Those who exploit global climate change for their own personal and political reasons rely on the general ignorance of the public when it comes to science and the scientific method.

The bible has it right …

Genesis 8:22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.

Ecclesiastes 1:4 One generation passeth away, and another generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.

And so the natural order of things appears to be both cyclical and beyond man’s current ability to drastically alter nature on a global scale.

What they are not saying …

1. It appears that the main purpose of those who are promoting the issue of global climate change are doing so in order to promote a political agenda or to pursue a personal agenda of fame and fortune.

2. All of the dire predictions are based on computer models which were created and operated by scientists whose organizations are either controlled directly by the government or who have significant government funding.

3. Without the appearance of catastrophic outcomes, media attention would fade and the public could not be manipulated into accepting draconian political policies which promote socialism, enlarge the sphere of government, raise taxes and limit personal freedoms.

4. Many of the models do not correlate well with historic projects and, upon closer inspection, appear to have been created with dodgy assumptions, suspect programming and highly manipulated data.

5. The public has been sold on the idea that “peer review” somehow implies acceptance by the broader scientific community, when in fact, peer review is a scientific journal publishing process that assures that the published works meets the journal’s standards for basic credibility and clarity. Reviewers do not replicate or test hypotheses, nor do they closely examine the underlying data. They simply reject “kooky” ideas. dot the I’s and cross the T’s while making sure that the article is clear, logically presented and devoid of obvious flaws.

6. The climate change alarmists have promoted the idea that climate change skeptics are out-of-touch or have evil “capitalist” intents. What the public most often fails to realize is that the scientific method demands skepticism and the replication of results. And that a single researcher, working in their home, is as likely to produce a scientific breakthrough as well-credentialed scientists working for prestigious institutions. In fact, some amateur climatologists have made very significant contributions to the science of global climate change by pointing our physical and mathematical inconsistencies in the research of others.

7. The simple truth is that climate appears to be cyclical. With repetitive periods of hot and cold climate; with more or less atmospheric carbon dioxide. And the great majority of natural processes, seem to contain built in feedback loops that control the process.

8. It can be quite easily demonstrated that the drivers of global climate change, as well as our daily weather, are the Sun’s output, the Earth’s position relative to the Sun, the Earth’s planetary dynamics, volcanic activity, deep ocean currents and the greatest and most significant greenhouse gas of all, water vapor.

It can also be quite easily demonstrated that carbon dioxide is not the proximate cause of global climate change nor the solution to influencing the global climate. Those who confuse correlation with causation fail to understand that the rise in carbon dioxide levels lags the rise in temperature by 600 –1000 years depending on the dataset used. Easily explained by considering that the atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and the levels of carbon dioxide dissolved in the Earth’s Oceans is more or less constant; and according to Henry’s Law, the warming oceans will increase the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere as the oceans warm. Conversely, as the oceans cool, they will hold more dissolved carbon dioxide

9. The Earth has been hotter, colder, with more atmospheric carbon dioxide and less atmospheric carbon dioxide – even before the industrial revolution; there it is unlikely that any man-made carbon dioxide can influence climate on a global scale.and all will be right with the world.

10. Due to the availability of time, money, manpower and other assets; most scientific studies are done in isolated sites, yielding small datasets. Which may present huge statistical errors when such relatively small datasets are projected into a global scale. To consider that Penn State climatologist Michael Mann’s famous “Hockey Stick” graph was based on a limited sample size of trees. Not something reliable enough to base United States public policy upon.

11. We have seen pictures of a number of weather stations which have been severely compromised by their locations. Giving rise to the theory that what these stations are actually reporting is the temperature record of increasing urbanization or “heat islands.” Especially since rural stations are overcome by the encroachment of asphalt-paved roads when cities are built out.

12. It appears that all climate findings to-date appear to have fallen within the band of nature’s normal variability and that any man-made restrictions on carbon dioxide may not be measurable within the noise levels of nature’s normal climate variability. Not to mention that we might have to wait 600 – 1000 years to see any results at all.

13. It also appears that all of our current weather issues can be traced to other factors (“multidecadal oscillations, or natural variations, can imprint on regional, hemispheric, or even global climate changes”) rather than global warming as the media pundits might claim. Something which may not be well-modeled. (“In neither study was the model able to capture interdecadal variability as it occurs in nature.”)

“A paper by Semenov et al. (2010) shows that natural variability contributed significantly to the warming period in the last few decades of 20th century and even may be responsible for the majority the warming.”

For those who want to see a driver of significant weather effects, it is suggested that you review both the NAO (North Atlantic Oscillation) and ENSO (El Niño/Southern Oscillation) and its affects on weather.

