About
Mankind has a moral obligation to be a responsible steward of God’s creation for the good of future generations. Protecting and preserving our earth’s ecosystems must remain a high priority for citizens of every nation.
However, we oppose the alarmist agenda employed by most global warming “evangelists.” In many cases, their agendas are based upon questionable scientific data and erroneous claims about global climate change. They claim the “science is settled” when, in fact, it is not. Scientists do not agree on the cause of climate change, the role of carbon dioxide (CO2), the degree to which man contributes to atmospheric CO2, and whether global warming is anything other than a naturally occurring phenomenon.
Global climate changes have been occurring for centuries. Global warming has most likely occurred in the last century, but we have recently been experiencing global cooling. There is much evidence to suggest that temperature fluctuations are part of a natural cycle of climate change, not the result of man-made causes.
The unproven “solutions” being proposed by global warming advocates would ultimately cost billions of dollars to implement and there’s absolutely no scientific proof that these changes would have a material impact on the earth’s climate. Most of the proposed “solutions” are based upon massive government bureaucratic programs that will ultimately reduce personal freedoms and impose additional costs upon the citizens of all nations, especially those who can least afford it. While man can take positive steps to improve some aspects of his natural environment, we must be wary of today’s grandiose claims that appear to be nothing more than a smokescreen for the intrusion of government on private property rights and the exploitation by special interests that stand to financially gain from government largess.
There’s a better approach to addressing the issue of global climate change rather than the campaign of mass hysteria being promoted by most of the media, much of academia, and many of the special interest groups that stand to profit from their “doom and gloom” pandemonium. The best solutions for preserving our environment will come from private enterprise that truly drives innovation and new technology. The usual expansion of government bureaucracies and their inherent gross inefficiencies is not the answer rather than more litigation and more government regulation. If government is to have a role, it should be to reward businesses and consumers that take positive steps to cut pollution and improve energy efficiency. Internationally there is a role for statesmen to reach out to foreign countries and encourage them to employ the best practices known for reducing air and water pollution.
At the root of the global climate change debate is an intractable claim on the part of those who would readily cripple our economy with new regulations and attack our personal freedoms with intrusion into our homes, automobiles and offices. The claim is simply that the debate about the causes of global warming is over. Far from it. Any advocacy that restricts our first Amendment rights to freely speak to the issue should cause alarm for the defenders of freedom everywhere. The debate is not over. It is our duty to see that the debate begins in earnest on a solid footing of civility and real scientific investigation.
GlobalClimateScam.com is a project of Minnesota Majority.
Entries (RSS)
It was wonderful to find you site – great job. My passion is to reach kids to counter Global Warming propoganda/mind control.
Please view the 3 short cartoons I made to do so, and please pass the word as I will about you.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMn20w1r9jQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLUG2nGjbaY
Thank you,
William Lavelle
Thanks for doing so much to combat this world power grab. Please watch our video that makes a powerful and comedic comparison to how ridiculous this has gotten:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tUZRjHK8rQs
Thank you
Here is a full version of the Global Warming swindle:
http://www.alexjonesfilms.com/global-warming-swindle.html
what about this http://www.alexjonesfilms.com/chemtrails.html
As we’ve noted, 2008 has been a year of records for cold and snowfall and may indeed be the coldest year of the 21st century thus far. In the U.S., the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration registered 63 local snowfall records and 115 lowest-ever temperatures for the month of October.
Global thermometers stopped rising after 1998, and have plummeted in the last two years by more than 0.5 degrees Celsius. The 2007-2008 temperature drop was not predicted by global climate models. But it was predictable by a decline in sunspot activity since 2000.
When the sun is active, it’s not uncommon to see sunspot numbers of 100 or more in a single month. Every 11 years, activity slows, and numbers briefly drop near zero. Normally sunspots return very quickly, as a new cycle begins. But this year, the start of a new cycle, the sun has been eerily quiet.
The first seven months averaged a sunspot count of only three and in August there were no sunspots at all — zero — something that has not occurred since 1913. – emphasis mine
As the IBD article explains, global temperatures have been on the rise since the end of the last minimum period known as ‘The Little Ice Age’ in roughly 1750. That is until 1998 when global temperatures stagnated. Now we know that global temperatures actually declined a half of a degree Celsius over the past 2 years. We also know that sunspot activity this year alone was almost non-existent. What further proof do we need?!?
From The London Telegraph:
2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved
Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.
First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare. Last winter, as temperatures plummeted, many parts of the world had snowfalls on a scale not seen for decades. This winter, with the whole of Canada and half the US under snow, looks likely to be even worse. After several years flatlining, global temperatures have dropped sharply enough to cancel out much of their net rise in the 20th century.
Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a “scientific consensus†in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world’s most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that “consensus†which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions.
Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades, harsh reality at last began to break in on those self-deluding dreams which have for so long possessed almost every politician in the western world. As we saw in this month’s Poznan conference, when 10,000 politicians, officials and “environmentalists†gathered to plan next year’s “son of Kyoto†treaty in Copenhagen, panicking politicians are waking up to the fact that the world can no longer afford all those quixotic schemes for “combating climate change†with which they were so happy to indulge themselves in more comfortable times.
