Source

For more than 90 per cent of recent geological time, the cores show that the earth has been colder than today. We modern humans are lucky to live towards the end of the most recent of the intermittent, and welcome, warm interludes. It is a 10,000 year-long period called the Holo-cene, during which our civilisations have evolved and flourished.

Backwards for hundreds of thousands of years, the core alternations march. Some, metronomic in their occurrence, are ruled by changes in the earth's orbit at periods of about 20,000, 41,000 and 100,000 years; others are paced by fluctuations in solar output on a scale of centuries or millennia; and others display irregular yet rapid oceanographic and climate shifts that are caused by\\u2026 we know not what. Climate, it seems, changes ceaselessly in either direction: sometimes cooling, sometimes warming, often for reasons that we do not yet fully understand.

Similar cores through polar ice reveal, contrary to received wisdom, that past temperature changes were followed - not preceded, but followed - by changes in the atmospheric content of carbon dioxide. Yet the public now believes strongly that increasing human carbon dioxide emissions will cause runaway warming; it is surely a strange cause of climate change that naturally postdates its supposed effect?

Yet we do not read about natural climate change in the everyday news. Instead, newspapers, radio and television stations bludgeon us with a merciless stream of human-caused global-warming alarmism, egged on by a self-interested gaggle of journalists, environmental lobbyists, scientific and business groups, church leaders and politicians, all of whom preach that we must "stop climate change" by reducing human CO2 emissions.

"In chaos and fear there is profit"
Billions of Dollars are up for grabs in this as feared consumers buy up any product which will reduce CO2 emissions. A fact seldom thought of is the energy to manufacture all these new products, transporting them to the stores/dealers. Not to mention Al Gore's Carbon Credit Trading Company.

With Billions of dollars up for grabs in manufacturing and retail they will push forward for making the big dollars. Greed.

Many distinguished scientists refuse to participate in the IPCC process, and others have resigned from it, because in the end the advice that the panel provides to governments is political and not scientific. Although at least -$50 billion has been spent on climate research, the science arguments for a dangerous human influence on global warming have, if anything, become weaker since the establishment of the IPCC in 1988.

$50 Billion dollars. That’s a lot of money up for grabs for these scientists. To get more money out of it all they need to do is provide "evidence" that global warming exists and governments will bend over to make themselves look good. "I'm saving the planet by giving this Scientist $50 Billion Dollars. Vote for Me!" Selfish. Power.

The IPCC advances three main categories of argument for a dangerous human influence on climate. The first is that, over the 20th century, global average temperature increased by about 0.7C, which it did, if you accept that the surface thermometer record used by the IPCC is accurate. More reliably, histo--rical records and many geological data sets show that warming has indeed occurred since the intense cold periods of the "little Ice Ages" in the 14th, 17th and 19th centuries. The part of this temperature recovery which occurred in the 20th century is the "global warming", alleged by climate alarmists to have been caused by the accumulation of human-sourced CO2 in the atmosphere.

It is easy to make fake records these days with a few punches of a button. You would think someone would stand up and shout lie! Unfortunately $50 Billion Dollars is on the line. Greed.

However, our most accurate depiction of atmospheric temperature over the past 25 years comes from satellite measurements (see graph below) rather than from the ground thermometer record. Once the effects of non-greenhouse warming (the El Niño phenomenon in the Pacific, for instance) and cooling (volcanic eruptions) events are discounted, these measurements indicate an absence of significant global warming since 1979 - that is, over the very period that human carbon dioxide emissions have been increasing rapidly. The satellite data signal not only the absence of substantial human-induced warming, by recording similar temperatures in 1980 and 2006, but also provide an empirical test of the greenhouse hypothesis as understood by the public - a test that the hypothesis fails.

A new set of data enters the battlefield.

The second category of alarmist argument rests upon circumstantial evidence. It is epitomised by the former American vice-president Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth, which claims that human greenhouse emissions are causing accelerated melting of icecaps, dangerous increases in the rate of sea-level rise, increases in the frequency and intensity of droughts or catastrophic storms, and enhanced rates of biodiversity loss.

Fear of the unknown, beyond life here on earth. It is the greatest fear of all. Some say there is no beyond, some say you will be teleported to another planet, some say heaven and hell, some say reborn as a new creature. We may believe different things but what lies beyond will remain a mystery until we get there. (Please no religious flaming)

The media is focusing in on this fear, along with the government. Weapons of Mass Destruction, Global warming. What is there to gain from these attacks of peoples worst fears?

Power: Controlling others thoughts/actions for:
Greed: Money
Fear: More money. More power.
Selfishness: I’m better than everyone else

These 4 are the greatest problems facing man kind today.

Is global warming Fact or Fiction?
Is it all media hype and political power like before?

~BoB

---

Do you Good Search for Seti@Home? http://www.goodsearch.com/?charityid=888957
Or Good Shop? http://www.goodshop.com/?charityid=888957