Purchase Global Warming Challenged Description and Purchase

Mankind, they claim, if left unfettered, uncontrolled, will be responsible for the wholesale destruction of our world ecosystems. This is Global Warming, the Climate Change crisis that we hear about everyday, everywhere we go.

The ordinary citizen sees politicians, college professors, Eco-groups and the UN caught up in the media frenzy. As an engineer, scientist and conservationist, I am compelled to show an alternative side to the issue: The side of the data. The side of cold logic, such as 5+5=10, rather than -25.

I take great exception to the media’s “popular” views of gloom and despair. Our future is filled with hope. Hope for the future.

For example, when was the last time a friend of yours died from tetanus? Or a broken leg? Or an infection from a small cut? Or smallpox? Or measles? What city in the U.S. has unsafe drinking water? Every problem that has cropped up over the years has had solutions. New problems have come up, but those, too, will have solutions. We should be cautious, not driven by emotion or panic. No sensible person should run off half-cocked— that goes for the conservationist as well as the drug-using Eco-nuts. Leave the panic to the feeble-minded. “Chicken Little” didn’t gain much with his panic and neither will we. Mindless fear distracts us from real problems.

Worldwide Hysteria

In 2007, the United Nation’s (IPCC) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change declared as an “established fact” that the Earth’s climate is being warmed and that carbon dioxide liberated as the result of man’s use of fossil fuels both personally and commercially is the cause. The politicos of the IPCC released press statements claiming that practically the entire world’s scientific community was in agreement on the foregone climatic world-in-crisis: all nations must accept the matter and adopt the UN proposals to legislate ways to stop climate change “before it is too late.” Remember that phrase, “before it is too late.” You’ll see it a lot in the media in stories about Global Warming and Climate Change.

Global Warming prophet and archarchon Al Gore’s 2007 Oscar Award-winning movie, “An Inconvenient Truth”, was seen by many to be a propaganda film purporting the same thing. To Gore and his cult’s followers, climate change is a fact and global warming IS happening and it IS man’s fault. That this flies in the face of what is known about atmospheric, geologic and hydrologic processes doesn’t appear to matter to him or those of his religion.

An Inconvenient Truth claims that we have less than nine years left to avoid destroying the world via weather phenomenon of Biblical proportions. It would be interesting to see how the Algorites came about this exacting timeline when our weather is unpredictable past a week or two, but I digress. Gore and his "circuit-riding global warming preachers," are adamant about getting the “truth” of what he calls our "planetary emergency" out to ordinary citizens before “it's too late...”

Is there any wonder that with the media running news stories that support Global Warming and ignoring news items to the contrary, that organizations like the IPCC and Gore received the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize?

Are people like Gore heroes? Are the Greens, the IPCC, political parties and NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations, which is UN-speak for lawbreaking, tetrahydrocannabinol-powered pests and terrorist groups like PETA or Animal Liberation Front) heroic in their desire to “save the world”?  Are they “saving the planet from destruction”? Are they correct in their analysis and in their conclusions? Or are they something less benevolent?  Is it really just a campaign to control the most basic activities of the free world?

There are foxes in our chicken coop. Red ones.

Is there Really a Scientific Consensus?

The claimed scientific consensus of the IPCC, Gore and most of the western press is the consensus of the schoolyard bully— agree with us or else. The “else” is ridicule, being called “irresponsible”, an “Earth-hater” or worse. One can be discriminated against or even fired from teaching or public sector jobs. If one looks deeper than the popular media does, it can be demonstrated that a growing number of climatologists, meteorologists, geologists and other atmospheric and earth scientists DO NOT accept this global warming myth. The idea that man-produced carbon dioxide can change the climate as they claim violates several scientific principles and the data accumulated over the last century and a half. The historic record doesn’t support their arguments, either.

I was astounded to find that some 31,000+ concerned scientists of different disciplines worldwide have signed a petition in La Jolla, California that essentially states that man is not causing warming of the climate by his activities. These scientists utterly reject Kyoto and other measures designed to restrict the use of energy. http://www.oism.org/pproject/

These scientists, like me, are concerned about the harm individuals and nations are by facing by the imposition of arbitrary global warming-induced restrictions and fear-based legislation. Many of these scientists further reject the idea that man even has the ability to change the climate through greenhouse gases. They are correct in this. At least a half dozen natural processes produce carbon dioxide in amounts so large as to dwarf anything man can do or would ever be able to do. It is sheer arrogance that so many have convinced themselves that man can warm the planet up, when we cannot even change the weather by one degree. Often, we can’t even forecast the weather accurately, only one day in advance.

Only after almost 20 years of the building frenzy in the media have many scientists finally begun to fight the climate change claims. It’s ten years past the time to do so, but any effort is hopeful. While the media has been largely uninterested in studies and reports disproving global warming, the more Climate Change is challenged, the more likely that it will finally lose its momentum and sanity will be restored for a time. At least, until the next apocalyptic craze comes along. Perhaps the next disaster will be “too much helium removed from our natural gas wells” being made into a threat to mankind or something similarly silly. Some have even tried to make nitrogen a threat.

Global Warming is actually part of a trend. In the last decade, I’ve seen most environmental groups go off the deep end, advocating policies that end up harming our local environments in order to somehow aid the “world’s ecosphere”. Lofty-sounding nonsense that ultimately ends up causing harm to the very environments that they claim to cherish.

Weather Channel founder John Coleman has been working to bring views opposing to Global Warming into the public view and his efforts have been mostly ignored. In 2008, he sued former VP Gore for fraud, in order to bring the matter to court, where the matter can be debated and evidence presented from both sides. I wish him well and hope he can accomplish what the media doesn’t have the honesty to do.

A 2007 report by U.S. Senator James Inhofe of the Senate Environment Committee cited 400 scientists that disputed the claims and assumptions by Gore and his fellows. Some of the European scientists cited were actually on the IPCC panel, but were ignored by the IPCC when they didn’t approve of or agree with the IPCC’s determination to blame Global Warming on man’s actions, regardless of studies or data. This bias alone should render the IPCC’s findings questionable, at the very least.

Why is there such alarm?  IS there a ‘clock-ticking’?  What are the true scientific facts and what can we as concerned citizens do to make our planet a better and safer place to live?

There is a clock ticking. It is not a clock for the planet, however. The time for Global Warming and its advocates is running out. The backlash has begun— with more and more scientists and politicians finally saying “enough”, it has limited time.

The fox in the chicken coop is nervous because the lights in the farmer’s house just turned on.

What is Global Warming?

Global Warming is the idea that the world has warmed since the beginning of the Industrial Age and that this warming is caused by man’s increasing the levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere by his industries and other activities.

Climate Change is almost synonymous with Global Warming as it is the assumption that the climate is changing rapidly and that man’s carbon dioxide emissions are to blame.

The primary questions this book tries to answer are:

Question 1: “Is the World’s Climate Warming?”

Question 2: “Is Man Capable of Changing the Global Climate?”

When I set out to answer these questions, I had no idea that so little research and so few studies had been done in the key areas of oxygen sources, carbon dioxide sources and carbon sinks. Like most scientists, I assumed that the major universities and the various government agencies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and United States Geological Survey had performed the studies necessary to at least partially answer these questions. With most television and radio programs, and newspapers, and many politicians worldwide now attributing hurricanes, unseasonably hot or cold weather, droughts and floods to Global Warming, surely there had been at least some solid science behind the idea.

Unfortunately not.

As a lifelong conservationist I think in terms of the stewardship of natural resources and conserving species and other elements of our environment in a logical fashion, rather than elevating nature for its own sake to a form of ‘nature worship’ as many extreme environmentalists have done. Indeed, the first job of man was to tend the Garden of Eden. This is the stewardship role of man— to take care of what one uses.

This book asks many questions about Global Warming and Climate Change. I approached the research of this book in the spirit of “well, if the science shows that it’s actually happening, I’ll accept it, bitter though the knowledge might be.” Wherever the evidence pointed was the view I would adopt. However, there is a severe dearth of solid information, a lack of serious studies, and a number of poorly done “studies” that would not pass peer review. Or worse, have passed peer review, despite being so badly done that no one should accept them. What information we do possess directly contradicts the claim that Global Warming/ Climate Change results from man’s actions.

This book was intended to be a rigorous interrogation of the facts and figures. I spent months going through various agencies’ databases, looking through peer-reviewed articles and other sources, both U.S. and international. The facts and figures that I could dig out of the National Astronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Solar Observatory, the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Geological Survey, and several other agencies and other institutions are contained herein. Originally, the research on this book was exclusively science-related, but as the project developed, it was necessary to add a section dealing with the politics of Global Warming and to add a section on logical conservation.

All things considered, I’ve been frustrated by the lack of basic data in several areas and cannot help but ask, “Why haven’t these studies been done? Why is this information not available, despite all the urgent claims by Global Warming/ Climate Change crisis apologists?” 

It amazes me that a matter so blatantly political rather than scientific has made such a splash with both Congress and the Hollywood set. Former Senator Al Gore takes the Global Warming and its associated Climate Change to new levels, cherrypicking his science to “prove” that it is happening in his movie. Are movie stars and political figures jumping on a fiery bandwagon of doom and gloom to “ride the wave” of a popular cause to “save the planet” in order to further their careers? It appears that this is the case. After all, name one Hollywood type or Senator that lives in a small house, drives a small car (that is their only vehicle), and uses less total energy than the average American in a given year? After all, that is what they tell the rest of us to do. Slightly hypocritical. (Especially as many Hollywood types now claim to be Buddhists, who disdain worldly goods.)

When Global Warming and Climate Change are tossed upon the compost pile of “scientific” hysterias of the past— the comet scares of the early 1900s, the “theory” of eugenics of the first half of the 1900s, the world blowing up from nukes in the 1960s and 1970s, a new global ice age in the 1970s, Y2K in the late 1990s and many other scares— one wonders how quickly those same politicos and celebrities will disavow anything to do with Global Warming. Or take up another worthless cause. “Save the Arthropods!” or somesuch.

Rather than appeal to the emotions, this book will attempt to analyze the facts as they are.

Let the facts lead us where they will.

Click for Next Page    

Or Purchase Global Warming Challenged Description and Purchase