Citrus Growers Forum Index Citrus Growers Forum

This is the read-only version of the Citrus Growers Forum.

Breaking news: the Citrus Growers Forum is reborn from its ashes!

Citrus Growers v2.0

Skepticism of global warmng, environmental hostages
Goto 1, 2  Next  
Citrus Growers Forum Index du Forum -> Off-topic forum (For anything you want to discuss)
Author Message
harveyc
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 372
Location: Sacramento Delta USDA Zone 9

Posted: Sat 14 Jun, 2008 12:14 am

Very interesting comments by John Coleman, founder of The Weather Channel, from a presentation he made to the San Diego Chamber of Commerce

http://www.kusi.com/weather/colemanscorner/19842304.html

Global Warming and the Price of a Gallon of Gas
by John Coleman

You may want to give credit where credit is due to Al Gore and his global warming campaign the next time you fill your car with gasoline, because there is a direct connection between Global Warming and four dollar a gallon gas. It is shocking, but true, to learn that the entire Global Warming frenzy is based on the environmentalist’s attack on fossil fuels, particularly gasoline. All this big time science, international meetings, thick research papers, dire threats for the future; all of it, comes down to their claim that the carbon dioxide in the exhaust from your car and in the smoke stacks from our power plants is destroying the climate of planet Earth. What an amazing fraud; what a scam.

The future of our civilization lies in the balance.

That’s the battle cry of the High Priest of Global Warming Al Gore and his fellow, agenda driven disciples as they predict a calamitous outcome from anthropogenic global warming. According to Mr. Gore the polar ice caps will collapse and melt and sea levels will rise 20 feet inundating the coastal cities making 100 million of us refugees. Vice President Gore tells us numerous Pacific islands will be totally submerged and uninhabitable. He tells us global warming will disrupt the circulation of the ocean waters, dramatically changing climates, throwing the world food supply into chaos. He tells us global warming will turn hurricanes into super storms, produce droughts, wipe out the polar bears and result in bleaching of coral reefs. He tells us tropical diseases will spread to mid latitudes and heat waves will kill tens of thousands. He preaches to us that we must change our lives and eliminate fossil fuels or face the dire consequences. The future of our civilization is in the balance.

With a preacher’s zeal, Mr. Gore sets out to strike terror into us and our children and make us feel we are all complicit in the potential demise of the planet.

Here is my rebuttal.

There is no significant man made global warming. There has not been any in the past, there is none now and there is no reason to fear any in the future. The climate of Earth is changing. It has always changed. But mankind’s activities have not overwhelmed or significantly modified the natural forces.

Through all history, Earth has shifted between two basic climate regimes: ice ages and what paleoclimatologists call “Interglacial periods”. For the past 10 thousand years the Earth has been in an interglacial period. That might well be called nature’s global warming because what happens during an interglacial period is the Earth warms up, the glaciers melt and life flourishes. Clearly from our point of view, an interglacial period is greatly preferred to the deadly rigors of an ice age. Mr. Gore and his crowd would have us believe that the activities of man have overwhelmed nature during this interglacial period and are producing an unprecedented, out of control warming.

Well, it is simply not happening. Worldwide there was a significant natural warming trend in the 1980’s and 1990’s as a Solar cycle peaked with lots of sunspots and solar flares. That ended in 1998 and now the Sun has gone quiet with fewer and fewer Sun spots, and the global temperatures have gone into decline. Earth has cooled for almost ten straight years. So, I ask Al Gore, where’s the global warming?

The cooling trend is so strong that recently the head of the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change had to acknowledge it. He speculated that nature has temporarily overwhelmed mankind’s warming and it may be ten years or so before the warming returns. Oh, really. We are supposed to be in a panic about man-made global warming and the whole thing takes a ten year break because of the lack of Sun spots. If this weren’t so serious, it would be laughable.

Now allow me to talk a little about the science behind the global warming frenzy. I have dug through thousands of pages of research papers, including the voluminous documents published by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I have worked my way through complicated math and complex theories. Here’s the bottom line: the entire global warming scientific case is based on the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from the use of fossil fuels. They don’t have any other issue. Carbon Dioxide, that’s it.

Hello Al Gore; Hello UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Your science is flawed; your hypothesis is wrong; your data is manipulated. And, may I add, your scare tactics are deplorable. The Earth does not have a fever. Carbon dioxide does not cause significant global warming.

The focus on atmospheric carbon dioxide grew out a study by Roger Revelle who was an esteemed scientist at the Scripps Oceanographic Institute. He took his research with him when he moved to Harvard and allowed his students to help him process the data for his paper. One of those students was Al Gore. That is where Gore got caught up in this global warming frenzy. Revelle’s paper linked the increases in carbon dioxide, CO2, in the atmosphere with warming. It labeled CO2 as a greenhouse gas.

Charles Keeling, another researcher at the Scripps Oceanographic Institute, set up a system to make continuous CO2 measurements. His graph of these increases has now become known as the Keeling Curve. When Charles Keeling died in 2005, his son David, also at Scripps, took over the measurements. Here is what the Keeling curve shows: an increase in CO2 from 315 parts per million in 1958 to 385 parts per million today, an increase of 70 parts per million or about 20 percent.

All the computer models, all of the other findings, all of the other angles of study, all come back to and are based on CO2 as a significant greenhouse gas. It is not.

Here is the deal about CO2, carbon dioxide. It is a natural component of our atmosphere. It has been there since time began. It is absorbed and emitted by the oceans. It is used by every living plant to trigger photosynthesis. Nothing would be green without it. And we humans; we create it. Every time we breathe out, we emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. It is not a pollutant. It is not smog. It is a naturally occurring invisible gas.

Let me illustrate. I estimate that this square in front of my face contains 100,000 molecules of atmosphere. Of those 100,000 only 38 are CO2; 38 out of a hundred thousand. That makes it a trace component. Let me ask a key question: how can this tiny trace upset the entire balance of the climate of Earth? It can’t. That’s all there is to it; it can’t.

The UN IPCC has attracted billions of dollars for the research to try to make the case that CO2 is the culprit of run-away, man-made global warming. The scientists have come up with very complex creative theories and done elaborate calculations and run computer models they say prove those theories. They present us with a concept they call radiative forcing. The research organizations and scientists who are making a career out of this theory, keep cranking out the research papers. Then the IPCC puts on big conferences at exotic places, such as the recent conference in Bali. The scientists endorse each other’s papers, they are summarized and voted on, and viola, we are told global warming is going to kill us all unless we stop burning fossil fuels.

May I stop here for a few historical notes? First, the internal combustion engine and gasoline were awful polluters when they were first invented. And, both gasoline and automobile engines continued to leave a layer of smog behind right up through the 1960’s. Then science and engineering came to the environmental rescue. Better exhaust and ignition systems, catalytic converters, fuel injectors, better engineering throughout the engine and reformulated gasoline have all contributed to a huge reduction in the exhaust emissions from today’s cars. Their goal then was to only exhaust carbon dioxide and water vapor, two gases widely accepted as natural and totally harmless. Anyone old enough to remember the pall of smog that used to hang over all our cities knows how much improvement there has been. So the environmentalists, in their battle against fossil fuels and automobiles had a very good point forty years ago, but now they have to focus almost entirely on the once harmless carbon dioxide. And, that is the rub. Carbon dioxide is not an environmental problem; they just want you now to think it is.

Numerous independent research projects have been done about the greenhouse impact from increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide. These studies have proven to my total satisfaction that CO2 is not creating a major greenhouse effect and is not causing an increase in temperatures. By the way, before his death, Roger Revelle coauthored a paper cautioning that CO2 and its greenhouse effect did not warrant extreme countermeasures.

So now it has come down to an intense campaign, orchestrated by environmentalists claiming that the burning of fossil fuels dooms the planet to run-away global warming. Ladies and Gentlemen, that is a myth.

So how has the entire global warming frenzy with all its predictions of dire consequences, become so widely believed, accepted and regarded as a real threat to planet Earth? That is the most amazing part of the story.

To start with global warming has the backing of the United Nations, a major world force. Second, it has the backing of a former Vice President and very popular political figure. Third it has the endorsement of Hollywood, and that’s enough for millions. And, fourth, the environmentalists love global warming. It is their tool to combat fossil fuels. So with the environmentalists, the UN, Gore and Hollywood touting Global Warming and predictions of doom and gloom, the media has scrambled with excitement to climb aboard. After all the media loves a crisis. From YK2 to killer bees the media just loves to tell us our lives are threatened. And the media is biased toward liberal, so it’s pre-programmed to support Al Gore and UN. CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, The LA Times, The Washington Post, the Associated Press and here in San Diego The Union Tribune are all constantly promoting the global warming crisis.

So who is going to go against all of that power? Not the politicians. So now the President of the United States, just about every Governor, most Senators and most Congress people, both of the major current candidates for President, most other elected officials on all levels of government are all riding the Al Gore Global Warming express. That is one crowded bus.

I suspect you haven’t heard it because the mass media did not report it, but I am not alone on the no man-made warming side of this issue. On May 20th, a list of the names of over thirty-one thousand scientists who refute global warming was released. Thirty-one thousand of which 9,000 are Ph.ds. Think about that. Thirty-one thousand. That dwarfs the supposed 2,500 scientists on the UN panel. In the past year, five hundred of scientists have issued public statements challenging global warming. A few more join the chorus every week. There are about 100 defectors from the UN IPCC. There was an International Conference of Climate Change Skeptics in New York in March of this year. One hundred of us gave presentations. Attendance was limited to six hundred people. Every seat was taken. There are a half dozen excellent internet sites that debunk global warming. And, thank goodness for KUSI and Michael McKinnon, its owner. He allows me to post my comments on global warming on the website KUSI.com. Following the publicity of my position form Fox News, Glen Beck on CNN, Rush Limbaugh and a host of other interviews, thousands of people come to the website and read my comments. I get hundreds of supportive emails from them. No I am not alone and the debate is not over.

In my remarks in New York I speculated that perhaps we should sue Al Gore for fraud because of his carbon credits trading scheme. That remark has caused a stir in the fringe media and on the internet. The concept is that if the media won’t give us a hearing and the other side will not debate us, perhaps we could use a Court of law to present our papers and our research and if the Judge is unbiased and understands science, we win. The media couldn’t ignore that. That idea has become the basis for legal research by notable attorneys and discussion among global warming debunkers, but it’s a long way from the Court room.

I am very serious about this issue. I think stamping out the global warming scam is vital to saving our wonderful way of life.

The battle against fossil fuels has controlled policy in this country for decades. It was the environmentalist’s prime force in blocking any drilling for oil in this country and the blocking the building of any new refineries, as well. So now the shortage they created has sent gasoline prices soaring. And, it has lead to the folly of ethanol, which is also partly behind the fuel price increases; that and our restricted oil policy. The ethanol folly is also creating a food crisis throughput the world – it is behind the food price rises for all the grains, for cereals, bread, everything that relies on corn or soy or wheat, including animals that are fed corn, most processed foods that use corn oil or soybean oil or corn syrup. Food shortages or high costs have led to food riots in some third world countries and made the cost of eating out or at home budget busting for many.

So now the global warming myth actually has lead to the chaos we are now enduring with energy and food prices. We pay for it every time we fill our gas tanks. Not only is it running up gasoline prices, it has changed government policy impacting our taxes, our utility bills and the entire focus of government funding. And, now the Congress is considering a cap and trade carbon credits policy. We the citizens will pay for that, too. It all ends up in our taxes and the price of goods and services.

So the Global warming frenzy is, indeed, threatening our civilization. Not because global warming is real; it is not. But because of the all the horrible side effects of the global warming scam.

I love this civilization. I want to do my part to protect it.

If Al Gore and his global warming scare dictates the future policy of our governments, the current economic downturn could indeed become a recession, drift into a depression and our modern civilization could fall into an abyss. And it would largely be a direct result of the global warming frenzy.

My mission, in what is left of a long and exciting lifetime, is to stamp out this Global Warming silliness and let all of us get on with enjoying our lives and loving our planet, Earth.

_________________
Harvey
Back to top
Millet
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 13 Nov 2005
Posts: 6656
Location: Colorado

Posted: Sat 14 Jun, 2008 12:43 am

GOD BLESS HARVEY. Recently a report aired on the KOA radio, concerning a scientific paper signed by 31,000+ scientists, of which 9000 held PPDs, disclaiming the Global Warming claim, but did you ever read about their paper in the mass media---NO. It is no longer called "Global Warming," by the adherents, it is now called Climate Change. Certainly can't error with a catch all wording such as "Climate Change". It happens daily, even hourly. - Millet
Back to top
harveyc
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 372
Location: Sacramento Delta USDA Zone 9

Posted: Sat 14 Jun, 2008 12:50 am

Thanks Bob, and blessings to you.

The current number is 31,072 signatures of which 9,021 are by those with PhDs. Simply amazing that this can be ignored by the media and general population.

Edit: forgot the link! http://www.petitionproject.org/

_________________
Harvey
Back to top
Skeeter
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 2218
Location: Pensacola, FL zone 9

Posted: Sat 14 Jun, 2008 10:20 pm

How you guys can blame someone that is for conserving oil and for developing alternative energy sources for the increasing price of oil is amazing. That is how things get twisted and nothing gets done.

This is one PhD. that understands the science. I know that climate varies and changes have always happened. There are many factors that affect climate, including sun spots which have cycle of approximately 11 years (11 years of high and 11 years of low activity). There are also the changing orbital cycles that are believed to have been responsible for the glacial and interglacial periods. But greenhouse gases do exist and they have caused major climate changes in the past. Greenhouse gasses are believed to have been responsible for the worst extinction of life that has ever occurred on this planet--wiping out over 95% of all marine species that existed at the time-- the Permian Extinction. Obviously, man was not the source of those greenhouse gasses--volcanos were --but it does show the potential of greenhouse gasses.

You can continue to ignore the laws of supply and demand and believe that your demand for oil has nothing to do with the price and you can continue your attempt to blame someone else for the problem, but I think I know where that will take us. You can continue to believe this is all some environmental hoax, but time will tell us who was right.

If I am wrong, maybe my grandchildren will get a big laugh out of it. If you are wrong, your grandchildren will not be laughing so loud.

_________________
Skeet
Back to top
harveyc
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 372
Location: Sacramento Delta USDA Zone 9

Posted: Sat 14 Jun, 2008 10:57 pm

Skeeter, it is not just one PhD, there are over 9,000 of them, far more than have signed on to the greenhouse gas theory. How can you ignore them? The environmentalists are the one who get to laugh for now.

There are two elements in the issue that are mixed into the argument in that speech. One is that environmentalists have supposedly got the media and some scientists into buying off on the greenhouse gas theory. Secondly, environmentalists have their hand in greatly restricting domestic drilling for oil as well as construction of refineries. Those both impact prices to a great extent since they are working on the supply end of the equation. You are the one ignoring supply and demand issues if you're not willing to accept that fact.

Should we conserve and develop alternative energy sources? Sure, that makes good economic sense. But we should not be scared into it with some questionable science. We should also hope for accurate reporting by the media, though I won't hold my breath. I would surely die of CO2 poisoning!!!).

_________________
Harvey
Back to top
Skeeter
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 23 Jul 2006
Posts: 2218
Location: Pensacola, FL zone 9

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 1:26 am

There is always debate amoung scientist--that is the nature of science. The number of scientist on one side or the other is not what determines which is right--only continued evaluation of the evidence will determine that. Even as late as the 1960's the ruling biologist excluded from meetings those that believed continental movement had anything to do with evolution of new species. They refused to believe the continents moved. Now that is well known.

The problem is that there are many involved in this debate that have a vested interest in confusing the issue. I have no vested interest except the health of my environment.

The fall of the iron curtain should have made it pretty clear what happens when environmental issues are ignored. There are many lakes and rivers there that will not provide useful food for generations.

_________________
Skeet
Back to top
harveyc
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 372
Location: Sacramento Delta USDA Zone 9

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 2:10 am

Skeeter, your mixing other issues but not addressing why you disagree with those that question the theory of CO2 causing global warming. Why has earth taken a break from warming and been cooler for the past 10 years? Does Al Gore believe his own prophetic warnings? If so, why does he spend 10 times or more for utilities for his house than I do?

Don't be confused into thinking that I don't care for the environment. I believe I'm a good steward of my land. I just don't care for the actions of some extreme environmentalists that hold us hostage. They'd prefer that I dig a hole and live in the ground.

_________________
Harvey
Back to top
dauben
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 963
Location: Ramona, CA, Zone 9A

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 2:23 am

harveyc wrote:
Thanks Bob, and blessings to you.

The current number is 31,072 signatures of which 9,021 are by those with PhDs. Simply amazing that this can be ignored by the media and general population.

Edit: forgot the link! http://www.petitionproject.org/


I'm one of the signatories.

Phillip
Back to top
harveyc
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 372
Location: Sacramento Delta USDA Zone 9

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 2:26 am

dauben wrote:
I'm one of the signatories.

Phillip


Thanks, Philip.

_________________
Harvey
Back to top
Millet
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 13 Nov 2005
Posts: 6656
Location: Colorado

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 3:09 am

Skeeter, if you wish to conserve oil, please feel free to conserve all you can. What you conserve will be snapped up by China in one half of one half of a heart beat. I also majored in Chemistry, for me it was at the University of Colorado at Boulder. I have long been stunned how educated people could possibly believe in all this silly Gore-ish science that blames warming as man made warming. Wonder why the environmentalist have dumped the wording "Global Warming?"

Millet
(Then Came The Morning, And The Stone Was Rolled Back)
Back to top
harveyc
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 10 Jan 2007
Posts: 372
Location: Sacramento Delta USDA Zone 9

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 3:40 am

Okay, I keep thinking of some of the silly things (well, they seem silly but are really very sad) related to all of this and one that comes to mind is "carbon credits". I belong to a chestnut discussion group with many participants being researchers, private and industry. Last year a member mentioned a conference which he invited all of us to. It had something to do with the environmental benefits of trees. That's fine enough, I thought. However, the conference required a carbon credit fee to supposedly offset the effects of participants flying to the conference. Okay, those credits were going to help support a rainforest that should be preserved anyways. But why on earth did the not just do a video conference and send even more money there? It seems to be just a way to help some people not feel guilty about what they are doing. Why not avoid doing it to begin with if you really think it's harmful? When it comes down to it, it seems to just be about money.

_________________
Harvey
Back to top
dauben
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 963
Location: Ramona, CA, Zone 9A

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 3:48 am

Skeeter wrote:

The problem is that there are many involved in this debate that have a vested interest in confusing the issue. I have no vested interest except the health of my environment.

The fall of the iron curtain should have made it pretty clear what happens when environmental issues are ignored. There are many lakes and rivers there that will not provide useful food for generations.


It's funny this subject came up. I just got done watching the History Channel episode on the various states of the Union. One of Ohio's claims to fame was the rivers catching on fire due to the pollutants. That they say was the start of the environmental movement.

Now where I sit, I don't see anyting like the conditions that existed back then (we may have a whole new set of issues), but people are definitely polarized when it comes to environmentalism. On one side, we have environmentalists that essentially worship nature that have no clue what they're talking about unless they're repeating the rehtoric from the leftist politicians. They unfortunatly have caused most of us to lump all environmental scientists into a category that has little credibility (fairly or unfairly). It has come to the point that I now work with environmental consultants on a daily basis. I've come to respect these individuals because they aren't the no growthers that want to stop all development while ignoring the increasing population that demand more resources, more housing, more water, more oil, etc. They intelligently use their expertise to advise us on a scientific unbiased basis rather than a political one.

Now, with that being said, I think the animosity that many of us have towards environmentalism is that the vast majority of them just want to stop all human activity without considering what the real consequences are. They don't want to drill for oil, they don't want cutting of timber, they don't want housing developments, they don't want water projects, and so on and so on. Then when it turns out we don't have oil, timber, water, and housing they refuse to take responsibility for the problems they caused. It's the "greedy oil companies, banks, and rich people that caused the problem" (and one guy at work blames Georgh Bush for everything).

Anyway, personally, I don't think the environment should be ignored and ruined, but the resourses are there and they should be used for our benefit (responsibly).

Phillip
Back to top
dauben
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 963
Location: Ramona, CA, Zone 9A

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 4:05 am

A couple of other items to look at:

CBC - Global Warming Doomsday Called Off
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3309910462407994295

Animation of Arctic sea ice concentration
(Jan 2003 to date; AVI format, ~10 MB)
http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr/Icefilm_long_n.avi

Animation of Antarctic sea ice concentration
(Jan 2003 to date; AVI format, ~10 MB)
http://www.iup.uni-bremen.de:8084/amsr/Icefilm_long_s.avi

Phillip
Back to top
Millet
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 13 Nov 2005
Posts: 6656
Location: Colorado

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 11:46 am

Skeet, do you see what you have done? Skeet, your guilty of what so many environmentalists are equally guilty of. You completely dismissed the opinions of 32,000 scientists, of which 9,000+ are PHDs. You immediately swept all there opinions under the rug without concern. Instead, the only item you had to offer was what Skeet thinks. This is what the environmentalists movement has done. They refuse to listen to the wall of credible evidence which stands before them. They continually shout out--"listen to me, it is what I say that is important". To a large part it is the environmental movement that has gotten us into the current mess we are in. Carbon, is one of the building blocks of life. I must agree with Harvey, all this carbon footprint talk is just plain ignorance, put forth by silly silly people.

Millet
(Then came the morning, the shadows have fallen before the sun)
Back to top
dauben
Citruholic
Citruholic


Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 963
Location: Ramona, CA, Zone 9A

Posted: Sun 15 Jun, 2008 1:59 pm

For the ultimate in absurdity, take a look at this website. It's a calculator geared to kids to tell them that they should die by the time they're 9 years old in order to be "carbon neutral".

http://www.abc.net.au/science/planetslayer/greenhouse_calc.htm

Phillip
Back to top
Citrus Growers Forum Index du Forum -> Off-topic forum (For anything you want to discuss)
Goto 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2
Informations
Qui est en ligne ? Our users have posted a total of 66068 messages
We have 3235 registered members on this websites
Most users ever online was 70 on Tue 30 Oct, 2012 10:12 am

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group