The Great Global Warming Con
The Sun is causing global warming, and sensationalists are concealing the fact that fossil fuels are running out!
In
the 1990s climatologists made millions by alarming us about fossil fuels running
out, then they switched to the even more profitable
claim that global warming is caused by burning fossil fuels and is going to wipe
us out -- hoping that we hadn’t noticed that
the two are contradictory.
Meantime 500 of their professorly superiors alerted the UN about them, but even
today they still get away with it.
Oh woe, woe and thrice woe! The world is warming
up and we're all going to drown! Well, we've all heard this warning, each
of us more times than we'd care to remember. But just how accurate is it?
The
concern is of course about the levels of CO2 (carbon dioxide) in the atmosphere.
CO2 is called a greenhouse gas. This means that it is capable of trapping the
sun's heat and warming the earth, rather like wrapping a blanket around it. This
in turn will cause the polar caps to melt, so that sea levels all around the
world will rise, by a up to 350 feet if all the ice on earth turns to liquid
water.
Large
amounts of Carbon dioxide are being produced by the worldwide burning of fossil
fuels (mostly oil and coal) in thousands of power stations and in the burning of
oil derivatives such as diesel and gasoline, through billions of cars.
And
between them, they are pumping 33 billion tons of CO2 into the earth's
atmosphere every single year.
Here
of course is very fertile ground indeed, for environmentalists, scientists and
journalists to carve out careers for themselves by researching or reporting on
the matter.
But
just how serious a problem is it really?
Firstly,
well yes, global temperatures have indeed been increasing, throughout the latter
part of the 20th Century. But very careful
measurements and analyses, involving the study of growth rings in tree species
which are particularly sensitive to temperature change, and of the north-south
migration of similarly sensitive shellfish, have shown that the overall
temperature increase over this period since the Industrial Revolution has only
been 0.6 deg C. Future forecasts vary enormously, but even the worst of
these only predicts a temperature rise, over the next 100 years, of 4 deg C.
which is only sufficient to melt enough of the polar caps to raise sea levels by
just 2 inches.
Perhaps,
at this point, even the most environmentally conscious of us might begin to
suspect that somebody is putting their careers first and accurate public
enlightenment second. And the suspicion gets worse.
For
the past 10,000 years, the earth has been climbing out of the last ice age. In
the early part of the 20th century a Serbian astronomer, Milutin Milankovitch,
calculated the effects on the amount of solar heat falling on the earth ("insolation")
which would be caused by cyclic changes in the shape of the earth's orbit, in
the earths axial tilt and in the actual distance of the earth from the sun due
to the gravitational effects of the other planets as they all constantly pull
and tug on each other. He plotted these changes on a graph, and then calculated
what we call a resultant, an overall temperature-time graph which is caused by
these three underlying graphs.
This
resultant was found to tally very exactly with the known temperatures back
through the most recent ice ages, and the warm periods in between, as measured
from glacial and ocean floor core samples.
However, when we look at the temperature/CO2 graph we see something rather interesting, which anyone over the age of about 11, who has read graphs in science at school, would be able to see for themselves. The rise in CO2 does not precede, but follows the rise in temperature. The climatologists have got these two the wrong way round and even a kid could see it. In other words the temperature goes up first, and then, with a delay of about 700 years, the CO2 follows. So what is pushing up the temperature? Not the CO2, that’s for sure. Please watch the documentary linked below. It makes one wonder just how stupid the ‘experts’ think we are.
Detailed
analysis of data from ice core samples. Any 11-year-old kid in science
class can see that the temperature goes up first, followed 800 years later
by the CO2. The CO2 rise cannot therefore be causing the temperature rise.
What’s actually happening is that life prefers a slightly warmer
climate, in which it thrives so that it then produces more CO2.
The warming and cooling are actually caused by changes in the earth’s orbit
due to the
other planets pulling on the earth, and also to the sun being a slightly
variable star.
This
in turn leads us to wonder just how much -- or how little-- of this temperature
rise has been due to man's activity at all.
It
has long been suspected that, after Milankovitch, the CO2 increase due to
industry is just too tiny to be responsible anything but a minuscule rise in
global temperatures. For example, the present (natural) concentration of CO2 in
the earths atmosphere is just 0.05%. That's just 1 part in 2000. But even at the
present industrial CO2 production rate of 33 billion tons a year, it would take
mankind five hundred and thirty years to
increase the atmospheric level from 1 just 1 part in 2000, to 2 parts
in 2000! And this presupposes that none of the industrially produced CO2 will be
naturally broken down (by plants) into carbon and oxygen, whereas in fact most
of it will be, and that none of it will be absorbed by the oceans, which again
most of it will be.*
But
our suspicions get even worse.
Have
you noticed how some years ago it was all the rage among environmentalists,
scientists and journalists, that fossil fuels were going to run out in the first
part of the 21st century, and that unless we found alternative sources of power
we’re all doomed? You see, in those days, before global warming was ever
thought of, this was the "excuse" for environmentalists to cause
alarm, for scientists to get research grant money and for journalists to put
their Sunday roasts on the table.
But
-- just a minute -- if fossil fuels are going to run out, then why are we
worrying about global warming, as after all that is caused by burning fossil
fuels, isn't it?
Realising
this themselves, they saw that they couldn't have both capers going at once, and
so they dropped the fossil-fuel-running-out one because the global warming one
(in which whole continents are laid waste and we all drown) was both newer and
more alarming and might give them much more research grant money to fatten their
pay packets with.
This
worked. In the last 20 years alone, the amount of money being put their way has
increased tenfold.
But
the problem is, that with these people behaving in such an irresponsible manner,
constantly putting their own interests first and responsible public
enlightenment second, the issue of just where the truth lies becomes somewhat
occluded.
The
truth is, unfortunately, that fossil fuels are running
out, and will probably be more or less deplete by the middle of this century.
But that in turn means that we have absolutely nothing to worry about on the
matter of human-induced global warming.
In
any case the interglacial periods, one of which the earth is now in, are rather
pleasant experiences for the earth's fauna and flora if the fossil record is
anything to go by. Back in Cretaceous times, for example, there was 9 times more
CO2 in the atmosphere than there is now, the average annual temperature on
Baffin Island, which was at the same latitude then as now, was +25C, there were
no polar caps -- and life was booming. But now, some animals have, for the very
first time in geological history, had to evolve fur coats. The fact is, that the
Earth is simply not supposed to be as cool as it is today. **
Further
in the matter of really having nothing to worry about regarding the consequences
of industrial CO2 production, if we were to mine all of the remaining fossil
fuels in the earth and "torch" them at once, the total CO2 produced
would only be enough to raise global temperatures by about 2 deg C. and raise
sea levels by just under an inch (in actual fact global temperatures would fall
dramatically under this scenario, due to the nuclear winter caused by all the
smoke – but that’s another matter).
However…..
haven’t we glossed past something here? The world is very definitely warming
up! And we’ve just seen, by applying a little basic commonsense, and no more
powers of observation than those possessed by a schoolkid, that manmade CO2 is
not the cause. So what is causing
this?
Well, in addition to the Milankovitch phenomena, the sun is now known to be a
slightly variable star which over recent millennia has had a period of just over
1,000 years.*** It also has a shorter cycle, known as the sunspot cycle of about
11 years, which has been known to us for centuries, but the larger one has, in
effect, been hiding in plain sight as anyone with a basic knowledge of history
can trace its effects through the centuries.
For
example, 2000 years ago in Roman times it was possible to grow grapes in
northern England. (it isn’t now; a few more degrees of warming will be
necessary to allow it’s return). It was warm, a little warmer than now. Then,
500 years and half a cycle later, we come to the Dark Ages, and the Rhine was
freezing over to such a degree that on the last day of AD 406 the Germanic
hordes came swarming over it, poured into Roman Gaul and precipitated the
complete collapse of the Roman Empire in the West.
Then
another half cycle later, it’s 1000 AD, its warm again and the Vikings are
colonizing Greenland, which at these times really is green, we now know; they
weren’t exaggerating to attract colonists. Today we see it beginning to return
to this situation while the alarmists, some of whom actually do know better, are
exploiting this changing Greenland for all its worth. Meantime in England the
cities, including northern ones like Lincoln and Widnes, were gaining such
features as Vine Street, Vineyard Way, Vineyard Court and Vineyard Road. Advance
another 500 years … it’s cold again… and we see Henry VIII, a big heavy
lad, skating on the frozen river Thames in London. So the ice must have been
reasonably thick to support his weight. Ice galas and fairs were also held on
this frozen river every winter for a couple of centuries. The Thames doesn’t
freeze over these days; it hasn’t done so for centuries.
