Dealing with Global Warming Fanatics

Up against the warming zealots. Martin Durkin says his British documentary (The Great Global Warming Swindle) rejecting the idea of human-caused global warming has survived last week’s roasting by the ABC

Digg This story!Submit to RedditSubmitSubmit Story to Furl

3 Responses to Dealing with Global Warming Fanatics

  1. Jason says:

    Climatology is a *very* inexact science, especially since mankind is so young, and our records are not as complete. Heck, we don’t even fully understand how a Hurricane works, so how can we be certain we know anything about climate change?

    On the *other* hand, Astronomers and Astrophysicists are *very* knowledeable, have *hard science* backing them, and they have not only proven that *all* the planets in the solar system are warming by the same percentage, but that the sun is actually sending out more energy than before.

    The cosmic radiation coming from the sun alone (not including all other forms of radiation from the sun, and not including *all* natural and artificial causes of global warming caused locally) account for over 95% of the change in temperature…

    This is proven fact. Yet who listens to astrophysicists? Aparently not the public.

  2. Andrew says:

    The Anti “Man-Made” Global Warming Resource
    http://z4.invisionfree.com/Popular_Technology/index.php?showtopic=2050

    Quick Facts:

    – Global surface temperatures have increased only about 0.6°C in the last 100 years. ( IPCC )
    – Global average sea level has risen only about 6 inches in the last 100 years. (Based on tidal guage data) ( IPCC )
    – Global mean sea level rise is in the range of 1.0 to 2.0 mm/yr. (Based on tidal guage data) ( IPCC )
    – No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected. ( IPCC )
    – Carbon Dioxide (CO2) levels in the atmosphere have risen by about 30% (280-370 ppmv) over the past 100 years. ( IPCC )
    – Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is only about 0.038% of the atmosphere. ( NASA )
    – Humans can only claim responsibility for about 3.4% of carbon dioxide emitted to the atmosphere annually. ( Source )
    – Ice core records show Carbon Dioxide (CO2) levels lag behind Temperature changes by hundreds of years. ( Source )
    – Carbon Dioxide accounts for somewhere between 4.2% and 8.4% of the greenhouse effect. ( Source )
    – Water Vapor + Clouds account for about 90-95% of the greenhouse effect. ( Source ) ( NASA )

    * Anthropogenic (man-made) Global Warming is an unproven Theory.
    * There is no “scientific consensus” that global warming will cause catastrophic climate change.
    * Science is not determined by “consensus” but by the Scientific Method.

  3. B.Offin says:

    “The cosmic radiation coming from the sun alone (not including all other forms of radiation from the sun, and not including *all* natural and artificial causes of global warming caused locally) account for over 95% of the change in temperature…

    This is proven fact. Yet who listens to astrophysicists? Aparently not the public.”

    “A new scientific study concludes that changes in the Sun’s output cannot be causing modern-day climate change.

    It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun’s output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

    It also shows that modern temperatures are not determined by the Sun’s effect on cosmic rays, as has been claimed.

    Writing in the Royal Society’s journal Proceedings A, the researchers say cosmic rays may have affected climate in the past, but not the present.

    “This should settle the debate,” said Mike Lockwood, from the UK’s Rutherford-Appleton Laboratory, who carried out the new analysis together with Claus Froehlich from the World Radiation Center in Switzerland.

    Dr Lockwood initiated the study partially in response to the TV documentary The Great Global Warming Swindle, broadcast on Britain’s Channel Four earlier this year, which featured the cosmic ray hypothesis.

    “All the graphs they showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that,” he told the BBC News website.

    “You can’t just ignore bits of data that you don’t like,” he said.”

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/6290228.stm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: