Earth’s environment has become a hot button issue; so much so, that it has stumbled into the political arena. Yet, when the layers are peeled away on this issue, critical thinkers ask if the sky is really falling or if the media is hyping the matter. Something is going on with Mother Earth’s climate; there is no doubt about that. Precisely what is going on is anyone’s guess and due to the planet’s dynamics, the reason can’t be pinned down to one primary cause. After all, it's been changing for 4.5 billion years and blaming it on the modern human industrial population has become the movement of the 21st Century.
It doesn’t take much for a rational minded person to soon realize that global warming, now called climate change and now being referred to as acid acidification (what'll they think of next?), is a religious movement of the far left; there always has to be some disaster looming and if we don’t change our ways or throw money at it we are doomed. The ice age scare of the 70’s comes to mind and we’ve seen where that went.
A Word About Consensus
A vast majority of these anthropogenic climate change doomsayers (some say all of them) claim that the debate is over, that scientists are in a consensus. Anyone with a modicum of intelligence knows that the word consensus in the world of science is a foreign concept; indeed it’s a concept of politicians. People that make the assertion that scientists have come to a consensus do so out of laziness and ignorance. These people do not want to understand the science behind the issue and therefore takes the word of scientists at face value, never questioning it as long as it supports their movement.
Michael Crichton said it best:
"Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.
"Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus.
"Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus."
The AGW Movement, Carbon Credits and papal indulgences
Let’s face it. Environmentalists have found a new movement and some say that it’s even a religious movement. This farce has gotten so out of control that a blatant scam has emerged called “carbon credits” and it’s a way for the limousine and Learjet liberals to live their lavish lifestyle, while spewing their venomous bile and wagging their finger at the middle and lower class to conserve energy. In Roman Catholic theology, papal indulgences was the full or partial remission of temporal punishment due for sins (Carbon footprint) which have already been forgiven. The indulgence is granted by the church (Limousine and Learjet liberals) after the sinner has confessed and received absolution. The belief is that indulgences draw on the storehouse of merit acquired by Jesus' (Al Gore in this case, though some see him as the liberal party savior) sacrifice and the virtues and penances of the saints and are granted for specific good works and prayers. Carbon credits sounds strikingly similar, doesn't it?
If this isn’t enough, law firms are setting up shop to sue corporations for altering the micro climate around them. This will ultimately trickle down to the single family home owner and when the next hurricane strikes, who will these lawyers blame for it? Certainly not Mother Gaia. No, it's your fault because you weren't using highly toxic, mercury laced compact flourescent light bulbs or driving an SUV instead of a Prius or taking the bus. Sounds gloomy, does it? Well, it's far from over and it will only get worse if we keep bending over to these environmentalist's knee jerk demands. It would appear that John McCain, our next president, has been hooked and reeled into this nonsense. Let's hope that he will see the light and get in touch with his rational side.
Our Mission
The mission of Global Warming Skeptics is to keep visitors informed of the other point of view, that there isn’t a “consensus”. By searching the web for news articles and reaching out to other sources that questions the human induced aspect to this natural phenomenon, the casual visitor won’t get information that is skewed.
Recall the words of H.L. Mencken: "The urge to save humanity is often a false front for the urge to rule."
Membership is free and once registered, you can even submit any newsworthy information.
A Word About Consensus
"Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had.
"Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus.
"Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus."
Michael Crichton
Kyoto Cost
ePetition
Don't forget, if you haven't already signed the ePetition you can do so by clicking on the
Attached the latest Memo by South African Professor Will Alexander.
A most thorough analysis of the bureaucratic paralysis and one-way-street policy decisions.
Please spread wide and far
Dear All
Memo 14/08 Humanitarian concerns
A very serious situation has developed. Climate change science has been demonstrated to be based on false premises. This raises a number of issues including unaddressed threats of severe agricultural droughts and water supply shortages commencing within a year from now.
I urge South African recipients to bring this memo to the attention of the heads of their institutions.
Regards
WJR Alexander
Professor Emeritus, Department of Civil and Biosystems Engineering
University of Pretoria
Will Alexander alexwjr@iafrica.com
Thursday 8 May 2008
Last weekend a tropical cyclone struck Burma. The death toll is reported to be 50 000 and rising. Al Gore was quick to climb onto his bandwagon. This is what he had to say and some of the immediate responses quoted in CCNet of 7 May 2008.
And as we're talking today, the death count in Myanmar from the cyclone that hit there yesterday, has been rising from 15,000 to much higher numbers... And last year a catastrophic storm hit Bangladesh. The year before, the strongest cyclone in more than 50 years hit China - and we're seeing consequences that scientists have long predicted might be associated with continued global warming.
