Over the past several years, it appeared that our society was doomed to succumb to what Weather Channel founder John Coleman has described as "the greatest scam in history": anthropogenic (human-caused) global warming (AGW). For two decades there has been an incessant drumbeat of propaganda attributing every weather-related event to an increase in carbon dioxide caused by the burning of fossil fuels. With the election of a president who is solidly in the global-warming-alarmist camp — and with many high-level appointees who are bona fide climate-change alarmists — coupled with a Democratic legislature anxious to please their environmentalist and media benefactors, the passage of legislation causing some form of economy-crippling energy taxation seemed to be a foregone conclusion.

But then came the unexpected: a recession brought on and exacerbated by the heavy hand of government, and a second consecutive severe winter. Indeed, we may look back and see that our current financial crisis and Mother Nature were the saviors of free-market capitalism. They may have slowed the statist steamroller long enough for the proponents of climate realism to make such socialistic schemes as "cap and trade" understood for what they are and what they are not. They are not about anything to do with global warming or climate change. They are instead a massive transfer of wealth from the productive to those who will not adopt free markets.

While the primary promoters of the warming hoax have not "broken and run" yet, there is much evidence that there is an increasing tide of defectors and that climate catastrophists have completely run out of dry powder.

Temperatures Stopped Increasing

Satellite data from NASA shows no increase in average global temperature since 1998, a year when El Niño caused a worldwide spike having nothing to do with carbon dioxide. Alarmists contend this is just a pause in a continuous rise in temperatures and that it will begin to increase again. Ironically that is the same argument that the warming skeptics have been using for years. There was warming for the first 40 years of the 20th century — until the very time CO₂ began to climb significantly — and then came cooling, which sparked concerns in the '70s about a looming Ice Age. Then rising temperatures resumed until 1998 and now we're back on a cooling trend. This fits well with a general planetary warm up, but is in conflict with climate forcing by CO₂ that calls for a continuous upward temperature movement.

Unfortunately for the alarmists, nothing seems sacred these days. It has long been known that the disintegration of the Soviet Union ended temperature data from large parts of that country, especially Siberia. Without massive re-calculations to exclude temperature readings from these stations during the Soviet era, a significant increase in global temperatures would be seen from the absence of this data during the post-Soviet period. From available literature there is no indication that any meteorological body went to such trouble. But what about the weather data from the United States — the "best in the world"?

In his presentation at the International 2009 Conference on Climate Change, 25-year veteran meteorologist Anthony Watts showed alarming data for the global-warming alarmists. But first we should note that the global temperature rise that we are supposed to be concerned over was less than 1°C for the entire 20th century, meaning minor errors in measurements can contribute significantly to an apparent warming trend. Watts was certainly aware of the "urban island" effect that causes cities like Tucson to have temperature increases three times those of surrounding rural measurement stations. But how have reporting stations, "urbanized" by a spreading population, been affected? With 650 volunteers, more than 860 of the National Weather Service's 1,221 climate-monitoring stations were inspected and photographically documented. Of these, 89 percent did not meet the Weather Service's own requirement of being 30 meters away from artificial heating or reflecting sources such as pavements or building.

Public Opinion Is Shifting

According to a January Rasmussen poll, 44 percent of U.S. voters now say "long-term planetary trends are the cause of global warming — up from 35 percent two years ago, while only 41 percent blame it on human activity, down from 47 percent. The remainder either attribute global warming to some other reason or are unsure. This means that only about 4 in 10 of the polled "expected voters" are still falling for the "greatest scam."

For the alarmists to pass their "cap and trade" or "carbon tax" legislation — the purpose of all this turmoil — they must do so before the awakened voters reach the 70-percent level, at which point some political analysts believe that even many liberal Democrats will abandon a sinking ship.

When people are more informed on the issue, the tide swings dramatically away from the alarmist position. In the Czech Republic where President Vaclav Klaus, a speaker at the climate-change conference and current president of the European Union, is educating his countrymen on the climate debate, a mere 11 percent believe in anthropogenic global warming. The more informed people are, the less likely they are to be in the alarmist camp.

