x Reality Check It is well known that people can dwell on one aspect of life for just so long, before loosing interest and shifting focus to something else So, in due course, the chilling fear of Global Cooling gave way to Global Warming.

Death by Heat-Stroke A scene in Al Gore's climate crisis movie shows a cute cartoon character, a little girl, eating an ice cream cone. Suddenly, the ice cream melts and drops to the ground. A voice then solemnly intones "Global Warming". This kind of absurdity, targeting those with mental capacity equal to that of school children, is typical of the fearmongering that pervades the cult-like Global Warming advocacy. The message is that disaster is certain and imminent, but arguments offered to support the message are based on selected observations gathered over a scant few years, and ignore evidence that doesn't fit the preconceived concept. A series of doomsday-like ‘scientific’ reports in 2007 and beyond, from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), reinforced the concept of Global Warming by extreme predictions of melting glaciers and polar ice, flooded coastal areas and a parched landscape to beset us some thousands years from now. Closer reading of the ‘fine print’ revealed that the warming might amount to only 0.09°C (9/100 of one degree) in this century, or maybe 4.4°C or possibly 6.4°C, depending on which of several computer-generated climate models you favor. The media, en masse, largely ignored the more modest and flexible forecasts for the coming hundred years, and focused instead on the catastrophic predictions for the far distant future; despite their resemblance to science-fiction more than real science. A seven metre surge in sea level (23 ft.) makes a far more gripping headline than a 0.09° temperature change in a century.                 On october 13th, 2005, the Washington Post                 quoted NASA's Goddard Institute for Space                 Studies, stating that the year 2005 would be                 the hottest year on record, continuing a 25 year                 trend of rising temperatures (1980 to 2005). To amplify the statement, it was pointed out that from 1998 to 2005, the average global temperature rose by one tenth of one Fahrenheit degree (0.1°). That is .00143° per year for that seven year period; an extraordinary feat of precision measurement. Furthermore, global temperature in 2005, that hottest year, was said to have risen 1.36$#176;F above the 1950 to 1980 average. Not said was the fact that in the prior and partly overlapping period from 1940 to 1975, a drop of 1.8°F was recorded. Notwithstanding that and other contradictions in the argument, the Global Warming concept has been driven across the world by vigorous advocacy from the IPCC (the International Panel on Climate Change) and many thousands of 'scientists' who have attached themselves to that body and taken up its cause like true believers, basking in reflected glory from the widespread promotion of Al Gore's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth."                 Coincidentally, warnings of Global Warming                 spread immediately after the collapse of the                 Global Cooling crisis, and President Carter's                 signing of the Climate Control act in 1979,                 to deal with Global Cooling. In 2006, in deference to the new wave of Global Warming 'science', Newsweek offered a retraction of its 1975 'scientific' Global Cooling feature. The problem, it avowed, is really Global Warming, aka Climate Crisis. Warnings of Global Warming are characterized by extreme, frightening predictions of melting glaciers and Greenland's ice cap, flooded coastal areas, crop failures, growing deserts, collapse of the fishery, forest fires, shrinking water supplies, reduction of permafrost, the spread of malaria, diarrhea, malnutrition, plus the death of polar bears and other wildlife. On Oct. 23, 2009, the Toronto Globe and Mail reported the consequences to come from "high-end climate change" as defined by the UK's Met' Office Hadley Centre. The report featured an elaborate map, showing the flooding to come with a four degree rise of world temperature. Thirty four computer simulations had been run, it was said, before the four degree benchmark was chosen. Clearly. those 'scientists' displayed admirable determination in persisting until they got the results they wanted, but they neglected to say when the disasters would befall us. The time offered by the IPCC for catastrophe of that magnitude is some thousands of years from now, as compared to more modest forecasts for this century. Still, it should be no surprise that such ambiguity creates doubt in the minds of many knowledgeable analysts.             Professor Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts             Institute of Technology, has been quoted as             saying, “Future generations will wonder in bemused             amazement that in the early 21st century, the             developed world went into hysterical panic over             a globally averaged temerature increase of a few             tenths of a degree; and on the basis of grossly             exaggerated and highly uncertain computer             projections, combined into an implausible chain             of inference, proceeded to contemplate a rollback             of the industrial age. Some renowned mathematicians go further, and challenge not only the average temperatures calculated for the planet, but the methodology used to calculate them as well. Given the impossibility of simultaneously recording the temperature at every point on Earth at a given moment in time, it seems reasonable to question the process. The current sampling method is an interesting mathematical exercise, but the results are dubious. Some say that calcuating the world's average temperature is like trying to calculate the average color presented by a rotating kaleidoscope.               Dr. Christopher Essex, Profesor of Applied               Mathematics at the University of Western Ontario,               contends that there is no such thing as an average               global temperature. He compares the method of               generating such an average to the meaningless               process of averaging telephone numbers. Scientific studies by Professor Timothy Patterson, director of Ottawa-Carlton Geoscience Centre, Department of Earth Sciences at Carlton University, raise important challenges to current climate-change hype. Climate stability has never been a feature of planet Earth, according to Professor Patterson. His studies are consistent with the findings by hundreds of unbiased scientists, showing that change is the only constant factor in Earth’s climate. At times in the past it has been warmer and sometimes it has been cooler. Records indicate that six thousand years ago it was about 3 Celsius degrees warmer than it is now (about 5.5 Fahrenheit degrees). A lengthy cold period followed; then ten thousand years ago, temperatures rose as much as 6°C (11° F) in a decade. That is ten times more than the much-touted rise of 0.6°C in the past century, which has contributed to the current environmental frenzy. Evidence in the Vostok ice core shows that such long-term climate changes are normal, while the well-known “Schwabe” eleven year sunspot cycle is also known to plays a part in short-term fluctuations.               Dr. Hans Storch, a prominent climatologist,               contends that the current predictions of doom               are hysterical and idiotic. He points out that               many ‘scientific’ pronouncements on the subject               of climate change are bereft of merit. According               to Dr. Storch, writing in Der Spiegel, Global               Warming theories have left the laboratory and               become the stuff of Hollywood. He reminds us               to consider how wrong some dire forecasts have               been in the past. Despite such words of caution however, and many carefully considered contrary opinions, Climate Crisis has now become flavor-of-the-month and darling of he media. The bandwagon is on a roll, and the me-too multitude has enthusiastically climbed aboard. It has become almost unacceptable, and is certainly unfashionable to question the ominous predictions of disaster. Politicians have likewise climbed aboard the bandwagon with great alacrity, and "green" is very much in vogue with them.               Meanwhile, Al Gore, former Vice President               of the United States has made a new career               from being ‘Green’ and now speaks ominously               of Climate Crisis, even as he plays fast               and loose with the facts. In an interview with Andrea Mitcchell of MSNBC on the occasion of the 2010 Copenhagen fiaso, Gore solemnly declared that the Arctic has been ice-covered for three million years. Some might accept that rash statement as fact, but there's abundant evidence to the contrary, and Gore offered no proof of his intemperate assertion. The blizzard of numbers marking the Global Warming debate defies proof or even comprehension, and might encourage thoughtful peoiple to embrace the old adage that 'figures don't lie, but liars figure'. But it may also lead to increased awareness of a global problem that is fundamental to this issue, but which we are reluctant to face. That problem is the destructive burden of human beings on the planet, that grows exponentially day by day and year by year, with each one of us helping to hasten our collective demise just by being what we are and doing what we must do.

The simple fact is that More People  =  More Human Activity.
More Human Activity  =  More strain on Earth’s capacity to cope
and Accelerates our Race to Oblivion

Please Read On

Doomsday & the Population Explosion

Back to the Top      Back to Home