Man-Made Global Warming - The Hoax Exposed

[threegee]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/the-billion-dollar-hoax/story-e6frfhqf-1225823736564

Today Australia awakes. But what are the BBC Time-lords going to do when they finally have to admit they've been feeding the great British public a load of cods-wallop, and worse: censoring informed dissent?

Which of the Beeb journos is going to stick his/her neck out, risk the job, and tell the unvarnished truth? Gentle climbdown seems the safest strategy. Retreat, slowly, in good order, and blame another commander for the debacle. "It was obvious to me/us all along."

[sizsells]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/opinion/the-billion-dollar-hoax/story-e6frfhqf-1225823736564

Today Australia awakes. But what are the BBC Time-lords going to do when they finally have to admit they've been feeding the great British public a load of cods-wallop, and worse: censoring informed dissent?

Which of the Beeb journos is going to stick his/her neck out, risk the job, and tell the unvarnished truth? Gentle climbdown seems the safest strategy. Retreat, slowly, in good order, and blame another commander for the debacle. "It was obvious to me/us all along."

What GLOBAL WARMING is just a myth, a natural phenomina that occurs every 20,000 years give or take a few and Joe public are just being screwed by governments NO WAY LOL..... its about time someone told the truth 3G

[Monsta®]

funny that! wonder how funny the future generations find it?

[mercuryg]

funny that! wonder how funny the future generations find it?

Depends at what point they live; colder for some, warmer for others.

3G - the 'gentle climbdown' actually began a few years ago - the phenomenon has been widely labelled 'climate change' for a some time now, rather than 'global warming'.

[threegee]

Depends at what point they live; colder for some, warmer for others.

G - the 'gentle climbdown' actually began a few years ago - the phenomenon has been widely labelled 'climate change' for a some time now, rather than 'global warming'.

My comments were limited to the government-boot-licking upper crust at the Beeb. The guardians of our morals, and our right to be presented with a balanced view of the world. Mere mortals have had their feet on the ground for a while - just as you say.

Monsta: I'd expect we should say sorry for burning up all the fossil fuels and leaving them to face the chilly British winter with only a few - by then - creaky old windmills. Still they'll be able to have a good laugh at 20th century mass-hysteria and delusion. Like everyone going to get skin cancer because they thought they'd punched a hole in the Ozone Layer, and that this wasn't part of a natural cycle.

Oh and the guy who kidded everyone we were about to enter a new ice-age in order to pad his research grants. And, what short memories we all had not to realise - when just a little later - the opposite case was being promoted, for exactly the same sordid reasons - by exactly the same guy!

[Monsta®]

My comments were limited to the government-boot-licking upper crust at the Beeb. The guardians of our morals, and our right to be presented with a balanced view of the world. Mere mortals have had their feet on the ground for a while - just as you say.

Monsta: I'd expect we should say sorry for burning up all the fossil fuels and leaving them to face the chilly British winter with only a few - by then - creaky old windmills. Still they'll be able to have a good laugh at 20th century mass-hysteria and delusion. Like everyone going to get skin cancer because they thought they'd punched a hole in the Ozone Layer, and that this wasn't part of a natural cycle.

Oh and the guy who kidded everyone we were about to enter a new ice-age in order to pad his research grants. And, what short memories we all had not to realise - when just a little later - the opposite case was being promoted, for exactly the same sordid reasons - by exactly the same guy!

that many top scientists can't be wrong! ok maybe the evidence maybe not as solid but something is definitly happening wether it is man made who knows, but i say its better to do something now rather than sticking me heed in the sand and hoping it will go away!

the green house effect is real look at venus it has a high co2 attmosphere that causes it to have temperatures that can melt lead!

heres the evidence!

[Andy Millne]

look at venus it has a high co2 attmosphere that causes it to have temperatures that can melt lead!

it's also at a minimum 38 million kilometres closer to the sun.

[threegee]

that many top scientists can't be wrong!...

Yes, I'd agree that 31,000 scientists can't be wrong!

http://www.petitionproject.org/

The ones that don't profit from the con, and are disgusted this clique of fourty or so shysters are getting their research budgets and international jollies by pure fraud! And.. if you still don't believe it's a fraud then read their e-mails to each other! I already posted a link to them on another thread.

....ok maybe the evidence maybe not as solid but something is definitly happening wether it is man made who knows, but i say its better to do something now rather than sticking me heed in the sand and hoping it will go away!

Something definitely is happening - it's called weather. And we can hardly predict that more than five days ahead. To pretend that the same sort of simplistic computer models can look years, or decades ahead, is pure fiction. You can make these models output anything you want - and they do! Read their e-mails to see how they are manipulating the data, selecting from the data, and even making up data when they still can't get the answers they need.

The scientific evidence says that there is no direct correlation between the level of CO2 in the atmosphere and mean temperature. The only evidence from ice cores that sheds light on this shows some sort of delayed effect running 200 to 1900 years behind the measured change. It's not understood how this happens, but it's very complex, relating to the enormous amounts of CO2 in the oceans and carbon locked in to limestone etc. But we do know that the vast majority of CO2 lose in the atmosphere is natural and not man made. Timescales running into hundreds and thousands of years aren't good enough to get the politicians to cough up the sums of money these shysters want, so they gloss over this "inconvenient truth".

Our politicians go for all of this because they like to be seen to be "saving the world" - it's far easier to posture and "lead the world" than get to grips with the real problems - ones that they have no answers to. But, just as you saw at Copenhagen, other nations aren't falling for this junk science in the way our own media has.

Like "the hole in the ozone layer" and loads of other hysteria you're not old enough to remember, it will all be quietly burried in a few years time. The politicians depend on the fact that Joe Public has a very short memory. And, there's always a new generation coming along that can be more readily taken in.

[threegee]

it's also at a minimum 38 million kilometres closer to the sun.

Now that's simply too obvious! And, though Monsta has picked up on Venus the global warmers/climate changers have a BIG problem in The Solar System. Because IF they presumed to mention Venus then others would point to Mars - and its melting ice caps!

The obvious conclusion would be that the output of the Sun is fluctuating a bit, as it likely does quite regularly. No funding for Earth climatologists there then? No international conferences to regulate the Sun?

Dammit - there's a really "Inconvenient Truth" Mr Gore!

[Malcolm Robinson]

It may well be to do with the gravitational matrix we are entering into with our celestial alignment around winter solstice 2012, as the Mayans predicated.

Whole new ball game, anyone want to fund my research a couple of million dollars will do it?

[Stephen]

it's also at a minimum 38 million kilometres closer to the sun.

But Venus is hotter than Mercury which is some 61 million km closer to the sun than Venus.

[Malcolm Robinson]

that many top scientists can't be wrong! ok maybe the evidence maybe not as solid but something is definitly happening wether it is man made who knows, but i say its better to do something now rather than sticking me heed in the sand and hoping it will go away!

heres the evidence!

I'm with Monsta on this one. Ok the climatologists might have their own agendas but without a shadow of a doubt we have polluted this planet, possibly beyond repair, and we should be doing something about it.

[mercuryg]

that many top scientists can't be wrong!

They can. The very fact that everything they claim is based upon 'models' should give you a clue - man made global warmin is a theory that is being presented as fact.

Alarm bells should begin to ring when you consider how much of the earths atmosphere is made up CO2. Many people will tell you it's less than one percent, which in itself sounds pretty light, but when you look at the true figure and find out that it's actually 0.038% of the atmosphere that is co2 questions have to be asked.

The level of water vapour in the atmosphere is far greater - from natural causes - and is know to have a similar effect.

Furthermore, contrary to claims the world has not been warming by any significant degree in the last twenty years; add into that that an 'average world temperature' is a quite ludicrous basis on which to propose the sort of inter-governmental agreements that are costing us a fortune now and things get even more cloudy.

Yes, we have polluted the earth by using fossil fuels, but the presence of a determined and competetive race such as humans was always going to result in pollution. yes we can cut it down, but co2 is not the cause of climate change.

Also, Venus is not the earth - the two are not even comparable; what happens there is completely different to what happens here.

[mobius]

They can. The very fact that everything they claim is based upon 'models' should give you a clue - man made global warmin is a theory that is being presented as fact.

... along with gravity, electromagnetism, thermodynamics, quantum theory ... ect ect ect

[Malcolm Robinson]

Yes, we have polluted the earth by using fossil fuels, but the presence of a determined and competetive race such as humans was always going to result in pollution. yes we can cut it down, but co2 is not the cause of climate change.

Merc,

That is quite a pessimistic statement isn't it? If we are talking post industrial revolution I would have thought a lot of the pollution was caused by ignorance and fiscal need, both areas where we could make change. I don't believe we are endemic polluters by genetic design!

For me the real problem on the horizon is population growth, which might just be sustainable present day but will soon tip over the edge, if it hasn't already. Given that the mature western economies have, by and large, population demographics which show almost stagnation if not reduction in their figures (financial pressure on lifestyle probably) then it follows that the third world and emerging countries have population explosions as they frantically follow our patterns of industrial development leading to even greater and completely unsustainable pollution.

[Monsta®]

They can. The very fact that everything they claim is based upon 'models' should give you a clue - man made global warmin is a theory that is being presented as fact.

wheres your phd?

Also, Venus is not the earth - the two are not even comparable; what happens there is completely different to what happens here.

and i wasn't comparing the planets more the green house effect! as venus is locked in an irrevesable cycle of growing temps!

[threegee]

The Monsta Book of Junk Science

Earth's atmosphere is 77% nitrogen and 21% oxygen.

The average surface temperature is degrees 59 F

Mars has an atmosphere of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, argon and a little bit of other gasses.

The average surface temperature is -81 degrees F

Conclusions:

Carbon Dioxide is a cooling gas.

Oxygen is a dangerous warming gas.

The BBC Book of Junk Science

If you get two jars and fill one with air and the other with 2630 times more CO2 than the terrifyingly high level in the atmosphere today. Then shine powerful lights on both, and don't provide any easy way for the energy to escape, the one with the air in will heat up faster (whoops, that shouldn't happen! Should it?) but keep on pumping energy in and the one with the CO2 will measure a bit warmer because the molecules in it are a lot heavier and so have more kinetic energy.

Conclusions:

The fact that the Earth's surface is 71% water, and if we put a bit of water in the jars a shook most of the CO2 would disappear doesn't matter at all - 'cos that would be beyond the comprehension of our dumb viewer panel, who's vote will validate our propaganda. And besides, it would give us a "wrong" result.

We are all gonna die very soon unless we start trading bits of paper which give us the right to put CO2 in the air (and make Al Gore rich).

Some Interesting Real Science

(That the BBC won't be at all interested in)

"CO2 concentrations worldwide average about 380 ppm. Compared to former geologic periods, concentrations of CO2 in our atmosphere are still very small and may not have a statistically measurable effect on global temperatures. For example, during the Ordovician Period 460 million years ago CO2 concentrations were 4400 ppm while temperatures then were about the same as they are today."

http://www.geocraft....t_400k_yrs.html

N.B. We are talking about total CO2 concentrations here, where the natural background is much greater than any man-made contribution. i.e. In the levels experienced on Earth total CO2 may not have any statistically measurable effect on global temperatures at all!

Conclusion:

This bunch of shysters are not only making alarmist predictions with no scientific basis, they're also pretending that they can measure the unmeasurable!

[Monsta®]

The Monsta Book of Junk Science

Earth's atmosphere is 77% nitrogen and 21% oxygen.

The average surface temperature is degrees 59 F

Mars has an atmosphere of carbon dioxide, nitrogen, argon and a little bit of other gasses.

The average surface temperature is -81 degrees F

Conclusions:

Carbon Dioxide is a cooling gas.

Oxygen is a dangerous warming gas.

The BBC Book of Junk Science

If you get two jars and fill one with air and the other with 2630 times more CO2 than the terrifyingly high level in the atmosphere today. Then shine powerful lights on both, and don't provide any easy way for the energy to escape, the one with the air in will heat up faster (whoops, that shouldn't happen! Should it?) but keep on pumping energy in and the one with the CO2 will measure a bit warmer because the molecules in it are a lot heavier and so have more kinetic energy.

Conclusions:

The fact that the Earth's surface is 71% water, and if we put a bit of water in the jars a shook most of the CO2 would disappear doesn't matter at all - 'cos that would be beyond the comprehension of our dumb viewer panel, who's vote will validate our propaganda. And besides, it would give us a "wrong" result.

We are all gonna die very soon unless we start trading bits of paper which give us the right to put CO2 in the air (and make Al Gore rich).

Some Interesting Real Science

(That the BBC won't be at all interested in)

"CO2 concentrations worldwide average about 380 ppm. Compared to former geologic periods, concentrations of CO2 in our atmosphere are still very small and may not have a statistically measurable effect on global temperatures. For example, during the Ordovician Period 460 million years ago CO2 concentrations were 4400 ppm while temperatures then were about the same as they are today."

http://www.geocraft....t_400k_yrs.html

N.B. We are talking about total CO2 concentrations here, where the natural background is much greater than any man-made contribution. i.e. In the levels experienced on Earth total CO2 may not have any statistically measurable effect on global temperatures at all!

Conclusion:

This bunch of shysters are not only making alarmist predictions with no scientific basis, they're also pretending that they can measure the unmeasurable!

a cannit stop laughin!

if fact:

Of all the planets in the Solar System, Mars's seasons are the most Earth-like, due to the similar tilts of the two planets' rotational axes. However, the lengths of the Martian seasons are about twice those of Earth's, as Mars' greater distance from the Sun leads to the Martian year being about two Earth years long. Martian surface temperatures vary from lows of about -87 °C (-125 °F) during the polar winters to highs of up to 20 °C (68 °F) in summers. The wide range in temperatures is due to the thin atmosphere which cannot store much solar heat, the low atmospheric pressure, and the low thermal inertia of Martian soil. The planet is also 1.52 times as far from the sun as Earth, resulting in just 43 percent of the amount of sunlight.

If Mars had an Earth-like orbit, its seasons would be similar to Earth's because its axial tilt is similar to Earth's. However, the comparatively large eccentricity of the Martian orbit has a significant effect. Mars is near perihelion when it is summer in the southern hemisphere and winter in the north, and near aphelion when it is winter in the southern hemisphere and summer in the north. As a result, the seasons in the southern hemisphere are more extreme and the seasons in the northern are milder than would otherwise be the case. The summer temperatures in the south can reach up to 30 °C (54 °F) warmer than the equivalent summer temperatures in the north.

Mars also has the largest dust storms in our Solar System. These can vary from a storm over a small area, to gigantic storms that cover the entire planet. They tend to occur when Mars is closest to the Sun, and have been shown to increase the global temperature.

[Monsta®]

also

Venus has an extremely dense atmosphere, which consists mainly of carbon dioxide and a small amount of nitrogen. The atmospheric mass is 93 times that of Earth's atmosphere while the pressure at the planet's surface is about 92 times that at Earth's surface—a pressure equivalent to that at a depth of nearly 1 kilometer under Earth's oceans. The density at the surface is 65 kg/m³ (6.5% that of water). The CO2-rich atmosphere, along with thick clouds of sulfur dioxide, generates the strongest greenhouse effect in the Solar System, creating surface temperatures of over 460 °C (860 °F). This makes Venus's surface hotter than Mercury's which has a minimum surface temperature of −220 °C and maximum surface temperature of 420 °C, even though Venus is nearly twice Mercury's distance from the Sun and thus receives only 25% of Mercury's solar irradiance.

[threegee]

And Venus is quite different too. The point is that we are BOTH comparing apples with oranges. "Junk Science"; you were meant to laugh.

i.e. the tiny tiny levels of CO2 here on Earth have nothing to do with the totally different conditions on either Mars, Venus, or the BBCs jars. Neither planet has any man-made CO2 - what the hysteria is actually all about.

CO2 probably is involved with the melting Mars ice caps too, but even BBC pop-science can work out that that has nothing to do with human factors. It's fluctuating solar radiation; the same Sun that shines on the Earth!

CO2 in whatever levels nature sets for us is good - life depends on it. We should start looking at the real pollutants, and tell our idiot politicians that we are not quite as dumb as they take us for.

[mercuryg]

wheres your phd?

Where's yours??????

[Monsta®]

Where's yours??????

Here!

[mercuryg]

Nice one Monsta. Funnily enough, that's about as relevant to knowing all about climate change as the qualifications that the boss of the IPCC holds. He's a railway engineer.

[Pete]

Here!

Does this mean that we now refer to you as the Doctor.

[Cympil]

Does this mean that we now refer to you as the Doctor.

Aye, Doctor Dolittle..cos he`s barking