BritinUSA Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 (edited) Respectful always of this forums rules on political discussion; I will merely post this link to a British documentary that aired at the beginning of March. The link will take you to a free download site where you may view the video in question (this is not a pirated link, it is perfectly legal). It lasts about 75 minutes and totally decimates the notion that human beings are causing Global Warming through increases in CO2. It goes on to show that CO2 has nothing whatsoever to do with Global Warming in the first place. The latter part of the movie shows the true impact of this political discourse and the effect it is having on Africa. I found the last scenes to be both depressing and thought provoking. The words of certain people who push this agenda are shortening the lives of those in poorer nations who are being denied access to the most common utilities that we take for granted. Here is the link ---> Global Warming Swindle CLOSED Edited March 25, 2007 by BritinUSA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike cyrwus Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Or if you all have a brain, you could look into factual data, and check out the latest report from the IPCC; The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, an international consortium of government representatives, from nations, like the US, Great Britian, and , uh, everyone else. "The role of the IPCC is to assess on a comprehensive, objective, open and transparent basis the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to understanding the scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change, its potential impacts and options for adaptation and mitigation. The IPCC does not carry out research nor does it monitor climate related data or other relevant parameters. It bases its assessment mainly on peer reviewed and published scientific/technical literature." http://www.ipcc.ch/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 (edited) Yep, a report from a United Nations. There's an unbiased source with absolutely no ulterior motives. Edited March 25, 2007 by EricW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike cyrwus Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Oh I agree that the UN sucks, but it uses already existing, peer-reviewed scientific articles that the worldwide scientific community as a whole have independently, and without UN money, published. and I love schnabels! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryeg7 Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Oh I agree that the UN sucks, but it uses already existing, peer-reviewed scientific articles that the worldwide scientific community as a whole have independently, and without UN money, published.and I love schnabels! watch the documentary and you can see how the UN and others select their 'peers' and data. cherry-picking is not science. real science simply does not support the theory of human-induced global warming. and, al gore invented global warming . frye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jman Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Human caused global climate change...please. Just pick up your dog crap and garbage. The planet will take care of itself thank you. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 (edited) Oh I agree that the UN sucks, but it uses already existing, peer-reviewed scientific articles that the worldwide scientific community as a whole have independently, and without UN money, published.and I love schnabels! I don't play this card often, but I have a degree in Physics. So, I'm actually relatively familiar with the ol' "I need some grant money" ploy. Saving the world from destruction has been incredibly effective at keeping "science" awash in money. Too bad that none of the players are as interested in using that money to create the next plastic or the next transistor. It's all about job security. When one's future employment opportunity is dependent upon coming to the conclusion that the world is going to hell in a handbasket, that's not independent evaluation. I looked into "global warming" and the "ozone hole" pretty hard about 15 years ago when I became interested in the environment. Both then and now, I find the ratio of published hard-data to wild-eyed conclusions to generate a high level of skepticism on my part about the validity of the hoopla. Finally, there is no disagreement on the part of educated individuals as to whether or not the earth is warming. We are coming out of an ice-age, of course it is warming. The question is - is there a substantial causal connection between the warming and human activities. I find it highly ironic that when warming levels recently exceeded the levels predicted by the models, that it was the basis for even more alarm. Nobody bothered to ask the fundamental question: "Do we really understand the causal connections by which 'global warming' occurs?" Edited March 25, 2007 by EricW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted March 25, 2007 Author Share Posted March 25, 2007 For those that don't have the time or the speedy internet connection to watch the movie, please allow me to provide a short overview: The cold-hard physical fact of all ice core samples shows that Global temperature changes PRE-DATE a corresponding increase/decrease in CO2 levels. As Global temps warm there is a lag time of about 750 years before CO2 starts to rise. The increased CO2 comes from the ocean depths and it takes this long for the increase in temps to reach the deeper ocean levels. As Global temps cool, so the CO2 returns to the source. Therefore CO2 does not affect temperature.... period. Measurement of sun-spot