Green Myths On Global Warming — Debunked

1       MYTH        Planet earth is currently undergoing global warming

FACT        Accurate and representative temperature measurements from satellites and balloons show that the planet has cooled significantly in the last two or three years, losing in only 18 months 15% of the claimed warming which took over 100 years to appear — that warming was only one degree fahrenheit (half of one degree Celsius) anyway, and part of this is a systematic error from groundstation readings which are inflated due to the ‘urban heat island effect’ i.e. local heat retention due to urban sprawl, not global warming…and it is these, ‘false high’ ground readings which are then programmed into the disreputable climate models, which live up to the GIGO acronym — garbage in, garbage out.

2       MYTH        Even slight temperature rises are disastrous, ice caps will melt, people will die

FACT        In the UK, every mild winter saves 20,000 cold-related deaths, and scaled up over northern Europe mild winters save hundreds of thousands of lives each year, also parts of ice caps are melting yet other parts are thickening but this isn’t reported as much (home experiment: put some water in a jug or bowl, add a layer of ice cubes and mark the level — wait until the ice has melted and look again, the level will have fallen). Data from ice core samples shows that in the past, temperatures have risen by ten times the current rise, and fallen again, in the space of a human lifetime.

3       MYTH        Carbon Dioxide levels in our atmosphere at the moment are unprecedented (high).

FACT        Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels, currently only 350 parts per million have been over 18 times higher in the past at a time when cars, factories and power stations did not exist — levels rise and fall without mankind’s help.

4       MYTH        Mankind is pumping out carbon dioxide at a prodigious rate.

FACT        96.5% of all carbon dioxide emissions are from natural sources, mankind is responsible for only 3.5%, with 0.6% coming from fuel to move vehicles, and about 1% from fuel to heat buildings. Yet vehicle fuel (petrol) is taxed at 300% while fuel to heat buildings is taxed at 5% even though buildings emit nearly twice as much carbon dioxide!

5       MYTH        Carbon dioxide changes in the atmosphere cause temperature changes on the earth.

FACT        A report in the journal ‘Science’ in January of this year showed using information from ice cores with high time resolution that since the last ice age, every time when the temperature and carbon dioxide levels have shifted, the carbon dioxide change happened AFTER the temperature change, so that man-made global warming theory has put effect before cause — this shows that reducing carbon dioxide emissions is a futile King Canute exercise! What’s more, both water vapour and methane are far more powerful greenhouse gases than carbon dioxide but they are ignored.

6       MYTH        Reducing car use will cut carbon dioxide levels and save the planet

FACT        The planet does not need saving, but taking this on anyway, removing every car from every road in every country overnight would NOT produce any change in the carbon dioxide level of the atmosphere, as can be seen using the numbers from Fact 4, and in any case it is pointless trying to alter climate by changing carbon dioxide levels as the cause and effect is the other way round — it is changes in the activity of the Sun that cause temperature changes on earth, with any temperature rise causing carbon dioxide to de-gas from the oceans.

7       MYTH        The recent wet weather and flooding was caused by mankind through ‘global warming’

FACT        Extreme weather correlates with the cycle of solar activity, not carbon dioxide emissions or political elections, the recent heavy rainfall in winter and spring is a perfect example of this — it occurred at solar maximum at a time when solar maxima are very intense — this pattern may well repeat every 11 years until about 2045.

8       MYTH        The climate change levy, petrol duty, CO2 car tax and workplace parking charges are justifiable environmental taxes.

FACT        As carbon dioxide emissions from cars and factories does not have any measurable impact on climate, these taxes are ‘just another tax’ on enterprise and mobility, and have no real green credentials.

9       MYTH        Scientists on the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issue reports that say ‘global warming’ is real and that we must do something now.

FACT        Scientists draft reports for the IPCC, but the IPCC are bureaucrats appointed by governments, in fact many scientists who contribute to the reports disagree with the ’spin’ that the IPCC and media put on their findings.
The latest report suggests that the next 100 years might see a temperature change of 6 Celsius yet a Lead Author for the IPCC (Dr John Christy UAH/NASA) has pointed out that the scenarios with the fastest warming rates were added to the report at a late stage, at the request of a few governments — in other words the scientists were told what to do by politicians.

Global Warming Debunked

Tuesday, October 30, 2007 2:20 PM

By: Philip V. Brennan      Article Font Size 

Despite the oft-repeated claim that the science is settled that man-made global warming is threatening the planet and that a there is a consensus on that contention among most scientists, a number of top members of the scientific community across the globe vehemently disagree.

Their voices however, go largely unheard thanks to the mainstream media that worships at the altar of Al Gore and promotes his global warming hysteria, refusing to report on any opposing views, no matter how scientifically sound they might be.

That has once again become obvious with the media's treatment of Sen. James Inhofe's, R-Ola., two hour speech delivered on the floor of the United States Senate on Oct. 26, debunking fears of man-made global warming. Although Inhofe effectively demolished the "science is settled" canard, citing numerous examples of studies debunking the global warming scam by some of the world's most respected scientists, the media decided that the truth must be kept from American people and ignored his groundbreaking speech.

Inhofe began by saying "We are currently witnessing an international awakening of scientists who are speaking out in opposition to former Vice President Al Gore, the United Nations, the Hollywood elitists and the media-driven "consensus" on man-made global warming.

"We have witnessed Antarctic ice grow to record levels since satellite monitoring began in the 1970s. We have witnessed NASA temperature data errors that have made 1934 — not 1998 -— the hottest year on record in the U.S. We have seen global averages temperatures flat line since 1998 and the Southern Hemisphere cool in recent years.

"These new developments in just the last six months are but a sample of the new information coming out that continues to debunk climate alarm."

You'd never know that, however, if the media has its way.

These new developments, Inhofe pointed out have prompted many scientists to declare that the scientific basis for fears of catastrophic man-made global warming are collapsing.

"I agree with [former Vice President Al] Gore," Inhofe said. "Global warming may have reached a ‘tipping point.' The man-made global warming fear machine crossed the ‘tipping point' in 2007. I am convinced that future climate historians will look back at 2007 as the year the global warming fears began crumbling.

"The situation we are in now is very similar to where we were in the late 1970s when coming ice age fears began to dismantle. We are currently witnessing an international awakening of scientists who are speaking out in opposition to former Vice President Al Gore, the United Nations, the Hollywood elitists and the media-driven "consensus" on man-made global warming."

Even leftists, Inhofe noted, have become disenchanted with global warming activism. He quotes Denis G. Rancourt professor of Physics and an environmental science researcher at the University of Ottawa, who believes the global warming campaign does a disservice to the environmental movement. Rancourt -- a committed left-wing activist and scientist -- believes environmentalists have been duped into promoting global warming as a crisis. Wrote Rancourt "Promoting the global warming myth trains people to accept unverified, remote, and abstract dangers in the place of true problems that they can discover for themselves by becoming directly engaged in their workplace and by doing their own research and observations. It trains people to think lifestyle choices (in relation to CO2 emission) rather than to think activism in the sense of exerting an influence to change societal structures."

The media, which weeps copious tears for the plight of the poor, ignores the terrible price the poor will pay for symbolic climate measures: "What few Americans realize is that the impact of these policies would not be evenly distributed. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) recently looked at the approach taken by most global warming proposals in Congress, known as cap and trade, that would place a cap on carbon emissions, allocate how much everyone could emit, and then let them trade those emissions."

He quoted from the CBO report: "Regardless of how the allowances were distributed, most of the cost of meeting a cap on CO2 emissions would be borne by consumers, who would face persistently higher prices for products such as electricity and gasoline. Those price increases would be regressive in that poorer households would bear a larger burden relative to their income than wealthier households would."

The media has enshrined the Kyoto Protocol which the Senate has refused to ratify and wept bitterly over America's failure to sign on to it.

Said Inhofe on the treaty's attempts to control global temperatures: "First, going on a carbon diet would do nothing to avert climate change. After the U.S. Signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, Al Gore's own scientist, Tom Wigley of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, calculated that Kyoto would reduce emissions by only 0.07 degrees Celsius by the year 2050. That's all. 0.07 degrees. And that's if the United States had ratified Kyoto and the other signatories met their targets. But we didn't and they won't.

"Of the 15 original EU countries, only two are on track to meet their targets. And even one of those, Britain, has started increasing its emissions again, not decreasing. Simi

Good thread Grendal.

11. Myth - kyoto

Fact - fools voted for the populist rudd and it will cost us a packet

Talk about dodgy. Take the first one for example. A decrease in temperature over 2 or 3 years does not disprove global warming. It just demonstrates the bleeding obvious - that temperature does not increase smoothly. It's just as stupid as saying there was a frost this morning so global warming isn;t real.

Yes but the last ten year of non-warming/ cooling is predicted to last another ten years.

So you accept that prediction, but not the prediction that the warming trend will continue despite the occasional frosty morning?

Not really. It doesn't mean we have 20 more years to spare. It just means we will see more of the impact after 10 years time than before. The CO2 we are emitting stays in the atmosphere for about 100 years, so a 10 or 20 year cycle is not some kind of reprieve.

It's like if the weather man predicts a few really hot days coming up, but it will still be cool at night. The fact that he predicts a cool night does not somehow negate his prediction of a warm day.

AGW theory does not predict a steady year on year increase in global average temperatures. It predicts an increasing trend with all the normal cyclical and random behaviour suprimposed on top. It's the underlying trend that matters. Variations about that trend do not disrpove the trend, any more than a frosty morning does.

Your the one who is absolutely certain as to what the future climate will be Muso (things are always crystal clear to activists). Why don't you put a bet down?

PJ the only thing we are certain of is that we have rational justification to take action to reduce greenhouse emissions. The denialist camp tends to go on about certainty, whereas rational people consider it from a risk management perspective. You have to be able to handle uncertainty in an objective manner.