Dishonesty unmasked …

Evidence from the so-called “Climate-gate” e-mails, tend to indicate that Mann not only cherry-picked his data, but that he may have spliced together data from other research to create his allegedly dishonest legacy finding.

From: Phil Jones <[email protected]> To: ray bradley [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Subject: Diagram for WMO Statement Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 13:31:15 +0000 Cc: [email protected], [email protected] Dear Ray, Mike and Malcolm, Once Tim's got a diagram here we'll send that either later today or first thing tomorrow. I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) amd from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline. Mike's series got the annual land and marine values while the other two got April-Sept for NH land N of 20N. The latter two are real for 1999, while the estimate for 1999 for NH combined is +0.44C wrt 61-90. The Global estimate for 1999 with data through Oct is +0.35C cf. 0.57 for 1998. Thanks for the comments, Ray. Cheers Phil

Phil, of course, is the famous climatologist Phil Jones of the prestigious CRU (Climate Research Unit) located at the East Anglia University.

Other e-mails tend to indicate that the peer-review process was subverted and a relatively small number of climate scientists were dishonestly involved with driving the story forward.

Bottom line …

Big money and corrupt politics continue to drive the debate over global climate change. With the politicians seeking control over energy production and usage in order to dictate social policy and engage in socialistic wealth redistribution. The special interests seeking government subsidies for projects that cannot stand on their own financial or operational merit are supporting the government initiatives. Thus a circle of toxic corruption is able to pollute American politics to the detriment of all American consumers and taxpayers.

Any funding for social policies associated with global climate change should be re-directed to eliminating pollution, providing food, clean water and sanitary conditions to the Earth’s population – along with strengthening our shelters and adaptive mechanisms to the vagaries of the Earth’s unstoppable physical processes.

And in the final analysis, we simply cannot trust the findings of those who continue to prompte man-made global warming to the extent of allowing our government to interfere with our lives in order to promote their own political agenda and special interest profits.

So it appears the Bible may be more accurate in explaining the phenomenon of global climate change than the scientists.

-- steve

Reference Links …

Thanks to Facebook friend Ron Fenner for contributing the biblical quotes.

Climate Models Fail to Match Observed Historical Data (25 Jan 2011)

Anagnostopoulos, G.G., Koutsoyiannis, D., Christofides, A., Efstradiadis, A. and Mamassis, N. 2010. A comparison of local and aggregated climate model outputs with observed data. Hydrological Sciences Journal 55: 1094-1110.

Polar Bears Reproduce Faster Than Previously Thought (25 Jan 2011)

Cronin, M.A., Amstrup, S.C., Talbot, S.L., Sage, G.K. and Amstrup, K.S. 2009. Genetic variation, relatedness, and effective population size of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in the southern Beaufort Sea, Alaska. Journal of Heredity 100: 681-690.

Impacts Assessments Systematically Overestimate Net Damages from Global Warming (25 Jan 2011)

Mont Blanc Glaciated Areas Not Affected by 20th Century Climate Change (26 Jan 2011)

Vincent, C., E. Le Meur, D. Six, M. Funk, M. Hoelzle, and S. Preunkert (2007), Very high-elevation Mont Blanc glaciated areas not affected by the 20th century climate change, Journal of Geophysical Research 112 D09120, doi:10.1029/2006JD007407.

The Fate of Tropical Rainforests in a Super CO2-Enriched and Warmer World (26 Jan 2011)

Jaramillo, C., Ochoa, D., Conteras, L., Pagani, M., Carvajal-Ortiz, H., Pratt, L.M., Krishnan, S., Cardona, A., Romero, M., Quiroz, L., Rodriguez, G., Rueda, M.J., de la Parra, F., Moron, S., Green, W., Bayona, G., Montes, C., Quintero, O., Ramirez, R., Mora, G., Schouten, S., Bermudez, H., Navarrete, R., Parra, F., Alvaran, M., Osorno, J., Crowley, J.L., Valencia, V. and Vervoort, J. 2010. Effects of rapid global warming at the Paleocene-Eocene boundary on neotropical vegetation. Science 330: 957-961.

Have Natural Variations in the Arctic and North Atlantic Region influenced Recent Global Temperatures? (26 Jan 2011)

Semenov, V.A., Latif, B.,Dommenget, D., Keenlyside, N.S., Strehz, A., Martin, T. and Park, W. 2010. The impact of North Atlantic - Arctic Multidecadal Variability on Northern Hemisphere surface air temperature. Journal of Climate 23: 5668-5677.