Is Global Warming Fake?
Not everyone agrees with Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. I’m currently watching a video on The Great Global Warming Swindle, and it’s certainly convincing. After all, climatologists need us to believe global warming is real in order to keep getting funding for research. Otherwise, it’s not a problem, and we can go on with our economic growth.
Here are some of my notes from watching the video. I haven’t verified whether this is all true, or to what extent it’s true, but this is from the video. But it’s really fascinating, so I’ll write about it. And this would be an intriguing topic to research in the future. Of course, the global warming scam, if it is one, is what makes it interesting.
Temperature is leading CO2 by about 800 years. CO2 is following temperature changes. How can it be that a higher temperature causes more CO2?
CO2 is a gas produced by all living things. We’re all made of carbon dioxide. Humans aren’t the main source. Volcanoes, animals and bacteria, dying vegetation, and the oceans produce a lot more. The ocean has a memory of temperature changes. Here’s the video… you can play/listen to it while you look over my own notes below.
If CO2 doesn’t drive earth’s climate, what does? Look at the sky; the gigantic thing called the Sun. The origin of long-term weather forecasting is the Sun. It’s much more interesting to use sunspots to predict the weather. Sunspots are intense magnetic fields. Astronomers used to count the number of spots thinking that more spots meant warmer weather. During the little ice age, there were few sunspots visible.
There’s a close correlation between what the sun’s doing and temperature here on earth. The sun is driving changes in the climate. It also affects us indirectly through clouds. How are clouds formed?
Cosmic rays meeting water from the sea, they form water droplets, creating clouds. When the sun is stronger, fewer particles get through, and fewer clouds get formed. The climate was controlled by the clouds, controlled by cosmic rays, controlled by the sun. The intensity of its magnetic field more than doubled in the 20th century.
What causes the increase in natural disasters? Global cooling and the threat of a new ice age was the problem in the 1970s. Experts warned that extreme cold temperatures would be a terrible problem. One scientist suggested that increased carbon dioxide output by humans could help to warm the earth.
Why did this theory go away? (1) Temperatures rose and (2) the miners went on strike. Nuclear is misrepresented. Since nuclear has no carbon dioxide emissions, prove that carbon dioxide is a problem. Then, nuclear power will be really pushed over oil and coal. Mrs. Thatcher set up the IPCC which produced a report suggesting global disaster as a result of global warming. He noticed the ignorance of all scientific data up to that point, such as the emphasis on the sun.
This was also attractive to medieval environmentalists. They loved it because CO2 is clearly an industrial gas, tied in with economic growth and car transportation. Basically: civilization. There are people who think economic growth is bad, and global warming could be used to justify a whole range of myths. It’s also anti-US.
Now in the 1980s, a majority of people agreed with environmentalists. You can’t be confrontational that way. So you need to take increasingly extreme standpoints. Also, the failure of global communism meant that communists took their anti-capitalist views with them elsewhere.
It was attracting more media attention, and thus, more government funding. $170 million a year, which was reasonable.. but then it jumped to $2 billion a year, and that brought a lot of jobs and new people who otherwise weren’t interested. You have whole cadres of people whose only interest is that there is global warming. If your field is the one of concern, you have to do less work showing why you should get funding. It’s a small part of science, but funding is going into global warming and distorting its part.
Climate models are only as good as their assumptions. A bad prediction could be far worse than none at all. All models assume man-made CO2 is the main source of climate change, instead of the sun, water vapor, and clouds. The models are so exciting that you can change a subtle detail and make something exciting happen. You can model anything.
An impressive way of making a more interesting forecast is by saying there will be more manmade CO2 than there is. Climate forecasts are only proved wrong long after people have forgotten about it. Forecasters are more concerned about making a model that’s impressive.
If you run a model and nothing happens, then it won’t get printed. If you run the model and something amazing happens, people will say it’s exciting and it’ll get picked up by the media. There’s a bias towards results that are dramatizable.
Environmental journalists? If the global warming story goes into the trash can, so does their job. The story has to get more dramatic because otherwise hardened news editors will think: “oh, it’s the same thing you reported 5 years ago.”
Catastrophic melting of the polar ice caps? Greenland was much warmer than it is just 1000 years ago. Yet there wasn’t a major meltdown event. The ice caps are always expanding and contracting, according to Professor Akasofu. This is becoming news now only because we have satellites that can now see this. People forget that ice is always moving. Falling ice in the arctic is as ordinary as falling autumn leaves. It happens every year. There’s no evidence of catastrophe due to global warming.
Just because you saw something happen to the ocean last year doesn’t mean something changed in the climate last year. In fact, that’s pretty unlikely, since it takes hundreds of years for the deep ocean to change, and then reflect that on the ocean surface.
Mosquitoes aren’t tropical; they thrive in cold temperatures. They’re extremely abundant in the arctic. In the 1920s, there was an epidemic of malaria, with about 600,000 deaths. It’s not a tropical disease. People in global warming invent scare stories that it will spread north due to warmer temperatures.
More than $4 billion a year is spent on global warming. Scientists speaking out against it are much more likely to lose. Few take a stand because it does cut into research funding. People think that these people are paid off by the oil and gas companies. But they’re not; there’s almost no private sector funding of climatology.
This is putting pressure on developing countries, suggesting that they shouldn’t develop. The UN is sponsoring a conference about global warming in developing countries. How to promote solar panels in Africa? Billions of dollars in climate science means there’s a lot of people dependent on those dollars, and they want to see that carry forward. They have a Global Warming Officer! There are a lot of people, in some way or another, dependent on it. People who dare challenge man-made global warming are vilified. If you’re skeptical about climate change, it’s like you’re a holocaust denier. Environmentalists are influential on a global level, and politicians know this.
The US government has succumbed in the past month, and now they are investigating environmental problems in the developing world. The policies being pushed are having a disasterous effect on the world’s poorest people. They also have the Precautionary Principle, and it’s used in one direction only: the risk of using fossil fuels, but not the risks of not using it. It never talks about the positives of using the energy!
500 million children die by indoor smoke because they have to burn things for fuel in developing countries. They don’t have electricity, which creates a long chain of problems. No refrigeration or modern packaging, so food can’t be kept. And there’s no hot water. The life expectancy of people living without electricity is short.
My own question. What about before electricity was widely used? Electronics are only an invention of the past couple hundred years. Humans lived long before that.
People promoting solar and wind power really like the idea of global warming. Personally, that includes me. But it’s true that they are notoriously unreliable, as the video claims. And they are a lot more expensive, too. It’s expensive for the Europeans and Americans, but for Africans, it’s about survival! This promotes the idea that the world’s poorest should be restricted to the most expensive types of energy. Saying they must use solar panels means that they can’t have electricity!
Also, there’s a romanticisation of the simple life. I agree: it’s really not that great. I love living in modern society here in California. Industrialization is really a good thing, no matter how much those people try to make it sound bad.
via Joel Comm
There is one point which I don’t see anyone considering. It’s a very basic thing that I learn as a kid.
The concept is that the balance in certain gases due to the respiration of animals versus plants. Animals breathe in oxygen and expel CO2. Plants take in CO2 and release oxygen. When there is a higher concentration of CO2, plants will grow faster, absorb more CO2 and release more oxygen; eventually reaching an equilibrium.
This isn’t entirely true. CO2 is only one of several things the plants have to take in to create sugar and pure energy. So plants won’t produce little or no more oxygen if they’re given more CO2 because ther’s already enough of it in the air. But as I said it’s not totally wrong either because the plants may produce a little more oxygen but since there’s so much CO2 in the air the most plants don’t produce faster if they’re given CO2 because they already have sufficient.
Very interesting. Very good discussion on the topics here: http://www.thescienceforum.com/The-Great-Global-Warming-Swindle-5985t.php
There also seems to be controversy about the interests of those behind the movie, and who they’re being paid by. Also a scientist has claimed to be misrepresented. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Global_Warming_Swindle#Criticism_and_reaction
“After all, climatologists need us to believe global warming is real in order to keep getting funding for research. Otherwise, it’s not a problem, and we can go on with our economic growth.”
Likewise, oil, manufacturing, and auto industries all require us not to believe in global warming so we don’t disturb their record profits. They have been amazingly effective at injecting doubt in the US population, but note that the educated populations of Europe and Asia have no such doubt.
Who do you think has more lobbying power and a larger budget? Academics who depend on tiny grants of thousands of dollars, or the hundreds of billions of dollars that oil companies make? Last I checked, there are no academics lobbying congress for pork and bills that keep them funded by tax payer subsidies.
You’re in college, do you trust your professors? Are you more likely to trust professors and scientists, or Dick Cheney and his profit driven energy task force? Who has a greater financial interest in hiding the truth?
You should travel a bit, I think you will be surprised how these USA corporate-centric opinions are interpreted by the rest of the world.
The media is also very one sided. When caliornia’s oranges froze over few months ago there was almost no news about this. But when unproven theories about global warming come out, it is on the front page of the newspaper. If the media told the public about the reasons against global warming, many people would not fall into the propaganda.
This isn’t true at all. The fact that the oranges in California(as I think you ment it) froze were big news all over the world, even in the little country Sweden´were I live.
You also don’t understand the fact that global warming causes more than a raise in temperature.. It also causes the temperature to change from High’s to Low’s… So the simple fact is the freezing of oranges in California is more likely to be caused by Global Warming than not to be. Lets not forget that holes in the Ozone are ripping, not to mention areas that emit the least amount of gas are effected more.. You’re not understanding a basic principle.. That the earth is indeed connected with the sun.. But we also had a layer that would protect life from extremely harmful rays.. Not to mention these rays also create intense amounts of heat. Glacier retreats occur in natural cycles throughout earth history, this includes intense heating before Ice ages, but the plain fact of the matter is we are far above the normal Co2 emissions that occured in the cycle. Not the mention, that glaciers do retreat, but the time that it takes for them to retreat is not 40 years..
the o-zone layer is ripping appart? i dont think so. if scientists are indeed not lying then how can the o-zone layer be ripping appart as we make it thicker with excess gas?
and how can it rip appart? a little thing called gravity holds the planet together and a hole cannot exist seeing as gravity will simply pull everything to become even.
and notice how scientists insist that we will heat the eatrh up when we have has a bitterly cold few months latly and little sun?
and co2 follows temperature because the temperature heats up the sea, producing more water vapour which is a greenhouse gas!
a hole bunch of lies to cause an inconveniance the the general pubil if you ask me.
know a counter argument please tell me because nobody at college can produce one!
Ronald Reagan, Banks, and Patrick are all absolutely correct. People say there is “no scientific consensus” on global warming everytime some jocko (who is not usually a scientist) goes on a talk show and scrolls some names of people who don’t believe in global warming. How about NEXT time, you scroll the names of those who DO “believe” in global warming. I put believe in quotes because global warming is not some crack pot idea, or a religion in which we need to rely on faith alone. Its hard proven scientific fact from the most esteemed scientific organizations in the world. I don’t care that Dr. So-and-So at Smallville College )who may not even be a climatologist) doesn’t “believe” its happening. I just want to ask any doubters: what part of the scientific research don’t you believe. If you can answer that question, then you can talk. What part of the scientific research is troubling to you? Go to the IPCC website, read the reports, visit the websites of the most esteemed scientists in their particular fields. No one is saying that we will wake up tomorrow with flooded fields, but over time if we continue the way we are, it very well could happen. The Naysayers are the clear minority, and by the way… scientists get more “funding” for projects when LESS scientists are ALSO studying the same problem.. Why would scientists want to study an issue that EVERY other climatologist in the world is working on? They wouldn’t. Scientists are strange people, they spend their lives asking the questions many others wouldnt, spend a lot of time in school looking at one small insignificant thing in nature that no one else cares about, knowing they will make no money when they get out. I highly doubt scientists are trying to LIE about global warming. They have nothing to lose if global warming is false. They will study something ELSE and get probably MORE funding for working on another hypothesis. Scientists WISH global warming would NOT be happening. Do you know how thrilled they would be to say that we have nothing to worry about, that everything is fine and our ecomomic development can keep going? Some people really need to rethink arguments.
You forgot about human corruption and how not everybody who paid more money for a fancier school, so if your going to say this put down both sides of the story. have you noticed how the big time scientists that get free research money, and the ones who dont usually end up believing the opposite? everything always boils down to money, money, money. and the ones in the general public who do believe usually are too stupid to believe whats on TV or not anyways. I do agree that those celebrities who just put list of people who oppose the subject are idiots who dont belong on the subject anyways. but why bring up religion on here? just leave it alone on here I dont want that atheist vs. religious conflict on this.
Money, Money, Money – we created it, we can get rid of it.
To Patrick
What are the “normal” CO2 levels? Is there a set number? In the 1800s, there was no instrument used to determine the percentage of different gases in the air. The information used to support global warming is biased, like the ever common, “temperatures have risen greatly over the past 50 years.” But, that was the 60s, a VERY cold decade, in which people feared an ice age. How do you know that the world does not just have a cycle of getting hot and cold every now and then?
Wow you guys are so blinded by whats in front of you. can you see that one scientist decided there was a hole and now there apparently is WOW. this has happened in previous ice ages it gets warm and freezes over, the youth beleives this because its what is said by the smart people come on! start showing the facts or dont dhow anything
Very interesting, personally I don’t believe in global warming at all. Climate changes are natural and have happened over the past million years. Just now, men is SO arrogant, they believe that its US screwing up the climate, nobody worried thousands of years ago when a new ice age showed up. It’s all natural! But just the last few years we think of ourself as SO important, that we believe that it’s not mother nature, but you, me, and the guy next door are changing climate!
I absolutely aggree with you.But is it caused by livestock or by humans? I’m just scanning this article, so could someone lend me a hand on this?
One more thing the dinosaurs millions of years ago produced more gas than any human being can. that includes driving his car, using electricity, and going on doing the normal things in his life. so Patrick like Brian Hunt said you have no idea what has gone on on this Earth 100 years ago let alone thousands or millions of years ago.
ok so it is a fact that excess CO2 can cause a greenhouse effect, I dont deny it. However this load of bullshit saying that global warming is the harbinger of doom? let’s get real people. If there was a more twisted and corrupt way for squeezing tax payer dollars into nothingness, I havn’t seen it. Like I wouldn’t care so much if people didn’t keep blameing the government for it. They are not corrupt, there are no conspiricies, and people are not just all around bad natured. Global Warming may exist but it is not gunna affect anyone even 1000 years from now. I doubt this planet will even be inhabited around then.
Hi, im Nick Monacelli, a 14 year old from Hibbing, MN. I have put together a site that offers REAL proof that Global Warming is fake. Please go to http://www.globalwarmingisfake.wetpaint.com
Thanks!!!
You’re right, climate change HAS been happened since the beginning of the Earth. However, the regular period of climate change from cold to warm that normally has occurred throughout Earth’s history has drastically changed since around the industrial revolution. Humans have altered the natural pattern of climate change so drastically that the Earth cannot handle it. Look at some graphs depicting the Earth’s history of temperature change. There’s a trend of rise and fall in temperature, but in the last 200 years or so, all that can be seen is a sharp incline. Global warming is real. If you still don’t believe in it, don’t you think that cutting gas emissions and cleaning up the Earth would make it a simply nicer place to live anyway?
Co2 levels can be determined by analyzing material found in sediment and rock from a certain time period. From these tests, scientists can determine gaseous levels from even prehistoric times. And the world does have a hot and cold cycle. See my other comment…I explain it there.
Also, in the age of the dinosaurs, there were a lot more trees and other plant life around that could take in co2 and release oxygen, therefore negating this huge co2 output that you think the dinosaurs made. The Earth had a balanced system which was ruined when we began cutting down millions of trees and burning fossil fuels. It’s completely idiotic to say that dinosaurs, just by breathing out co2, created more than humans are now with modern devices, like cars and factories. The burning of fossil fuels in factories, cars, etc is literally pumping co2 into the atmosphere. Dinosaurs simply exhaled co2, which was then taken in by the abundance of trees. When dinosaurs died, natural decomposers removed the co2 or it was absorbed by the roots of plants.
Cars and factories creating CO2? Are you just plain dumb? That creates CO, Carbonmonoxide. Not carbondioxide. Two totally different gases.
If you’ve studied chemistry you should know that CO easily reacts with another oxygen atom amd then becomes CO2. And also carbonmonoxid, if i wouldn”t react with oxygen, is an even more efficient greenhous gas than CO2, because it has an higher concentration of Coal wich is what makes the heat bounce back to the earth. You know, it’s not only CO2 which is an greenhousgas.
Are you really attempting to say that low temperatures are also caused by global warming? So according to you if it’s hot, global warming, if it’s cold, global warming. That sounds more like a convenient untruth than anything else.
totally agree with this
§♀↨
♀-↨)♫☼►↕◄‼3=▼)G♀☼♫►♪
wtf man. An Inconvienient Truth pretty much said it all… I mean, how many more graphs and numbers do you want to believe that global warming is going on… and it’s going on right how. so before your blog hurts are earth anymore, i suggest you go get yourself a hybrid or something.
Your dumb. Apparently all those numbers and graphs really got to your head and brainwashed you. People like you believe anything with graphs that looks fancy because you can’t actually understand it. You just accept the fact that it must be right. And its “our earth”, not “are earth”.
okay, my bad for the spelling, but i am only thirteen so don’t get all worked up. if you can’t feel the temperature changing or you somehow got all the invisible snow this year, then good for you… but i only got one snow day this year and it was only because of ICE. if you really need proof then why don’t you go to the north or south pole and check out all the dying polar bears and melting glaciers… some people really need a reality check.
Those graphs and numbers don’t show the full truth. Only part of it. Yes the temperature has been rising, but it’s been rising before we even started pumping those gases into the air. It was rising before the industrial revolution. We may be having some impact on it’s rise, but it’s minimal in the grand picture. The Earth’s temperature will rise and fall in a cycle repeatedly as stated.
sorry mr. guy, but you are wrong!
i am like totally agreeing with u, but do u really think that humans are made out of carbon? cause carbon is like a chemical and hunas are like flesh and stuff. i think u are a bit of track here darling.
Are you serious?
humans are completely made of some carbon!!!!! plants have carbon in them whales have carbon in them all living things have carbon in them. flesh is made of minerals and atoms and crap and if you do your research then you will discover that carbon is a very common mineral. also in the field of archeology they use carbon dating, the measure of the amount of carbon 14 in a dead organism. this proves that all living things have carbon of some compound in them
Yes he really thinks humans are made out of carbon. Yes carbon is a chemical. More importantly it is an element. The entire universe is made of elements. Humans included.
i am a pretty smart goon and you are not smat but a real big goon
This is a very interesting theory
uhmm…. HELLO. i am a goon that liVes in an old house and i woulf just like to say….. HUMNHA-HUMNHA-HUMNHA!!!!!!
I agree!