Alan Nicholl- A Call for Common Sense in the Global Warming Debate
The Gisborne Herald of 20 October carried a story on politicians from the Maldives signing a document under water calling on the world to get tough on global warming, blaming CO2 for the possibility of their nation being inundated by sea level rises. This type of blatant propaganda makes me extremely angry as there is absolutely no science to back such a claim. There is however a hell of a lot of politically motivated scientific fiction which has been eagerly grasped and distributed around the world as fact. All of this fiction is easy to disprove but the perpetrators of it seem to have control of the media outlets in an endeavour to protect their lies.
In order to reach the conclusion that CO2 is the reason for increasing temperatures you first have to prove that no other factor could possibly be responsible. These factors include the following:
1) Solar variability - the amount of sunspot activity has been proven to have a major impact on earth's temperature; this is a scientific fact and has been known for over 200 years (the Chinese have known about it for 2000 years), yet it is dismissed as irrelevant. Current low sunspot activity is responsible for the cooling now being experienced. The warming phase from 1980-1998 was duplicated in the atmospheres of Mars, Jupiter, Pluto and also on Neptune’s moon Triton, (NASA studies provide this) -obviously human produced CO2 was not responsible for that, the only possible cause was the sun. How come earth’s warming is blamed on CO2?
2) Orbital variability- the earth's orbit around the sun is not fixed in one path but varies over time and is influenced by outside factors; namely the gravitational pull of the sun and the other planets. A closer orbit means higher temperatures, an orbit further out lower temperatures.
3) The effect of ocean currents and the oscillation of known weather affecting events such as El Nino; these all play a part in temperature. The 1998 high temperature spike was caused by El Nino. This created a worldwide temperature rise. Since then global temperatures have been declining, with the last few years wiping out the total 20th century increase in spite of rising CO2 levels. The hottest decade of the 20th century was during the 1930’s (NASA study again) before CO2’s more rapid increases. Where is the correlation between CO2 and rising temperatures? There isn’t any.
4)The angle of the earth's tilt plays a role in climate change. Although this is generally over a long time frame it nevertheless is important to keep in mind. I have read a global warming book which suggested the Sahara desert was caused by this one factor.
5) The effects of other greenhouse gases, predominantly water vapour which accounts for 95% of the total effect. This brings us to clouds, these have both a positive and negative effect on temperatures, causing both warming and cooling. Clouds have the ability to reflect heat back into space (cooling) and also to earth (warming), they also cause a huge amount of cooling through precipitation (rainfall). The very formation of water vapour causes cooling. Water vapour could literally be called the heat pump of the world, warming when necessary and cooling when necessary. Yet the UN chooses to ignore all this and fails to include any of this data in their modelling, giving false conclusions. The only way you could possibly construe that CO2 is responsible for increasing temperatures is to base it on roughly 20 years of correlation in the 20th century while ignoring all other data. If that’s science, then I am from Mars.
The entire case for CO2 induced global warming, all of the so called science, is nothing more than a gigantic hoax and is fraudulently promoted around the world, it would seem in order to promote a sense of guilt which can then be used to raise taxes etc, with the bogus intent to help poorer nations, who probably would see very little of such monies raised.
What of the science used by global warming promoters? Can it be duplicated by others? Apparently not, as no other group of scientists have been able to replicate the results; they in fact find the opposite to be true. Some of the data used to justify their calls is so blatantly false it would be really funny (of Billy T James’ quality) if the proposals being promoted to combat global warming were not so catastrophic to the world's wellbeing. It is time for this utter stupidity to stop and for common sense to prevail. Our government needs to put an end to all legislation promoting so-called cures (emission trading, emission taxes) and face up and tell the world they are wrong. Let us lead the world in this, instead of being the first country to go bankrupt because of supposed human caused global warming, which is now global cooling. Are we to produce more CO2, to combat this cooling? How ironic that would be!
Throughout this whole global warming debacle history has been ignored. We are told to ignore history at our peril, which is certainly true in this case. History is full of instances which show that global warming and cooling are natural events unaffected by human activity, if we go back roughly 1000 years to the medieval warm period we find Vikings living in Greenland growing crops and running stock that cannot be done today; temperatures were approximately 6 degrees warmer than now. Throughout Britain and Europe, places have names that reflect what was grown during this period, which it is impossible to do in our current so called warm period. This phenomenon also occurred during the Roman warm period with crops grown in places that today will not support them, it is not just a European or northern hemisphere thing but occurred worldwide with similar patterns showing up in South America. Another characteristic of warming and cooling periods is revealed in the spread of plants around the world, especially noticeable in the expansion and contraction of forest, which during warmer times spread into the predominantly cooler planetary regions.
Through all of this I have given you only a small portion of the evidence available on the subject but it is enough to show that we do not have a global warming problem and we do not need to do anything about it. Money spent trying to prove or convince us we do, would be better spent helping those less fortunate than us to a better standard of living. If you need more convincing then I suggest you read Ian Wishart’s book Air Con and if still not convinced then Ian Plimer’s book Heaven+Earth; both these books have far more scientific information and referrals than any other global warming promoting book I have read. I have read several, (including Gareth Morgan’s), all of which contain little actual scientific material but heaps of propaganda b*****t majoring on the catastrophic consequences (these occur only with major cooling events) of warming which real science and history shows as false. Who should we believe? From what I have seen and read, certainly not the UN or what our current bunch of politicians are saying and especially not what the Greens and Greenpeace say on the matter. Don’t be fooled! Global warming and cooling are natural events and are not caused by humans burning fossil fuels as some would have you believe.
What do I get out of promoting this? Absolutely nothing, except maybe what every other Kiwi will get if the government chooses to listen: no increase in taxes or increased prices as producers pass on their extra cost to the consumer as they will have to do to survive. Nothing else bar relief at averting total stupidity
Alan Nicholl
