Tag: Global warming

Categories
Quick Analysis

Paris Climate Accord: Politics, Not Science

 The recently adopted Paris climate agreement is based on political considerations, not science.  Indeed, an objective view of scientific data concerning alterations in the global climate would indicate that concerns over man-made planetary warming don’t have a solid foundation in objective facts.

In a survey  of 1800 scientists, only 43% agreed with the UN’s ‘95%’ certainty’ about global warming.

Dr. Steve Koonin, who served as undersecretary for science in the Energy Department during President Barack Obama’s first term, noted the lack of scientific agreement in a Wall Street Journal article:

“The idea that ‘Climate science is settled’ runs through today’s popular and policy discussions. Unfortunately, that claim is misguided. It has not only distorted our public and policy debates on issues related to energy, greenhouse-gas emissions and the environment. But it also has inhibited the scientific and policy discussions that we need to have about our climate future…The crucial scientific question for policy isn’t whether the climate is changing. That is a settled matter: The climate has always changed and always will. Geological and historical records show the occurrence of major climate shifts, sometimes over only a few decades…Even though human influences could have serious consequences for the climate, they are physically small in relation to the climate system as a whole. For example, human additions to carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by the middle of the 21st century are expected to directly shift the atmosphere’s natural greenhouse effect by only 1% to 2%. Since the climate system is highly variable on its own, that smallness sets a very high bar for confidently projecting the consequences of human influences.”

A purely scientific debate would have featured significantly different facts. Astronomy Now discusses the potential of exactly the reverse of global warming:

“The arrival of intense cold similar to the one that raged during the “Little Ice Age”, which froze the world during the 17th century and in the beginning of the 18th century, is expected in the years 2030—2040. These conclusions were presented by Professor V. Zharkova (Northumbria University) during the National Astronomy Meeting in Llandudno in Wales by the international group of scientists, which also includes Dr Helen Popova of the Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics and of the Faculty of Physics of the Lomonosov Moscow State University, Professor Simon Shepherd of Bradford University and Dr Sergei Zharkov of Hull University”.

The goals appear to be more in line with a traditional leftist objective of transferring wealth from developed, capitalist nations to other countries.

Among the scientific questions scrupulously avoided in Paris:

  • Earth was warmer both in the 10th century A.D. and during part of the Roman Empire period. How does this compare with the concept of man-made global warming?
  • During the period when Earth was warming during the past decades, other planets in the solar system were also warming. Doesn’t this indicate that it is solar activity, not human activity, that is the major factor? (Live Science  noted in 2007: “Earth is heating up lately, but so are Mars, Plutoand other worlds in oursolar system, leading some scientists to speculate that a change in thesun’s activity is the common thread linking all these baking events.”
  • Antarctic ice cover reached its greatest level ever in 2014. Forbes reports: “Updated data fromNASA satellite instruments reveal the Earth’s polar ice caps have not receded at all since the satellite instruments began measuring the ice caps in 1979. Since the end of 2012, moreover, total polar ice extent has largely remained above the post-1979 average. The updated data contradict one of the most frequently asserted global warming claims – that global warming is causing the polar ice caps to recede.
  • There has been virtually no global warming for close to two decades. This should be reviewed more carefully before making drastic plans.

buy cialis online If you are considering taking Kamagra then you can place an online order to get this drug delivered at your door- steps. Get up and indulge yourself order cialis online into certain activities which make you feel good such as reading motivational books, cooking or baking, meeting your friends or exploring new places. When this happens, cialis low cost deeprootsmag.org a number of factors could be responsible. The emphasis should be on lifestyle change, order generic cialis education about proper diet, exercise, and behavior modification.
There appears to be considerable attempts to prevent a truly scientific discussion of global climate matters. William O’Keefe, writing at Marshall.org, reports that “In recent months, climate advocates have stepped up efforts to silence and intimidate organizations that question the climate orthodoxy that human activities involving the use of fossil fuels are leading to a climate catastrophe.  Their tactic is to urge that organizations expressing any skepticism be investigated under RICO—Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. They have been championed by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse who claims that “fossil fuel companies and their allies are funding a massive and sophisticated campaign to mislead the American people about the environmental harm caused by carbon pollution.”

President Obama’s enthusiasm for the 31-page agreement follows a pattern set in other matters.  He has employed international accords (carefully crafted not to be treaties which require Senate approval) to get around a Congress reluctant to agree with his domestic agenda.  As noted in The Hill  “Obama has also used the climate deal to bolster major controversial climate regulations. He’s argued that rules like the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) carbon dioxide limits for power plants and its methane emissions rules for the oil and natural gas sectors are necessary to obtain the 26 to 28 percent greenhouse gas reduction he pledged to the UN…Since the accord does not commit the United States to anything with legal force that it has not already agreed to in previous treaties, the Obama administration will argue that it does not require Senate ratification as a treaty.”

