Quick Facts That Debunk Hysterical Global Warming Claims


Join the Global Warming is Unfactual group on Facebook!

Take the quick poll question!

————————————–

WHAT IS ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING?

Anthropogenic global warming theory is the idea that human activities that release carbon dioxide are causing the Earth’s temperature to rise drastically.

Anthropogenic global warming theory has the following assumptions:

1) Carbon dioxide is the main cause of rising global temperatures
2) The main source of this carbon dioxide is from human activities
3) The temperature rise will be quick and large
4) The temperature rise will cause massive devastation and disaster
5) We must act now to stop the release of carbon dioxide

But that is only one side of the story. Have you ever heard, seen or read the other side?

The following collection of facts all come with citations and links. They are but the tip of the not-melting iceberg of data that refutes global warming junk-science.

Read on and ask yourself:

What do the following FACTS mean for purported human-caused global warming?

——————————————

WORLDWIDE WEATHER

– Meanwhile, on planet Earth, the oceans have been cooling since 2003. (Source: NASA)

– Sea ice is growing at the fastest rate ever recorded. (Source: Arctic Research Center)

– Arctic ice is back to 1979 levels, meaning no net melting has occurred in 30 years. The graph below is resized smaller, but see the jagged lines? That’s the levels of ice – fluctuating a bit, but always around the same amount over 30 years. (Source and full size graph: Daily Tech)

– Perhaps the recent fears that the Arctic was melting is due to the fact that scientists undermeasured the amount of ice by 500,000 square kilometers (the size of California!) because of a satellite sensor glitch. So much for careful and accurate science! What else have they miscalculated thus far? (Hint: See the SCIENCE AND SCIENTISTS section later on) (Source: Bloomberg)

– Antarctic ice is at highest levels ever recorded and still expanding. The purple shaded area shows the record ice cap growth this year in Antarctica. (Source: The Australian, Heartland Institute)

– Here’s some visuals of just how much more ice and snow there is in Antarctica over 20 years. The structures below were on ground level in the mid-1960s; by the time the photos were taken in the late 1980s, they are already almost completely buried by the additional snow! And Antarctic ice is at record high levels today, 30 years onwards. (See the very purple picture on this page.) (Source: The Next Ice Age – Now!)

The electrical transmission towers above are 115 feet tall. Of that, 85 feet of height has been buried.

The above construction crane was used to build those tall towers!

– The year 2008 saw colder temperatures across the United States. (Source: National Climatic Data Center)

– It snowed in Saudi Arabia during their coldest winter in 30 years. Yes, you read that right – it snowed in the DESERT KINGDOM! (Source: Arabian Business.com, photo from Watts Up With That? collection)

– It snowed in Iraq for the first time in 100 years. (Source: Agence France-Presse)

– In 2009, it snowed in the United Arab Emirates for the second time in history. When was the first time? In 2004! (Source: Associated Free Press and Terra Daily)

– China had its coldest winter in 100 years. (Source: Reuters)

– Pakistan had its coldest temperatures in 70 years. (Source: The Indian Express)

– Australia had its coldest summer in 50 years. (Source: Bloomberg)

– Mumbai, India had its coldest winter in 40 years. (Source: India News)

– Takijistan, formerly part of the Soviet Union, had its coldest winter in more than 25 years. (Source: npr)

– Record cold in Vietnam. (Source: Earth Times)

– Rare snowfall occurred in Jerusalem, Israel. (Source: BBC)

——————————————

CARBON DIOXIDE

It is claimed that the more carbon dioxide is put into the atmosphere, the hotter the planet gets. But is this what the data shows?

– Historical data shows that temperature always rises first, followed 800 years LATER by carbon dioxide levels. This is the REVERSE of what global warming theory claims. (Source: Six respected climate and environment scientists)

– Carbon dioxide, for all the hype and panic, forms only 0.0383% of the entire atmosphere. That is to say, in every 2611 buckets of air you collect, you will only collect 1 bucket of carbon dioxide. (Source: Wikipedia on carbon dioxide concentration)

– Meanwhile, how much carbon dioxide is released in a year? The amount of CO2 being released by humans is only 3.4% of all CO2 emissions!

