Manmade Climate-Change Hoax

President Obama and the Congress – or at least most of it – have been breast-beating about the terrible effects that mankind has wrought and continues to wreak upon the climate, their claims asserting the inundation relatively soon of many land areas by the oceans, not to mention the increase in temperatures, called global warming, a buzz-term used by the alarmists. One result of this climate-fear-mongering, naturally, has been the carbon-cap legislation, complete with stiff penalties for concerns that allegedly infuse the atmosphere with too much greenhouse gas, meaning consequent higher taxes and prices for everything as the losses are recouped.

Former vice president Al Gore has made an industry out of this matter, producing a film, An Inconvenient Truth, writing a book of the same name, and traveling everywhere to push his project, namely, forcing people/industries to cut their greenhouse emissions, mostly CO2. For this, he won a Nobel Prize, even though he’s not a scientist, climatologist, or anything else having to do with an academic or practical study of climate phenomena. Indeed, his film may not be shown in England’s public schools unless the teacher points out its nine (or eleven, depending on the take) outright lies and designates it as political rather than scientific.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a United Nations adjunct, puts out reports periodically, the last one in 2007 amounting to a virtual earth-murder by especially the industrial nations, with the United States being the worst culprit, notwithstanding that China is the worst offender, with India not far behind. It should be noted that only 20% of the members of the IPCC gang actually are scientists. Gradually, credible American scientists such as Dr. John Christy of the Univ. of Alabama, Huntsville, are setting the record straight. Another is Australian Bob Carter, an adjunct research fellow at James Cook University, Townsville, who studies ancient climate change. This is part of an article by him in The Australian of 19 December 2008:

“THE Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change model of dangerous, human-caused climate change has failed. Independent science relevant to supposed human-caused global warming is clear, and can be summarised in four brief points.

First, global temperature warmed slightly in the late 20th century and has been cooling since 2002. Neither the warming nor the cooling were of unusual rate or magnitude.

Second, humans have an effect on local climate but, despite the expenditure of more than $US50 billion ($70 billion) looking for it since 1990, no globally summed human effect has ever been measured. Therefore, any human signal must lie buried in the variability of the natural climate system.

Third, we live on a dynamic planet; change occurs in Earth's geosphere, biosphere, atmosphere and oceans all the time and all over the world. No substantive evidence exists that modern rates of global environmental change (ice volume; sea level) lie outside historic natural bounds.

Last, cutting carbon dioxide emissions, be it in Australia or worldwide, will likely result in no measurable change in future climate, because extra increments of atmospheric CO2 cause diminishing warming for each unit of increase; at most, a few tenths of a degree of extra warming would result from a completion of doubling of CO2 since pre-industrial times.”

In other words, manmade global warming is a crock. Indeed, it appears that there was slightly more sea ice in January 2009 than in January 1980, though the amount increased in the southern hemisphere while decreasing in the northern hemisphere. In one of the Ice Ages (the third?), according to the scientists, the Ohio River was carved out as a humongous glacier did its deed and retreated northward from Kentucky back toward the North Pole, from whence it came. As far as anyone knows, this was millennia before any industrial activity and thus only a climate change as only an act of nature and little more. Indeed, Kentuckians and everyone north of the state might meditate upon this and consider a bit of warming as quite good.

Interestingly, while it demands all sorts of drastic/expensive changes/sacrifices from the United States, the Kyoto Treaty demands absolutely nothing on the parts of China, the worst polluter, and India. The combined populations of these two countries, 2.5 billion, represent 37% of the world’s population, while that of the United States comprises less than five percent. Federal statutes require billions of dollars worth of “scrubbers” in this country, already adding to the cost of everything from toothpaste to autos, while the Chinese and the Indian governments require virtually nothing, thus gaining advantage in the world market, especially exporting far more to the U.S. that it imports, in the case of China.

The time is long overdue for members of Congress (assuming they aren’t all dolts) to tell the president that the manmade-global-warming hoax is just that, and that easing the restrictions on industry is in order, along with a cessation of the fear-mongering about the oceans usurping New York and Los Angeles. Finding alternative sources of energy is important not because of this imagined manmade warming, but because fossil fuels will someday disappear, and, as they do, the cost of them will skyrocket.