World's Fastest Browser

About Global Warming Hype

Purpose

My main purpose for building this site is to express my opinion regarding the hype surrounding global warming controversy, and to provide a source for some of the resources I found, while doing my homework. During my research, I found a wealth of conflicting scientific data, as well as some pretty darn funny stuff out there including plenty of good old fashioned hyperbole on both sides. I decided to build this site as a means to archive some of the things I found, in order to make them easier for others to find. Here are some common myths about global warming. You can also visit the archive pages.

The Debate is NOT Over!

February 9, 2007-
These days, if you voice any skepticism about anthropogenic (man-made) catastrophic global warming, you are quickly dismissed, if you're lucky. A more likely reaction might be for you to be accused of being a right wing nut, or even compared to a holocaust denier. You might even find yourself the target of a Nuremberg-style trial for crimes against humanity. You may even be accused of bribing scientists with $10,000.00 cash to undermine legitimate climate research! And if you're meteorologist, you had better pledge your loyalty to the Religion of man-made Global Warming and accept the IPCC propaganda as fact, or you may risk being decertified by the American Meteorological Society!

The world is round.
When a theory becomes a proven fact through scientific methodology, then and only then will the debate be over. The debate is over when scientists stop debating, not when one side declares the debate over. If the debate really was over, no one would be debating any more. For example, I don't hear anyone debating wheather the world is flat or round. That is because the world has been proven to be round. However, it has not been proven beyone any resonable doubt that humans are causing any significant global warming. If 2,500 scientists at the IPCC, and that's a very generous number as it relates to actual climate scientists, claim that humans are causing global warming but 17,000 scientists say they're full of it, then where is the consensus? Surely, this is some indication that the debate is not entirely over.

My Position on Climate Change

Let me just start by stating that I'm not a scientist. I'm just an average middle aged American male. Like most Americans in the 1990's, I tended to not worry about the "little things" while going about my busy life in southern California. I never really gave the global warming issue much consideration one way or the other until the hyperbole really began to heat up. First we heard that it was now a scientific "consensus." Shortly after the release of Al Gore's movie, we began to hear the line, "the debate is over" from more and more people. I remember thinking gee, the damn thing isn't even out on DVD yet, and the debate is over? How odd it is that at the height of the controversy, global warming activists declared the debate over. The media jumped on board and immediately the politicians followed. I decided to do a little research of my own. The more I Googled the subject of anthropogenic climate change, the more I became convinced that the "debate" is definitely NOT over. So what's my position Global Warming? In order to form my own opinion about global warming, I started by asking myself some basic questions. The answers to these questions and others would need to be considered in order to form the basis of my position. Disclaimer time...

Disclaimer - The opinion expressed here is just that; my opinion. My opinion is not meant to be construed as fact, nor does it imply any absolute truth or myth. This is only my opinion. - DEK -

Question 1
Is the Earth's climate changing?
Yes, definitely. It's always changing.

Question 2
It the Earth warming or cooling?
I believe the short answer is warming, but when you look at a trend, it depends on where you start and stop the trend.

For example, the data in the circled area of the chart below was published in a 1996 paper by Ben Santer and his colleagues, one week before the United Nations was to begin laying the groundwork for the Kyoto Protocol. Only the data from 1963 - 1988 was used, even though more complete data was available.

Photo source - World Climate Report dot com

This is clearly an example of selective use of data. This selective data was then used to generate computer models predicting catastrophic global warming.

But in the context of this question, (Is the Earth warming or cooling?), I assume that the trend we are talking about covers the last 150 years of the industrial revolution, in which case my opinion is that the Earth is warming. About 6/10 of one degree Celsius.

Question 3
Assuming the Earth is warming, how fast is it warming?
I really don't know the answer to this one. I'm not sure that anyone knows the answer. A lot of scientists think they know the answer but the numbers range anywhere from six one hundredths of one degree Celsius on the low end, all the way up to 17 degrees Celsius by the end of the 21st century, depending on who's science you choose to believe.

Question 4
Assuming the Earth is warming, is man causing it?
Probably, to some extent.

Question 5
Assuming man is causing global warming to some extent, precisely how much are humans to blame?
It is my opinion that science has not yet proven conclusively that human activity is responsible for a significant portion of global warming. If that makes me a denier, or a climate skeptic, then add my name to the list of defendants and I'll see you in Nuremberg.

Water vapor makes up at least 96% of the Earth's greenhouse gasses. Carbon dioxide makes up only 3% of all the greenhouse gasses, and only a portion of that is caused by humans. Methane and the other greenhouse gasses even less.

I believe that climate is more significantly influenced by naturally occurring forces of nature such as solar activity, cosmic rays, the Earth's orbit, rotation etc.

From Nasa.gov -
"Many researchers believe the steady rise in sunspots and faculae since the late seventeenth century may be responsible for as much as half of the 0.6 degrees of global warming over the last 110 years (IPCC, 2001)."

You know, anyone can write anything. That doesn't make it true. We constantly hear that George W. Bush denies that global warming exists. Not true. We constantly hear that the Bush Administration is to blame for the Unites States rejecting the Kyoto Treaty. Not true. The United States Senate rejected the Kyoto Protocol by a vote of 95-0. At that time, the Oval Office was occupied by Bill Clinton. Do your own homework, and don't believe everything you read. Verify your sources, weigh all the information, and make your own decision. Just make sure you get your information from a variety of sources, other than the agenda-driven main stream media.

My opinion is just that, my opinion. However Here is a partial list of other more qualified people that share (of have shared) an opinion similar to mine. Full Disclosure: My political footprint.

From Wikipedia - Scientists opposing the mainstream scientific assessment of global warming

Global warming is mostly due to natural processes

Khabibullo Ismailovich Abdusamatov, at Pulkovskaya Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the supervisor of the Astrometria project of the Russian section of the International Space Station

Sallie Baliunas, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Robert M. Carter, researcher at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia

George V. Chilingar, professor of civil and petroleum engineering at the University of Southern California, and Leonid F. Khilyuk

William M. Gray, professor of atmospheric science and meteorologist, Colorado State University

Zbigniew Jaworowski, chair of the Scientific Council at the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw

David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware

Marcel Leroux, former Professor of Climatology, University Jean Moulin

Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and Professor of Geology at Carleton University in Canada

Frederick Seitz, retired, former solid-state physicist, former president of the National Academy of Sciences

Nir Shaviv, astrophysicist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Fred Singer, Professor emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia:
Willie Soon, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics

Henrik Svensmark, Danish National Space Center

Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, Professor Emeritus from University of Ottawa

The cause of global warming is unknown

Claude Allegre, French geophysicist, Institute of Geophysics (Paris)

Robert C. Balling, Jr., director of the Office of Climatology and an associate professor of geography at Arizona State University

Chris de Freitas, Associate Professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland

David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma

Richard Lindzen, MIT meteorology professor and member of the National Academy of Sciences

Roy Spencer, principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville

Former Skeptics Of Main Consensus

Rupert Murdoch
ExxonMobil
Richard Branson
Ronald Bailey
Gregg Easterbrook
John Howard
Frank Luntz
Pat Robertson
Michael Shermer

I won't attempt to draw any conclusions as to why the names on the above list are "former" skeptics, but I doubt that they "saw the light" all of a sudden.

A huge list, too large to reprint here, of more Global Warming Skeptics, including non-scientists can be found here.

HOME | ABOUT | ARCHIVES | CHRISTY | CLIMATE INQUISITION | CONTACT | COOLING WORLD | BLOG | EVANS CONFESSION | GERHARD GERLICH REPORT | GLOBAL WARMING FALSE ALARMS | HEALTH FEARS | HOCKEY STICK | INCONVENIENT HYPE | LIVESTOCK'S LONG SHADOW | MASS. VS. EPA | MYTHS OF GLOBAL WARMING | PEER REVIEW? | POLITICS | RELIGION | SCIENCE | SITE MAP | SKEPTIC GUIDE | STORE | TRENBETH'S 23 SCIENTIFIC ERRORS | ZBIGNIEW JAWOROWSKI - 21st CENTURY SCI-TECH |