When Scientists looked at the environment and saw carbon dioxide (CO2) rising with temperature, they knew there was a correlation but did not know exactly what is going on. It was theorized by many that CO2 increases were causing significant temperature increases planet wide, due to the Green House effect. And don't confuse the Green House effect with a greenhouse, they work differently.
As you probably know it's humans basic nature to be opportunistic. If you find a paper money bill floating on the wind, and manage to catch it, you claim- 'finders, keepers'. If you find a sale due to bankruptcy, it's fair game to make out on the savings deal, to even negotiate a lower price. But there are those who will take advantage of someone else's ignorance or stupidity in order to profit from it. They are called scamers and schemers. TV and Internet ads are a good example for this.
That is essentially what some scientists, lobbyists and politico's have done with Global Warming. The people who are educated in the earth sciences know that global warming is mostly natural and has been happening since the last Iceage. But climate forces are complex and chaotic so that the warming does not happen in a linear fashion. It happens in spurts of warming with temporary cooling periods along the way. Temps might even reach higher temporary peaks in the transition spurts. And the reverse is true when the climate cycles into an ice age. Meteor strikes and volcanic eruptions can further complicate this process.
HadCrut & MSU Temps vers CO2 accumulation. Really drives those temps, down?
Scientists know that climate periods have been repetitive in cycles of warm and ice ages of about 100,000 years. Such is the nature of climate. Because of proxie data and historical evidence, scientists and scholars know there were two, recent, temporary warm periods in recorded history. One was during the Roman period, and the last one during the Medieval period. They lasted about 3~4 hundred years. Ref, Geophysical Research Letters 29: 10.1029/2001GL014485. It is also during these periods that civilization made significant advances.
2005, the hottest year since when?
Since governments have become concerned about climate events they established grants and government agencies to study climate changes. And that's where things went awry. You see, it's human nature to take advantage of a situation and that's exactly what some scientists, politico's and bureaucrats did. They twisted climate science to make it appear that the extra human caused (anthropogenic) CO2 introducing to the atmosphere has been accelerating global warming. They did the same thing with radiation and cancer. Scientists perpetuated their grant funding by twisting the climate science to make it appear that the extra anthropogenic CO2 was the primary driver behind global warming. Politicos like it as it gives them a forum to help get them elected, or to extend their powers over Boobuses (Ignorant, gullibles). They use fear mongering to get the unscientific to buy their pseudo- science rants, and they get monies from self interested lobbyist groups; like the corn growers, who get more bang per kernel via ethanol subsidies and market conditions.
I will present to you two good science revelations that show why global warming is not controlled by CO2 emissions.
The Oceans just aren't cooperating Al!
Ice Core Data shows CO2 lagging Temperature increases.
Ferenc Miskolczi is an atmospheric physicist with 30 years of experience and a former researcher with NASA's Langley Research Center. He re-evaluated the CO2 forcing equations and found that modern researchers relied upon equations derived over 80 years ago, equations which left off one term from the final solution. He noticed the solution (originally done in 1922 by Arthur Milne, but still used by climate researchers today) ignored boundary conditions by assuming an "infinitely thick" atmosphere. Similar assumptions are common when solving differential equations; they simplify the calculations and often result in a result that still very closely matches reality. So Miskolczi re-derived the solution, this time using the proper boundary conditions for an atmosphere that is not infinite. His result included a new term, which acts as a negative feedback to counter the positive forcing. At low levels, the new term means a small difference, but as greenhouse gases rise, the negative feedback predominates, forcing values back down.
IR absorption bands of main Atmospheric G.H. Gases. CO2 bands, in Green, are overlaid by Total Solar IR-Yellow. H2O Predominates.
NASA refused to release the results. Miskolczi believes their motivation is simple, "Money". Miskolczi's working relationship with NASA supervisors eroded to a level that he was not able to tolerate. His idea of the freedom of science cannot coexist with the recent NASA practice of suppressing new climate change related scientific results detrimental to their getting future Gov. research grants. So he quit NASA. And NASA, under Hansen, has made some damning tweaks to it's surface temp records, see: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/02/a_tale_of_two_thermometers/
Miskolczi theory was eventually published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal in his home country of Hungary. The conclusions are supported by research published in the Journal of Geophysical Research last 2007 from Steven Schwartz of Brookhaven National Labs, who gave statistical evidence that the Earth's response to CO2 was grossly overstated. http://www.ecd.bnl.gov/steve/pubs/HeatCapacity.pdf.