activity neatly correlates to increase in Global Temperature, the more sun-spots the more heat is directed toward the earth, when both levels are mapped on the same graph the correlation is clear. Volcanos put out more CO2 per year than all human activity. CO2 accounts for .054% of the total atmosphere, our contribution to that number is less than half of that put out by volcanos, forest fires, animals, decomposition of organic waste etc. Human beings do not cause Global Warming, global warming has happened in the past, world temps were 5C warmer than now in medieval times (that's about 8F). Polar bears survived this warming, crops grew in Greenland, grapes were being grown in North England. We are all still here.... Follow the money... Carbon trading is the name of the game, one country buys carbon credits from another, via the UN. There are media outlets that hire environmental journalists to report on these issues, if the global warming is normal and un-alterable then those journalists are out of a job. The same applies to the scientists, if they say that humans are not causing Global warming then there is no point in studying it and no grant money. The grant money for studying this fallacy is over $3,000,000,000 a year. Follow the money.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fryeg7 Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 For those that don't have the time or the speedy internet connection to watch the movie, please allow me to provide a short overview:The cold-hard physical fact of all ice core samples shows that Global temperature changes PRE-DATE a corresponding increase/decrease in CO2 levels. As Global temps warm there is a lag time of about 750 years before CO2 starts to rise. The increased CO2 comes from the ocean depths and it takes this long for the increase in temps to reach the deeper ocean levels. As Global temps cool, so the CO2 returns to the source. Therefore CO2 does not affect temperature.... period. Measurement of sun-spot activity neatly correlates to increase in Global Temperature, the more sun-spots the more heat is directed toward the earth, when both levels are mapped on the same graph the correlation is clear. Volcanos put out more CO2 per year than all human activity. CO2 accounts for .054% of the total atmosphere, our contribution to that number is less than half of that put out by volcanos, forest fires, animals, decomposition of organic waste etc. Human beings do not cause Global Warming, global warming has happened in the past, world temps were 5C warmer than now in medieval times (that's about 8F). Polar bears survived this warming, crops grew in Greenland, grapes were being grown in North England. We are all still here.... Follow the money... Carbon trading is the name of the game, one country buys carbon credits from another, via the UN. There are media outlets that hire environmental journalists to report on these issues, if the global warming is normal and un-alterable then those journalists are out of a job. The same applies to the scientists, if they say that humans are not causing Global warming then there is no point in studying it and no grant money. The grant money for studying this fallacy is over $3,000,000,000 a year. Follow the money.... well-said and a good summary of the documentary. frye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike cyrwus Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 (edited) Oh I agree that the UN sucks, but it uses already existing, peer-reviewed scientific articles that the worldwide scientific community as a whole have independently, and without UN money, published. and I love schnabels! I don't play this card often, but I have a degree in Physics. -and my card beats yours; I have a graduate degree in Ecology and have worked with a climate change ecologist at a Major Research University for 4 years. I hate academia, but for other reasons, not for the science it puts out. I dont recall any UN money truck pulling out in front at any time. We got our funding, like 99% of research in the US does, from the National Science Foundation, and the Dept of Energy. -You know, the same govt agencies whose budgets are signed by President Bush. You Physical Science guys need to start looking at the environment as a little bit more than a variable to plug into a formula. Its the rate of change, the rate of warming, that correlates so well with a multitude of data sets. Its happening at a rate thats never been known to have happened. Got any "cards" left? Edited March 25, 2007 by mike cyrwus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Di Vita Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 This seems to fall pretty far outside forum guidelines... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike cyrwus Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 Jake, these are seriously long data sets; they looked at CO2 concentrations, CO2 emissions, precipitation, solar output, a ton of stuff. The sun isnt getting measurably hotter, not as far as the timespan of CO2 emissions started. I really am not typing here to be smug and to give glory to Gore and other liberal causes. I would just like folks to know that not all that think this is a problem, are hippies and left wing turds. I am a very conservative guy, this is about the only thing that I disagree with as far as a conservative Republican platform goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted March 25, 2007 Share Posted March 25, 2007 I seem to notice that my bullets are shooting to a slightly higher POA of late, Could this be a result of the CO2 increase leading to a temperature increase thusly making the air less dense? Damn that global warming! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts