As we have dove into the whole issue of manmade global warming, or its new rebranded title of climate change, we found that Al Gore and people like him were guilty of a number of things:
- Ignoring science and realities that did not support their opinions and positions.
- Rather than have an adult conversation about climate, these types of advocates like Gore sank to the level of insulting those who dared look at ALL science by calling them a variety of names including racists, homophobes, terrorists, flat earth believers, and other slanderous names.
- Continuing to insist that politicians step up their intrusions into our lives with higher taxes, more regulations, and more control of our freedoms and standards of living based on a shaky theory at best.
Thus, let’s see the latest facts and science that prove you can be a global warming doubter and a believer in science, regardless of what Al Gore proclaims:
1) Let’s talk some science today that Al Gore and other global warming advocates so often seem to ignore. But first, a little history relative to the EPA:
- In 2009, the EPA released its so-called “endangerment finding.”
- This assertion is the EPA’s legal attempt to issue government regulations to reduce the country’s use of carbon based fuels and fight global warming.
- The EPA claimed at that time that there was a “tropical hotspot” in the tropical troposphere which is the mystical fingerprint that proves manmade global warming.
- This justified the Obama administration’s attempt to put into effect stringent U.S. power plant restrictions without the consent of Congress, restrictions that are being challenged in court by many states.
- Their research analyzed satellite temperature observations, weather balloons, weather stations and ocean buoys.
- Their research concluded that the “tropical hotspot,” relied upon by the EPA to declare carbon dioxide a pollutant “simply does not exist in the real world.”
- Part of their research included the valid approach of taking El Ninos into account from a climate perspective which showed that the global warming simply did not exist when the random El Ninos were taken into account, “there is no ‘record setting’ warming to be concerned about.”
- Additionally, “These analysis results would appear to leave very, very little doubt but that EPA’s claim of a Tropical Hot Spot (THS), caused by rising atmospheric CO2 levels, simply does not exist in the real world."
- "Also critically important, even on an all-other-things-equal basis, this analysis failed to find that the steadily rising atmospheric CO2 concentrations have had a statistically significant impact on any of the 13 critically important temperature time series analyzed,” they wrote.
- Adjusting for El Ninos and La Ninas from tropospheric temperatures creates “temperature time series each having a flat trend.”
- The research found that oceanic warming events, not humanity’s use of carbon fuels, are responsible for virtually all the warming since 1977 when El Ninos became more frequent and stronger: “It is an accepted fact that El Ninos bring global warmth and La Ninas cooling,” D’Aleo said. “It is thus not at all surprising that the period from 1947 to 1977 brought cooling, 1977 to 1997 warming and we had a flat trend from 1997 to current.”
- The researchers seem very confident in their findings: “Needless to say, if regardless of data source, the results are the same, the analysis findings should be considered highly credible.”
- John Christy is the co-operator of the satellite temperature dataset at the University of Alabama in Huntsville and his partner, climatologist Roy Spencer, have previously presented evidence and data that proved global warming forecast models severely over predicted global warming in the tropical troposphere.
- Ross McKitrick, an environmental economist at the University of Guelph in Canada, independently ran his own analysis and data and also found that climate change models overestimated warming in the tropical troposphere.
- McKitrick provided evidence of a phase shift in 1977 from dominant El Ninas to El Ninos — just like D’Aleo, Christy and Williams found: “Over the 55-years from 1958 to 2012, climate models not only significantly over-predict observed warming in the tropical troposphere, but they represent it in a fundamentally different way than is observed,” McKitrick wrote in a 2014 study.
2) An interesting article from Kerry Jackson was put up on the Investors’ Business Daily website on October 17, 2016. Yesterday, we showed how the frequency of hurricanes has been declining since 1982 despite over 30 years of humanity using a lot of carbon based fuels, the exact opposite of what global warming advocates said would happen. In fact, over a decade ago Al Gore claimed that "the science is extremely clear now" global warming was "magnifying" the "destructive power" of the "average hurricane" and mankind's impact on the environment "makes the duration, as well as the intensity of the hurricane, stronger."
But, also as we discussed yesterday, as a Florida resident since 2005, my adopted state had not seen a hurricane since then until Hurricane Hermine earlier this summer, a hurricane that was not devastating by any stretch of the imagination. But when, heaven forbid, a second hurricane hit the country, Matthew, Al Gore decided to ignore the previous eleven years of no hurricanes: "Mother Nature is giving us a very clear and powerful message."
Hillary also seemed to forget the eleven years without a hurricane at the same time: "Hurricane Matthew was likely more destructive because of climate change." As always, neither provided any science or real data to support their assertions.
But if the data does not support your position, let’s change the measurement system. Science editor Andrew Freedman wrote in Mashable that "it's time to face the fact that the way we measure hurricanes and communicate their likely impacts is seriously flawed. We need a new hurricane intensity metric, that more accurately reflects a storm's potential to cause death and destruction well inland."
When global warming stopped for almost twenty years, global warming advocates changed their market strategy to get rid of the disproven global warming myth and go to the more generic and more nebulous “climate change” myth. Now that the hurricane data and realities do not support the Al Gores of the world, they want to change the measurement process. When losing, just change the rules. Pathetic.
As we have always said, as global warming doubters and believers in science, all we want is an adult, mature, and respectful discussion that uses ALL of the relevant data, science, and research. I do not think that is too much to ask but apparently it is for the likes of Gore, Obama, and Clinton who obviously do not want such a discussion to occur. More myth busting next month.
It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedom for both yourselves and others everyday.
Please visit the following sites for freedom: