Why I am an Anthropogenic Global Warming Sceptic


 Michael Hammer, September 21st, 2009

I HAVE been asked several times ‘why am I so sceptical of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) hypothesis’?  There are many reasons, some of which I have documented in previous articles at this weblog, but these have relied on sometimes complex calculations which I admit can be difficult to appreciate.  So I would like to outline here a few of my reasons based only on simple consistency with the AGW proponents’ own data.

Climate Change

From my ongoing study of the subject I can see no demonstrable connection between carbon dioxide levels and climate.  The historical record shows no demonstrable correlation.
Human contribution to carbon dioxide levels is miniscule compared to other contributors, but it makes no significant difference, because of the point made above.

New Revelations In Climate-Gate Scandal

David Horowitz's newsreel- article by Nancy Morgan- 17 December 2009

New revelations have come to light casting yet more doubt on the UN backed science data being used to buttress man-made global warming claims. The Russian media is reporting that the Hadley/CRU, whose e-mails were hacked last month, deliberately distorted the climate of 1/8 of the planet.

[T]he Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.

Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country’s territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.

Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.


'Botch after botch after botch'

Leaked 'climategate' documents show huge flaws in the backbone of climate change science

Last Updated: 29th November 2009, 11:29am

I've been poring over one of many leaked computer files from the "climategate" scandal.

It's worse than those e-mails revealing leading climate scientists did a "trick" to "hide the decline" in global temperatures and privately called it a "travesty" they couldn't explain recent cooling.

Lead Author Admits Deleting Inconvenient Opinions From IPCC Report

Global Warming Profiteers Exposed On National Television as Ventura Show Blows Giant Hole In Climate Change Fraud

Paul Joseph Watson
Thursday, December 17, 2009

The latest installment of Jesse Ventura’s highly successful Conspiracy Theory show exposed millions of viewers on national TV last night to the climate change fraud, blowing a giant hole in the global warming scam by exposing how its adherents comprise wealthy industrialists making billions in profits by fearmongering about the environment.


Opinion: The case for global warming is in serious doubt

Otago Daily Times- 4 December 09

Retired science teacher Peter Foster, of Waikouaiti, believes the case for global warming is anything but settled. Here he explains his views (links are in italics). 

Letter from Ken Ring to some of the NZ media

Dear Phillipa
NIWA has recently put out a damage-control article "Niwa publishes climate data to answer critics"
Rather than have silence over the accusations that they cooked the books to show global warming in order to continue to receive research funding, along with the East Anglia Climate Centre, in which Dr Jim Salinger once worked, they have attempted to explain away their alterations to data. But their new NIWA figure of 1C rise in 60 years compares badly with their previously published figure of 0.7C rise over 100 years and only 1C rise over the past 8,000 years on NIWA's own website.

John D Hamaker- Biography


John D. Hamaker (1914-1994), was an American mechanical engineer, ecologist, agronomist and science writer in the fields of soil remineralization, rock dusting, mineralomics and climatology.
John Hamaker (originally Hanamaker) was born in Michigan, United States and graduated in Mechanical Engineering. Concerned for the environment, and influenced by books such as Bread From Stones,[1][2][3], which showed plants grow better in soils formed by mimicking natural soil-forming processes that take millenia (glaciers grinding over the earth’s crust), in the 1970s, he cultivated a strong interest in soil and climate issues. From the 1960s, Hamaker published articles about how the health of an individual, society and planetary ecology only thrive as an integrated interdependent whole. For decades he wrote and campaigned about the subject of remineralization, and was the first to call for the remineralization of the Earth to mitigate the next ice age. Hamaker produced a notable book The Survival Of Civilization in 1982, republished in 2002.[4]

Kevin Rudd's $7b UN wrangle

Friday November 20 2009

Black is Newspaper report
Red is comments by readers
Copenhagen bound: Climate Change Minister Penny Wong will attend the UN's climate C=change conference next month. Source: Herald Sun
NEXT month Kevin Rudd flies to Copenhagen to help seal a United Nations deal to cut the world's emissions - and to make Australia hand over part of its wealth
So keen is the Prime Minister to get this new global-warming treaty signed that he's been appointed a "friend of the chairman" to tie up loose ends.
So here's the question: is Rudd really going to approve a draft treaty that could force Australia to hand over an astonishing $7 billion a year to a new and unelected global authority?
Yes, that's $7 billion, or about $330 from every man, woman and child. Every year. To be passed on to countries such as China and Bangladesh , and the sticky-fingered in-between.

Where is the middle ground?


I wonder at times over the reported Global warming/climate change scenario. Where, one should ask is the middle ground?
Let’s for example assume that the projections of manmade global climate warming are correct despite indications otherwise that the whole thing is a political scam even grander than say the Kaipara district council plan which will keep generations of planners and bureaucrats’ in gravy for a very long time.
What does a global increase of C02 gas and warmth mean?  The good news is that plant growth will increase dramatically. The more C02, the more plant growth. This means more food for the starving people.


Subscribe to RSS - blogs