Wavels
Well-Known Member
Wow, it sure is fun to pile on the hapless buffoon Algore.......hahah
Here is more....heheh
THE MOVIE "An Inconvenient Truth," with which the indoctrinating centers in the Tri-Valley are propagandizing our children, comes across like this: We only have 10 years to return to a medieval lifestyle, to figure out how to get the sun to radiate more than 1.4 kW per square meter without melting the icecaps or to invent other "alternative" (what a ridiculous name) non-nuclear energy sources.
The Al Gore (or should I say Goebbels?) propaganda machine seeks to limit each person to 1 ton of carbon per year. The proposal is to create a system of carbon allowances that will be the rationing cards of the future.
The government would dole out what bureaucrats think we should have.
Kyoto targets, however, will not be met. Two facts about the futility of controlling emissions:
1) Uncontrolled fires in China's abandoned coal mines release as much carbon dioxide as the entire nation of Japan does from useful fuel consumption.
2) The oceans and land outgas 210 billion tons per year compared to 3 billion tons per year from human activity.
Ian Murray, a critic of Gore's "work," recently detailed 25 truths that Gore conveniently leaves out of the companion book to his video because they are inconvenient to his argument.
A few examples: The relationship between temperature and carbon dioxide is not linear; therefore the graph on pages 66-67 is seriously misleading.
The Peruvian glacier pictured on Page 53 probably disappeared during a climate change a few thousand years ago.
The only way to turn off the Gulf Stream is to turn off the wind system, stop the rotation of the Earth, or both.
Gore fails to mention that introducing coal-fired electrical power generation in Africa and South America would reduce the 30 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions from burning wood to cook substantially and save more than 1.6 million lives per year.
Perhaps the biggest lie of all is the assertion that a consensus exists on human-attributed catastrophic global warming when scientific agreement only exists on a narrower range of issues such as the increase in temperature between 1919 and 1940.
From irregular sequences such as climate observations almost any trend one desires can be obtained purely by choosing the starting point and the right ending point and turning the extrapolation crank.
The climate charlatans play up this process to the hilt. Global warmers select whichever data tend to support their preconceived notions. They never go back to 1855 or try to explain decreases instead of increases in temperature. And they keep their data and algorithms close to their chest lest someone check them and expose the fallacy of their arguments.
Stephen McIntyre, a minerals consultant, recently demonstrated that the global warmers' favorite graph is wrong. Their reconstruction of global temperatures over the past 1,000 years shows slight oscillations until a sharp upward swing (the "blade" of the hockey stick) in recent years. McIntyre showed that the method used by climatologist Michael Mann and colleagues generates hockey sticks even from random data. Global warming guru Mann then published a partial correction but he refuses to release his computer algorithm for further checking. Diehards such as Mann et al. continue to defend the climate icon. Others, however, are beginning to downplay the hockey stick graph.
Consider what you get from 1 ton of carbon: You could heat your house with a small electric stove (1 kilowatt) for six hours a day for 10 months of a year. Nothing would be left for cooking, lighting, hot water, refrigeration, vacuuming or washing. No travel would be possible except on foot or on bicycle. A 1-ton footprint would actually return you to a lifestyle that existed before our lifetime.
Answering your propagandized children (for the time being they are not yet recruited to report you to the thought police, but watch out anyway): Giving in to the global warming lobby when so much evidence indicates that it is a gigantic paper tiger is irresponsible, unscientific, immature and selfish.
Our children and grandchildren will ask us whether we believed the great hoax of global warming and I, for one, don't want to be telling them that I kept a chart of my carbon footprint. I love to take my SUV to Tahoe, ski at night on well-lit slopes, fly airplanes and do all the power-intensive activities within my reach.
I recommend you keep doing the same or whatever else you enjoy. Have no fear. The Earth is a big place and your enjoyment of life will not hurt it in the least.