It also helps to explain why current global climate models continually predict more warming than actually measured. It also explains why in the geological past CO2 levels reached over 2000 ppm and a tipping point was never reached. The full article can be read at:
http://www.dailytech.com/Researcher+Basic+Greenhouse+Equations+Totally+Wrong/article10973.htm
Even with this revelation you may still have doubts in your mind as to the proof of Miskolczi's findings. Well, Dr. SyunIchi Akasofu is a Professor of Physics, Emeritus, and was the director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks from its establishment in 1998 until Jan. of 2007. He originally came to the University of Alaska Fairbanks in 1958 as a graduate student to study the aurora under Sydney Chapman, receiving his PhD in 1961. He has been professor of geophysics since 1964. Dr. Akasofu has published more than 550 professional journal articles, authored and co-authored 10 books and has been the invited author of many encyclopedia articles. He has collaborated with numerous colleagues nationally and internationally, and has guided 9 students to their Ph.D. degrees. The rest of his bio can be read here:
http://www.iarc.uaf.edu/people/indiv/iarc_all_staff.php?photo=sakasofu
Do you think Hasen can hold a candle to this guy? His research shows that the Earth is still warming from the last 'little ice age' at a steady rate of 0.5C (0.9F) per century. The warming has been relatively constant and has not accelerated as the IPCC contends. The records of two widely space glaciers (Glacier Bay, Alaska and the Gangotri Glacier in the Himalayas) have shown a steady retreat since the 1700s. You can read his paper on it at:
http://people.iarc.uaf.edu/~sakasofu/pdf/Earth_recovering_from_LIA_R.pdf.
It reveals much.
The last article I will bring to light shows how involved companies with Carbon sequestering or trading interests stand to benefit from it.
The Global Warming Bubble
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/2307
Steve Milloy, of junkscience.com, recently attended a Wall Street Journal conference where CEOs (from General Electric, Wal-Mart, Duke Energy, and Dow Chemical, to name just a few), California'ss Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the heads of several environmental activist groups, were invited to attend. In an instantaneous poll, the Wall Street Journal asked the audience to select the most pressing societal problems from a list of 5 that included: infectious disease, terrorism, and global warming. Global warming was the most popular response, receiving 31% of the vote, while infectious diseases was far behind in last place with only 3% of the vote. Virtually every speaker at the conference professed that they were either in favor of free markets or that they supported a free-market solution to global warming. But in their next breath, they would plead for government regulation of 'greenhouse gases' (CO2) and government subsidies for alternative energy. The attendees are so in anticipation of climate profiteering that there's no fact that will cause them to reconsider whether or not anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is a reality. The coldheartedness of their blind greed was very evident at the conference.
Just recently, March 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency issued its economic analysis of the Lieberman-Warner global warming bill that is now being considered by the Senate. The EPA projects that, if the bill is enacted, the size of our economy as measured by its gross domestic product (GDP) would shrink by as much as $2.9 trillion by the year 2050. ThThat'sa 6.9% smaller economy if the bill is enacted. For perspective, consider that during the first two years of the Great Depression, 1929 and 1930, GDP declined by 8.6% and 6.4 %, respectively. The EPA says that by the year 2095 atmospheric CO2 levels would be 25 ppm lower than if no 'greenhouse gas' regulation (CO2) was implemented. Current atmospheric CO2 level is 380 ppm and the projected 2095 CO2 level is about 500 ppm by the EPA (.05%). The average global temperature would only be reduced by a max of about 0.10 ~ 0.20 degrees Celsius, according to existing GCM research. This bill would also add to the cost of gas by as much as $8 dollars.
This is like going to a doctor because of a fever and getting sent to the hospital for all kinds of therapy and some organ removal. You ending up feeling somewhat better, but much poorer, with a huge medical bill while the doctors go smiling to the bank. Afterwards you come to realize that traditional home treatments would have given you similar comfort and the body would have eventually fought off the fever. This is like treating a cold like it was Pneumonia.
Another thing about temperature. The temperature of an air mass is a relative energy measurement, not absolute. Why? Because an air mass of 60% absolute humidity contains much more energy then an air mass at 10% humidity (with temps being the same) due to the latent heat of evaporation. It's a physics term so look it up. Then there's relative humidity.
It's time to wakeup to the back- room, skullduggery, schemes going on in government and scientific bureaucratic circles. I don't care if it's Newt Gingrich, you have politicos and corporations trying to impose a modern alchemy method of turning CO2 into 'politico gold'. CO2 is as natural as exhaled breath and does not drive climate change. It's only a very small factor of the global warming effect, it's the sun mostly that dominates. Most CO2 comes from Ocean warming than human sources:
http://www.rocketscientistsjournal.com/2007/06/on_why_co2_is_known_not_to_hav.html.
Human's contribution to AGW is mostly though land use and land changes. And, as revealed by Ferenc Miskolczi, there is no tipping point to CO2 increases, unless the solar radiative output significantly increases to an unprecedented level.
For Further Proof-Ref:
Scientist Who voted for Gore in 2000 Now Debunks Warming Fears
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/DonEasterbrookInterviewTranscript.pdf
US Temperatures and Climate Factors since 1895
http://icecap.us/images/uploads/US_Temperatures_and_Climate_Factors_since_1895.pdf
HOW THE ENVIRONMENTAL EXTREMISTS MANIPULATE THE MASSES
http://newswithviews.com/Williams/carole7.htm
Congress is moving quickly to pass a $1.2 trillion Global Warming Tax that is based on unfounded science and could sevearly cripple our economy. A vote is expected before summer. I signed a petition and am asking you to join me. Please go here: http://www.grassfire.org/106/petition.asp?PID=16564857&NID=1A>
No comments:
Post a Comment