Global Warming

These are just a few of the many comments by scientist:

On April 29, 2008, environmental journalist Richard Littlemore revealed that a list of "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares"[22] propagated by the Heartland Institute included at least 45 scientists who neither knew of their inclusion as "coauthors" of the article, nor agreed with its contents.[23] Many of the scientists asked the Heartland Institute to remove their names from the list.

Christopher Landsea, a hurricane researcher, said of "the part of the IPCC to which my expertise is relevant" that "I personally cannot in good faith continue to contribute to a process that I view as both being motivated by pre-conceived agendas and being scientifically unsound"

In 2005, the House of Lords Economics Committee wrote that "We have some concerns about the objectivity of the IPCC process, with some of its emissions scenarios and summary documentation apparently influenced by political considerations." It doubted the high emission scenarios and its "played-down" positive aspects of global warming.[37] The main claims of the House of Lords Economics Committee were rejected in the response made by the United Kingdom government[38] and by the Stern Review.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming_skeptics

The global warming crisis is just the latest surrogate for an over-arching agenda of anti-growth and anti-development. This agenda grew and gathered support in the years following World War II.

One of the first issues to be celebrated as a crisis by these reformers was over-population. That fad peaked in the ‘60s and early ‘70s. The bible of that cult, “The Population Bomb,” argued that “... the battle to feed all of humanity is over” and claimed we had lost the battle, claiming “ ... in the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death.”

This clearly phony crisis was followed by warnings about global climate change: Global cooling was going to lead to a new ice age.

But the best parallel to the current crusade, the real precursor to the current “panic du jour,” was the computer model-based alarmism of the “Club of Rome.” The Club of Rome’s claim that global economic collapse was imminent because the world would soon “run out” of some critical resources was a very appropriate precursor to the current dire warnings. It too based its alarms not on any scientific analysis of specific issues, but on a computer model. And like the current call to action, their model was pre-destined to give the result they wanted.

The criticism of the “Club of Rome” models by Resources For the Future clearly applies to the Global Climate Models’ predictions of doom. RFF pointed out that parameters with a negative impact were programmed to grow non-linearly (exponentially in fact) and parameters that mitigated negative effects were programmed to grow, if at all, “only in discrete increments.”

In each of these false alarms, nature and technology spiked their prophecies. The natural cooling period of the ‘50s and ‘60s turned into the warming period of the ‘80s and ‘90s, and with the help of increased C02, a plant nutrient, instead of mass starvation, we had no problem growing enough food for the rapidly increasing world population, and we continue to find and make more efficient use of our other critical resources.

But the anti-growth, anti-development crowd are a hardy bunch. They won’t give up. As nature switched from global cooling to global warming, so did they.

Make no mistake, their cast of characters may have expanded a bit, but at the core, there is an unbroken lineage back to those unbelievably wrong, unscientific prognosticators.

Their basic method of attack may be the same, but they have certainly refilled their operations. They learned from the “Club of Rome” episode. Since basic hard science is more difficult to bias, they would resort again to modeling. And since critics will take the time to examine their assumptions, they make the models big, obscure, and full of complex feedback structures much too abstract to debate in a public forum.

That all brings us to what has happened in the last 20 years, and where we are today. It is worthwhile reviewing what has gone on over the past two decades to give perspective and context to what is taking place today.

Some Basic Facts

Let’s begin by summarizing what we did know then and what we do know now. In fact, we don’t know as much as the media and the public have been led to think we know.

Here is what we could include in an absolute fact base:

Over long periods of time climate changes

Over short periods of time weather changes

There have been relatively long periods of time when the world has been colder than it is now

There have been relatively long periods of time when the world has been warmer than it is now

C02 is a trace gas whose presence in the atmosphere can contribute to an increase in the absorption of thermal radiation

The increased use of carbon-based fuels has produced significant increases in the amount of C02 released to the atmosphere, though still dwarfed by natural sources

Also, there have been a number of identifiable periods of temperature variability over the past century:

Cooling in the ‘20s

Heating in the ‘30s and ‘40s

Cooling in the ‘50s and ‘60s and ‘70s

Warming in the ‘80s and ‘90s

and cooling for the past decade

It was the warming period of the late ‘80s and ‘90s that provided the context and the opportunity for the alarmists to argue that once again we faced a serious calamity.

http://www.heartland.org/full/24851/The_Politics_of_Global_Warming.html

A small cadre of influential international bureaucrats are hard at work devising a system of 'global governance' that is slowly gaining control over ordinary Americans' lives.

Maurice Strong, a 68-year-old Canadian, is the 'indispensable man' at the center of this creeping UN power grab."

Proposals to restrict emissions of greenhouse gases (then under negotiation) would cost the US "$90 billion to $400 billion annually in lost Gross Domestic Product and a loss of between 600,000 and 3.5 million jobs."

The influential gang is thus:

o Former United States Vice President Al Gore;

o Former World Bank President James Wolfensohn;

o James Gustave Speth, head of the United Nations

Development Program.

o Shridath Ramphal, formerly Secretary General of the

(British) Commonwealth,

o Jonathan Lash, President of the World Resources

Institute;

o Ingvar Carlsson, former Swedish prime minister

o Mikhail Gorbachev; and

o Former United States President George H. W. Bush.

Fifty years is like soap bubble in earth history,, read the book "State of fear" for a little bit of enrichment in the matter.

has anyone here watched al gore's inconvenient truth? yes its true that earth goes thru a period of cold and hot era but this time the temperature is exceeding the temperature before the ice age and is off the charts.

i recommend you guys see the documentary. it might change your mind about the topic and it suggest how we as humans, the stewards of nature, can help solve global warming.

"For the strength of the Pack is the Wolf, and the strength of the Wolf is the Pack."

kabayan usap tayo sa Barangay Qatar!

All we need are more air-conditioners.

Yes I think the universe will survived from all the heat or cold just like many million years ago.

Everybody is right everybody is wrong, it depend where you stand

The earth goes through cycles of cooler and hotter periods, each lasting thousands of years. It's not all down to human influence.

you can start by 3R. Reduce, Reuse and Recycle.

Everybody is right everybody is wrong, it depend where you stand