ContraCostaTimes.com | 01/27/2007 | VLADO BEVC From the community: Global warming nothing but a paper tiger
Here is more....heheh
THE MOVIE "An Inconvenient Truth," with which the indoctrinating centers in the Tri-Valley are propagandizing our children, comes across like this: We only have 10 years to return to a medieval lifestyle, to figure out how to get the sun to radiate more than 1.4 kW per square meter without melting the icecaps or to invent other "alternative" (what a ridiculous name) non-nuclear energy sources.
The Al Gore (or should I say Goebbels?) propaganda machine seeks to limit each person to 1 ton of carbon per year. The proposal is to create a system of carbon allowances that will be the rationing cards of the future.
The government would dole out what bureaucrats think we should have.
Kyoto targets, however, will not be met. Two facts about the futility of controlling emissions:
1) Uncontrolled fires in China's abandoned coal mines release as much carbon dioxide as the entire nation of Japan does from useful fuel consumption.
2) The oceans and land outgas 210 billion tons per year compared to 3 billion tons per year from human activity.
Ian Murray, a critic of Gore's "work," recently detailed 25 truths that Gore conveniently leaves out of the companion book to his video because they are inconvenient to his argument.
A few examples: The relationship between temperature and carbon dioxide is not linear; therefore the graph on pages 66-67 is seriously misleading.
The Peruvian glacier pictured on Page 53 probably disappeared during a climate change a few thousand years ago.
The only way to turn off the Gulf Stream is to turn off the wind system, stop the rotation of the Earth, or both.
Gore fails to mention that introducing coal-fired electrical power generation in Africa and South America would reduce the 30 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions from burning wood to cook substantially and save more than 1.6 million lives per year.
Perhaps the biggest lie of all is the assertion that a consensus exists on human-attributed catastrophic global warming when scientific agreement only exists on a narrower range of issues such as the increase in temperature between 1919 and 1940.
From irregular sequences such as climate observations almost any trend one desires can be obtained purely by choosing the starting point and the right ending point and turning the extrapolation crank.
The climate charlatans play up this process to the hilt. Global warmers select whichever data tend to support their preconceived notions. They never go back to 1855 or try to explain decreases instead of increases in temperature. And they keep their data and algorithms close to their chest lest someone check them and expose the fallacy of their arguments.
Stephen McIntyre, a minerals consultant, recently demonstrated that the global warmers' favorite graph is wrong. Their reconstruction of global temperatures over the past 1,000 years shows slight oscillations until a sharp upward swing (the "blade" of the hockey stick) in recent years. McIntyre showed that the method used by climatologist Michael Mann and colleagues generates hockey sticks even from random data. Global warming guru Mann then published a partial correction but he refuses to release his computer algorithm for further checking. Diehards such as Mann et al. continue to defend the climate icon. Others, however, are beginning to downplay the hockey stick graph.
Consider what you get from 1 ton of carbon: You could heat your house with a small electric stove (1 kilowatt) for six hours a day for 10 months of a year. Nothing would be left for cooking, lighting, hot water, refrigeration, vacuuming or washing. No travel would be possible except on foot or on bicycle. A 1-ton footprint would actually return you to a lifestyle that existed before our lifetime.
Answering your propagandized children (for the time being they are not yet recruited to report you to the thought police, but watch out anyway): Giving in to the global warming lobby when so much evidence indicates that it is a gigantic paper tiger is irresponsible, unscientific, immature and selfish.
Our children and grandchildren will ask us whether we believed the great hoax of global warming and I, for one, don't want to be telling them that I kept a chart of my carbon footprint. I love to take my SUV to Tahoe, ski at night on well-lit slopes, fly airplanes and do all the power-intensive activities within my reach.
I recommend you keep doing the same or whatever else you enjoy. Have no fear. The Earth is a big place and your enjoyment of life will not hurt it in the least.
ContraCostaTimes.com | 01/27/2007 | VLADO BEVC From the community: Global warming nothing but a paper tiger
