Global Warming: A Pollution Ponzi Scheme?

Global Warming Doomsday Called Off gives very good scientific information on the subject, seldom found.


Over the last few years, how many times have you  heard the following questions: Are the temperatures we're experiencing unusual? Is the climate becoming more variable or extreme? What role does human activity play in the current global warming trend? Does global warming even exist?

Well, in answer to the last question, if it does exist, it's probably not anthropogenic (man-caused) according to Glaciologist Jorgen Peder Steffensen, curator of the Neils Bohr Institute, Department of Geophysics, and scads of other scientists who up until recently, were under a gag-order.  As Steffensen said, those who came to the "global warming is man-made" conclusion, conducted an extremely poor experiment.  They started observing meteorology at the coldest spot in the last 10,000 years - only 140 years ago - so, of course, the 20th century temperature spike looks like an anomaly.  Moreover, when you start following the money (carbon trading: potential multi-trillion dollar business), it becomes all too clear as to why the "global warming is man-made" conclusion was constructed.

Steffensen, extracted ice core samples from Greenland, which bear the fingerprints of climactic conditions over the last 120,000 years. From that sample, the temperature data revealed longer periods with much higher temperatures than we experience today. The coldest point occurred 140 years ago in what they call the "little ice age". Other core samples, from Greenland and elsewhere around the globe, in addition to using other methods such as carbon-14 dating from organic matter from peat bugs and tree-rings confirm the pattern. In other words, major fluctuations in climate are normal, and the recent warming may be a natural consequence of leaving the little ice age in 1875, the lowest point we've had over the last 10,000 years.

Former senior official of the United Nations and billionaire industrialist, otherwise known as the Godfather of the international environmental movement, Maurice Strong,  who played a major role in organizing the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm, Sweden in 1972, thus launching the "Green movement" is the "wizard behind the curtain" regarding the global warming scam.

He organized the U.N. sponsored conferences, including Kyoto, Japan in 1997 (Kyoto treaty on greenhouse gas emissions, aimed at fighting global warming) and he was instrumental in establishing the IPCC  (International Panel on Climate Change). In 2005, Strong stepped down from his UN post because he was involved in the food for oil scandal. Evidence later showed that Strong, in 1997, while working for Kofi Annan, endorsed a check for $988,885, made out to “Mr. M. Strong,” issued by a Jordanian bank.   Strong is also one of the nine directors on the Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX)which describes itself as “North America’s only cap and trade system for all six greenhouse gases, with global affiliates and projects worldwide.”  Climate scientist, Dr. Benjamin Santer, supposedly Strong's right-hand man, altered a crucial United Nations report on climate change to convey the misleading impression that there is a "discernible human influence on climate".

And we can't forget Al Gore, appointed poster boy and expert on global warming. Not only is Gore a partner in  Hara Software, who helps companies manage their "carbon footprints," and who admittedly stands to rake in between 10% to 50% of the trillion dollar business its supposed to become in the next few years, but he and David Blood (former CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management) co-founded Generation Investment Management (GIM), in 2004 “to take financial advantage of new technologies and solutions related to combating global warming”.

In November 2009, Gore minimized the significance of the so-called "Climategate" scandal that grew out of confirmed reports that the top scientists at the Climate Research Unit (CRU) in England, possessor of the world's largest temperature-data set, had secretly and repeatedly manipulated scientific evidence in order to conceal or destroy data that contradicted their claims.

Links:

The Hockey Stick Illusion

Read more...

Our Carbon Footprint May Be All That's Left Of Us Soon

We may not have as much time as once thought. Recent studies show, along with an ever increasing level in greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere; a corresponding dramatic decline in the ability of the Earth to soak up those man-made emissions is also occurring. Prior to this recent study, half of all man-made emissions of carbon dioxide have been absorbed by "carbon "sinks" on the land and in the sea.

Anthropogenic (man-made) emissions of carbon dioxide are rising three times faster than in the 1990s; the levels are at the highest levels they've ever been in the last 650,000 years causing the Arctic ice cap is melting three times as fast and the seas are rising twice as rapidly. This rise can be traced back to the beginning of the Industrial Revolution 250 years ago, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Once again, after the Industrial Revolution, carbon dioxide levels started to increase in 1960. Over the last five years, the rise in emissions was four times greater than for the preceding 10 years. Scientists measure carbon dioxide levels at different periods in our history by analyzing gas samples trapped in the frozen bubbles of deep ice cores.

"This is incredibly important. It is bad news because we can't do much about these natural carbon sinks, but the good news is that we can increase the efficiency of fossil fuel use. I would say this is a wake-up call. Things are happening much faster than we expected," -- Dr Le Quéré

Read more...

One T-shirt Leaves 9-lb Carbon Print.

There are ways we can all contribute to slow global warming without too much sacrifice, except maybe to the American ego. America is a country, where bigger is better and a symbol of success to many, consequently we waste and “we waist”.

Most of the people who buy large homes do not use or need the space their homes provide. Smaller homes built less efficiently leave a much smaller carbon print than larger more efficiently built homes. I bet many of these large home owners do not use half the rooms in their houses...that these rooms are primarily for show and must only be admired from afar, as if they live in a museum. Many of my friends believe their homes are not only a symbol of success but their "masterpiece"...there must be a less costly way to exhibit one's "masterpiece". Having said that, this is one reason I've chosen to remain anonymous...I want to keep the friends I have.

I'm in the habit of always leaving my computer on all day, but according to this report I should turn it off when not using it. "Stand-by mode" (power consumption when the device is not active with producing output but instantly available to do so) account for 75% of the carbon emissions per home.

New York City is one of the greenest cities in the United States if not the greenest. The reason for this is people are less likely to own cars, they are more likely to live in high rise buildings, which increases efficiency because numerous housing units in one building rely on one power source instead of thousands of units spread out over a large area, each requiring their very own power source as in most suburban communities. Also, studies have proven that city dwellers have much smaller waists than those who must drive everywhere they go.

Clothing increase carbon emissions because of the washing and drying most clothing requires. If we let the sun dry our clothes we cut down substantially on that 9-lb carbon print one t-shirt leaves. In addition, recycling clothes also cuts carbon emissions because there is a high cost to manufacturing clothes as well.

There are many more things we could all do to lessen this problem and maybe, at the same time, add to the quality of our lives.

Read more...