Projected by whom? Meteorologists usually say that it is not possible to say in advance if temperature will rise or fall. Hot and cold periods are much governed by the amount of sunspots and compared to the effects of the sun the atmospheric CO2-level has almost nothing to do with global temperature. The effect exists but it is too small to be of any importance. They also say that warming cause rise of CO2 and not the opposite.
There is reason to believe that this projection is made by politicians and other people in power, who have their own interests in keeping this alarmistic belief alive and the reason for that is political and economical.
Global warming refers to the recent and ongoing rise in global average temperature near Earth's surface.
Yes, nobody denies that.
It is caused mostly by increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
The scientists do not agree. The present rise in temperature (after 1600) is following natural cycles as we are now recovering from a very cold period. We have not yet come back to the higher temperature that we had during the earlier part of the Medieval Age (when the Vikings colonized Greenland).
The mainstream agenda is usually illustrated with a diagram that starts around 1800. They seam to mean that we do not know about temperature before this time because there were no measurements made earlier.
It might be true that we did not measure temperature earlier, but it is not true that we know nothing about earlier global temperature swings. Science has many methods of tracing global temperature millions of years back in time. But the existence of these curves is not much mentioned by the climate alarmists. Why not? Probably because it would quickly ruin their theory as people would begin to question it.
It might be true that we did not measure temperature earlier, but it is not true that we know nothing about earlier global temperature swings. Science has many methods of tracing global temperature millions of years back in time. But the existence of these curves is not much mentioned by the climate alarmists. Why not? Probably because it would quickly ruin their theory as people would begin to question it.
The constant temperature-rise from 1700 till now is similar to the temperature from 4 am to 1 pm. Both give a picture that shows a constant temperature rise. We know that the daily temperature rise is always followed by a temperature fall in the evening and night. It follows the same curve, which is caused by the regular nearness to the sun.
The global temperature follows many different curves so the picture becomes more complicated and this makes it impossible to provide an exact forecast.
If we have never seen the long term curves of the global temperature we don´t know that these swings exist. We might believe that earth has always been on an avarage, "normal" temperature, which is now suddenly changed (by us) and only goes up (and will continue to do so till we lower the CO2-level.)
President Obama's EPA ruled in 2009 that CO2 was a pollutant that needed to be regulated.CO2 is not a pollutant as it is what nature "inhales" to produce oxygene for us and the mammals. We breathe out what the forests breathe in and the forests breathe out what we breathe in.
If the CO2 in the air is higher we can blame it on human activity. Yes, but why not blame it on the deforestation of earth? Humans are taking away all the forests that should use this CO2 for growing and producing oxygene. We could reverse this by planting new forests all over the globe and also by creating "green energy" by cultivating algea, which consume CO2. From algae we can make both food (proteins and minerals) and fuel (oil and gasoline) so a global focus on algae could maybe solve the problems of both CO2, energy and food. More about algae.
Recent climate changes, however, cannot be explained by natural causes alone.
Scientists seem to agree upon this. Our CO2 production ads to the warming. But if you show this on a curve of millions of years we can see that the impact of CO2 is not even seen on the curve. So when they show the effect of human emission of CO2 the map is a blow-up that shows only a detail so the importance of the CO2 is also blown up.
Research indicates that natural causes do not explain most observed warming, especially warming since the mid-20thcentury.
Scientists agree that some of the warming might be caused by humans, but not "most observed" warming.
Rather, it is extremely likely that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming.
Scientists do not agree upon this. They usually say that the natural causes are far more potent than any human activity and we have no chance to have any important impact on it. So human activity is not the "dominant cause".
Sometimes we are closer to the sun and sometimes the distance to the sun is longer. We have day / night. We have summer / winter. We also have a changing distance between earth and sun due to the fact that we are going around the sun in an ellips and not a circle. We cannot change that.
Our sun is also producing warm and cold periods on earth with the changing of the solar activity as the amount of sun-spots change the temperature. Around 1600 it was extremely cold, but after 1700 the temperature has been rising again, but it is not yet back to the warmth that we had when Erik Röde settled on Greenland, which at that time was a place where you could have sheep and cattle and grow rye and barley.
A report published today has determined what climate scientists already suspected: 2014 was the warmest year since such records have been kept.
Yes, of course, if you only look at the temperature on a short period, when we are on the rise from a colder period, every year can be the warmest since the records began.
