The Anti "Man-Made" Global Warming Resource

PopularTechnology.net ^ | Feb 1, 2007 | Andrew

[Poptech]

This is a resource against the "Man-Made" Global Warming Hysteria.

"There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition." - Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology, MIT

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off

Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown

New!!: Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH

Ping me if you find one I've missed.

---

Excelent resource indeed.

[facedown]

bttt

[Don Corleone]

The dems (Socialists) learned well from Goebbels.

[svcw]

What a fabulous resource page - thanks.

[Sam Ketcham]

As all are aware here, the DIMS tell a big lie then cite that lie afterwords as if it were the truth. The point with respect to man made warming IF that is a fact, is that we account for 4% of the global warming activities on this planet. How much of that can be stopped? If it were 1/4, that is 1 % or a negligible amount of correction at the cost of billions. Then again, the effect of our “corrective” action may have unintended consequences.

[Repeal The 17th]

---

Not the End of the World as We Know It - By Olaf Stampf
Svante Arrhenius, the father of the greenhouse effect, would be called a heretic today. Far from issuing the sort of dire predictions about climate change which are common nowadays, the Swedish physicist dared to predict a paradise on earth for humans when he announced, in April 1896, that temperatures were rising - and that it would be a blessing for all.
——read the rest of it here:——
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,481684,00.html

---

[wayoverontheright]

I battle this all the time with my lib brother and sister. Here’s my list of retorts:

1-The North Polar Ice Cap is composed of floating ice, as opposed to land-borne ice. Since ice expands as it freezes, and contracts as it melts, no volume of water would be added to the ocean by virtue of melting floating ice.

2-Antarctica would be the source of land-bourne ice, which would raise the sea level if it melted. Problem? The average temperature in Antarctica is 60 below zero (F), the globe would have to warm another 60 degrees before any of the Antarctic ice would melt.

3-Ice core samples reveal that for thousands of years, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere FOLLOWS temperature increases, it does not precede them.

[texanyankee]

Thanks! Bookmarking this.

[Jackknife]

BTTT

[elfman2]

Looking for someone to debate a global warming proponent on a Florida Keys radio show.

Cal Sutphin hosts “From the Water” each morning on KFFG and is looking for someone to call in and present the anti-man made global warming position. It might even open up to a debate with a global warming advocate named Captain Dan Kipnis who just got a 20 minute segment two days ago.

Cal’s shows focuses on Keys fishing, boating (and sports on occasion), and he bought Dan Kipnis in who’s a long time marine activist promoting his lecture on global warming's effects on ocean life. Cal’s a good guy, very nice, funny, but way over his head with global warming and is asking for help to counter Dan’s position. This is a non-paid gig of course.

He’s not necessarily looking for a world class expert, just someone who has studied the facts and can talk about them on his feet. Being able to apply them to ocean life would be very helpful.

If you might be interested or think you know someone who can help, please frepermail me or email Cal directly at fromthewatershow@REMOVETHISbellsouth.net

[jackel09]

Thanks for this valuable resource to combat the climate-change hysteria.

[slowhandluke]

4. As the glaciers melt in Europe, we find evidence of human activity exposed, from both the Roman and Medieval periods. The parts of the glaciers that are melting in Europe are quite recent additions.

[knarf]

bump

[Molly Pitcher]

Bookmarked!

Still sending out the link to the GGWS video, it is so good!

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[SteamShovel]

Then again, the effect of our “corrective” action may have unintended consequences.

This is the part that amazes me. If we are looking at the big picture, we can only be a small part of the GW cause and any attempt to stop it by stopping all human activity would have little affect. GW is a natural process, which I thought was supposed to be a good thing.

So they want to stop GW by some pretty radical schemes like reflectors flooding the upper atmosphere. How in the world do they think such a misguided scheme will not have unintended consequences is beyond me.

Their urgency in stopping the debate and getting on with the socialist agenda is what tells me they are afraid of the debate and also want to make a killing on a carbon credit house of cards after they are mandated. The unintended consequence of this will be worldwide economic collapse and revolution. Their fortunes will be worthless.

[Trteamer]

Thak You! Thank You! Thank You!

This will make an excellent handout sheet for when we FReep the Democrat National Convention in Denver!

[aflaak]

ping

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

BtTt