This is essentially a primer on Global Warming or Climate Change that I have put together for the scientifically impaired. I have included a number of internet links that are labeled at the end of this report for those who wish to read extensively on the subject. I have been following the issue for more than a decade and after seeing what the radical environmentalists are doing with this concept, I have decided to do something about all of the lies, distortions, misinformation, bogus science and extreme environmental double speak being used to run a hoax on the people of the State of Washington. I am sure you have heard the terms: carbon footprint, carbon sequestration, carbon emissions, and greenhouse gases. You may have read a number of regionally generated, unsubstantiated Associated Press pieces in newspapers and seen these same reports on local TV news, reporting that Seattle and Puget Sound will be under water, snow packs will disappear, trees will die, and oceans will be dead because of this warming. You may also have been aware that the Governor of this state is trying to pass a 'carbon trading system' bill through the State Legislature that would tie 'carbon dioxide emissions' to the Growth Management Act. The chief big brother of all of this new regulatory regime would be the Department of Ecology who want to tie the CO2 emissions to the "Endangered Species Act" that would allow them to sequester autos, power generation, and even manufacturing sources of carbon dioxide emissions legally in the name of saving salmon or some other 'endangered' critter. I have had exasperated mothers approach me last summer at the Evergreen State Fair complaining about teachers in the public school system scaring kids to death about 'carbon emissions' and the drowning of Puget Sound unless they went home and turned off the lights!
What is Global Warming? Well, some years ago it was noticed that the earth has gradually and SLOWLY been warming since the end of the 'Mini Ice Age' about 1800 AD or so. This has shown up with the retreat of glaciers, melting of polar ice and other obvious consequences of a warmer environment. This began a number of studies by responsible and irresponsible environmental organizations and national scientific institutions to try and find the reasons for this phenomenon. After all of the research and speculation two hypotheses have emerged as the cause. First is increased radiation output of the star this planet orbits combined with complex variations in that orbit. Data suggests that these factors have been a major player in this planet's weather over the past 750 million years. It has also been observed that other planets are showing signs of warming including Mars and Saturn.
The other hypothesis is that "green house gases" emitted by man and man made activities are causing the problem. Some include the increased output of radiation from the sun in this speculation, others do not. In any event up until recently most responsible scientists have turned away from the greenhouse gas cause and effect because it CANNOT account for the observed warming and since water vapor is our primary atmospheric greenhouse gas, a ridiculous idea. Now the radical environmental groups are working to try and blame it on Carbon Dioxide released by human activities. They are trying to make CARBON a dirty word.
What happens to those who disagree with this speculation? George Taylor, Oregon's State Climatologist not only disagrees but he offers proof that CO2 has nothing to do with it. He is on the block and about to be fired by Oregon's Governor. Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Meteorology at MIT has had his life threatened when he stated, "There is a clear attempt to establish truth not by scientific methods but by perpetual repetition." Others have been threatened with the loss of grants and even scholarships by the environmental lobby if they speak out. This is particularly true at the University of Washington's "Climate Impacts Group" which has put out so many false reports ordered up by "environmental granters" that it has lost all credibility in the region. Their prediction that Puget Sound would be 'under water' by melting of polar ice was retracted recently. They reduced the estimate they were supporting by two thirds in a report that failed to mention that the original flawed study came from the University.
Some of the more outspoken forces in favor of destroying the nation's economy with this unproven speculation have been far more vocal and have engaged in name calling against their detractors. At first the word they used was DENIALISTS to label folks who disagreed with the CO2 argument. This term was hatched up by the scientifically uneducated, radical Bill McKibben, his left wing extremists over at National Public Radio in cahoots with the National Geographic and the 'Nazi' name calling, very controversial Dr. Heidi Cullen of the Weather Channel. The idea is to somehow link those who do not accept the concept of man caused 'global warming' to those who have denied the 'Holocaust'. In other words they are accused of being Nazi, fascists, capitalists out to destroy the planet! This was echoed recently by an emotional diatribe on cable TV news by Robert Kennedy Jr. who called oil company executives Nazi murderers out to destroy 'mother earth'. Locally and with straight faces, Governor Christine Gregoire and State Representative Hans Dunshee said that recent flooding in SW Washington and a tornado that touched down near Vancouver, WA were caused by 'global warming'. Dunshee's comments were so far out and stated in such extremist language, few understood what he was talking about. This news conference was the announcement of sweeping legislation to 'reduce the state's carbon footprint'.
Now let's consider the REAL science concerning this issue.
Water vapor is responsible for 95 per cent of the earth's atmospheric greenhouse effect, an effect which is vital to keep the world warm. Without the greenhouse effect the planet would be at an average 64 degrees below zero Fahrenheit on the night side of this planet, everyday. We do have a greenhouse effect and it keeps the temperature at about 59 degrees above zero, on the average.
The other greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen dioxide, and various others including CFCs, contribute only five per cent of the effect, carbon dioxide being the largest contributor at 3.6 per cent.
