The climate is changing. The climate is always changing.
Scientists show that there is no connection between the human contribution of carbon dioxide and climate change / global warming.
Climate change is a political agenda. It is propaganda. Not science.
Why do we suppose CO2 is responsible for climate change?
CO2 = 0.054% of the atmosphere; how much CO2 is there in the atmosphere?
Humans are adding only a very small percentage.
Atmosphere has very small % of greenhouse gases.
Water vapour = 94% of greenhouse gases
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Formal US VP Al Gore – the definitive popular interpretation; comes from ice core surveys. That's it. What is the correlation between temperature and CO2 levels?
However, the link is the wrong way around. Temperature leads CO2. CO2 follows – a lag of 800 years.
CO2 is not a pollutant. It is natural. Humans produce a small fraction.
Humans and factories, volcanoes, animals and wildlife, dying plants and vegetation, and oceans. Oceans are #1 contributors of CO2 according to scientists – if you heat the ocean, it emits co2; the cooler, the more they absorb. Shoe we have a war on oceans?!
There is no evidence that CO2 has ever determined climate change.
How about Sunspots – how reliable are sunspots as an indicator of climate change?
Sunspots v. Temperature. In fact there is a direct correlation. The sun is driving climate change.
Androgenic global warming is unfounded and a lie.
visit: Wikipedia - The Great Global Warming Swindle
Watch: The Great Global Warming Swindle
1 comment:
No one has made a coherent case for the swindle argument. No one has a solid motive for "conspiring" to fake anthropogenic global warming.
NOTE: In this PARTICULAR instance, I am not attempting to challenge any of these assertions: global warming isn't happening; global warming, if it is happening, is natural; global warming might be happening, but we can't prove it; global warming is happening, and it is a good thing. That's not my goal here. Attempting to convince me that the science is flawed is of no use, because I am not even engaging in that discussion here. I am ONLY discussing the claim that environmentalists are perpetuating a swindle and a lie.)
While we liberals may indeed wish to control the actions of other people in particular ways, we do not do so as an end in itself. We have no desire to control the legal drinking age except to protect people we feel are not developed emotionally or intellectually enough to handle the risk. We do not want to control your vehicle's emissions except to prevent the vehicle from damaging the environment for everyone. We do not want to stop fracking except that we believe it is environmentally risky and dangerous. Etc. Our desire to control is based on a desire to prevent damage and promote good. We do not (as a whole) simply wish to control.
So where is the motive to perpetuate this lie?
The idea of global warming is not a new idea. It was not dreamed up over the past decade in order to push a particular agenda except the prevention of expected anthropogenic global warming. This has long been a theoretical concern, and I learned about it as a child more than twenty years ago. The current peak comes on the tail of decades of research and concern about the environment and human pollution.
This is not sudden, or a surprise.
So, AT BEST the average believer in anthropogenic global warming might be *overly credulous*. We might not give the case enough criticism because it is echoing what we've been expecting. I accept that MAY be the case, but that does not in any way make AGM a lie or a swindle.
Do you really think the tiny solar and wind energy industries are behind some sort of scientific conspiracy? I mean, sure, they've been getting funding, but so has Big Oil, for a loooong time.
Post a Comment