‘Cargo cult’ science

No Comments »

Here is a link to an article I just read that eloquently states what I’ve seen in the current non-science going on with the global-warming adherents. It’s a religion, a cult, aimed at gaining power instead of protecting the earth.

Mars warming too…man-made?

No Comments »

I recently came across an article detailing what I’d heard before: Mars has experienced a global temperature increase similar to the Earth’s. Unless the government is covering up even more than I think they are, man-made activities are certainly not contributing to that global warming. I mean, a couple of robots gathering rocks couldn’t possibly emit enough carbon dioxide to affect Mars. If so, maybe we could send a few more and get some plants going up there, but I digress.

The point here is that, if a planet completely outside our control is showing a similar warming trend to our planet, maybe we should look at a different source. Even more plain than the proverbial elephant in the room is the giant ball of fire tracing its way across our sky every day. Interestingly enough, the sun went through a historically high peak in activity from 1998-2005 that matches the historic temperatures (even allowing for intentional and unintentional skewing of thermometer data). Since then temperatures have been dropping, and the sun is currently in a prolonged minimum in activity that has some scientists comparing it to the Maunder minimum.

From 1645 to 1715 astronomers noticed that sunspots grew extremely rare. Further research shows that there was an associated period of cool temperatures known as the Little Ice Age (that followed several warmer years known as the Medieval Warm Period). Hmm…could it be that we’re seeing another similar pattern?

In the current solar cycle, scientists keep extending the forecast for the next solar maximum. This minimum has lasted longer than any for quite a while. By now we should have been seeing much more activity, well on our way to a solar maximum in late 2012 or early 2013. But even though there has been slightly more activity, we have dropped back off and are again seeing a week or so at a time with no spots on the sun (during the last two years there were periods of 100+ spotless days). So the current adjusted prediction is for a lower solar maximum than the last one, occurring in around 2015. There is still so much to learn about solar activity, so who knows if that will pan out?

All that to add more weight to the gathering data refuting man-made, or anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

Global warming is “settled”

No Comments »

If you’ve read any of my previous posts, you know that I think the only thing settled about global warming is that it’s not settled. The science is most definitely not conclusive, and all of the efforts to control carbon dioxide and other emissions are misguided at best at blatant power grabs at worst.

A new book has just been released (on Earth Day, appropriately), written by Brian Sussman, a well-known former meteorologist from San Francisco. Called “Climategate” in reference to the e-mails brought to light from the East Anglia research center, he exposes much of the fraud that has been foisted on us by the whole global warming scam. I’ve only read articles referring to it, but I plan to buy it and get back to you.

One of the important things as I see it is that a meteorologist was willing to step forward and try to tell the truth.  That in itself put the lie to the oft-repeated refrain that scientists are in agreement that global warming is a real phenomenon.  In fact, scientists are far from unanimous on the subject, as evidenced by the Petition Project, a list that now numbers tens of thousands of scientists who believe that:

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

It all sounds pretty interesting to me, so I’ll let you know.  I know what I believe and why, but I don’t know enough about research (or have enough time) to back it up.  Looks like I don’t have to now!

Worldwide cold snap signs of coming ice age?

No Comments »

Just over 30 years ago, in the late 1970s, scientists were warning the world of a coming ice age.  This was heralded by record worldwide cold and snowstorms in 1976 and 1977 that haven’t been seen since — until now that is.

This year, Arctic air has poured out of the Canadian plains into the United States, bringing bone-chilling temperatures and heavy snowfall across the Plains and freezing temperatures all the way down to the Gulf Coast and Florida.  We are potentially seeing but a taste of what may be coming in the future as we swing back toward a glacial period from an inter-glacial one.  Basically, we’ve been rather lucky it’s been as warm as it has.

At least one forecaster at Accuweather is bold enough to address the science directly instead of jumping on the global warming band wagon. His name is Joe Bastardi, and you can see a video he made here.  That’s exactly what we need — more unbiased science and less politics and scare tactics.

Grasping at straws

No Comments »

Yet another article is out today with an alternate explanation for an event that had been attributed to global warming. Swiss scientists reported that alpine glaciers in their country experienced the greatest recorded melting in the 1940s (even more than now) due to increased solar radiation during that period.

I’m not surprised by that finding, since I don’t believe the earth is warming as much as they say we are, and any warming that is occurring is certainly not attributable to people.  But what I do find interesting is that, later in the article, the scientists involved in this report still cling to their ideas about global warming.  Despite the mounting evidence that there are other things that have a bigger impact on the climate than mankind, they aren’t swayed from their dogmatic beliefs.

I can’t speak to their motivations.  Maybe it’s the only way for them to get the grants that will allow them to pursue their research.  Maybe they believe it that fervently, but then they couldn’t be called scientists — instead they would be something like priests in this new global religion of climate change.  Either way, the world population is waking up, aided by the leaked e-mails recently, aka “Climategate,” and becoming less trusting of scientists and their conclusions.

And I say it’s about time.

More fringe claims

No Comments »

It’s hard to know what to believe a lot of the time. There is so much money and power to be gained by the global warming hysteria that the experts we should be able to rely on for impartial discovery and reporting of the scientific truths are at best blinded by their own beliefs, and at worst trying to fabricate or twist the data to fit their own agendas. Whether or not it’s verifiable, some hackers found data and e-mails between climate scientists regarding tricks to make the data appear to support rising temperatures.

Then, too, you have the poor countries trying to strengthen themselves by their claims of damage from climate change caused by the rich, developed countries. I remember reading somewhere that a small island country in the Indian Ocean was trying to sue the United States because of sea level rises caused by global warming.

Then there’s the recent report by Suneeta Mukherjee, country representative of the United Nations Food Population Fund (UNFPA) that poor women in countries like the Philippines would be driven to prostitution by climate change. Seriously?

Who knows what’s coming next? But it’s a pretty scary time when politicians use something like this to gain power. If the science and the dangers are that clear, you would think everyone would want to come together to do their part. Then there wouldn’t be any need for new regulations. The natural cycles of supply and demand would drive developments in alternative energy and energy efficient products, while gradually phasing out the inefficient and dirty processes and products we’ve been using.

I find it all very transparent when you look at things with an open mind and an unbiased perspective. World leaders just want to use this fabricated crisis to grab power and push us toward a world government. Or in the words of Rahm Emmanuel, Obama’s chief of staff,

“You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”

Update: I found two new analysis articles here and here after I made this post, and you can even search the hacked documents and decide for yourself!

3rd coldest October on record

2 Comments »

The preliminary data is in, and October 2009 came in with an average temperature of 50.8°F for the United States, 4.0°F below the average for the past 100 years.  That makes it the 3rd coolest October on record.  Several individual states (Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma) also had their coldest October on record.  Sure sounds like we’re having catastrophic global warming.

Here’s a graph of the temperatures from 1895-2009, showing brief periods ofwarmer or cooler temperatures, but overall much the same:
ustemp1895-2009

UN climate treaty on hold

No Comments »

Thankfully, it seems the UN climate treaty will take 6 months to 1 year longer to iron out the details.  We can only hope that some sense will prevail in that time.

One of the “roadblocks” mentioned in the article is the fact that the United States’ cap-and-trade bill has not yet made it through Congress.  A bill had made it out of committee, but I haven’t been able to find out if it has actually passed the Senate.  Even so, it scares me how close we’re getting and how much power the government is gaining over our lives with no one putting up any serious resistance.

The science pointing to global warming is far from concrete, but if it was, would we really want to give up so much of our personal and collective liberty to avert it?  Do we really think we have that much of an impact on the globe either way?  Don’t get me wrong, I think we should be good stewards of this planet that God has given us and be able to pass on a good world to our children and their children.  But such actions should be left to individuals and their own sense of responsibility.  Government has no business mandating such behaviors.

Toward a one-world government

No Comments »

In just 41 days, world leaders will attend the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Copenhagen, including President Obama.  With this innocuous-sounding name, and the supposedly noble goal of reducing or eliminating global warming, the treaty many country leaders are likely to sign will instead create a government that will control the world.  And not just any government, but a Socialist government on an immense scale.  Instead of limited wealth-redistribution from wealthy individuals to poor individuals, this treaty will transfer wealth from developed nations to developing nations, in the name of “carbon debt.”  This idea is that developed nations are the ones that have put the carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, so they owe a debt to other countries since they were the ones that caused this global warming crisis.

Much of this information comes from Lord Christopher Monckton, who was the science policy advisor to Margaret Thatcher when she was Prime Minister of the UK.  He made several warnings in a speech to the Minnesota Free Market Institute, attempting to educate the public on the danger of this upcoming treaty and the consequences for our nation and the world if it is ratified.  I think it is very interesting that the mainstream media is not reporting on this much at all, positively or negatively.  The only place I’ve heard about it is WorldNetDaily, my daily dose of reality.  At least there are some people out there who don’t gloss over or sugarcoat the dire situation this nation and the world are in.  If you need any more support, Chuck Norris feels the same way I do about this treaty and our future.

I don’t really know if anything can be done to stop this.  President Obama is almost certain to sign this treaty, in contrast to President Bush who refused to sign the Kyoto Protocol because of its threats to our national sovereignty.  Then it would usually need a 2/3 majority vote in the Senate to be ratified, but it wouldn’t surprise me to see them push it through as an amendment to the cap-and-trade bill already in progress through the Senate, which would only need a 50% vote to pass.  That’s an entirely different, and nearly as scary, piece of legislation that would limit many of our personal freedoms and tax us for many of the things we do daily.

After all of this, I certainly don’t need any more evidence that the global warming “crisis” is, primarily, a scheme to seize greater government control over our lives and push us further toward the path toward socialism.  Now I see that we’re talking a global scale, too, not merely national.  If you’ve read any of my prior posts, you already know that I fervently doubt whether global warming is even occurring, and completely convinced that mankind is not causing it.  The world has actually been cooling since 1998, which was one of the hottest on record.  I just hope we can see some reason before it’s too late.

Has Earth’s fever broken?

No Comments »

That’s the first sentence of an article I came across on McClatchy.  You can read the whole article at this link.

It says that the high in 1998 (the warmest year in recent history) was 0.76 degrees Celsius above the 20-year average, while so far this year the high has only been 0.42 degrees Celsius above the average.  So that’s giving global warming critics some added fuel for their arguments.

I find a couple of things interesting in this article.  First, we’re talking about a mere 0.34 degree Celsius difference between the average global temperature between this year and 1998, and both years are less than a degree above the average.  Granted we’re talking the average over the entire globe, where even small differences can have a bigger impact.  But we’re still talking about minuscule changes in a very complex pattern, while climate change alarmists are advocating huge and costly changes and regulation in our lives.

The other interesting thing is that the believers in global warming can have their cake and eat it too.  No matter what the temperature averages do, they say that there are complex forces at work and are not dissuaded from their dogma.  Skeptics, however, are not allowed to use the same arguments.  They are laughed at for not using sound science.  It really confuses me.  When did we move from trying to prove a hypothesis and changing it if the evidence doesn’t support it to blindly following a belief and trying to engineer the evidence to match?  I don’t know, sounds a lot like a religion to me.