However, carbon dioxide as a result of MAN'S ACTIVITIES is only 3.2 per cent of that, hence only 0.12 per cent of the greenhouse gases in total. Human-related methane, nitrogen dioxide and CFC's etc made similarly minuscule contributions to the effect: 0.066, 0.047 and 0.046 per cent respectively. Scientifically that is the end of the argument. Man couldn't change the climate even if we wanted to because WATER VAPOR DOMINATES and in fact we want this greenhouse effect.
As for increases in CO2 emissions, plants absorb enormous quantities of CO2, along with the oceans and large bodies of fresh water. These systems can absorb even more CO2 than they do now. This is particularly true in the developing world where crops and trees are being planted at very high rates in the face of some over stated deforestation in some areas.
However, let's look at the concept of taking action against CO2. Let's have the US decrease its emissions by say 50% over the next 3 decades. Will it make a difference? NO, IT WILL NOT! China alone is in the process of bringing on line more than 45 mega generators of electricity all FIRED BY COAL and has plans for many more. The same is true in India, South/Central America and in Africa. Natural gas and oil fired electrical generation is now on the list for major expansion in Russia and many of its surrounding neighbors in the far east, AND NO ONE IS GOING TO STOP THEM FROM BUILDING AND USING THESE FACILITIES. This same situation is true all over the developing nations of the world. So no matter what we do, it will MAKE ABOSULTELY NO DIFFERENCE WHAT-SO-EVER, except for its profoundly negative impact on the nation's economy.
My name is Bob Clark*. I have a degree in Physical Chemistry with Honors. I can be reached at Fsearch at msn.com. I am retired and I am available to speak to groups within driving range of my ranch in Monroe, WA. Those wishing a word copy of this document for either conversion to PDF or other formats, you have my e-mail address. You have my permission to send this report to anyone you wish, provided you acknowledge my authorship and DO NOT ALTER its content.
HERE IS AN INDEX OF WEBSITES THAT HAVE IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE AND GLOBAL WARMING for those who want to educate themselves about this issue.
In order to protect your computer, I have set this up so that to use these links one must first press the CTRL button on your keyboard and click the blue writing at the same time. All of these links are safe and everything has been scanned by McAfee and System Mechanic:
NW Climatologist predicts "Global Cooling" says Global warming is over and cannot be caused by CO2
HTTP://www.capitalpress.info/main.asp?SectionID=67&subsectionID=618&articleID=39037&Q=85344.48
UN and National Public Radio representatives come to Portland last June to indoctrinate the NW media (all major TV stations and all major newspapers in Washington, Oregon and Idaho were represented). Here is the invitation they sent out:
THE CHANGING CLIMATE ISSUE: REPORTING AHEAD OF THE CURVE
A Day Long Seminar for Print, Radio and TV Journalists and Editors of All Beats
OVERVIEW
The University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication, the Climate Leadership Initiative at the University of Oregon and the Society of Environmental Journalists invite you to a day-long seminar for journalists on one of the most pressing and debated issues of our time: climate change.
The issue of climate change is moving beyond journalism's science pages and into business, finance, outdoor, lifestyle, health, and political beats. More than ever, reporters in every part of the newsroom must understand some aspect of climate change and explain it to their publics. This conference provides an opportunity to hear presentations and panel debates by national and regional scientists, economists and policy experts, as well as journalists who are reporting the issue and dealing with issues of fairness. Key members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change including Dr. Stephen Schneider of Stanford University will be at the conference, as well as Richard Harris, science reporter for National Public Radio. The conference will generate climate change story ideas for journalists covering many beats.
The Message: "Run your bogus stories on Global Warming and forget about those who object!" I didn't make this up, read it:
http://www.capitalpress.info/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=32964&SectionID=75&SubSectionID=767&S=1
If we can't prove it using real science we will make kids learn bogus science on Global Warming?
http://www.mercurynews.com/education/ci_8269190
400 Prominent scientists dispute UN Report on global Warming
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Minority.SenateReport#report
Take the test on Climate Change. How much do you know?
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/GlobWarmTest/start.html
Al Gore's views: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59329
Solar Radiation Cause of Climate Change http://www.livescience.com/environment/070312_solarsys_warming.html
Scientists say humans not responsible: http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/global_warming/2007/12/10/55974.html
India and China and Carbon Dioxide
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/Economy/India_to_become_third_biggest_CO2_emitter_by_2015/articleshow/2527217.cms
Another mini-Ice Age on the way?
http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=287279412587175
Weather channel founder says it is all a hoax:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58586
Scientists I respect object to hoax:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57605
The UN carbon trading (corruption on an international scale?)
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070905222150.shqns3qn&show_article=1
19,000 American Scientists object and petition:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/
Rolling Black and Brown outs on the way? It's happening in Europe:
http://www.junkscience.com/ByTheJunkman/20080207.html
Best book on the hoax:
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/reviewofbooks_article/4357
Carbon Tax: http://www.cei.org/gencon/019,04474.cfm
Real objectives of Green Radicals
http://www.undueinfluence.com/global_green_goals.htm
Media bias on global warming: http://newsbusters.org/taxonomy/term/525?from=30
Top ten Myth Busters on Climate Change in 2007:
http://www.junkscience.com/ByTheJunkman/20071227.html
Site that has a complete list of links constituting the best science research sites on the Internet concerning the Global Warming con:
http://junkscience.com/
*Bob Clark sits on the Executive Board of the Snohomish County Republican Party
Is a member of:
Snohomish County Farm Bureau
Snohomish County Chapter of the Washington Cattlemen's Association
American Chemical Society, (past chapter President)
Phi Mu Epsilon (Math fraternity)
Past Membership/Event Chair of the Bellevue Chamber of Commerce
American Legion
US Army Military Police Officer's Association
Northwest Recruiters Association
American Electronics Association
The whole global warming scheme is the latest in government's desire to rob our resources. It gives them a carte blanche right to take everything you own and destory our economy.
It is their will and their way!
Posted by: GS on March 4, 2008 12:10 AMAt first proponents of the bill said that the Washington State Department of Ecology would run this so-called ‘trading system’. Then comes word that it may somehow be tied to an international Al Gore system. That may indicate that Mr. Gore may be the one who profits. That news comes as no surprise to those who have heard of his $1,359 per month electricity bill to run his Tennessee mansion. He obviously needs the money to plant trees on his estate to erase his ‘carbon signature’.
Estimates are that literally Billions of dollars in commissions and fees may be generated by the ‘CO2 trading system’. Most of this money would be paid by utilities who use coal and natural gas to generate electricity, which would on the average effectively DOUBLE the cost of electricity to Americans around the country.
Here is the compete text of the Coleman Story: http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080303175301.aspx
I have a question to which you might know the answer.
Have any scientists anywhere built a model ecosystem with a "sun" source and tried changing .12% CO2 to replicate worst case scenarios?
They've built bio-dome, super colliders, and other things - if global warming was such a potential earth killer, wouldn't they have tried?
Have the "scientists" said why the sun is not part of their calculations 100% of the time?
As an aside, have scientists ever done experiments to recreate crude oil? Have they ever grabbed a bunch of plant and animal matter and compressed it under heat to see if they could create oil?
Thanks again.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on March 4, 2008 09:52 AM1) All of the "scientific" models of the Carbon Emission crowd who are heavily subsidized by government grants are just that, computer models. These models generally work by plugging in various human emissions data and then crunching with a feedback mechanism that has the effect of multiplying the resulting conclusion. The models that get the attention are the ones where the feedback loops produce the wildest conclusions with the greatest amount of hysteria. This egregious feedback loops in the computer models are the origin of the claims of 20 foot sea level rise within 50 to 100 years. But now, upon pressure from real science, most of this fear mongering has subsided, even within the IPCC report, such that more realistic rises of a foot or two over 100 years are now the admitted worst cases. Which brings me to my second point.
2) The politics of crisis always matter. If I tell you that your house will be underwater tomorrow, that is emergency. But if I tell you that a waterfront house may see an average one to two foot rise of the Puget Sound over the next 100 years or more, then you probably could care less, as you may not even be able to address that problem in your lifetime. And even if you assume the worst and take an aggressive line of prevention, that might mean adding some landfill to your property and building a better sea wall over the course of several years as finances permit. Not a crisis.
So the Global Warmers want to create a climate of fear and immediate crisis so as to justify their economy destroying and statist policies. But even their own reports now indicate that no such crisis exists.
And there are plenty of reports that show that warmer periods have been very beneficial to man, and other reports that show that we might actually be entering a cooling period.
The rational will prevail here, because ever in zeal, the Marxists always overplay their hands. Average Joe has been casually following along with all of the media reports of fear mongering. But Average Joe can also plainly see the shore level as he drives around Puget Sound, and he can see that level over a period of years as he ambles along through his life. Eventually, after five or ten years or so, it occurs to Average Joe that all of the immediate panic peddled by Al Gore and crew has not materialized, even over the course of a decade or more. The pace of these massive global changes is glacial at best. So Average Joe finally concludes that Al Gore is nothing more than a chicken little who also claims he invented the Internet. Within fifteen years, Al Gore's name will be synonymous with ludicrous scare-mongering and he will be known and remembered only as a shuckster / quack on par with those who sell diet pills, fad diet books, and other elixirs and cure-alls that never really work.
Thanks for your efforts, please keep it up.
Posted by: Jeff B. on March 4, 2008 11:25 AMGlobal Warming: Truth or Dare?
I particularly like the author's attack on the basis of Global Warming itself, that global temperatures have increased at all.
"This means that determining an average of a quantity (Earth surface temperature) that is everywhere different and continuously changing with time at every point, using measurements at discrete times and places (weather stations), is virtually impossible; in that the resulting number is highly sensitive to the chosen extrapolation method(s) needed to calculate (or rather approximate) the average."
Posted by: Reality on March 5, 2008 02:22 PM