President Obama has pledged (without the consent of Congress) $3 billion as just a start to fund the $100 billion goals of the Paris agreement. Transferring wealth to developing countries appears to be the primary but unspoken  goal of the Paris deal. The agreement’s Article 9, as reported by CNS,  notes: “Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.”

Bloomberg  reports that Mr. Obama’s $3 billion pledge “would make the U.S. the largest donor to the newly established fund.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Plans to completely replace carbon energy with wind & solar are not practical

In the recent debate among Democrat presidential candidates, global warming, and the proposed actions proposed in response to it, was a major topic. However, the prevailing orthodoxy among left-wing politicians, pundits, and educational bureaucrats, about man-made global warming is being challenged.

The facts opposing the theory are substantial.

  • Long before the industrial revolution, Earth had periods when it experienced a warming trend, some more so than the current era.
  • During the latest period of global warming, other planets in the solar system, quite removed from human activity, also displayed some warming.
  • In the past 15 years, it appears that global warming has stopped.
  • The ice cover, when measured on a planetary wide scale, does not appear to be significantly receding.
  • Despite President Obama’s contention that the concept is “settled science,” vast numbers of scientists disagree.
  • Astronomers specializing in the Sun assert that solar activity is the engine of planetary temperatures, not human activity.
  • Scandals have erupted over various institutions falsifying data to make claims of global warming seem more genuine.
  • Some scientists even contend that global warming, if it did occur, could do more to help than harm the environment.

But the look may vary in case of generic products as they make a significant difference in composition of generic prescription viagra http://djpaulkom.tv/problems-of-intercourse-development-atypical/ is that the inactive substances like color are usually different. You can maintain erection cheap buy viagra quality for long duration and satisfy her in bed. Ask the medicine from an authorized medical pharmacy and can be purchased at very economic prices. cheapest cialis australia Not only so, men also experience low self-esteem and broken buy online viagra this relationship.
Former Governor O’Malley focused heavily during the Democrat debate on his proposal for a carbon-free energy deadline of 2050. Is that goal, whether necessary or not, attainable? We reviewed available facts about the affordability, practicality, viability, and potential side effects of eliminating carbon-based energy.

The United States currently obtains energy from a variety of means. According to the Energy Information Administration  In 2014, the United States generated about 4,093 billion kilowatthours of electricity. About 67% of the electricity generated was from fossil fuels (coal, natural gas, and petroleum). Major energy sources and percent share of total U.S. electricity generation in 2014 were:

  • Coal = 39%
  • Natural gas = 27%
  • Nuclear = 19%
  • Hydropower = 6%
  • Other renewables = 7%
    • Biomass = 1.7%
    • Geothermal = 0.4%
    • Solar = 0.4%
    • Wind = 4.4%
  • Petroleum = 1%
  • Other gases < 1%

 

While the pollution caused by carbon-based energy is frequently discussed, other forms of energy production have their own drawbacks. Opposition to nuclear power is well-publicized, but wind and solar pose daunting problems, as well.

The Wildlife Society Bulletin estimates that 888,000 bat and 573,000 bird fatalities/year (including 83,000 raptor fatalities) at 51,630 megawatt (MW) of installed wind-energy capacity occurred in the United States in 2012.

According to the Brookings Institute, “Adding up the net energy cost and the net capacity cost of the five low-carbon alternatives, far and away the most expensive is solar. It costs almost 19 cents more per KWH than power from the coal or gas plants that it displaces. Wind power is the second most expensive. It costs nearly 6 cents more per KWH.

“To place these additional costs in context, the average cost of electricity to U.S. consumers in 2012 was 9.84 cents per KWH, including the cost of transmission and distribution of electricity. This means a new wind plant could at least cost 50 percent more per KWH to produce electricity, and a new solar plant at least 200 percent more per KWH, than using coal and gas technologies.”

The Energy Reality Project describes the challenges that would be encountered in moving to more emphasis on solar and wind: to generate America’s baseload electric power with a 50 / 50 mix of wind and solar farmsit would take a sufficient amount of land to cover land area totaling the size of Indiana. It would cost over $18 Trillion with Concentrated Solar Power (CSP) farms in the southwest deserts, on parcels of land totaling the area of West Virginia.

“Tad W. Patzek, PhD, Chairman of the Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering Department at the University of Texas at Austin, and David Pimentel, PhD, Professor Emeritus of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at Cornell University stated … in Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences: “We want to be very clear: solar cells, wind turbines, and biomass-for-energy plantations can never replace even a small fraction of the highly reliable, 24-hours-a-day, 365-days-a-year, nuclear, fossil, and hydroelectric power stations. Claims to the contrary are popular, but irresponsible…”

Categories
Quick Analysis

White House ignores contrary climate data

President Obama utilized his recent trip to Alaska to visit Exit Glacier and state that its gradual receding justifies the extensive and expensive actions by federal agencies that are based on the theory of man-made global warming.