Suddenly it has become rather less appealing that we should divert trillions of dollars, pounds and euros into the fantasy that we could reduce emissions of carbon dioxide by 80 per cent. All those grandiose projects for “emissions tradingâ€, “carbon captureâ€, building tens of thousands more useless wind turbines, switching vast areas of farmland from producing food to “biofuelsâ€, are being exposed as no more than enormously damaging and futile gestures, costing astronomic sums we no longer possess.
My wife Marilyn read this quote to me,and it really challenged my life! So I thought I would pass it on as a challenge for others! May we all be found faithful to Jesus til we reach heaven’s shores!!
Because Jesus Is Our Example,
Ron
US Army Retired
615-319-4595-Office
http://www.cmfhq.org
http://www.nash3.com/ingod.html (Standing Up For Our Lord and The Land We Love)
“I am part of the fellowship of the unashamed! I have the Holy Spirit’s power! The die has been cast. I have stepped over the line. The decision has been made-I’m a disciple of His! I won’t look back ,let up, slow down, back away ,or be still. My past is redeemed ,my present makes sense, and my future is secure. I’m finished with low living ,sight walking, smooth knees, colorless dreams ,tamed visions ,worldly talking, cheap giving, and dwarfed goals. I no longer need preeminence ,position, promotions ,plaudits ,or popularity. I don’t have to be right ,first ,tops ,recognized, praised ,regarded ,or rewarded. I now live by faith ,depend on His presence, walk by patience ,am uplifted by prayer, and labor with power. That’s what it means to be a disciple of Jesus”!!(A national pastor who was later martyred in Zimbabwe Africa).
Ron….Heaven’s shores? what convinces you that Heaven has a shoreline?
Ron,
This site is intended to debunk the fantasy of human caused global warming. There are plenty of websites intended to provide a forum for your own particular fantasy. You and Jesus toddle on over there, please. We tend to deal in facts here. Sorry.
This issue is larger than the span of your lives, so it’s perfectly safe for you to stick your heads in the sand. You-all are to climate change as skinheads are to race relations–wrong, but fortunately in too small numbers to sway mankind’s new direction. Wake up, keep up.
You are my hero. We need more people like Arlene in this world.
(R)evolution is an unstoppable occurrence. Eventually, the good will replace the bad, and that is that.
Thank God that there are people out there that actually care for our planet. Thank God that the people who don’t are finally beginning to dwindle in numbers.
There are problems with your site here- I tried clicking on your ‘general support’ or ‘Customer support’ but it only made
some hotmail sign-in thing pop up. I then tried to use your ‘contact’ page and send this message but the capcha thing wouldn’t
show so it wouldn’t let me send.
I would like to air your new film on cable access, as I am a member of the local cable access station and have sponsored
many other programs exposing the New World Order etc. like Alex Jones films. (Jones gives blanket permission
to make copies of his and air them non-profit wise) I’m assuming your film ‘Not Evil Just Wrong’ is copyrighted
and so I’m writing to ask you folks if I can do the same with it and have it air locally in the Brattleboro area.
Thanks for your help.
-Scott Barr
Guilford Vermont (www.bctv8.org is the station’s website)
Scott,
Sorry – I didn’t even know there was a Contact, general support or customer support page at GlobalClimateScam.com – where on earth did you find these? We don’t use Captcha, either. Odd. Try contacting us through http://www.minnesotamajority.org. Not Evil Just Wrong isn’t our product, though (perhaps the source of the confusion?). We’ve merely bought copies to exhibit them at events around Minnesota.
I’m not sure what this website is trying to accomplish. I see a lot of talk, but not much sense. The graph in the UK’s PM’s speech saying Antarctic ice is growing is flawed, rising in winter and falling in summer, showing the last 4 years only. Water usually follows that pattern. Maybe you should find the whole graph, not just something you pulled out of a year 7 maths text book.
Also, if you have a good reason for why Canberra, Australia’s temperature flucuates up to 20 degrees celcius every day, please let me know. I’m kind of sick of having boiling hot days and freezing cold nights. The ozone layer is shot to hell, causing Australia’s worst drought and worst bushfires in history, and it won’t be long before the whole world will be having problems. When you can explain that, and produce a legitimate solution people can start taking you seriously.
Scott,
No one, and I mean no one is saying there isnt problems, cause there are. But what we are saying without hesitation is that carbon emissions are not the cause of Global Warming, if there is even such a thing as a rise in the earths temperature cause I think, there isn’t. This is, has and will always be an attempt to create panic and flawed legislation to cause a demise in the nation state and force a one world government upon us. Al Gore is an idiot of great, great porportion. He who lectures us and flys around in a G5 and lives in a house that consumes 5x the power on average than the rest of us. Soooo many scientists have debunked this stretch of a theory. It does not have any consensus and is loosing hundreds of climatologists each and every day. But as they say, never let a crisis, supposed, manufactured or otherwise go to waste. I will never let a UN member from zimbabway tell me what I can and can not do. And in essence this is what this is all about. Take the time and think. Dont be the sheep who is led to the slaughter!!!
Can anyone tell me on what page of the treaties is the “One world government” and other matters he speaks too on the you tube clip??? I have read about 40 pages and find reference but no smoking gun. Thanks…..
You’ve heard it all before: Obama is the new God and he’s on a warpath of change. Change this, change that; ne’er ponder the consequences or whether change was necessary to begin with. Change is good!
Sounds like Gordon Gecko’s “Greed is good” speech to shareholders of a company he was about to take over . . . and then dismantle, piece by piece, not unlike a horde of army ants quickly disintegrating a captured grasshopper.
Climate change and global warming are phrases that we hear in the news each day, so much so that we’ve now habituated to them and their consequences, both of which scream for our attention. Most of us don’t realize, though, that Mother Earth has undergone a series of glacial and interglacial periods, with drastic consequences: in glacials, ice sheets that covered most of our planet; in some interglacials, no ice at all but this has been the exception.
We’re now deep into the Holocene epoch, a long interglacial period with some ice cover at the northern and southernmost latitudes. The path our planet makes as it rockets around the sun at about 17,000 miles an hour also is undergoing significant change: the normally eccentric (not circular) path is now becoming almost circular. What does this mean for the planet? Under eccentric conditions, the earth experiences extreme differences in temperature, esp. at the poles. There are other factors, like insolation and obliquity and precession, that I won’t go into here, because your eyes will cloud over and you’ll go back to Oprah or Fox News.
Continuing on, a more circular path around the sun means that those extreme temperature differences we now see will decrease, maybe even significantly, in the future. How far into the future? If carbon dioxide levels remain the same as today, probably about 50,000 years, when we then will be entering the next glacial period.
There are those who scoff at the notion of the more circular path earth is now taking. Either they’re idiots or they’re stupids, perhaps both. While earth and planetary science have only been practiced for a few hundred years, and most of the work has been done in the last 100 years, we’ve developed into a pretty savvy scientific society. We’ve discovered many of the laws of physics that govern our very existence in the universe, deciphered some of the nuances of subatomic structures, traveled back into time billions of years using powerful telescopes to study the origins of the universe, and made reasonably accurate models and predictions about possible future events. All have been based on good, solid science.
The evidence for earth’s near-circular travel is overwhelming, a large body of work termed the Milankovitch mechanism or theory. Right now, we’re entering a period where radiation from the sun striking the earth will become relatively constant, which in turn will amplify other forces at work. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is known to influence the temperature of the earth. If the current trend continues, carbon dioxide levels will triple. The end result will be a prolonged interglacial period, which means the ice sheets will continue to melt and sea levels will continue to rise, probably disastrously high.
You can exhale now: these drastic effects are not likely to occur in the next several thousand years. But don’t breathe any sighs of relief just yet: the next hundred years will likely see an increase in global temperatures, the effects of which will be real and will be visible. Since we’re now moving into a period of circularity around the sun, this means that carbon dioxide effects will be even more pronounced that ever before.
Obama has it right: decrease carbon dioxide in the atmosphere now. Thing is, he can’t force or change the laws of physics: any changes on a global scale are not likely to take place anytime soon and their effects will be imperceptible. His plan would take about a thousand years to effect. In short, it won’t do much at all to make changes big enough to offset the coming warming period.
What type of changes would be sufficient to effect noticeable change in our atmosphere? China would have to promise to stop building all those skyscrapers in Hong Kong, stop consuming so much petroleum products, stop burning all that coal and wood for fuel, and tell its citizens to stop exhaling and evolving carbon dioxide. We exhale it when we breathe, and we also evolve it across our skins when at rest and at play and at work and–you get the scene, yes? China is the biggest polluter of carbon dioxide, next to the US.
Once you’ve gotten China to march lockstep with you, please move on to the United States. What do you think people will say to you when you tell them what you told the Chinese to do?
Of course, if Obama is as he thinks he is–our new God–then he’ll have little trouble rewriting the laws of physics and instituting his plans for global climate change. Maybe he could also add another 48 hours to each day so I could actually get some real work done for a change.
[by William Dean A. Garner from ThatsJustPlumDumb.com]
Global Warming is Crap
ReformationTwo’s purpose is not to pursue political agendas as an end in themselves. Antagonists in the political arena are already separated by profound and insoluble philosophical differences, and are thus unable to come to any common understanding or conclusions. The inevitable result of political dialogue is thus enmity and division. We would do well to avoid such activities. It is our purpose, however, to comment on political issues, amongst others, if in doing so we can show how regenerate thinking can solve those philosophical problems and thereby achieve new insight and rapprochement. Who has something to add to the caldron of social debate if not Christians? Because of their reconstituted minds, Christians should be the first to examine the divisive issues of our time, and show where sinful Man has lost his way and needs to repent even of the way he thinks.
This avoidance of logical thought is to the eternal discredit of the Church. Logic can, and should, play a huge role in the conversion of the world to the Christian Gospel. When does the sinner decide to change his wicked ways, if not when he logically concludes that he must? The drunk decides to stop drinking, because worship of the bottle has destroyed his life. The thief decides to stop stealing because he’s in jail and deprived of his freedom. Is that not why they’re called penitentiaries? The homosexual or heterosexual philanderer decides to leave his life of sin because his past choices have debased one of God’s greatest gifts. Are not these examples, one and all, of people engaging in logical, ordered, analysis of cause and effect as encountered in God’s creation? When we allow subjectivity and “faith” to enter into the debate, we lose hold of our greatest tool, and that is the ability to think straight.
Nowhere is logical, objective thinking more rare than in the current debate, highly politicized by an election year, about global warming. Wherever you turn, be it in specialty magazines about cars, climbing, the outdoors, or in the pontifications from the Democratic nominees in debate, there’s one issue that is swallowed hook, line and sinker by everybody, and that is that the world is warming up due to anthropogenic (man made) carbon dioxide. Is this true? Who has studied the issues? Upon what are their alarming predictions based?
If you do any research at all into the issue, you’ll find some interesting facts that will cause you to reconsider your position. Here are some examples:
• Humans are responsible for 2% to 5% of all carbon dioxide produced in the atmosphere; the rest is from natural sources. Carbon dioxide comprises from 3% to 4% of all greenhouse gases by volume, the largest of which is water vapor from the oceans. Thus, humans are responsible for .2% of all greenhouse gases, or less.
• Global temperatures have risen about .6 of a degree Centigrade during the past century, with much of the gain coming BEFORE 1940, BEFORE the bulk of fossil fuels were burned. 80% of the fossil fuels burned in the 20th century were used since WWII, a period which until 1976 was a COOLING trend. Furthermore, high altitude temperature readings for the 20th century show no consistent trend in terms of temperature change.
• The current rise in global temperature is observable only in contrast to the “Little Ice Age” which concluded at the end of the 19th century. Claims of global warming do not consider paleoclimatological data which suggest that there have been many periods of warmer and cooler weather, all of which occurred without the benefit of anthropogenic carbon dioxide.
• Fossil, sedimentary and ice gas data suggest that past temperature fluctuations are indeed accompanied by changes in carbon dioxide levels, but that the changes in carbon dioxide FOLLOW temperature changes by about 800 years. Thus, carbon dioxide production is dependent upon temperature, not the other way around.
• The earth receives about 342 watts of solar energy per square meter. This should be compared to the amount of energy carbon dioxide is expected to add, which is only 1.5 watts per square meter. This latter figure should be contrasted with the amount of solar energy a cloud can absorb or reflect, which is calculated to be about 78 watts per square meter. Thus, a cloud can have 52 times the influence of carbon dioxide in terms of affecting our global temperature.
• The best correlation between global temperature and any other natural phenomena is found with solar activity in the form of sun spots. Although the exact linkage is ill-understood, it appears as though cosmic rays affect the upper atmosphere of the Earth, inhibiting the condensation of lower level clouds and allowing more solar radiation to strike the Earth and increasing surface temperatures.
• Many of the world’s most prominent scientists involved in paleoclimatological and atmospheric studies have abandoned the global warming ship.
• The computer simulations that predict a sudden rise in global temperatures are mere approximations of the exceedingly complex system that is our biosphere, and they have consistently shown themselves to be subject to the prejudices of their authors. Water vapor feedback loops programmed at exponential gain produce temperature rises, no matter what data are entered into the equation. The predictions are embedded in the algorithms, not the observed data.
The validity of the research cited here is, of course, open to question, but a definite pattern emerges when the data are consulted. Those who have looked at the facts are anything but convinced that anthropogenic carbon dioxide is the civilization killer as it’s portrayed in the popular press. The question for ReformationTwo, though, remains: why would people be so eager to adopt this highly suspect interpretation of our climatological predicament and tout it as received truth?
The answer to this question returns, of necessity, to philosophy. Remember what the Bible says about Man. We are not rational, but irrational, creatures. Rational behavior would be this: study the facts, draw a conclusion, and then modify your behavior to align yourself with the facts. What we do, of course, is the opposite. We decide what we want to do, then we look for “facts” that justify our prior decision, and go with them instead. Philosophy is the study of how we think or fail to think, and the whole global warming debate is a classic example of the latter. There are at least three reasons why the liberal political machine, the environmental movement and the media are so attracted to the global warming bandwagon.
• First of all, it lets them blame others for their problems; an important psychological necessity for the idle. Remember what Adam said when confronted with his sin. “It’s the fault of the woman you gave me.” Thus it was the woman’s fault, and God’s fault for giving her to Adam, but it was not Adam’s fault. Blame shifting was therefore the first sign of human sin. The global warming people, most of whom do nothing to contribute to the economic pie, are jealous of those who actually work to make the world a better place. They don’t grow crops, they don’t mine resources, they don’t manufacture or distribute anything; they just consume. So what do they do with their neurosis? They blame those who make their lifestyle possible for hurting the environment. It’s simply guilt talking.
• Secondly, it turns the tables on Man’s role in creation. According to the Scriptures, Man has been put in charge of the garden to make it more orderly and beautiful. Plants, animals, all are here to be used to our advantage. This is not to say that we’re to misuse Creation, as it does not belong to us. We are stewards of that which ultimately belongs to somebody else, and we will be held accountable for the use, or misuse, of what’s entrusted to us. We are not, however, slaves to that which we are to superintend. The world is not, in the lamentable words of Eucharistic Prayer C in the Book of Common Prayer, 1979, a “fragile earth, or island home.” It’s pretty damn robust, and has a God-given capacity to rejuvenate itself after profound abuse from humans. We are not to feel guilty about being at the top of the pyramid in the animal kingdom, the food chain, or any other aspect of Creation.
• Thirdly, the global warming mantra distracts us from the real issues in the human experience, notably the increase in sexual sins and the resultant slaughter of unprotected, unborn children. By acting put out over global warming, the would-be moralists are able to issue sanctimonious denunciations of the rest of us, while doing nothing of substance to help the human condition. What’s more important, sixth tenth’s of a degree in temperature, of the fact that more than half the babies being born are not born of married parents? At best these people are like Diogenes, who trundled his clay pot around the streets of Athens in an energetic display of action with no clear goal in mind. At worst, they are masking their own moral shortcomings by pointing their fingers at others.
So what are we to do? First of all, ask the next proponent of global warming you meet for the source of his “facts.” Which study is he referring to? What paleoclimatological data support his conclusions? Sea shell isotopes, ice gases from Greenland, soil sediments from Canada? Whose model are they referring to? The ones that make the same prediction, no matter what data are entered into them? Let’s get real. I’m the son of the world’s foremost expert on computer simulation, and I know how these models of “soft” systems are done. They tell you more about the philosophy of the modeler than they do about the system under consideration. Secondly, you must make sure your elected leaders are supported when they refuse to be drawn into the global warming worldview. God bless George Bush. Forget Kyoto. We’re going to run out of fossil fuels soon enough, and we’ll have a whole new set of problems when that happens. Finally, ask those who espouse this worldview how they got where they are currently standing. Did they ride a bicycle? Did they walk? Do they do anything that uses energy? Do they have a car? Do they go to concerts to support the environment? Why are they entitled to use energy, and we aren’t? Don’t they know that their beloved poor and disenfranchised will be the FIRST to suffer if the world economy is disrupted by attempts to shut it down?
We are enjoined by Scripture to love God with our whole selves, body, spirit, and MIND. If you can’t think clearly about the created order, what makes you think you can come to any accurate and sane conclusions about more weighty matters? Let’s practice on the little stuff, like science, then we can move on to the big stuff, like the stewardship of a beautiful creation and the discovering the purpose of Man therein.
This is probably the longest comment ever approved here. Worth reading, though.
I’m amused by your obsession with money. You can’t eat money. But the things we CAN eat might some day (sooner than you’d like to think) be poisoned or depleted.
Mark 12:17 — “And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s”
Forget about “global warming” for a minute. Y’all use that phrase against the Earth. Think instead about pollution. Do you think it’s right to pollute God’s earth? Do you think it’s right to chop down God’s forests? Do you think it’s right to poison God’s streams? Do you think it’s right to pollute the heavens above you?
You are all hypocrites and should take a hard look at yourselves in the mirror.
Very well put,
and though I am not in agreement with everything said, this is the kind of post that stands as an example to others of thought and coherance.
I want to print a copy of Obama’s proposed bill on global warming (?) but can’t do it from your website.
I have the correct Acrobat system but it still sends me a message that it will not print. Can you advise
me on how to get a copy?
Lois Conwell
Sorry that should have been “Global Climate” ….etc.
Lois Conwell
I saw your interview on the Rachel Maddow Show on MSMBC.
You are a “Paid” political hack. You have a number of “Scan” websites.
You disgust me, [censored].
I suggest that you get a real job and stop selling the entire planet out so that you can make a buck.
I have an idea. Why don’t you s\tart another Astor Turf protest and invite Fox fake news to cover it?
Who is this comment about, exactly? It makes no sense.
There are other websites with similar names. So it looks like it’s the same people running all the websites. One mistake or inconsistency in any of these conspiracy theories will affect the credibility of them all. A bit like the boy who cried wolf.
Congrats on a successful website though
Your “logic” is flawed. Topic: Global Warming. 10 Websites about GLobal Warming have “global” in their name, ergo, same people behind them all! How could two, let alone 10 people come up with a name with “global” in it for a website about global warming?! The odds must be staggering!
Thanks for the congratulations.
The real Scam is that oil companies have suppressed the fuel saving technology that would eliminate air polloution by changing gasoline into natural gas and methanol hundreds of patents suppressed or owned by oil companies. real answers stopped fopr greed sake
see http://www.himacresearch.com http://www.byronwine.com http://www.fuelvapors.com
You’re either greedy selfish criminals being funded by businesses set to lose money under cap and trade, or else you’re a bunch of deluded idiots. Either way you make me ashamed to be part of the human race.
We’re all set to lose money under cap and trade. A lot of it and we will see nothing in return. Our hard earned dollars will be funnelled into the pockets of people like Al Gore and other charletans as well as overseas. To prevent 1/10th of a degree of theoretical warming in 100 years, we’ll all be ponying up $1,700 to $6,000 a year, not to mention job losses and more damage to our flagging economy.
Why are you suggesting email petitions? My understanding is that snail mail gets the count. Correct me if I am wrong. Also,, how valid is a petition with out a signature or at least an electronic sisgnature. You have neither.
Don’t worry. Our petition method is effective. Besides the instant effect of an email notification being sent to your specific elected officials, we can print all the signers for delivery on what will likely be boxes and boxes of paper. You don’t need a handwritten signature for a petition like this. There is no legal function to the petition, like a recall petition, or ballot inititave. This is a simple notification to elected officials.
Seems like all the global warming believers out there are suddenly silent, since the truth came out about the
scam last saturday. Think it will be enough in copenhagen to stop this lie?
It’s one more straw on the camel’s back. Don’t kid yourself that theyll jus roll over and give up. There are billions, even trillions of dollars at stake in the climate scam. At this point, even if 95% of people were convinced that global warming is a criminal fraud, I believe the cap and traders would still try to proceed with their climate change mitigation plans.
Dan,
You are right, they would try anyway. Unfortunate but true.
Dan,
Just want to make one thing clear, please do not confuse me with Mark L Brown. I stand on the opposite side and I do use my real name. I used to be an AGW sympathizer, But I had a change of heart, to say the least. For more details, contact me on my mail.
No question, this is the most comprehensive website on AGW and the ClimateGate scandal since the story broke a month ago. And what I appreciate is that you do not put up all the anti-AGW whacko stuff up. Your content is valid, and carefully vetted for accuracy. I gave you a healthy endorsement in today’s feature commentary on RhodesNews.com, and below the fold I’ve included a direct link. I don’t do that often, and if you notice on my site, you’re in very exclusive company. I will continue to use this site as a primary resource. Keep up the great work.
Ted Rhodes
Editor in Chief
RhodesNews.com
Twitter: #RhodesNews
Thank you! We’re honored to be in such prestigious company.
I’m totally with the global warming scam….but I have a question on one of your main pieces of literature : “The 5 facts on Global Warming”. I would love to print and distribute to people, BUT, I have a problem with Fig. 1. Maybe someone can help me with this. You show temperature readings from Antarctica ice samples dating back some 500,000 years….I don’t know…but I’m just guessing that we weren’t taking and documenting ice sample temperatures in Antarctica 500,000 years ago ??? It kind of hurts the credibility….
That’s extrapolated data based on the chemical composition of ice core samples. In theory, the deeper you go, the older the ice and by comparing the trapped atmospheric elements and the condition of the ice a rough idea of past temps is constructed. It’s like geology, studying the layers of strata for clues about the condition of the earth hundreds of thousands or even millions of years ago. Granted, it’s probably not terribly accurate – just look at the tree ring data.
did you only look at sarah palins website? your “facts” are moronic s***. you all should take a look at some other sources besides emails and republican funded webpages
Please make an easy list with important sources and information that debunks the global warming hysteria.
Global warming is mostly a natural phenomenon that cannot be stopped etc.
See our 5 Facts about Global Warming flyer.
Extensive independent education about global climate
I have just completed a very extensive independent educational site about understanding global climate and climate change in 5 chapters (over 100 printed pages with numerous graphs and diagrams): http://www.seafriends.org.nz/issues/global/climate.htm
It is unique in that it fosters true understanding of the underlying concepts and complexities, while being part of the trilogy about land, sea and air. The associated hall-of-shame should cause some smiles and sighs. Please review and send to others.
shares employ a perfect webpage decent Gives many thanks for the working hard to help me personally
[editors note: This is an example of the kind of spam that comes in to this site every day. This is one of the more humorous examples of a bizarrely bad, non-sensical translation. Allowed through without URL for your amusement.]
Climate change deniers are contrarians who challenge the evidence that human activities such as deforestation and human behaviors that result in more greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide are causing changes in our planet’s climate that may prove devastating and irreversible. Contrarians pose as skeptics, refusing to accept consensus conclusions in science on the ground that there is still some uncertainty. True skeptics raise specific doubts about specific claims and do not try to debunk a whole area of science by an occasional error or by the general lack of absolute certainty, which is unattainable in any area of science.
The core of the consensus view of the scientific community has been stated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its “Climate Change 2007″ report. The core of the consensus view is, among other things, that global warming is happening and that human activities are contributing significantly to the climate change, which is affecting such things as the intensity of hurricanes and rising sea levels. It would be absurd, of course, to claim that the consensus of the scientific community agrees with everything in the IPCC reports, especially since not all the scientists who worked on those reports agree with each other on every item.
In one important respect, it doesn’t matter what the scientific consensus on climate change is, since what matters is what policies the powerful governments of the world institute, and those governments tend to ignore science.
As the folks at Denialism.com note, deniers employ rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of argument or legitimate debate, when in actuality there is none. Most deniers’ arguments incorporate more than one of the following tactics: Conspiracy, Selectivity, False Experts, Impossible Expectations/Moving Goalposts, and Argument from Metaphor/violations of informal logic. Global warming deniers are big on conspiracy: according to them, an entire community of scientists has some ulterior motive for their climate research, such as an ideology or a desire to keep their funding. Global warming deniers are also prone to cherry-picking their data and their quotes, citing single errors or discredited papers as proof that a whole field of science is corrupt. Because many of those supporting the climate change denial campaign are corporations heavily invested in fossil fuels or are politicians who depend on those corporations for campaign funds, they are prone to put forth fake experts to raise some dust.
reader comments
further reading
books and articles
Friel, Howard. 2010. The Lomborg Deception: Setting the Record Straight About Global Warming. Yale University Press.
Hoggan, James. 2009. Climate Cover-Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming. Greystone.
Michaels, David. 2008. Doubt is Their Product: How Industry’s Assault on Science Threatens Your Health. Oxford University Press.
Oreskes, Naomi and Erik M. Conway. 2010. Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming. Bloomesbury Press.
http://www.skepdic.com/climatedeniers.html
you’re all on ecstasy….seriously…yea nature’s fine, I triple dog dare you to go outside yourself and drink water from a local suburban/urban pond, river or stream for a few days or give it to your dog, yeah. Go ahead, yea you won’t because you know as well as anyone else nature is not doing fine. You ignorant self absorbed people, willing to just blatantly accept any wiff of a so-called eco -conspiracy without so much as any proof to actually support it as happening, but then you readily deny the myriad and millions of terabytes of evidence from all over different parts of the world in, states, countries, and communities, all clearly supporting the evidence and fact that the environment and people are, to understate it not OK. Ignorance on a grand scale is what you people all sitting around blogging to each other is….dear lord you people are seriously being f*ed with or are just f#ed people
‘Merchants of Doubt’. Educate yourself instead of embarrassing yourself. The only scientist who don’t agree (which is a handful at best) that climate change is occurring and that humans polluting plays a significant role are hired by corporations and those once employed by such corporations who now work for the government. But just sit back and keep your uneducated conclusions and when they start charging you for clean air to breath we won’t have to listen to you anymore
Really? Handfull? Last I checked, there were over 19,000. Keep visiting – you’ll learn some things. Upon what do you base your beliefs? Somebody told you? Big corporations! Big Oil! Profit bad! Save the spotted owl! Charging for clean air? You get your science from Spaceballs, The Movie? Seriously, stick around.
My comment was supposed to be in regard to this wesite and in support of Rena’s post.
I’m 17 years old and a junior in a Catholic school. I’m taking a class called global issues and we have to write a paper on global solutions and incorporate a book in it. I wish to do a solution for global climate change- but not the traditional view. I want to use this view, but I’m at a loss as to what solutions could work. The book I plan to use is called “The Climate of Extremes: Global Warming Science they don’t want you to know” by Patrick J. Michaels and Robert C. Balling.
Do any of you have any suggestions for me?
By the way, I’m a firm believer against global warming.
Thanks.
There are several good books on the fraudulent nature of AGW. Some are listed on this site, in the right hand column. Not knowing the direction you’re planning to take to find a “solution,” it’s hard to offer much advice. Solving an unsolvable, fictitious problem is a challenging concept. Check out some of the books and papers by Bjorn Lomborg, like “the Skeptical Environmentalist” and see the Heartland Institute’s website. You might also check out http://wattsupwiththat.com/
Good luck.
I wretched at the oil funded thought of this website of red herrings and lying with statistics through oil funded scientists that are financially purpose driven. I care not for political divisions nor finance, I care about people, relationships, life, health and love. This is a values issue. Those with power relish it and seek with much adversity, to keep their power and grow it at the expense of others through damaging biosphere resource extraction. I trust most individuals can make this distinction of denial. For the last hundred years our planet has been prisoned to oil, but your bars will be cut one by one, as this is the only viable option for our future generations. We don’t need all the scientists to legitimize global warming, just the ones who have demonstrated sound unbiased reasoning and truth. After all, eventually all lies are made evident.
Global Orbit Decay
The events below have been occurring for millions of years. I believe they are now beginning to affecting the earth’s climate. I’m not a climate change scientist, but I’m a climate change expert with 28 years of experience. I started July-1983.The reason I believe the earth’s orbit around the sun is decaying, and is responsible for climate change is:
1. The earth is moving away from the moon.
2. The earth is shifting on its axis
3. The earth is wobbling on its axis
4. The earth is developing a breach in its magnetic field
5. The sun is getting hotter, and brighter
A. Go to yahoo search engine, and type in: Sun getting hotter, and brighter
6. Both polar ice caps are being melted during each ice caps summer season.
7. The rotation of the earth is slowing down
8. Many scientists are how saying that the IPCC report, and the green house gas theory is a fraud.
A. Go to yahoo search engine, and type in: IPCC fraud.
B. Go to yahoo search engine, and type in: Global warming fraud
References: NASA, NOAA, USGA, The American Astronomical Society, etc. If you need more reference I’ll be happy to provide them.
The green house gas theory, and the IPCC are a fraud, and there are many articles to support my statement. Many scientists believe the sun play a larger roll in climate change, than first thought. You can yahoo, or google any of these subjects above.
Mr. Willie McDonald
cdnld30@gmail.com
You folks are sor “folksy”! How many have any real knowledge of climate, or earth history?
Get over yourselves… You are being played by corporate interests, just
Ike the tobacco industry… We need to evolve (do you also hate that idea, or are you similarly ignorant).
The nature of science as an intellectual and observational, reasoning-based mental discipline always allows for ambiguity. That is science…. Yet the preponderence of evidence ( more than mere opinion – which like so many butts, we all have, and all stink), suggests (as strongly as any concensus can) that climate change in the modern era is being driven by humanity’s use of fossil fuel (which is carbon long removed form the current earth-surface cycling system).
If you are having trouble following this train of thought so far…. You are certainly not informed enough to make decisions for yourself, weighing the evidence, etc…. So… You are likely to allow so,e “authority” (likely someone who really has their own agenda-greed) do your thinking for you…. In that case, I pray for you and you ignorance..l.l if you really want to make sound decisions, think for yourself, follow the real evidence, follow the $, and always question authority…. My own extensive study (yes, I am extensively educated in both the science and economics of natural resources)….. I know that climate changes, by definition it is dyna,ic and responding to earth rpocesses that act to control atmosphere, hydrosphere, geosphere, biosphere over thousand s and millions of years… Climates change… Period. Its just that humanity has never really experienced changing climate before, at least not as a globally connected and scientifically informed collective.
The problem is… Either global warming (which we now face, for certain) or global cooling, both result in dramatic changes, and humanity is not current
Y wise enough to react appropriately..l but we must, or else we will be like ants scattered before the flame… Clueless by our own choice and resistence to reason… We ned to move beyond our ignorance and start thinking ahead – into 2100+ . Do we leave a reasonable healthy world to future generations of humans, or will this generation go down in history as so selfish and greedy that we sacrificed the world, biodiversity and habitability….. Our great great granchildren will vilify us all, as the generation who should have known better…. We will be more hated than Caligula!
Delusion? Babbling? It’s you who has said “it is the thinking on the Left that caused the North Korean disaster.” That’s a great example of delusional babbling to me, truebearing, and in typical right-wing fashion, not a stitch of evidence for your remark. By the way, what are your solutions to bring hope to common north Koreans? I will look forward to your answer.
I recently finished a conservative documentary that I feel you may enjoy, if you would be so kind as to take a look and possibly give us a review i would really appreciate it! Below is a press release we are putting out to coincide with the RNC this week:
There is a new force in the world of Global Warming, and unlike proposed Cap and Trade Legislation, this one is FREE! A documentary film encompassing all the public misinformation on Climate Change (hence the one and a half hour running time), “The Boy Who Cried Warming” is now available online for audiences to enjoy at the website:www.theboywhocriedwarming.com.
The site offers potential viewers the ability to watch the film, in its entirety, for free! Viewers can also sign up to be included in future E-mailing lists. The site and film will be retroactively funded through use of a “Pay what you want” format. Basically what we are saying is “if you like it: please donate and tell your friends to check it out. If you don’t like the film you loose NOTHING, you only run the risk of gaining knowledge in the process.” The film to date has survived solely on private personal donations from concerned citizens, and we see no reason to change this format now!
If you are viewing this: it is because we see you as an interested party in the debate (be it either over-stepping government, free markets, political interests, or simply a party interested in Global Warming) we could now use your help in getting the word out. We made the movie, we are literally giving it away, all that we ask from you is to check it out and tell your audience to do the same. If there is anything that we can do to assist you in any way, please do not hesitate to ask…
Enjoy the Show!
Jesse Jones
Hi
I have published a book that gives an explanation for the reasons behind climate-change and global warming. In the first part of the book I explain the physics background and the reason why our current understanding of climate-change focuses on human influence. First of all, the Sun is travelling through our galaxy on a helical path and periodically crosses the galaxy plane (over and under). The strength of its magnetic field increases as it moves above the galactic plane because the plasma region becomes denser, which means higher solar radiation and an increased number of high energy particles in the magnetosphere.
Since the magnetic fields of the Earth and Sun are linked, solar radiation on both the surface of the earth and inside it will increase with the solar cycles. This in turn, will result in the rapid change of the magnetic polarity of the earth.
So in short, global warming can be blamed on the increase of the Sun’s magnetic field. As the strength of the Sun’s magnetic field increases over several thousands of years, the planet is heated up gradually and natural carbon dioxide and methane gas start to increase, which causes the greenhouse effect. When the magnetic field reaches a certain strength, global warming becomes obvious and the speed of earth’s magnetic polarity reversal increases dramatically. This is also the reason for the strange weather patterns and geological activity (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, etc.)
you can review my book at the following link: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00CH9S5XQ/ref=cm_sw_su_dp
Best Regards,
Jamal Shrair
Why is the fact that after 28 years of climate change “research” there still does not exist one single IPCC report or any scientific paper that says a crisis is inevitable just as the scientists like to say asteroid hits are “inevitable”, not a good enough reason to declare climate blame a total exaggeration? Science didn’t lie; the followers of climate blame belief lied in declaring that a crisis “WILL” happen. Science has never said their crisis will happen, only could and might and likely happen.