Finally
let’s advance another 500 years. That brings us to now and, you guessed, its
warming up again. That’s because it’s supposed to
be! ****
There’s also a common sense factor here as well, isn’t there? Consider for
example the fact that CO2 is a weak greenhouse gas and is only present in the
earth’s atmosphere at the level of 1 part in 2,000. Now consider water vapour
– a far more powerful greenhouse gas – and the effect of the sun hitting the
Pacific Ocean, almost half the earth’s surface, every single day! ***** On a
wet day water vapour, far from making up only 1 part in 2000 of the air, can
amount to 90 per cent of it by weight. Climatologically,
ignoring the sun and blaming CO2 is a bit like if your car was playing up and
instead of looking at the powerful engine, which is the sun, or the
transmission, which is the water vapour, you blamed a little bolt on the back
somewhere. I’m afraid the science behind manmade global warming really is that
bad.
Regarding these climatologists, at this point most of us, myself certainly, are
beginning to smell a caper. They’ve done it before! First they said that the
earth was flat, and everyone fell for it, despite the commonsense fact that if
you stand on a beach, there before you is a horizon and ships can be seen
disappearing over it. Flat earth = no horizon. Then they said the earth was at
the centre of the universe and everyone fell for that, and then they said the
earth was at the centre of the solar system and everyone fell for that …. why
they’ve even had people running outside banging saucepans together every time
there was an eclipse! And now they’re scaring you by telling you that fossil
fuels are causing global warming, despite the commonsense outlined above,
despite the fact that any 11 year old can read their graphs, and despite the
fact that fossil fuels are running out!
Not long ago, these climatologists’ elite, five
hundred top Professors of Climatology, wrote a joint
letter to the United Nations decrying the actions of their subordinates and
categorically denouncing human-caused global warming as a con, with influence
and money as its motives.
Worse,
almost 200 climatologists worldwide have been prosecuted for obtaining and
attempting to obtain research grant money by deception, in other words, by
telling you lies.
Mind
you, the human race also has itself to blame for being so gullible. Notice how
the flat earth thing was defused by the simple observation of ships going over
the horizon, just as the present human induced global warming caper is easily
defused by the proper reading of simple graphs -- and yet few seem to have
noticed.
And
so, all considered, and retaining the good old common sense that we must never
allow to fail us, it seems that in reality the depleting fossil fuel supply, and
not global warming, is what we need to worry about, and what we have to do as an
imperative is find alternative ways of producing electricity and of powering
cars, for reasons which are nothing to do with global warming.
Thankfully
research has long been underway on the production of realistic amounts of
alternative energy. Now nuclear power stations might have a dirty name, but
there are other, perfectly clean, nuclear reactions which could produce vast
quantities of electricity. One of these reactions is the fusion of hydrogen into
helium in a thermonuclear fusion reactor. The fuel for this would actually be
the hydrogen in sea water, which would give us a virtually limitless supply.
This is one of the Holy Grails of physics but the required technology to do this
still remains a little beyond us, as we're having some trouble producing the
phenomenal temperatures required to get this particular reaction to work.******
But rapid advances are now being made, and a stage was reached only recently
where more energy was finally released that was initially put in, even though
the difference between the vast amount of energy put in, and the vast amount
liberated, was only enough to boil a kettle.
Also,
more efficient batteries are on their way which can power electric cars for much
greater distances, although we do have an ongoing environmental problem here in
that the pollution caused by manufacturing these cars, especially their
lithium-ion batteries, (together with the fact that no electric car is ever any
cleaner than the mucky power station which charges it up), cannot
be made up for for years, thereby giving present electric cars little
environmental gain. Another fad, I’m afraid, until we learn cleaner ways of
producing them.
---
Michael Alan Marshall
*
Water readily absorbs CO2 which is why we use CO2 to gas up our fizzy drinks. We
can perform another commonsense thought experiment here: imagine the three
neighbouring planets, Venus, Earth and Mars, stretching out from the sun in a
row. Compared to the size of the solar system, they’re very close together and
all formed out of the same material which was initially orbiting the sun in a
dust belt. Now look at Venus and Mars. They both have no water and almost total
CO2 atmospheres. Now look at Earth, right in between. It’s the opposite… 71
per cent covered in water -- and almost no CO2 (just 1 part in 2,000). On Earth,
CO2 going into the atmosphere is grabbed by the oceans and absorbed. And when
the oceans absorb too much, they dump it as carbonate sediments which is where
the world’s limestone deposits including the UK’s beautiful Cliffs of Dover
came from.
**
This is because the Himalayas, which formed around 40 million years ago, are by
earthly standards an unusually extensive and lofty mountain range, and the air
which passes over them uplifts and cools, and then circulates around,
effectively cooling the entire planet. The monsoon rains caused by this air
condensing again when it comes back down, also prevents CO2 buildup by washing
it out of the atmosphere.
***
The causes of solar variability: All stars, including the sun, form when a cloud
of gas, usually part of a nebula, collapses under gravity. This creates a
gaseous sphere, the centre of which is so hot, the kinetic energy of all those
particles having fallen inwards over a distance of light years and then
converted into heat energy, that nuclear fusion begins in the sphere as the
particles are pushed together under the contraction of the mass.
However
this causes a massive outward rush of particles, which try to blow the star
apart. But this is counteracted by the gravity of the star which tries to make
the star collapse inwards. This contraction pushes the particles together again,
which increases the fusion, which then pushes the particles outwards again
thereby reducing the fusion. And so the process repeats, the surface of the star
moving outwards then inwards in a constant pulsation. Now this eventually
dampens into a very small amplitude phenomenon, but it’s still enough to cause
temperature variations on earth, as again the fusion is greater when the star is
contracted, thereby increasing the sun’s output, and less when the sun is
slightly expanded as the fusing particles are further apart.
Tracing
the earth’s climate through recorded history, the present period is close to
1,000 years. After 4.65 billon years since the sun first formed, the degree of
variation in solar output is now less than 1 per cent. The average temperature
this far out (at the earth) is about 370 degrees K, indicating a temperature
variation due to this effect of just 3 or 4 deg C every 1,000 years.
****
People are great ones for going along with the tribal group-thinking of their
peers, and sharing its worries, instead of using their own independent minds,
and consequently they will go along with any mistakes their peers make. For
example if the polar caps all melt, raising sea levels by 350 feet, the
accompanying warming would allow crops to be grown all year round in such vast
(but presently frozen) expanses as Siberia and Northern Canada, feeding many
times the world’s present population, and the flooding of coastal areas would
create 200 years of full employment, worldwide, moving the cities further
inland. Higher temperatures in the tropics would be greatly relieved by the air
naturally flowing from hot to cold and going off to heat the freezing polar
regions. Regrettably, we might say, the sun will not warm us to that extent;
instead its cycle will add just a few extra degrees to present temperatures
(allowing vineyards to return to northern England), before it cools again as
part of its cycle. Even more regrettably, the underlying temperature trend in
the 1000-year cycle is actually down, each solar max being slightly cooler than
the last, as we slide down towards the next ice age, which in geological terms
is due ‘about now’.
*****
Actually 71 per cent of the earth’s surface, almost three quarters, is covered
by water.
******
It works with the hydrogen bomb, but only because the necessary temperature is
created by placing a Hiroshima – type atomic bomb inside the hydrogen bomb,
which then acts as a spark to trigger it. We could hardly do that in a power
station and it is scientifically impossible to create a tiny atomic bomb to go
inside a tiny hydrogen bomb that might be exploded inside a boiler; the smallest
scientifically possible atomic bomb’s yield is 10,000 tons of TNT equivalent.
Talk about blowing the works. So scientists are trying to obtain the necessary
temperatures for clean fusion by firing thousands of intersecting laser beams
into tiny pellets of frozen hydrogen. But the energy levels needed for this are
stupendous – it’s going to be a long job.
A
must see for the more interested reader.
Among its ranks of contributing climatologists, this documentary includes only top professors of climatology, not their subordinates who have been responsible for so much alarm.
The Great Global Warming Swindle - YouTube