According to the New York Post “Exit Glacier has been shrinking … since 1815 — long before widespread industrialization and automobiles…Alaska has been buffeted by cyclical swings in climate for thousands of years. That’s true for the rest of the world, too. There was a 300-year-long Medieval heat wave, followed by a Little Ice Age that began around 1300, and then the 300-year warming period we’re in now. …The Alaska Climate Research Center reports almost no evidence of warming trends in Alaska since 1977…Many scientists are predicting the onset of two or three centuries of cooler weather — which would mean bigger glaciers.”

Despite the extensive disagreement by numerous scientists (31,072 American scientists, including 9,029 with PH.D’s, have signed a petition opposing the views of those who claim human factors have altered the climate) the White House continues to contend that the issue of man-made warming is “settled science” and there is no need for further research.

An icon of global warming advocates is failing to cooperate. The Daily Caller’s review of a Lakehead University study found that polar bears, supposedly threatened by global warming, are in fact thriving.

Part of the problem in determining what climate changes the Earth is enduring is that, as noted by federal sources “Temperature records from thermometers and weather stations exist only for a tiny portion of our planet’s 4.54-billion-year-long life.”

Official or semi-official weather records go back only about 100 years, although some records do go back a few centuries before that.  However, scientific data indicates that substantial global climate swings occurred long before industrial activity began. According to Green Agenda “In AD 1000, the Earth was experiencing an episode of climate warming similar to that of the present day…In Europe, several centuries of long hot summers led to an almost unbroken string of good harvests, and both urban and rural populations began to grow. These centuries are known as the Medieval Warm Period. One of the more dramatic consequences of the Medieval Warm Period was the expansion of Viking settlements in the North Atlantic. From their Icelandic base (established in AD 870), the Norse people began to move west and north to Greenland, Canada, and eventually above the Arctic Circle.”

A Nature study has found that temperatures in ancient Rome were warmer than the present.
At old generic cialis age , people get a variety of products as per their choices directly from generic pharmacies. Accurate reports help in arriving at the right time is necessary appalachianmagazine.com purchase viagra to get the safe treatment. With Irving drawing the opposing center or power forward out of the play, Tristan Thompson or Kevin Love often swoop in for an offensive rebound and uncontested order generic viagra appalachianmagazine.com putback. These include reducing cholesterol levels, reducing weight pfizer viagra appalachianmagazine.com or take medication to relieve the blood vessels.
One of the more significant arguments against the extreme measures advocated by the White House can be gleaned from a study of the other planets in our solar system. A National Geographic  review in 2007 reported that

“Simultaneous warming on Earth and Mars suggests that our planet’s recent climate changes have a natural—and not a human-induced—cause, according to one scientist’s controversial theory…In 2005 data from NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide ‘ice caps’ near Mars’s south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row. Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the sun. ‘The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars,’ he said…Abdussamatov believes that changes in the sun’s heat output can account for almost all the climate changes we see on both planets.”

The Earth and Mars are not alone. A Daily Tech  report noted that “The entire solar system appears to be warming up lately…Global warming was detected on Jupiter last year, and the warming is apparently behind the formation of a second red spot. Global warming on Neptune’s moon Triton has also been noted, with severe atmospheric changes as a result. And even tiny Pluto has experienced moderate warming in recent years, with temperatures rising a full 3.5 degrees.

“The common denominator in all these cases, the Earth included, is of course the Sun, which is in the middle of an extremely active period at present. The last time it was so active was during the Medieval Warm Period of 700 years ago, a period where the Earth was warmer than it is today. Interestingly enough, the period in which it was least active (the Maunder Minimum) corresponds with the Little Ice Age the earth experienced in the 17th century.”

The article points out that this doesn’t mean that the sun is getting hotter, but that is more “active.”

“Such correlations are causing many scientists to consider the Sun the primary cause of terrestrial climate change. The initial problem with this theory was that the changes in solar flux didn’t appear to be enough to account for the warming.  Scientist Henrik Svensmark of the Danish Space Research Institute reports that increased solar activity not only warms the earth directly, it increases the strength of the solar winds. This reduces the amount of cosmic radiation striking the earth, which directly reduces the formation rate of clouds. Less clouds = more warming. Astrophysicist Nir Shaviv reconstructed 550 million years of Earth’s climate change history. He found that 2/3 of the temperature variance could be explained by changes in cosmic flux alone, without even considering the direct influence of solar heating. This has always been a weak point of CO2-based models, which have never been able to successfully explain these warming and cooling trends in our past.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

New EPA plan not based on solid science

On August 3, The Environmental Protection Agency released its new Clean Power Plan, aimed at reducing carbon pollution from power plants. The central reason for the plan is to limit global warming, a concept considered “settled science” by its advocates, including the Obama Administration.

Far-ranging policies that will cost Americans a great deal have already been adopted in response to the global warming theory. Further, much of the policy action has been adopted by regulation, not legislation which would have allowed for far greater public debate and review.

The problem, of course, is that the theory of man-made global warming is neither settled science nor particularly accurate, given the numerous issues its proponents have completely failed to address.

31,072 American scientists, including 9,029 with PH.D’s, have signed a petition opposing the views of those who claim human factors have altered the climate. Even some advocates of global warming have objected to governmental intervention. Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, quoted in infowars.com,  notes that the changes due to global warming are too small to account for.  He stated that in the January 2014 article that “Global warming, climate change, all these things are just a dream come true for politicians. The opportunities for taxation, for policies, for control, for crony capitalism are just immense, you can see their eyes bulge.”

For thousands of years, far beyond the birth of modern industry and pollution-causing activities, the planet has alternately warmed and cooled, a result largely of solar activity.  The warming described by advocates of radical measures inspired by man-made global warming advocates warming is not consistent with prior periods of naturally occurring change. Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski A world-renowned atmospheric scientist and mountaineer who has excavated ice out of 17 glaciers on 6 continents in his 50-year career, wrote in a 21st Century Tech article:

“Since the 1980s, many climatologists have claimed that human activity has caused the near-surface air temperature to rise faster and higher than ever before in history. … Just a few years earlier, these very same climatologists had professed that industrial pollution would bring about a new Ice Age. In 1971, the spiritual leader of the global warming prophets, Dr. Stephen H. Schneider from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, claimed that this pollution would soon reduce the global temperature by 3.5°C.1 His remarks were followed by more official statements from the National Science Board of the U.S. National Science Foundation, ”. . .[T]he the present time of high temperatures should be drawing to an end . . . leading into the next glacial age.” In 1974, the board observed, “During the last 20 to 30 years, world temperature has fallen, irregularly at first but more sharply over the last decade.”2No matter what happens, catastrophic warming or catastrophic cooling, somehow the blame always falls upon “sinful” human beings and their civilization— which is allegedly hostile and alien to the planet…

“In fact, the recent climate developments are not something unusual; they reflect a natural course of planetary events. From time immemorial, alternate warm and cold cycles have followed each other, with a periodicity ranging from tens of millions to several years. The cycles were most probably dependent on the extraterrestrial changes occurring in the Sun and in the Sun’s neighborhood.”

Dr. Philip Lloyd, a physicist researching climate change, has found that the variation in temperature over the past century is within the planet’s natural variability over the past 8,000 years. Lloyd formerly was a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. His conclusions are the result of ice-core based data.

The data employed to foster the manmade change theory has been shown to be seriously flawed. When “change” advocates generally cite records only a few hundred years old, they ignore extremely relevant information. From the 10th to the 14th centuries, the planet’s temperature was warmer  than that of our time. This period was followed by an era now known as “the Little Ice Age.”  Changes continued, not tied to human activity, and continue still.

As climate change advocates pursued significant alterations in the U.S. economy, some scientists began to notice an interesting phenomenon. The planet Mars appears to be experiencing climate changes similar to Earth. Clearly, human activity could not be a factor there.
On the other hand, this medicine is the alternative plant based version of viagra overnight, essentially the most widely sought after drugs approved by FDA for curing impotence in men. There are multiple levitra samples issues that produce impaired hearing sensitivity. The medicines have to take before 30 minutes of sexual action. purchase generic viagra valsonindia.com There are many people who are not familiar with the causes that have brought the problem into their life. generic cialis valsonindia.com
Peter Ferrara, writing in Forbes,  noted:

“The increase in global temperatures since the late 19th century just reflects the end of the Little Ice Age. The global temperature trends since then have followed not rising CO2 trends but the ocean temperature cycles of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO). Every 20 to 30 years, the much colder water near the bottom of the oceans cycles up to the top, where it has a slight cooling effect on global temperatures until the sun warms that water. That warmed water then contributes to slightly warmer global temperatures, until the next churning cycle.

“Those ocean temperature cycles, and the continued recovery from the Little Ice Age, are primarily why global temperatures rose from 1915 until 1945, when CO2 emissions were much lower than in recent years. The change to a cold ocean temperature cycle, primarily the PDO, is the main reason that global temperatures declined from 1945 until the late 1970s, despite the soaring CO2 emissions during that time from the postwar industrialization spreading across the globe.”

“The 20 to 30 year ocean temperature cycles turned back to warm from the late 1970s until the late 1990s, which is the primary reason that global temperatures warmed during this period. But that warming ended 15 years ago, and global temperatures have stopped increasing since then, if not actually cooled, even though global CO2 emissions have soared over this period. As The Economistmagazine reported in March, “The world added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010. That is about a quarter of all the CO2 put there by humanity since 1750.” Yet, still no warming during that time. That is because the CO2 greenhouse effect is weak and marginal compared to natural causes of global temperature changes.”

Alan Caruba, who passed away on June 16, 2015, wrote in Heartland  has also noted that some of the extremist scenarios portrayed by the global change advocates, (many of whom have built careers and personal fortunes from the concept) are thoroughly incorrect. Even if the scenario of warming did occur, the increase in C02, which they maintain would be the cause, would actually increase, not decrease vegetation throughout the planet.

As serious as the ignored data has been the intentional falsifying of key science studies. The most well-known case, popularly known as “Climategate,” came to the public’s attention when leaked emails from the University of East Anglia revealed that results of studies were tailored to ignore actual results in favor of propping up the beliefs of global warming theory advocates. The U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA have fabricated computer modeling of the atmosphere, perhaps in response to political pressure, also to better serve the wishes of climate change advocates.

Professor Don J. Easterbrook, professor emeritus of geology at Western Washington University, writing in Global Research concludes:

“Global warming (i.e, the warming since 1977) is over. The minute increase of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008%) was not the cause of the warming—it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years.

The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling, perhaps much deeper than the global cooling from about 1945 to 1977. Just how much cooler the global climate will be during this cool cycle is uncertain. Recent solar changes suggest that it could be fairly severe, perhaps more like the 1880 to 1915 cool cycle than the more moderate 1945-1977 cool cycle. A more drastic cooling, similar to that during the Dalton and Maunder minimums, could plunge the Earth into another Little Ice Age, but only time will tell if that is likely.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Man-made climate change theory challenged

Frequently overlooked in the debate over whether human activity has resulted in global climate change are two key factors: To what extent do current temperature variations differ from those experienced in the past, particularly in pre-industrial times, and, if there is any significant change, to what extent is it due to human activity?

Dr. Philip Lloyd, a physicist researching climate change, has found  that the variation in temperature over the past century is within the planet’s natural variability over the past 8,000 years. Lloyd formerly was a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. His conclusions are the result of ice-core based data.

An abstract of his research, which has also been reported in the Daily Caller, states:

“There has been widespread investigation of the drivers of changes in global temperatures. However, there has been remarkably little consideration of the magnitude of the changes to be expected over a period of a few decades or even a century. To address this question, the Holocene records up to 8000 years before present, from several ice cores were examined. The differences in temperatures between all records which are approximately a century apart were determined, after any trends in the data had been removed. The differences were close to normally distributed. The average standard deviation of temperature was 0.98 ± 0.27 °C. This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was due to natural variations.”

Dr. Philip’s research adds to the growing body of work that contradicts the largely unsupported claims of significant man-made climate change. Highlighting that increasingly large group of scientists disagreeing with the unsupported claims of man-made climate change proponents is the statement by over 9,000 Ph.D’s who, as summarized by Weather Channel founder John Coleman, found that (as quoted in Breitbart)  that “the science [purportedly proving man made global warming] is not valid…“It is important to … know that there is no climate crisis. The ocean is not rising significantly. The polar ice is increasing, not melting away. Polar Bears are increasing in number. Heat waves have actually diminished, not increased. There is not an uptick in the number or strength of storms (in fact storms are diminishing). I have studied this topic seriously for years. It has become a political and environment agenda item, but the science is not valid.”
For instance, Technorati has 100 million blogs in tadalafil canadian pharmacy its index, with a new one started every second. This may even help men with best online cialis premature ejaculation. It also helps to increase testosterone level and hence very popular among those struggling with impotence. cialis 40 mg reached in popularity the legendary cialis that created the whole market of ED pills in cheaper rate with cialis 40 mg. In the fight against viagra cialis on line erectile dysfunction many have turned to alternative sources outside of conventional medicine.
Repeatedly, the Obama Administration has alleged that the scientific community is virtually unanimous in its support of the man-made climate change theory. The facts simply do not support that claim. Secretary Kerry has stated that addressing the “crippling consequences” of climate change, as supported by “Ninety-seven percent of the world’s scientists…is urgent.” Science fails to support his statement.

The scientific world has been rocked by numerous reports of falsified data engaged to support the man-made change theory, as well as substantial incidents of the suppression of contrary data. Christopher Booker wrote in the Telegraph,

“When future generations look back on the global-warming scare of the past 30 years, nothing will shock them more than the extent to which the official temperature records – on which the entire panic ultimately rested – were systematically “adjusted” to show the Earth as having warmed much more than the actual data justified … Paul Homewood, who, on his Notalotofpeopleknowthat blog, had checked the published temperature graphs for three weather stations in Paraguay against the temperatures that had originally been recorded. In each instance, the actual trend of 60 years of data had been dramatically reversed, so that a cooling trend was changed to one that showed a marked warming. This was only the latest of many examples of a practice long recognised by expert observers around the world – one that raises an ever larger question mark over the entire official surface-temperature record.”

The extraordinary political and financial dimensions proposed to counterman-made warming are apparently based on unsound and suspect information.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Time for a candid look at the climate change theory

The time has come for a candid re-examination of an almost sacrosanct article of faith: the acceptance of significant global climate change resulting from human causes.

Originally, advocates of the theory suggested that the planet was cooling.  That concept didn’t work out, and the same advocates proposed that the population, particularly in industrialized nations, was causing global warming.  That, too, hasn’t withstood the rigors of scientific analysis, particularly since the alleged warming trend appears to have halted for decades, if indeed it ever existed, and so the rather nebulous concept of “climate change” was proposed, and is now widely taught in schools, accepted by most of the media, and used as a factor in fostering large-scale government intervention in the private sector.

A number of explicit facts have challenged the notion that manmade activities are having a significant impact on the Earth’s temperature, starting with the fact that the Earth has continuously experienced climate change, even before humans made their relatively recent appearance.

The data employed to foster the manmade change theory has been shown to be seriously flawed. When “change” advocates generally cite records only a few hundred years old, they ignore extremely relevant information. From the 10th to the 14th centuries, the planet’s temperature was warmer  than that of our time. This period was followed by an era now known as “the Little Ice Age.”  Changes continued, not tied to human activity, and continue still.
In blend with sexual incitement, vardenafil meets expectations by expanding blood stream to the penis and may help men with discount cialis ED get and keep up erection for sufficient measure of time. It improves your immune system and allows males to last longer in bed to make her delighted with sexual pleasure. cialis tadalafil 5mg The two generic cialis pill dominant supplements, Blue and Pink color. A regular chiropractic check-up should be included in every person’s wellness plan viagra stores in order to avoid debilitating pain and irreversible degenerative damage.
As climate change advocates pursued significant alterations in the U.S. economy, some scientists began to notice an interesting phenomenon. The planet Mars appears to be experiencing climate changes similar to Earth. Clearly, human activity could not be a factor there.

As serious as the ignored data has been the intentional falsifying of key science studies. The most well-known case, popularly known as “Climategate,” came to the public’s attention when leaked emails from the University of East Anglia revealed that results of studies were tailored to ignore actual results in favor of propping up the beliefs of global warming theory advocates. It has now been revealed that the U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA have fabricated computer modeling of the atmosphere, perhaps in response to political pressure, also to better serve the wishes of climate change advocates.

The Earth’s environment does require attention, and actual harmful activities should be addressed. But the use of ignored facts and falsified data to support incorrect theories can only cause harm. The cynical employment of counterfeit science to pursue political ends is unacceptable.

Categories
Quick Analysis

EPA misleads public

The Heartland Institute has obtained a memo  through the Freedom of Information Act revealing that the Environmental Protection Agency intentionally employed misleading tactics to gain public support for its policies. According to the report,

“The March 2009 memo shows the EPA feared it was losing citizen support for its climate efforts because opinion polls consistently showed the public ranked fighting global warming very low on its list of priorities. According to polls, the public felt harms from global warming were exaggerated and had little bearing on people’s lives.

In response, the memo describes the EPA’s decision shift the debate from concerns about melting ice caps and declining caribou and polar bear populations, to promoting the idea global warming poses a direct threat to public health, especially children’s health, and air and water quality.

Is Enhancement Health supplements Truly cialis generic uk Effective? For women who wish to take bust enhancement the non-surgical way, the key question they often would ask, is that, the actual pills really work? Well, the answer is in negative. Well, about the first drug called Minoxidil, the results do not order cheap cialis satisfy them. Sildenafil contained medicines are used with some safety tips. levitra sales click here for more The political coverage of the newspaper is very strong. see here now viagra cheap india “Most American’s will never see a polar ice cap, nor will ever have a chance to see a polar bear in its natural habitat. Therefor it is easy to detach from the seriousness of the issue. Unfortunately, climate change in the abstract is an increasingly – and consistently – unpersuasive argument to make. However, if we shift from making this issue about polar caps and about our neighbor with respiratory illness we can potentially bring this issue home to many Americans.”

The problem for the EPA is, there has been no serious research linking global warming or greenhouse gas emissions to human health problems, or air or water pollution.”

The memo can be read here.

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Underreported News in 2014

With 2014 now solidly in the rearview mirror, it’s clear that several key issues were not adequately covered by the major media. To name just three:

DISCRIMINATION

News sources reported extensively on matters involving alleged discrimination in cases involving race. Yet one of the most significant discrimination stories continues to be underreported.

Unfair treatment of older workers has become increasingly prevalent. An early 2014 AARP  analysis found that the percentage of those ages 45—74 working full time has dropped 11 points since their 2002 survey. The percentage working part time has increased 5%, and the percent looking for work has increased 7%. This may at least partially coincide with a report by the Center for Immigration Studies  revealing all new jobs created in the past several years have gone to immigrants.

GLOBAL WARMING

While many key leaders, including the President, continue to advocate costly and economically burdensome measures to deal with global warming, the reality is, that particular problem has not been a factor for about 18 years.
Other useful signs are viagra sildenafil 100mg cheilosis and koilonychia. The cost turned out to viagra without prescription be to be a dampening factor on what was an eagerly awaited release. When physical stimulation causes local release of NO, inhibition of PDE5 by cialis price increased levels of cGMP in the corpus cavernosum bringing about smooth muscle unwinding and irritation of blood stream to the penis, which at last causes erection. There are commercial systems available for Platelet Rich Plasma(PRP) which includes Cydomedix, Emcyte Pure PRP, Angel system and Harvest system .Sometimes it is combined buy levitra wholesale with A-cell ,although the benefit is speculative.
Scientists Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberger,  according to the Cato Institute, have found that “…observations show that the rise in the global average surface temperature has been little different (in the case of the University of East Anglia record, no different) from zero for the past 18 years or so. So instead of accelerating, global warming is actually decelerating, or, (nearly) stopped.

Despite the observations of Michaels, Knappenberger and others, expensive “solutions” to a problem that doesn’t actually exist to any harmful degree continue to be debated.

DEFENSE

Nothing should capture headlines more than Russian nuclear arms capable bombers flying along American coastlines, or nuclear subs stealthily patrolling near our shores. Both of these incidents have been occurring, but the readers and viewers of most major media sites didn’t hear very much about it.  Similarly, the news that President Obama withdrew all American tanks from Europe early in 2014 (Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine later prompted 150 to be returned) and the lack of any available US aircraft carrier for East Asia patrol in the first half of 2015 have also received scant notice.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Global warming, the “Irreconcilable Differences” Issue

Guest editorial from Russell Cook

 Russell Cook recently appeared on the Vernuccio/Allison Report.  In response to a number of requests for more information, he has submitted the following.

One has to wonder if global warming promoters are oblivious to the manner in which their talking point narratives are plagued with crippling contradictions. Consider the following statements, paraphrased from my own experience of being on the receiving end of such assertions:

“You have no climate science expertise allowing you to comment on whether global warming is happening.” Neither does Al Gore, nor scores of book authors declaring the issue settled, or the collective lot of environmental organization administrators, or any mainstream media reporters.

“You’re a denier of climate change.” But not one skeptic climate scientist or prominent skeptic speaker has ever been seen saying the climate has remained static over the last century, nor has any actually advocated for an unchanging climate. Global warming promoters, on the other hand, appear to advocating for exactly that.

“You’re ignorant.” Of what? Avid followers of the issue who are skeptical of man-caused catastrophic global warming are often adept at citing specific IPCC material in order to point out which climate predictions are failing to happen, and they are often well-versed in related facets of the issue, such as the fine details and overall scope of the ClimateGate scandal.

“You oppose stopping global warming because you are guided by your religious beliefs / economic greed / political views.” Again with advocating for an unchanging climate? But what church do I belong to / what is my economic situation / what political party am I registered in? Can anyone hazard a guess that has any hope of being confirmed? Can anyone do the same on other skeptics?

“You oppose President Obama’s global warming reduction efforts because you’re a racist.” Vice President Biden holds the same views, as does Hillary Clinton. President George W. Bush suggested global warming reduction efforts could be accomplished through voluntary means.

“If you don’t see what runaway global warming is going to do to us in the future, you are crazy.” Diagnosing a person’s mental health is usually left to those having psychology expertise. But we are talking about events that have not yet happened.

This is what creates the addiction for the impotence medication and brings out such positive results that men are left wonder if they had consumed the original generic sildenafil uk next. After all, a buy brand viagra treatment is supposed to eradicate all problems and not let them come back later in life. Both men and women generic viagra buy get affected by erection problems. These are rich generic cialis professional in potassium, minerals, and other essential steroids. “There’s a 97% consensus among climate scientists saying global warming is happening.” It’s more like 100%, but this goes back to the assertion about ‘deniers’ above. Regarding the “97%” talking point, that largely stems from just three reports having highly suspect methodologies, not restricted to just the loaded too-simple question of whether global warming is happening. On top of that, a show of hands has never validated scientific conclusions any time in the entire history of the Scientific Method.

“A minority of denier scientists have long been given media balance by reporters when they never deserved it.” Again with the denier talking point? But show all of us the last ten times when any mainstream media news outlet balanced their news reports about global warming with equal time given to purely scientific viewpoints offered by skeptic scientists.

“Denier scientists don’t publish papers in peer-reviewed journals, the gold standard of determining science conclusions.” Could we stop with the denier talking point? Skeptic scientists most certainly do get their papers published in peer-reviewed journals, they also describe in great detail how that process has been stacked against them by biased science journal editors, and there is at least one instance of where a science conclusion was seen in a science journal and its conclusion was widely cited as a situation to make decisions from. However, the paper’s author was later found guilty of 145 counts of fabrication and falsification of data for his work The mere presence of a science conclusion in a science journal is therefore no validation of the conclusion’s merits.

“Denier scientists deny that cigarettes cause cancer, that there is an ozone hole, or that acid rain exists.” Each time the ‘denier’ talking point is repeated, it undermines the critic when that individual never proves skeptic climate scientists deny climate change or that global warming has happened over the last century. As for the other points, they would be devastating if only they were supported with actual evidence to prove such a denial took place.

“Well, you and they are shills of Exxon / the Koch brothers / ‘dark money’, and are paid to lie, deceive, and fabricate false reports.” Two words: prove it. If that accusation had any merit, it would have wiped out the skeptic scientists’ credibility more than a decade ago. One more thing, remember who accusers are talking to in this particular situation: I am the one who has access to my bank accounts and my correspondence, and there is no way on Earth anyone can make that accusation stick to me.

“You are an idiot and no amount of reason will change your closed mind.” It must be first proven I am an idiot, that I’ve been presented with reasonable arguments, and that I have rejected such arguments.
I have no climate science expertise, and have said so from the beginning. All I ever did from the start was point to one side of the scientific consideration of the issue completely contradicting the other side. Rather than receive any informed degree of information on why the contradiction existed, I was told to ignore the skeptic side out-of-hand, usually culminating every time with the latter two responses above. The bit about skeptic scientists being paid to lie via industry money at least sounded plausible, but I didn’t proceed farther than just one day into a serious look into where the accusation came from before I ran into irreconcilable differences on who had discovered ‘smoking gun’ evidence proving the accusation to be true, and I could not even find the so-called ‘evidence’ – leaked industry memos – in order to read them for myself. Long story short, when I did find partial copies of the memos seven months later buried in Greenpeace archive scans in a way that ordinary internet searches would not dredge them up, it turns out the memos are not evidence of a sinister top-down industry-wide directive. Worse, narratives about who discovered this ‘industry plot’ are full of holes, and the people surrounding the initial push of the accusation have a lot of explaining to do if they want the accusation to stay afloat.

Basically, the entire global warming issue can be boiled down to a 3-point mantra on “settled science” / “corrupt skeptics” / “reporters may ignore skeptics because of points 1 & 2.” Its promoters almost seem to be praying to whatever god they believe in that nobody will question those assertions.

However, we don’t have to be climate scientists, or really any kind of scientist at all, in order to ask tough questions about the whole issue. We most certainly do not have to be a scientist to ask whether their accusation about ‘corrupt industry funding’ is true, and when it is readily seen how that one folds up like a cheap suit, then the central point in their 3-point mantra implodes, wiping out the other two by default.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Smearing Critics of Global Warming

In a revealing study, researcher Russell Cook, writing for the Heartland Institute, has disclosed evidence that there has been a significant attempt to deliberately discredit scientists who provide credible, accurate data casting doubt on the theory that human activity has caused global warming.

According to Cook’s study, entitled “Merchants of Smear, ” “For about two decades we’ve been told the science behind human-caused global warming is settled, and to ignore skeptic scientists because they’ve been paid by industry to manufacture doubt about the issue…The truth, however, has every appearance of being exactly the opposite”

According to Cook’s research, acceptance of global warming “survives only in the absence of science-based criticism. Solid science-based skeptic criticism exists, but the public rarely hears about that; they are simply told to ignore allegedly industry-corrupted skeptic scientists.”
A matter of levitra 20 mg discover this link life and death. It must have a physical address so you won’t be duped with a fake firm supposedly having a beautiful web site, but have nothing more than it. best pharmacy shop viagra professional canada Natural treatment of varicose veins Vein Protex from Calivita, a natural food supplement with hesperidine, is a very effective natural treatment of super viagra varicose veins, swollen or heavy legs. It’s no wonder that acai berries are exceedingly nutritious and helpful foods that can help our generic viagra without prescription bodies in several ways.
The gist of what Cook has discovered is that a concerted effort was made, essentially orchestrated by Al Gore (who has financially profited significantly from global warming activities) to keep important and accurate data out of the public view. The key method employed to accomplish the cover-up was an attempt to discredit objective scientists by falsely claiming they were linked to energy industry corporations.

Cook believes that the end result of his investigation is that “We are overdue for the biggest ideology collapse in history, begging for an investigation into why the mainstream media and influential politicians apparently never checked the veracity of claims about “settled science” and “corrupt skeptics.”