The baseline temperature in the NOAA report, for example, is the average temperature of all the years from 1981 through 2014. The report compares the global average temperature from each year from the 1880s through last year. While there is a lot of variation looking at the whole set of data, it's blatantly obvious how quickly temperatures have risen in recent decades.
Scientists seem to agree upon this. Our CO2 production ads to the warming. But if you show this on a curve of millions of years we can see that the impact of CO2 is not even seen on the curve. So when they show the effect of human emission of CO2 the map is a blow-up that shows only a detail so the importance of the CO2 is also blown up.
Research indicates that natural causes do not explain most observed warming, especially warming since the mid-20thcentury.
Scientists agree that some of the warming might be caused by humans, but not "most observed" warming.
Rather, it is extremely likely that human activities have been the dominant cause of that warming.
Scientists do not agree upon this. They usually say that the natural causes are far more potent than any human activity and we have no chance to have any important impact on it. So human activity is not the "dominant cause".
Sometimes we are closer to the sun and sometimes the distance to the sun is longer. We have day / night. We have summer / winter. We also have a changing distance between earth and sun due to the fact that we are going around the sun in an ellips and not a circle. We cannot change that.
Our sun is also producing warm and cold periods on earth with the changing of the solar activity as the amount of sun-spots change the temperature. Around 1600 it was extremely cold, but after 1700 the temperature has been rising again, but it is not yet back to the warmth that we had when Erik Röde settled on Greenland, which at that time was a place where you could have sheep and cattle and grow rye and barley.
A report published today has determined what climate scientists already suspected: 2014 was the warmest year since such records have been kept.
Yes, of course, if you only look at the temperature on a short period, when we are on the rise from a colder period, every year can be the warmest since the records began.
The baseline temperature in the NOAA report, for example, is the average temperature of all the years from 1981 through 2014. The report compares the global average temperature from each year from the 1880s through last year. While there is a lot of variation looking at the whole set of data, it's blatantly obvious how quickly temperatures have risen in recent decades.
Yes, it looks alarming, but only if you show such a small piece of the curve, which, when made bigger, is not at all unusual. It is just a temperature increas that has been repeated many times before in a relatively known pattern.
Antarctic Ice Sheet is melting which will cause a disaster.
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
The view of the sceptics is that IPCC is not driven by science but by politics
There are a mass of studies that show it was warmer in medieval times, and that it was global. Yet there is a disinformation campaign out there by the IPCC and others to promote the idea that it was a local phenomenon. More
The typical representant for the sceptics seems to be an older professor emeritus of meteorology, climatology (or similar), who has no longer a need to fit in to get payed.
The grand old guru of the opposite side is Al Gore, politician and businessman, mostly famous for his film about global warming An Inconvenient Truth.
But.... schools will have to issue a warning before they show pupils Al Gore's film about global warming. The move follows a High Court action by a father who accused the Government of 'brainwashing' children with propaganda by showing it in the classroom.
Stewart Dimmock said the former U.S. Vice-President's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, is unfit for schools because it is politically biased and contains serious scientific inaccuracies and 'sentimental mush'. (They had found many statements that were wrong in the film. Al Gore is making emotional claims that are not backed up by science) MailOnline 2007
He is a spokesman for the clean energy economy: Al Gore laid down a green gauntlet Thursday, challenging the nation to produce all our electricity from renewable sources, such as wind mills and solar panels - and do it within a decade.
Wind is not consumed when we draw energy from it´s movement. It will continue to blow, but the huge wind turbines are not made of "renewable sources" and they also cause pollution and other problems for nature, animals and humans. After around 15-20 years a big wind turbine is old and has to be taken down. That is a big and heavy industry, which also destroys the life in the forests where they are put up.
The debate is like a war between two religions, where both sides have their gurus, who are supported by masses of disciples, and each side accuses the other side of industry funded antiscientific desinformation campaigns.
There is reason to believe that the mainstream idea, which is promoted by our politicians and big media, is the side that is mostly funded and sponsored by industrial interests, as it is the side that is controlling the big money, i.e. has the power. It started with a 30 million USD fund from George Soros to Al Gore. (If Al Gore is favored by Soros he might still have a chance to become the next president of the USA!)
In 1974 the media wrote about the climate change and the expected disaster was billions of people starving because of the climate getting colder, not only from natural trend but also from human pollution as fossil-fuel burning..
That the globe is getting cooler is also what many scientists say today as that is what we can see on the very long trend (thousands of years).
"Bryson is the leading spokesman for the view that man-made atmospheric pollution has changed the global climate. Fossil-fuel burning, mechanized agricultural operations, accidental forest fires, and the primitive slash-and-burn land-clearing method still widely practiced in the tropics have increased the amount of dust in the atmosphere, Bryson says, causing more sunlight to be reflected into space and lowering earth´s temperature."
He was a towering figure in climatology and interdisciplinary studies of climate, people and the environment, and the founder of the University of Wisconsin–Madison’s meteorology department and Center for Climatic Research, and the first director of the Institute for Environmental Studies.
Antarctic Ice Sheet is melting which will cause a disaster.
NASA Study: Mass Gains of Antarctic Ice Sheet Greater than Losses
The view of the sceptics is that IPCC is not driven by science but by politics
There are a mass of studies that show it was warmer in medieval times, and that it was global. Yet there is a disinformation campaign out there by the IPCC and others to promote the idea that it was a local phenomenon. More
The typical representant for the sceptics seems to be an older professor emeritus of meteorology, climatology (or similar), who has no longer a need to fit in to get payed.
The grand old guru of the opposite side is Al Gore, politician and businessman, mostly famous for his film about global warming An Inconvenient Truth.
But.... schools will have to issue a warning before they show pupils Al Gore's film about global warming. The move follows a High Court action by a father who accused the Government of 'brainwashing' children with propaganda by showing it in the classroom.
Stewart Dimmock said the former U.S. Vice-President's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, is unfit for schools because it is politically biased and contains serious scientific inaccuracies and 'sentimental mush'. (They had found many statements that were wrong in the film. Al Gore is making emotional claims that are not backed up by science) MailOnline 2007
He is a spokesman for the clean energy economy: Al Gore laid down a green gauntlet Thursday, challenging the nation to produce all our electricity from renewable sources, such as wind mills and solar panels - and do it within a decade.
Wind is not consumed when we draw energy from it´s movement. It will continue to blow, but the huge wind turbines are not made of "renewable sources" and they also cause pollution and other problems for nature, animals and humans. After around 15-20 years a big wind turbine is old and has to be taken down. That is a big and heavy industry, which also destroys the life in the forests where they are put up.
The debate is like a war between two religions, where both sides have their gurus, who are supported by masses of disciples, and each side accuses the other side of industry funded antiscientific desinformation campaigns.
There is reason to believe that the mainstream idea, which is promoted by our politicians and big media, is the side that is mostly funded and sponsored by industrial interests, as it is the side that is controlling the big money, i.e. has the power. It started with a 30 million USD fund from George Soros to Al Gore. (If Al Gore is favored by Soros he might still have a chance to become the next president of the USA!)
In 1974 the media wrote about the climate change and the expected disaster was billions of people starving because of the climate getting colder, not only from natural trend but also from human pollution as fossil-fuel burning..
That the globe is getting cooler is also what many scientists say today as that is what we can see on the very long trend (thousands of years).
The text says:
"For the long run, there is mounting evidence of a world-wide cooling trend. The average temperature of the world as a whole has dropped by one-third to one-half a degree Centigrade in the last 30 years. "The decline of prevailing temperatures since about 1945 appear to be the longest-continued downward trend since temperature records began," says Professor Hubert Lamb of the University of East Anglia in Great Britain."
"There is a very important climate change going on right now", asserts Dr. Reid Bryson of the University of Wisconsin.
Reid Bryson (7 June 1920 – 11 June 2008) was an American atmospheric scientist, geologist and meteorologist.
In 1948, he founded the university’s meteorology department, now known as the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences.
Here is an inteview with him.
Prof. Reid Bryson
Founder of
Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences.
..........................
Start with the diagrams because they form the basic for any discussion. Everyone refers to "science" and these diagrams are the base for what science is saying.
Peter Temple
Market Analyst and Business Cycles Expert
Who says what?
Richard Lindzen
Prof. Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences
Richard Lindzen
Prof. Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences
Professor Carl-Otto Weiss
Former President of the
Former President of the
National Meteorology Institute
Braunschweig, Germany,
Schiller Institute
co-founder of Greenpeace
Vi orsakar bara 12 tusendelar
av 1% av CO2-utsläppet.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar