Al Gore, Inconvenient Truth the Sequel

This is funny!

The Global Warming Myth?

The End Is Not Near -- Instead of Panicking Over Climate Change, Learn to Adjust to It

John Stossel is up to it again, ABC News last remaining skeptic is again debunking an other myth. If he keeps this up he will be bounced to the street by his bosses, that know there is money to be made in panicking there viewers.

Here is a small piece.

Lawyers from the Natural Resources Defense Council (another environmental group with more lawyers than scientists) warn that "sea levels will rise, flooding coastal areas. Heat waves will be more frequent and more intense. Droughts and wildfires will occur more often."

Wow.

But many scientists laugh at the panic.

Dr. John Christy, professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Alabama at Huntsville said: "I remember as a college student at the first Earth Day being told it was a certainty that by the year 2000, the world would be starving and out of energy. Such doomsday prophecies grabbed headlines, but have proven to be completely false." "Similar pronouncements today about catastrophes due to human-induced climate change," he continued, "sound all too familiar and all too exaggerated to me as someone who actually produces and analyzes climate information."

Here is a Google video of Dr. Michael Crichton talking with Charlie Rose. Dr. Crichton is one of the most understandable critics of the theory of global warming. The interview is promoting his newest book “Next” and the problems with genetic research, but Dr. Crichton does answer questions about global warming about 22 minutes in.

Al Gore “Ugly American”

"Al Gore condemned Canada's new plan to reduce greenhouse gases, saying it was "a complete and total fraud" because it lacks specifics and gives industry a way to actually increase emissions."

I hate it when other world leaders condemn the U.S. Thanks Al for reinforcing the idea of the ugly American.

Nuclear power will save the world form Global Warming

Leading scientists are today expected to back a major expansion of nuclear power as a way of saving the world from global warming.

Dr. William Gray Speaks Out

THE United States' leading hurricane forecaster says global ocean currents, not human-produced carbon dioxide, are responsible for global warming.

William Gray, a Colorado State University researcher, also said the Earth may begin to cool on its own in five to 10 years.

Speaking to a group of Republican MPs, Dr Gray had harsh words for researchers and politicians who said man-made greenhouse gases were responsible for global warming.

"They are blaming it all on humans, which is crazy," he said.

"We're not the cause of it."

Dr Gray said in the past 40 years the number of serious hurricanes making landfall on the US Atlantic coast had declined even though carbon dioxide levels had risen.

He said increasing levels of carbon dioxide would not produce more, or stronger, hurricanes.

Dr Gray, 77, has long criticised the theory that heat-trapping gases generated by human activity are causing the world to warm.

Earlier this month, he dubbed former US vice-president and 2000 Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore "a gross alarmist" for making the Oscar-winning documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, which helped focus media attention on global warming.

Yesterday, Dr Gray said that politics and research into global warming had created "almost an industry" that had frightened the public and overwhelmed dissenting voices.

He said research arguing that humans were causing global warming was "mush" based on unreliable computer models that could not possibly take into account the hundreds of factors that influenced the weather.

He said little-understood ocean currents were behind a decades-long warming cycle, and disputed assertions that greenhouse gases could raise global temperatures as much as some scientists predicted.

"There's no way that doubling CO2 is going to cause that amount of warming," he said.

Dr Gray also said warming and cooling trends could not go on indefinitely and believed temperatures were beginning to level out after a very warm year in 1998.

Do carbon offsets provide a false sense of security?

This is from the gristmill blog, they are a bunch of believers in global warming, but they seem to be having a understandable discussion of carbon offsets. Check it out and see how the true believers view carbon offsets.

Carbon Neutral through Carbon Offsets

"Also, a largely unregulated carbon-cutting business has sprung up. In this market, consultants or companies estimate a person’s or company’s output of greenhouse gases. Then, these businesses sell “offsets,” which pay for projects elsewhere that void or sop up an equal amount of emissions — say, by planting trees or, as one new company proposes, fertilizing the ocean so algae can pull the gas out of the air. Recent counts by Business Week magazine and several environmental watchdog groups tally the trade in offsets at more than $100 million a year and growing blazingly fast.

But is the carbon-neutral movement just a gimmick?

On this, environmentalists aren’t neutral, and they don’t agree. Some believe it helps build support, but others argue that these purchases don’t accomplish anything meaningful — other than giving someone a slightly better feeling (or greener reputation) after buying a 6,000-square-foot house or passing the million-mile mark in a frequent-flier program. In fact, to many environmentalists, the carbon-neutral campaign is a sign of the times — easy on the sacrifice and big on the consumerism."

Carbon Offsets, More Fraud?

A sign of potential fraud in the carbon offset market, British airline EasyJet has delayed the lunch of it carbon offsetting scheme. The reasoning for this delay is they have found that the carbon offset market is riddled with “snake oil salesmen”.

“Toby Nicol, EasyJet's communications director, said the company had been shocked by how much money carbon offsetting firms wanted for their service.”We have been quite surprised at the percentage that the offsetting companies would like to take out of the scheme for administration costs. Between 25% and 30% of every pound put in by consumers would go into administrating the company and that was simply too expensive," he said.

There are a lot of people who have dived into the market who are desperate to make a margin from it. There are too many snake oil salesmen in the business.”

Has EasyJet given up on the carbon offsetting market? No, EasyJet is going to buy UN-backed carbon credits on the open market at about 7.50 British pounds per ton, with a launch date sometime this summer. Lets be honest here, the UN's past is a bit checkered, with the Iraq oil for food program as its chief example of out of control fraud. Can EasyJet trust that the UN backed offsets will be any more effective?

Credit Card Environmentalism

There is a hint in this article at an other problem with carbon offsets, that this is just credit card environmentalism. Carbon offsets allow the rich to buy off there indulgences, rather then change they behavior.

“Low-budget airlines in particular have been targeted by environmentalists because they have driven a boom in air travel. The environment minister Ian Pearson labeled Ryanair the "irresponsible face of capitalism" this year after the airline criticized the European emissions trading scheme.”

Targeting the low cost airlines shows that the cost of saving the planet will be born by those on the lowest rungs of the economic ladder.

Carbon Offsets

This article in the International Herald Tribune, opinion page talks about carbon offsets. It covers the pluses and minuses of purchasing carbon offsets:

“But is the carbon-neutral movement just a gimmick?

On this, environmentalists aren't neutral, and they don't agree. Some believe it helps build support, but others argue that these purchases don't accomplish anything meaningful — other than giving someone a slightly better feeling (or greener reputation) after buying a 6,000-square-foot house or passing the million-mile mark in a frequent-flier program. In fact, to many environmentalists, the carbon-neutral campaign is a sign of the times — easy on the sacrifice and big on the consumerism.”

A summary of the article is this is an unregulated industry and it is unlikely that every carbon offset purchased is removing the CO2 that it claims.

Climate Change on Mars

NASA says that the Mars has warmed about 0.5C since 1970. That is about the amount of what the earth has risen over the same time frame. I guess the CO2 from my neighbors SUV has finely made to the planet Mars. Now his CO2 is causing a massive climate change on the red planet.

Have to point out that one researcher thinks that this is due to strong winds.

Carbon Offsets Checkbook Environmentalism?

Carbon Offsets could be a $100 million dollar market in the U.S. alone. From this article published in Business Week it looks like most carbon offset are either ineffective of fraudulent

Business Week uses TeraPass Inc., (the supplier of carbon offsets to the Academy Awards) project in Springdale Ark as an example of the ineffectiveness of the carbon offset market. This project in a sprawling garbage dump in the Ozark foothills captures methane gas, that as a greenhouse gas is over 20 more power full then CO2. This gas is then burned and converted into CO2 which is far better then methane in the atmosphere. The problem with this project is its effect as a carbon offset is that this project would have happed with or with out the TeraPass Money. I the end TeraPass money is just a supplemental revenue to the owners of the dump Waste management.

Methane and Global Warming

Fart Cops

It looks like the EU is look at the affects of cow farts on Global Warming. This is from the belief that live stock is a greater threat to the planet then transportation emissions.

Is methane produced by livestock (cows and hogs) a problem? Studies have shown that methane is 21 times greater impact as a greenhouse gas then CO2. In North America we have about 100 million cows, millions of hogs, and more then 2 billion chickens, we have the potential of billions of tons of CO2 equivalent greenhouse gasses being emitted each year

Looking for ways to reduce methane emissions from livestock Canadian authors Karin Wittinberg and Dinah Boadi conducted a study on this subject found 20 different way to reduce methane and nitrous oxide emissions. Some ideas are:

• Grinding and pelleting the can reduce methane by 20 – 40%
• Allow the grazing in high quality alfalfa can reduce methane by 50%
• Changing pastures every few day
• Add 4% canola oil to feedlot cattle rations

The authors showed that there ideas can have a measurable impact on reducing green house gases for little increase in cost to the consumer. This would be preferable the draconian changes proposed by global warming supporters.

At least Al Gore is not alone

An other example of do as I say not as I do. Last night Democrat debate all participating candidates arrived by private jet. This is not how you reduce CO2 to save the planet, this flight was roughly 1,700 miles and the CO2 Emissions for each candidate was 794lbs or a total of 6,352lbs. This was determined by using TerraPass flight calculator.

I have no doubt that all the republicans candidates will also fly by private jet and some of them have bent over to kiss the global warming extremists buts, should know that continued use of private jet make them look just as hypocritical as last night Democrats candidates did.

More on Carbon Trading Fraud

Al Gore is looking to cash in on carbon trading. His profiteering on Global Warming looks to be able to turn him into a billionaire.

Cheep Carbon Offsets

If your looking to go carbon neutral here is a great Carbon Offset Broker.

China has over taken the United States as the leading emitter of CO2

With China’s growth over the last few years (11% GDP this year) has pasted the US as the leading emitter of CO2. This has happened far quicker the past projections by the International Energy Agency (IEA) three years ago the IEA said China would pass the US by 2025.

China this year will emit 6,020 million tons of CO2 compared the United States 5,900 tons. This growth in CO2 from China will be greater then the total reductions in CO2 by the European Union, affectively wasting billions spent by the EU.

The scale of this problem for the EU is enormous:

“In the next eight years alone, the Chinese would install, as new, as much energy generating plant as currently exists today in all of the 25 countries of the expanded European Union- a total of 800 giga watts.

Ninety per cent of this would be coal-fired, that is, producing the most C02, and most of this, he said, would last for 50 to 60 years - "you can't shut down a power station after five or 10 years as that would be economic suicide". He said: If we can't influence China and India in their coming energy business decisions, we will be locked in, and we will have to live with the consequences for half a century or more.”

Global warming debate 'irrational'

much of the up-to-date research indicates that "changes in the brightness of the sun" are almost certainly the primary cause of the warming trend since the end of the "Little Ice Age" in the late 19th century. Human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2), the gas of concern in most plans to curb climate change, appear to have little effect on global climate, he said.

"I think the proof in the pudding, based on what (media and governments) are saying, (is) we're about three quarters of the way (to disaster) with the doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere," said Patterson. "The world should be heating up like crazy by now, and it's not. The temperatures match very closely with the solar cycles."

Patterson explained CO2 is not a pollutant, but an essential plant food.

Billions of taxpayers' dollars are spent to control the emissions of this benign gas, in the mistaken belief that they can stop climate change, he said.

"The only constant about climate is change," said Patterson.

Patterson said money could be better spent on places like Africa.

Don’t like the weather, lets change it.

Can we engineer the weather? Some scientists think so, but what are the risks?

Carbon Trading Fraud

The Financial Times has found problems with the carbon credit market. They see it as just a gold rush for a $68 billion dollar market. Looks like a great opportunity for Wall Street to make some big dollars.

Delta Airlines now is offering carbon offsets, you to can be like Al Gore, well with out the private jet.

• The Reference Frame has more in this boondoggle.
• Wikipedia entry on Carbon offset

Much of this push to become carbon neutral looks to have little benefit to the possible Global Warming problem.

Scientists Demand Changes to Global Warming Skeptic's Film

To these scientists they think they are helping by correcting errors in a program, others look at this as pure censorship. They look to eliminate the discussion of two ideas in the video, 1) the effect of volcanic activities in the creation of CO2 and 2) the medieval warm period.

I am leaning towards the idea that this is and attempt at censorship if the scientists plan on ignoring the errors in Al Gore movie.

If you want to check out the video your self here is the link to The Great Global Warming Swindle at Google video.

A Contrarian view on Earth Day

Again John Stossel takes a look at the opposite view of Earth Day, working in the left leaning media John’s voice stands out in his call to slow down and really look at what we are saying.

"The precautionary principle, popular in Europe, is the idea that no new thing should be permitted until it has been proved harmless. Sounds good, except as Ron Bailey of Reason writes, it basically means, "Don't ever do anything for the first time."

Stakeholder participation means that busybodies would be permitted to intrude on private transactions. Semmens's example is DDT, which for years would have saved children from deadly malaria, except that "'stakeholders' from the environmental quarter have prevailed on governments to ban the trade in this product."

The first victims of these principles are the poor. We rich Westerners can withstand a lot of policy foolishness. But people in the developing world live on the edge, so anything that retards economic progress -- including measures to arrest global warming -- will bring incredible hardship to the most vulnerable on the planet.

If we care about human life, we should celebrate Economic Progress Day."

Relax on Global Warming, the planet is fine

In an interview with Professor Richard Lindzen, it is pointed out that the planet is in good shape. He says that we have done a good job so far in cleaning up the planet:

• Forests are returning in Europe and the United States
• Air quality has improved
• Water quality has improved
• We grow more food on less land
• The world has moved forward in conquering hunger

The environmental movement has accomplished much in the last 50 years to be proud of, but Professor Lindzen thinks that money may be affecting there research.

Is Lindzen a quack, well he is an atmospheric physicist and the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT, have a read and then decide.

Scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming

Did you ever want a list of scientists that oppose the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming?

This Wikipedia page list scientists that have voiced there concern over the mainstream opinion on global warming. Wikipedia has categorized there area of dissent from the mainstream:

• The Earth is not warming
• The principal cause of global warming is unknown
• Global warming is mostly due to natural processes
• Climate forecasting isn’t as accurate as the IPPC ranges imply
• Global warming is good for human society

Green House Conspiracy

Here’s an other documentary on global warming. If you spent the time to view the BBC documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle” you will want to check this on out on Google video. It was shown on SBS Television Australia in 1990, 17 years old but this has some valuable information.

One square just isn't enough

Ok, this can not be helping the cause.

U.S. Adults Less Likely Than Europeans to Think Humans Are Contributing to the Increase in Global Temperatures

"While two-thirds of U.S. adults (65%) believe humans are contributing to an increase in global temperatures, this is less than the British (77%), Italian (87%) and French and Spanish (88% each) who believe this. The country where they are most likely to believe humans are contributing to this increase in temperatures is Germany (92%)."

A little more information on our beliefs about global warming it looks like the majority of the US believes in (65%) global warming.

Climate change: Why we don't believe it

"Global warming is a threat that is going to wipe out civilisation as we know it. The liberal elite and political classes are signed up to the message that, unless we take urgent action within ten years, we are all literally doomed to burn up.

But who else believes them?

Beyond the corridors of Westminster and the offices of environmental pressure groups, where global warming and sustainability are buzzwords of the moment, British consumers continue flying, driving and buying with unchecked enthusiasm. The gulf between the pronouncements of our politicians and what the majority of people think and do, could scarcely be wider."

This is interesting, a discussion on why global warming message is not getting across to the masses. My thought is the alarmists have over sold the issue, most already know that the planet is getting warmer, but we do not trust the idea that it is caused by human actions.

Climate Catastrophe Cancelled

Here is an other view of the global warming debate. Not as snazzy as An Inconvenient Truth but some interesting information. Check it out if you are looking to balance the information you have been seeing on global warming.

The Global Warming Jihad

This is an interesting article on the religious tone to the global warming debate.

Butler Shaffer can turn a phrase like no other.

Check it out if you have been getting the feeling that you are witnessing the birth of a new religion.

Da Bum