According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, only 1~2% of the atmosphere is made up of greenhouse gases. Of that amount of greenhouse gases, only 3.62 percent of it is carbon dioxide. Of that amount of carbon dioxide, only 3.4% is emitted by human activity.

So humans contribute only 0.28% of the greenhouse effect. What does this tiny little number actually mean? To put it another way, in every 40,624 buckets of atmosphere, human activities will only add 1 single bucket of carbon dioxide every year.

And we are supposed to ‘save the planet from global warming’ by halting this 3.4% of 3.62% of 2% of the atmosphere of human carbon dioxide emissions? Even if all human activities were immediately stopped tomorrow, 96.6% of the carbon dioxide would be totally unaffected! (Source: National Center for Policy Analysis, pages 5-8)

– How does this tiny amount of carbon dioxide claimed to cause global warming? Supporters of global warming scaremongering say that carbon dioxide absorbs a particular wavelength of radiation from the surface of the Earth, which would otherwise escape off into space. Thus, carbon dioxide traps this radiation and heats up the planet.

However, the wavelength of radiation carbon dioxide has been shown to absorb is actually so narrow, it is already mostly absorbed by other gases such as water vapor! (Source: Page 13 of this PDF or first graph here)

What is more, once carbon dioxide and other gases absorb this radiation, then adding more carbon dioxide does not have any effect – the radiation is already being absorbed in full. (To visualize this, imagine a flashlight beam being blocked by pieces of black paper. Once there is are enough pieces of black paper to block the beam totally, adding more pieces does nothing. All the light is already being absorbed.)

——————————————

SCIENCE AND SCIENTISTS

The IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) claims that a ‘consensus’ of scientists agree that global warming is a real and urgent danger. They are basically saying that ‘all’ serious scientists believe in global warming.

But what does the science actually show?

100 + 400 + 650 + 31000 prominent scientists DENY global warming claims. (Sources: Science and Public Policy Institute, Senate Minority Report, Telegraph Newspaper UK)

– The American Physical Society offers mathematical proof that the IPCC’s calculations on global warming are WRONG. (Source: Christopher Monckton, former advisor to Margaret Thatcher)

– How is temperature measured, anyway? NASA uses ground-based measuring instruments. However, many of them are placed in REALLY STUPID LOCATIONS where they are exposed to a lot of temporary heat. Examples: Hot car parking lot, air-conditioner hot air vent, barbeque grill! Don’t you think this affects the temperature measurements? (Source and more photos: here, here and here)

——————————————

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH AND PUBLIC OPINION

Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth has been a major influence in getting people to believe that global warming is destroying our world.

– But did you know that this film has been found to have at least 35 major scientific errors? (Source: Science and Public Policy Institute)

– This caused the British High Court to officially rule that the film was unscientific, and may only be shown to schoolchildren if the film’s one-sided political slant is clearly stated to them. (Source: Investors Business Daily)

– An Inconvenient Truth portrays the Antarctic as warming up, with the Larsen Ice Shelf melting away. However, it does not deem to mention that this part is only 2% of the Antarctic, while the rest is COOLING. (Source: Wall Street Journal)

– What about the ‘poor, drowning polar bears that are going extinct’ that Al Gore and others love to bring up in order to pull at our heart-strings? The truth is, there are 5 times more polar bears today than 70 years ago (25,000 today versus 5,000 in 1940). And the polar bears featured in the photo below? Not in any fear, suffering or danger of drowning! Basically, Al Gore either lied or was ignorant. (Source and citations: This article, and polar bear numbers from Polar Bears International)

– In fact, more and more people began thinking that global warming is OVER-EXAGGERATED since around the time An Inconvenient Truth was released! (Source: Gallup poll)

– With an entire two thirds of those polled not believing it is caused by humans! (Source: Rasmussen Reports)

– While global warming is currently the UTTER LOWEST AND LEAST IMPORTANT concern on people’s minds! (Source: Pew Research Center)

——————————————

AL GORE

Maybe global warming panic is losing momentum because Al Gore – the foremost outspoken champion of stopping global warming – has proven to be a huge hypocrite when it comes to not releasing carbon dioxide.

– His home uses 20 times the energy as a standard American home, even while he tells us to conserve energy for the sake of the planet. (Source: Tenessee Center for Policy Research)

– Sorry! That information is outdated. His home now uses 22 times the energy as a standard American home! (Source: Tenessee Center for Policy Research)

But don’t worry! Al Gore tells us to slow the advance of global warming by reducing our carbon output, but if we cannot do so personally, we can still buy carbon offsets – pay money to plant trees, support solar power, etc. So he too buys carbon offsets to make up for his polluting lifestyle.

– Guess who owns a carbon offsets company? Al Gore himself. He is the founding partner and chairman of Generation Investment Management LLP. (Wikipedia entry here)

– And where does he buy his carbon offsets from? From his own company. (Source: WorldNet Daily)

– Thanks to this marvellous scam, Al Gore has earned $35 million in profits at our expense. (Source: Bloomberg)

——————————————

IN CLOSING

And remember: 34 years ago, the world was panicking about GLOBAL COOLING! (Source: Newsweek from 1975)

DO YOU STILL BELIEVE THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS HAPPENING AND THAT HUMAN-RELEASED CARBON DIOXIDE CAUSES IT?

SPREAD THE TRUTH!!


Tags: , , , , , ,

17 Responses to “Quick Facts That Debunk Hysterical Global Warming Claims”

  1. oneworldmaybenot Says:

    Scott, you will love this especially coming from a liberal NYT

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/29/magazine/29Dyson-t.html?_r=1&ref=magazine&pagewanted=all

  2. Scott Thong Says:

    An excellent and informative long article. Thanks!

  3. hoosierarmymom Says:

    Hi Scott!!!! Great Piece! My question is… are you on Facebook??? If so, I’ll hit you up to add you to my friend list.

  4. Scott Thong Says:

    I’ll give you a little quest… Join the group mentioned at the start of this post, and you’ll find out!

  5. evan Says:

    this is a queer website

  6. Gerry Beauregard Says:

    > Of that amount of carbon dioxide, only 3.4% is emitted by human activity.
    The 3.4% figure is basically nonsense because it fails to take into account the fact that the largest natural CO2 sources are also the largest CO2 sinks. What matters is the *net* contribution of human activity to the increase in CO2 concentrations. For more info, refer to my comments here:
    http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/27/man’s-contribution-to-global-warming/

    As for the 31000 petition signers – if you do the slightest bit of digging, you’ll realize that the petition was basically a fraud. The original petition mailer was accompanied by a pseudo-scientific summary of climate science formatted to look just like a reprint from Proceedings of the National Academy of Science. They even included a bogus publication date and volume number!

  7. Gerry Beauregard Says:

    Regarding the British court ruling regarding Gore’s film, here’s what the BBC says:

    [From http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/7037671.stm%5D

    “Mr Justice Burton said he had no complaint about Gore’s central thesis that climate change was happening and was being driven by emissions from humans. However, the judge said nine statements in the film were not supported by mainstream scientific consensus.”

    It’s also instructive to see the notes of two noted climate scientists (Gavin Schmidt and Michael Mann) regarding the court case, and the details of the nine ‘errors’:
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/10/convenient-untruths/

  8. Scott Thong Says:

    Gerry, my good man… You’re behind on the issues. We’re all talking Climategate now.

  9. Gerry Beauregard Says:

    Oh, I’ve certainly heard about Climategate. It’s clearly embarrassing to a lot of people, and there’s definitely some questionable stuff that’s been dug up. Dig through 10 years of email in virtually any organization and you’ll find messages that people wish they hadn’t written, or phrased much better.

    That said, it appears the reaction in the ‘skeptic’ crowd has been somewhat overblown, based on reading far too much into specific emails without understanding their context.

    Take the allegations of withholding data. As RealClimate explains…
    http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2009/11/the-cru-hack-context/
    ….
    “From the date of the first FOI request to CRU (in 2007), it has been made abundantly clear that the main impediment to releasing the whole CRU archive is the small % of it that was given to CRU on the understanding it wouldn’t be passed on to third parties. Those restrictions are in place because of the originating organisations (the various National Met. Services) around the world and are not CRU’s to break. As of Nov 13, the response to the umpteenth FOI request for the same data met with exactly the same response.”

    Consider also the allegations of using RealClimate to “control the message” and “hide dissent”. If you read the threads on RealClimate.org, you’ll see that lots of hard thoughtful questions are asked, and the RC folks do an admirable job at responding. (Running the site isn’t their full-time job, after all!). That said, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they screen out stuff that’s off topic or brings up points that they’ve repeatedly answered elsewhere on RealClimate.

  10. Scott Thong Says:

    Is the admission that the CRU researchers cannot account for the cooling trend and therefore wish to hide it also out of context? It seems pretty much in context to me, with the past 11 years having been a cooling trend with record cold and snowfall around the world.

    (Yes, I do know that individual instances of weather should not be used as indicative of the general climate. Someone tell global warming hysterians and the media, yes?)

    If Climategate were in isolation it would be a minor matter – perhaps overblown, as you say. But skeptics have been keeping tabs for a long time – Mann’s hockey stick (of which the methods are re-used by the CRU), cherry picking Yamal tree rings data, GISS recycling summer month temps, surface station sensors next to newly installed air-conditioning vents but obviously inaccurate data not rejected, the latest Climategate NZ.

    Tampering with data and misrepresenting results in order to support global warming theory seems to be the norm rather than the exception. If the world really is warming, why the need for such suspicious number massaging?

  11. cody oakley Says:

    suck my duick

  12. Adifferentvoice Says:

    Obscenity for the sake of obscenity, cody oakley?

  13. Scott Thong Says:

    *Quiack*

  14. Global Warming Facts Says:

    Observed global warming remains far below the amount predicted by computer models that served as the basis for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Whatever record is used, the largest portion of the warming of the second half of this century has mainly been confined to winter in the very coldest continental air masses of Siberia and northwestern North America, as predicted by basic greenhouse effect physics. The unpredictability of seasonal and annual temperatures has declined significantly. There has been no change in precipitation variability. In the United States, drought has decreased while flooding has not increased.

  15. SailDog Says:

    What a load of tosh. Whether or not AGW is real (it is) is not even being discussed anymore, except in the denialist circles and blogs like this. If AGW isn’t real how come ALL the Science Acedemies from All the major nations support AGW theory and urge governments to act?

  16. Scott Thong Says:

    Well, a simple reason… They could all have been TRICKED.

    And once upon a time ALL noted scientists believed in spontaneous generation, disbelieved in plate tectonics, believed the world was flat, believed the sun revolved around the Earth, believed the Newtonian concept of gravity (instead of the Einsteinian one we believe today)…

    Science marches on. What was ‘consensus’ can eventually turn into ‘kooky fringe belief’. How many Lamarckian evolutionists do you see today?

    Besides, there are plenty of scientists – including Nobel laureates – who do not agree with AGW. Here’s a list:

    900+ peer-reviewed papers skeptical of AGW.
    31,000 prominent scientists deny AGW
    Another 1000 scientists reject AGW
    230 signatories from the American Physical Society skeptical of AGW
    Nobel Prize for Physics winner quits the American Physical Society to protest its belief in AGW

    But why not apply your own intelligence to the issue?

    AGW says that humans release carbon dioxide, which causes the Earth’s temperature to rise. So let’s look at the current situation:

    1) Carbon dioxide levels are increasing every year. Source: BBC, BBC.
    2) Temperatures have not increased in 15 years. See the first image here. Source: Forbes, Phil Jones (head of the Climate Research Unit), Telegraph UK, Reuters, BBC.

    Doesn’t this immediately show that something is inaccurate in AGW theory?

    Many more citations at http://globalwarmingisunfactual.wordpress.com/ as noted in my post

  17. Myth and Lie: Global Warming | weehingthong Says:

    […] it could be that more and more scientists are refuting AGW: – 900+ peer-reviewed papers skeptical of AGW. – 31,000 prominent scientists deny AGW – Another […]

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: