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) Earlier this week we discussed a research report that re-examined government data that had shown an upward trend in global warming of the Earth. The research study was done by a statistician and two climate scientists and had been peer reviewed and approved.
Their bottom line is that the government had adjusted raw temperature data over the years in a biased manner to show a warming trend that did not exist in the raw data. I was able to find the abstract for their study that summarized their results and have listed it below. As you will see, it is a serious indictment of false science and research that government workers have perpetrated in the field of climate science:
In this research report, the most important surface data adjustment issues are identified and past changes in the previously reported historical data are quantified. It was found that each new version of GAST has nearly always exhibited a steeper warming linear trend over its entire history. And, it was nearly always accomplished by systematically removing the previously existing cyclical temperature pattern. This was true for all three entities providing GAST data measurement, NOAA, NASA and Hadley CRU.
As a result, this research sought to validate the current estimates of GAST using the best available relevant data. This included the best documented and understood data sets from the U.S. and elsewhere as well as global data from satellites that provide far more extensive global coverage and are not contaminated by bad siting and urbanization impacts. Satellite data integrity also benefits from having cross checks with Balloon data.
The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality. In fact, the magnitude of their historical data adjustments, that removed their cyclical temperature patterns, are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data. Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever –despite current claims of record setting warming.
Finally, since GAST data set validity is a necessary condition for EPA’s GHG/CO2 Endangerment Finding, it too is invalidated by these research findings.
“The conclusive findings of this research are that the three GAST data sets are not a valid representation of reality.” Let me say it again, “not a valid representation of reality.” Seems to be a trend among many climate change/global warming advocates. And while man made global warming may actually be a reality, it is not proven by this government data, the reports and predictions based on this falsely adjusted government data are invalid, and the theory takes another hit from a scientific integrity perspective.
2) In light of this previous point that proved that falsely adjusted government data seriously undermines the theory of manmade global warming, let's take a look at some other data that does the same thing. We have previously talked about this scientific research from Denmark but in light of the fake government data we just discussed, let’s look at some other real data, as reported on the Federalist Papers website:
- The analysis comes from research done by the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) and was reported in by England’s Telegraph newspaper.
- Since December, temps in the Arctic have been consistently lower than minus 20 C.
- In April, the Arctic sea ice coverage was back to where it was in 2004.
- While the ice had been on the thin side for a number of years, this year it is back to being two meters thick.
- The Greenland ice mass increased in volume this past winter faster than any time in years.
- While 2016 was a very warm year, with the dissipation of the strong El NIno from last year, satellite records show that in recent months temperatures have quickly dropped more than .06 degrees C, the exact same thing that happened 17 years ago when a similarly strong El Nino dissipated.
- Global temperatures have been more or less constant for 19 years running, totally blowing away the accuracy of most if not all primary global warming forecast models.
- Some climate research is predicting that a natural cooling cycle of the Earth happens every 230 years or so and that the next cooling cycle actually began taking hold in 2014.
- By 2019, we should see a significant drop in temperatures if this climate research is correct.
- Some scientists are expecting a big drop in solar activity between 2020 and 2053 which will cause the next ice age.
- If new ice age if it happens, would devastate crop yields and lead to food shortages around the world.
3) A few days ago we reviewed research that showed that the end of the life cycle of solar panels is really bad for the environment:
Well, it seems that other research shows that the the manufacturing of solar panels at the beginning of their life cycle is not that great for the environment either:
- A recent research study by scientists at Utrecht University in the Netherlands found that if you take into account the amount of CO2 produced from the mining of materials used in solar panels and the output of factories that produce solar panels, then the total amount of CO2 produced in the total manufacturing process of solar panels is generally greater than the amount of CO2 saved by using solar panels.
- The raw data for the study and research spanned 40 years worth of solar panel manufacturing and CO2 output.
- The researchers found that it would take decades for solar panels to be friendlier to the environment than burning fossil fuels but since most solar panels do not last decades, the net benefit to solar panels is negative relative to CO2.
- The research was funded by the Technology Foundation STW which is a government agency of the European Commission, hardly a fossil fuels front.
One more post in the next few days that continues to prove it is perfectly sane and rational to be a global warming doubter and a believer in science.
www.loathemygovernment.com
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:
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w
Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at:
www.loathemygovernment.com
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:
http://www.reason.com
http://www.cato.org
http://www.bankruptingamerica.org
http://www.conventionofstates.com
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08j0sYUOb5w
No comments:
Post a Comment