A right-winger attacks global warming (Left-winger attacks right-winger who attacked global warming)

Pittsburgh live ^ | 1/2/05 | Wayne Madsen

[Outland]

DugwayDuke: "Simply because it is a convienient scam to transfer wealth from the US to the 3rd world."
Smokin' Joe: "And who will the brokers of the transfer be? cashing in on every transaction?(Hint: No food for oil!) "
MonroeDNA: "Close, but it is really about transferring wealth from capitalists to socialists. "

MonroeDNA is the winner! The socialists in question are entities of the EU.

Carbon trading won't be directly perfomed between invidual countries, but through a "clearing house" in the EU. Acting much like a stock market, carbon will be the commodity being traded. Supply versus demand will affect the bidding and the end-price for credits will include profitable commisions for various EU middlemen.

Carbon dioxide traders set for summit

Another profit center will be the largest insurers in the world who will no longer have to dismiss losses to "acts of God". One of the strongest motives to pin a human face onto climate disasters lies in the realm of the insurance industry. Blaming mankind for climate change is key to insurance companies now being able to recoup losses by trying to make corporate entities or whole countries pay for damages. After all, God doesn't send out checks, so man will have to foot the bill. Through the efforts of the green/socialist/eco-idiots, they're getting closer to achieving this end.

For many years now, new articles have popped up about insurers screaming about losses due to "global warming". Here's a small sample of many....
Insurer issues global warming warning
Climate threat to home insurance

Of course, all of the "global warming" nonsense hinges upon the notion that mankind is somehow influencing the Earth's climate in an unnatural way, by artificially increasing atmospheric "greenhouse gases" (GHGs). This is absurd at best and is perhaps the weakest part of the argument.

Not counting water vapor, a naturally occuring and variable GHG, all other manmade and naturally occuring GHGs add up to a little over 400 Parts Per Million (PPM). That's the same as saying 0.04% of the atmosphere.

Can anyone tell me how 0.04% of the atmosphere can influence the heat capacity of the remaining 99.96%??

I thought not.

Let's look at it another way...

What you see below is a a graph that I made in Excel comparing CO2 and Global Temperature Anomaly (GTA) trends going back to 1856 using freely obtainable data sets from NOAA and other sources.


Finding a more than negligible correlation between these two trends would be a stretch. Even if you add the other "greenhouse gases" such as CO, CH4, etc., the trends diverge even more. The degree of effect of "greenhouse gases" (aside from water vapor) upon climate is really only based on theory and little more. Ask any "scientist" who supports the "human-enhanced 'greenhouse'" theory the following questions and get ready for a lot of "maybe's", "could-be's", and "theoretically's"...

· At what threshold in PPM of GHG's does a noticeable "greenhouse" effect occur?
· How can a mere 400 PPM influence the heat capacity of the other 999,600 PPM?
· If a GHG can "trap" heat by infrared absorption, this also means that a GHG is also a good conductor of the resulting heat energy. Therefore, wouldn't the GHG's actually help carry heat to higher altitudes? (Water vapor, also a GHG, is an excellent example of this.) If so, why is this not the case according to satellite and radiosonde balloon observations?

It's all barf.

[Straight Vermonter]

Thanks for posting that. Now my last remaining shred of a fragment of a kernel of trust in the government is gone.

[Smokin' Joe]

It's all barf

Nice, succinct, and I agree. I am one of the tremendous number of scientists who disagree that global warming is human induced, or that short of cataclysmic nuclear war or engineered celestial impacts, is anything we can do much to stop.

I see the use of this scam, though, to further fill the coffers of 'regulatory' agencies, more of which are 'global' in nature.

I am not one of those who wish to empower a global government; (at least you have the option of fleeing a badly run country--sometimes).

[DocH]

What we have here is a bunch of lemming-like scientists trolling for grant money.

You're right... it all comes down to some scientists (mainly liberals who like feeding at the easy-money trough of forced public support) putting themselves ahead of what is best for America - the TRUTH. Pure and simple greed.

[Frohickey]

Read the book. Its actually a pretty good book, IMHO.

And the amount of research and references at the end is enough to give you a balanced view of the whole global warming THEORY issue.

[CaptRon]

Michael Crichton's new novel, "State of Fear," not only unfairly bashes the global environmental movement

This guy would have absolutely no problem with this book if the villains were part of corporate America. But use the novel approach of making the leftists the villains and listen to him holler.

Crichton has been cited here as claiming that belief in global warming is more akin to religion than to science. Listening the left howl only proves his point.

[jongaltsr]

Proven time and again, GLOBAL WARMING is a total Hoax. Scientists have proven "time and again" that the Arctic did recede during the early 1990's a bit but the THICKNESS of the Ice Shelf increased dramatically during and after.

The actual amount of ICE in the Arctic actually increased since the early 1970s and THAT FOLKS is the actual and factual status of the world in the north.

The Antarctic on the other hand has become a big problem to researcher and people shipping products around the world. Because the Antarctic's Ice shelf has grown SOOOOOOOO large it is breaking off and has become a nuisance and danger to people in the area. In the past two years two of the largest icebergs have broken from the shelf and were larger than many states in the US. New Jersey would be dwarfed 2 1/2 times by the latest one to break off.

If you only consider one factor out of many you will always be able to prove a negative. It requires all of the facts and factors to consider the actual conditions. That is why Liberal "SKY IF FALLING" mentality is "LAZY" THINKING at it's very worst.