--Al Gore, NPR, 6 May 2008
The world has not warmed in a decade. Moreover, there is little evidence that tropical cyclones have got worse. And any link between hurricanes and warming is highly disputed. Yet Al Gore is already feeding on Burma's dead. Using tragedy to advance an agenda has been a strategy for many global warming activists, and it was just a matter of time before someone found a way to tie the recent Myanmar cyclone to global warming.
--Andrew Bolt, 7 May 2008
And while these poor souls will undoubtedly see years of unimaginable suffering and the arduous rebuilding of over a million destroyed homes, this man -- who professes his desire to save the planet - saw another opportunity. That it arrived at the end of a one month period in which another wheel fell off the greenhouse gas disinformation bus almost daily only adds to the morass. This was an astonishingly nauseating display -- even for the likes of Gore.
--Marc Sheppard, 7 May 2008
There was a BBC item on the lack of an early warning system.
As the scale of the disaster in Burma becomes clear, questions are being asked over how much the authorities knew about the magnitude of the approaching storm. India's meteorological agency, which monitors cyclones in the Indian Ocean, says it warned the Burmese authorities 48 hours before the storm struck. Officials from the UN's disaster reduction agency in Geneva say the scale of the devastation suggests there was not a proper early warning system.
--Steve Jackson, BBC News, 6 May 2008
This is a comment I wrote for the weekly paper at my home university at the request of its editor. It seems appropriate for eco-myths as well.
I do not believe in anthropogenic global warming (AGW).There, said it. Out in the open.There are lots of reasons really but they are irrelevant to this essay.Because this essay is not about AGW or climate change or environmentalism.Instead, this essay is about thinking.And what it's like to profess something at a university outside of the mainstream of accepted thought.
Iconoclast.That's a label I could live with.But it's not one usually applied to me.I am a "denier", an "ideologue", an idiot, a joke.This is an essay on why I am not considered an iconoclast at my university and what it is like to work in an atmosphere that is intolerant of individualism.
An iconoclast is a nonconformist, a rebel, a dissenter or radical who attacks cherished beliefs and traditional institutions as being based on error or superstition. It is a term of respect and most often used in the arts or humanities for individual thinkers who inspire others to view the accepted paradigms of a culture in new and challenging ways.
So why am I not an iconoclast?Well academia has this propensity for embracing radicals only from the left, those that espouse socialist politics.Those that advocate social justice and the overthrow of the accepted evils of capitalism.Those that embrace the mantra of established radicalism i.e. intellectualism.
Suppose your organization (e.g. school, library, kntting circle, rugby team, local saloon) would like to book Al Gore to come to your organization and do his bullshit global warming Power Point presentation “Environmental Multimedia Lecture.” What to do?
You would contact Mr. Gore’s agent for the deets. You would learn that Mr. Gore’s speaking fee is $100,000 for the 75 minute presentation, and you would also be provided with a contract to sign, which contained a special addendum relating specifically to Mr. Gore’s requirements. In short, the $100,000 is just for openers. It will cost you considerably more than that.
The Smoking Gun has published the contract and the five-page addendum here, but, if you don’t feel like wading through the woids, here are some of the more interesting terms and conditions:
Travel: You will have to provide round-trip, first-class air travel for Mr. Gore and “another individual” from wherever Mr. Gore happens to be when he desires to fly to your location. He has the option of making his own travel arrangements, as he sees fit, but you will get the bill.
ENSO and Monthly Global Temperatures Thursday, May 08, 2008 @ 15:38:18 EDT by sunsettommy (89 reads)
ICECAP
May 08, 2008
ENSO and Monthly Global Temperatures
By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM
EXCERPT:
In a recent story we showed how the PDO cycle related to the relative frequency of El Ninos and La Ninas and through that, global temperatures. This is the case because El Ninos lead to global warmth and La Ninas a cooling.
Vincent Gray and Alan Siddons have been emphasizing an important point that the (arithmetic) average temperature is not the relevant quantity that should be substituted into various calculations of the heat and energy budget of Earth.
Why? Because what matters for the energy budget is the average radiated (or absorbed) energy. According to the Stefan-Boltzmann law, the energy radiated by a black body per unit surface area (also called "radiant emittance") is proportional to the fourth power of the absolute temperature.
When we divide the solar constant by four, to obtain 342 Watts per squared meter, we really average the irradiance over latitudes, seasons, and parts of a day. If the Earth were a black body, that would be equivalent to averaging the fourth power of the absolute temperature.
Suppose your organization (e.g. school, library, kntting circle, rugby team, local saloon) would like to book Al Gore to come to your organization and do his 
