Skip to comments.Media Promote Global Warming Fraud
Posted on 05/09/2008 5:22:43 PM PDT by porgygirl
When it comes to Iraq, our media have been preoccupied with the issue of whether there was adequate intelligence to justify the invasion and if policy-makers made up evidence before the war. But on the matter of global intervention to stop global warming, there seems to be no need for scientific evidence to justify what is shaping up as a global carbon tax of 35 cents a gallon of gas on the American people.
(Excerpt) Read more at aim.org ...
McCain's Nose-Under-the-Tent Strategy - McCain's "Climate Stewardship Act" (S. 139), co-sponsored with Senator Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.)
Kyoto Through the Back Door? A Debate on the Lieberman McCain Climate Stewardship Act - Heritage Foundation
Promising Vote on Global Warming - "But Mr. McCain, as we know, does not give up easily. ... He promises to be just as tenacious on this issue."
If you look at the chart below, you will see that sunspot activity (during solar maxes--the individual peaks) has been relatively high since about 1900 and almost non-existent for the period between about 1625 and 1750. This period is known as the Maunder (sunspot) Minimum or "Little Ice Age".
From BBC News [yr: 2004]:
A new  analysis shows that the Sun is more active now than it has been at anytime in the previous 1,000 years. Scientists based at the Institute for Astronomy in Zurich used ice cores from Greenland to construct a picture of our star's activity in the past. They say that over the last century the number of sunspots rose at the same time that the Earth's climate became steadily warmer.
It's really hard to imagine how this little ball of fire could have any impact on our climate at all.
But the main arguments being made for a solar-climate connection is not so much to do with the heat of the Sun but rather with its magnetic cycles. When the Sun is more magnetically active (typically around the peak of the 11 year sunspot cycle --we are a few yrs away at the moment), the Sun's magnetic field is better able to deflect away incoming galactic cosmic rays (highly energetic charged particles coming from outside the solar system). The GCRs are thought to help in the formation of low-level cumulus clouds -the type of clouds that BLOCK sunlight and help cool the Earth. So when the Sun's MF is acting up (not like now), less GCRs reach the Earth's atmosphere, less low level sunlight-blocking clouds form, and more sunlight gets through to warm the Earth's surface...naturally. Clouds are basically made up of tiny water droplets. When dust particles in the atmosphere become ionized by incoming GCRs they become very 'attractive' to water molecules, in a purely chemical sense of the word.-Eye On The Left
2008: "The Center for Sun-Climate Research at the DNSC investigates the connection between variations in the intensity of cosmic rays and climatic changes on Earth. This field of research has been given the name 'cosmoclimatology'"..."Cosmic ray intensities and therefore cloudiness keep changing because the Sun's magnetic field varies in its ability to repel cosmic rays coming from the Galaxy, before they can reach the Earth." :
The graph above represents temperature and CO2 levels over the past 400,000 years. It is the same exact data Al Gore and the rest of the man-made global warmers refer to. The blue line is temps, the red CO2 levels. The deep valleys represent 4 separate glaciation periods. Now look very carefully at this relationship between temps and CO2 levels and keep in mind that Gore claims this data is the 'proof' that CO2 has warmed the earth in the past. But does the graph indeed show this? Nope. In fact, rising CO2 levels all throughout this 400,000 year period actually lagged behind temperature increases by an average of 800 years!
The article is more than a year old, and it is complaining that the supporting data was not published by the IPCC at the same time as it issued its report.
It would be better to know if the data has now been released, and what are the comments by experts on that data.
There a frost warning here for tonight. The Global Warming fraud is meant to push for a world socialist government. A worldwide problem will require a world government solution. That’s why the the left is pushing it.
We’ve only had ten sunspots since January 8th of this year, only two of them arguably linked to the way overdue Cycle 24.
Thanks, but I know. I check with the site often. The solar cycle still has a couple of years before it starts to get really active again, although the new cycle (cycle 24) has in fact already started. This happened about a month or so ago when a high latitude sunspot pair appeared with reversed magnetic polarity. The sun's magnetic flips on a regular 11-15 year cycle.
“In 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued its Fourth Assessment Report. The report included predictions of big increases in average world temperatures by 2100, resulting in an increasingly rapid loss of the worlds glaciers and ice caps, a dramatic global sea level rise that would threaten low-lying coastal areas, the spread of tropical diseases, and severe drought and floods.
These dire predictions are not, however, the result of scientific forecasting; rather, they are the opinions of experts. Expert opinion on climate change has often been wrong. For instance, a search of headlines in the New York Times found the following:”
This Sunday on C-Span 2:
how can these clowns be SO wrong on SO many issues, yet be so successful? is the media that compelling to the sheeple?
do americans respond to emotion, and care naught about facts and evidence?are they just lemmings?what is it about the right that demands facts and evidence and abhors emotional bs?