Not by Fire but by Ice
THE NEXT ICE AGE - NOW!
Discover What Killed the Dinosaurs . . . and Why it Could Soon Kill Us
|BACK TO HOME PAGE|
They are all dead wrong!
Meyer botches it, as far as I'm concerned.
I want no part of Meyer's explanation. He makes it sound as
if all skeptics agree that
is warming the planet; that it's just a question as to what degree.
These skeptics that Meyer is talking about have gotten the cart before the horse. The fact is that the warming precedes the rise in CO2 levels. First, the oceans warm, then the oceans release CO2. The rise in carbon dioxide levels is therefore a result of ocean warming, not the cause. (If you've read Not by Fire but by Ice, you know that I think the rise in ocean temperatures is caused by underwater volcanic activity.)
Meyer then babbles on about "positive feedbacks" from CO2, and the interaction of carbon dioxide levels with the "greenhouse gas effect."
But to what avail? Why talk about positive feedback and the greenhouse effect when no proof has ever been presented that CO2 levels drive the climate? That's like trying to figure out - scientifically - how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
I do agree with a few of Meyer's statements, such as, "Nothing about our current temperatures or CO2 levels is either unusual or unprecedented."
And, unfortunately, I also agree with Meyer that many skeptics accede to the alarmists, saying that carbon dioxide levels may contribute a tiny amount to global warming. I they're making a dreadful mistake.
Luckily, some scientists have had the guts to stand up to the onslaught.
"They are all dead wrong!" says analytical chemist Hans Schreuder. "Carbon dioxide has a nil effect on the global climate and does not cause climate change in any way, shape or form." (More by Schreuder here and here.)
"Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2)," says climatologist Dr. Timothy Ball. "This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. They have to perpetuate the myth that CO2 and especially human CO2 is causing warming."
"It’s been the academics, the pros, who have tripped all over themselves to explain and defend a theory that the evidence keeps contradicting," climate researcher Alan Siddons.
"Human-generated greenhouse gases are warming the earth but not as much as
alarmists say" never was a good strategy for winning the debate," says
"Dissenters should have just stuck with the evidence: there is
no sign of
warming at all, the "well established physics" of greenhouse theory be damned."
"The increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide has, however, had a substantial environmental effect," says Soon. "Atmospheric CO2 fertilizes plants. Higher CO2 enables plants to grow faster and larger and to live in drier climates. Plants provide food for animals, which are thereby also enhanced. The extent and diversity of plant and animal life have both increased substantially during the past half-century. Increased temperature has also mildly stimulated plant growth."
"Is it possible that the particular temperature increase observed in the last 100 years is the result of carbon dioxide produced by human activities?" asks Dr. Sallie Baliunas. "The scientific evidence clearly indicates that this is not the case," answers Baliunas, an astrophysicist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in the Solar, Stellar, and Planetary Sciences Division and formerly Deputy Director of the Mount Wilson Observatory.
Meanwhile, chemist Dr. Kenneth Rundt, a bio-molecule researcher and formerly a research assistant and teacher at Abo Akademi University in Finland, declared his global warming dissent in June 2008.
“Let me state immediately before you read on that I count myself among the ‘skeptics’,” Rundt wrote in a scientific paper titled “Global Warming – Man-made or Natural?” “I am only a humble scientist with a PhD degree in physical chemistry and an interest in the history of the globe we inhabit. I have no connection with any oil or energy-related business. I have nothing to gain from being a skeptic.”
“It can also be reliably inferred from palaeoclimatological data that no uncontrolled, runaway greenhouse effect has occurred in the last half billion years when atmospheric CO2 concentration peaked at almost 20 times today’s value," Rundt wrote. Given the stability of the climate over this time period there is little danger that current CO2 levels will cause a runaway greenhouse effect.”
"People are not responsible for the documented rise of carbon in the atmosphere," says meteorologist Joe D'Aleo. Not only do the numbers fail to match, the numbers can’t be made to match.
Clearly the US annual temperatures over the last century have correlated far better with cycles in the sun and oceans than carbon dioxide. The correlation with carbon dioxide seems to have vanished or even reversed in the last decade.
Given the recent cooling of the Pacific and Atlantic and rapid decline in solar activity, we might anticipate given these correlations, temperatures to accelerate downwards shortly (even though CO2 levels have been rising).
See entire Forbes article, entitled
BACK TO HOME PAGE
|Order Book I Q & A I Book Reviews I Plant Hardiness Zone Maps I Radio Interviews I Table of Contents I Excerpts I Author Photo I Pacemaker of the Ice Ages I Extent of Previous Glaciation I Crane Buried in Antarctic Ice Sheet I Ice Ages and Magnetic Reversals I It's Ocean Warming I E-Mail Robert at firstname.lastname@example.org l Expanding Glaciers|