This was evidenced by a 2007 Oxford-style debate in New York sponsored by National Public Radio, a more difficult venue being hard to imagine for warming skeptics, or "deniers" as they were popularly referred to. The issue under debate was "Global Warming Is Not a Crisis." Prior to the debate about 30 percent of the audience agreed with the motion, and 57 percent were against, with 13 percent undecided. After the debate 46 percent agreed, while 42 percent were opposed with 12 percent apparently still unsure, a swing of 19 percent of those with an opinion toward the climate-realist position.

More and more scientists are also publicly coming out against the anthropogenic global-warming hypothesis. On March 21, 59 additional scientists from NASA, the EPA, the Navy, the Air Force, the Defense and Energy Departments, and major universities joined the previous 650 who disagree with this hypothesis, according to Senator James Inhofe, ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Goodbye CO₂, Here Comes the Sun

Because of undeniable properties of the spectral properties of atmospheric gases and the wavelengths of solar radiation and terrestrial re-radiation, all climate predictive models have a "hot spot" in the atmosphere at a height of 8 to 10 kilometers above the equatorial regions. Sought after for years as proof of CO₂-induced warming, thousands of radiosonde (balloon) and satellite measurements have failed to find this critical signature or "fingerprint" of CO₂ as a climate-forcing agent. Lack of such evidence caused the defection of Dr. David Evans from his post with the Australian Greenhouse Office. But there is other evidence of this disconnect presented by none other than Al Gore in his movie, An Inconvenient Truth. Featured in the video is a large graph with two lines of data, one being temperature as calculated by the thoroughly discredited and phony "Hockey Stick" graph, while another plots the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide. The data are separated for a reason: if you put them together, it is evident that a rise in temperature precedes the increase in CO₂, as if the oceans give up the gas when they are heated. Which they do.

On the other hand, the controversy has brought to light a correlation that seems to have been lost in history: temperature change versus solar activity, not only solar irradiance that can account for only a small change in temperature, but activity that includes solar winds and magnetic fields.

Let us take two end points: first the coldest temperatures of which we have a historical record, the depth of the Little Ice Age from about 1645 to 1715, and the second being today's global temperatures. Next to this we plot the lowest sunspot activity, a period known as the Maunder Minimum where there were no sunspots for five decades, and then the solar activity that occurred at the end of the 1900s, estimated to be the highest in the last 11,000 years.

It is interesting that the lowest temperature is associated with the Maunder Minimum while the highest is found in the late 1900s temperatures. Unfortunately while this may bring thinking people to discount the warming hoax, there is a possible downside for the human race. In the last two years there have been almost no new sunspots while scores, if not hundreds, were expected in a new solar cycle. Not wanting to sound like an alarmist, nonetheless, this condition bodes ill for a continued warming trend and is likely the precursor of significant cooling — the real problem for the human race.

One can imagine a scene 10 years hence when government has shut down coal-fired power plants while global temperatures are plunging toward those last seen in the mid 1800s.

Alarmist Leaders Avoid Questions

The two most vocal and quoted leaders in the campaign to convince the public that global warming is both caused by human activity and is a threat to mankind are former Vice President Al Gore and NASA employee James Hansen. Both were invited to speak at the March 8-10 Conference on Climate Change. Neither accepted.

In his closing address to the conference, producer of the informative DVD Apocalypse, NO!, Lord Christopher Monckton remarked: "Gore's speaking contract stipulates that he will not debate, he will not answer unscripted questions, and he will not be interviewed except by journalists acceptable to him. Which journalists are they? The dim ones that don't know any science, and the prejudiced ones that don't care. Just about all of them."

Gore appeared before the U.S. Senate a few weeks ago in a "public" hearing, except the public was not invited. The former V.P. showed "science slides" to the senators. Would you like to know what they were about? Me too. Sorry, but they are secret, and the Senate is exempt from the Freedom of Information Act. Fancy that.

Meanwhile Chief Alarmist James Hansen wasn't too busy to lend a hand at a March 2 demonstration, self-proclaimed as "Mass Civil Disobedience at the Coal-Fired Capitol Power Plant in Washington D.C." The nation anxiously awaited Capitol Climate Action's report proclaiming: "Courageous activists have now occupied three of five gates at the Capitol Power Plant. The march of thousands is continuing to circle the plant." The report didn't mention that the plant no longer generates electricity and is already slated to be changed over to natural gas.

At this point the entire cabal of global-warming alarmists must realize that all it would take is a single mainstream news organization to opt for truth, and their entire house of cards would come tumbling down. Through public pressure on our legislators and through letters to the editor, we can hasten this glorious day.
 

Climate Realists Gather

The 2009 International Conference on Climate Change was held in New York City on March 8-10. Over 800 people from 40 countries attended lectures chosen from a smorgasbord of 80 topics in paleoclimatology, climatology, climate-change impacts, and economics & politics. Featured keynote speakers included European Union President Vaclav Klaus, MIT Professor Richard Lindzen, Hon. John H. Sununu, Willie Soon, Astronaut Harrison Schmitt, Arthur Robinson, Jay Lehr, NASA retiree John Theon (former boss of James Hansen), Lord Christopher Monckton, and Joe Bast, president of the sponsoring organization, the Heartland Institute.

Return to main text

Photos: Heartland Institute, Surface Stations

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (20)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

The wealthy are the least productive members of our society!!!, Lowly rated comment [Show]

Robert Speirs said:

	... Dear me. "The wealthy are the least productive in society". So they are less productive than the ho-bo's (homeless bozos) who hang around bus stations and public libraries? When you want a job and are tired of leeching, who do you ask for a job? The homeless bozos or a wealthy, productive businessman?
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 01, 2009
Votes: +7

Curious Jack said:

... Todd, Please enlighten me. How many jobs have you created? How much money have you given to charities? How many businesses have you started? How many products have you built and sold to how many American families? Here is a clue for you. They consume more because they produce more. Good God man, when will you ever learn even the basic laws of economics? On second thought, don't even bother to answer. Nothing you would say would even remotely interest me.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 01, 2009
Votes: +10

Antonio Sosa said:

We must stop Obama More and more scientists and thinking people all over the world are realizing that man-made global warming is a hoax that threatens our future and the future of our children. The more than 700 international scientists who now dissent over man-made global warming claims are now more than 13 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers. http://www.climatechangefraud..../3562/218/ Using the global warming/climate change scam, Obama and his accomplices plan to impose Cap and Trade, which will increase taxes; increase the cost of energy; force many companies to close; and multiply unemployment, poverty and despair, while increasing the power and wealth of Obama and his accomplices. Dr. S. Fred Singer, an internationally famed climatologist, says Cap and Trade “would be the equivalent of an atomic bomb directed at the U.S. economy—all without any scientific justification.” We must stop Obama.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 01, 2009 | url
Votes: +22

When the dying starts due to drought etc., Lowly rated comment [Show]

Crazy Train, Lowly rated comment [Show]

Edward Metcalfe said:

	Just for the record We keep getting told by the media, regardless of which side of the fence they are on, of the number of scientists who agree with their point of view. Is it possible to get the names of these scientists (along with their signatures) from both sides of the fence.
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 01, 2009 | url
Votes: +12

James L said:

	This is an eye opener! check it out!!! http://www.petitionproject.org/
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 01, 2009
Votes: +8

geoff pohanka said:

	where is the global warming Al Gore's testimony and slide show can be watched on youtube. Lots of counter arguments to the global warming hoax on this website: www.isthereglobalwarming.com
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 01, 2009 | url
Votes: +4

Flu-Bird said:

	Green poppycock Just look at AL GORE and all his fleet of limos and all his private jets and he dont have one single hybrid in his car fleet and then theres hollywood wackos like JOHN TRAVOLTA with his own 707 and LUARIE DAVID and her limos all while these wackos are lecturing us all on how to live green and yet their the biggist bunch of hypotcrits around
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 01, 2009
Votes: +15

Lee said:

Hot Topic I've noticed of all the subject matter that receives more comments than any other is global warming. Every article that Ed Hiserodt, William Jasper have recently posted stirs up the global warming waters. Keep the articles coming! The global warming scam is being exposed as Mr. Hiserodt points out in the above article, and, just like in the recent Ponzi scheme where people lost millions of dollars to a scam artist, the ACW con is reaching Bernie Madoff proportions. It's good to see that people are waking up to this gigantic swindle. Good! Let TNA hasten the day when the US senate finally puts Al Gore's charts in the right order. At some point even the most neurotic global warmist will have to face the fact that he has been taken. Maybe? There will be people who will never fully recover from the entire con built on the "earth day" philosophy. They'll never accept reasonable arguments, which is what The New American writers provide.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 01, 2009
Votes: +7

So much text...so little science, Lowly rated comment [Show]

Climate Change Deniers in the Dark Ages, Lowly rated comment [Show]

Flu-Bird said:

	kelly the green fool Too bad kelly but it looks like you have falled hook,line and sinker for this whole GLOBAL WARMING fruad might i suggest you quit watching the main-stream lie a day news media and cancil your subcription to NATIONAL GEPGRAPHIC becuase despite its so called SCIENCE its total fabrications
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 04, 2009
Votes: +4

Solar Chaos said:

	Look to the sun What if the sun does have an impact on the temperatures on earth? The current data shows solar activity is decreasing. Are we prepared or preparing for a worse scenario of the earth cooling? Do we have the energy and food supplies?
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 04, 2009 | url
Votes: +3

Sean said:

Consensus means nothing in science. Facts are not determined by popularity in science. For those saying that if MOST scientists think global warming is true, who are you going to believe, the few scientists who are the minority or the overwhelming majority? Such a silly argument. If there is one field in which scientists would be the first to admit that hardly anything is actually understood or that we even have enough date to come to meaningful conclusions it is climatology. The "Consensus" in the past among reputable scientists used to be that the Sun revolved around the earth, that the earth was flat, that time was a constant, etc. etc. I could go on and on about these "consensuses" where 99.9% of scientists believed these things. All it takes is ONE scientist to overthrow a consensus, if they are right and the consensus is wrong. And this has happened time and time again throughout scientific history. The evidence is pointing more and more that CO2 is NOT the gas that determines the overall climate of our planet, and that human influence is not enough to send us over any so called "tipping point". This current global warming "consensus" is looking weaker every year that goes by, and it will become even more obvious that something is wrong with prediction in the coming decade.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 05, 2009
Votes: +9

Sean said:

CONT. If people would use their common sense once in a while they would realize that the Earth has to be extremely resilient climatically simply because life has existed on this planet for ~4 billion years in one form or another! During this immense time period some major catastrophies have happened... meteor strikes being just one example, lava flows larger than half of the United states being another. We have records of temperature that only spans ~150 to 100 years depending on who you ask. The indirect methods of determining temperatures earlier than that are dubious a best. Even 10000 years of accurate temperature measurements would not be enough to actually know what the climate does in response to inputs. Just look at the length of the ice ages and extremely short warm periods in between... which we are lucky enough to be in one of those warm periods now.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 05, 2009
Votes: +1

Sean said:

CONT 2 The climate by its very nature has both positive and negative feedbacks that keep it in line, which we barely understand. The piddly small amount of CO2 humanity is pumping into the atmosphere and the resultant warming is easy for the climate to erase through negative feedbacks we don't yet understand. Mark my words. In addition, NOT ONE climate model was able to predict the lull in the warming that we have seen since 1998. Not one. The warming trend has been essentially flat since 1999, this despite the fact that CO2 has continued to rise at the same rate it always has. When there is a discrepancy of this magnitude, it is time for the "consensus of scientists" to rethink their hypothesis. This is not like debating Relativity, Quantum Mechanics, Evolution, etc. etc. These fields are very solid in their foundations of factual basis. However, there is PLENTY of room for debate in climatology. We know next to nothing about what makes climate tick. Climate, by its very nature is exceedingly hard to predict and to understand. Being a skeptic is a healthy thing in science.

report abuse vote down vote up

April 05, 2009
Votes: +2

Yawn said:

	Total nonsense This comment has been deleted because it was uncivil and abusive. We welcome dissent, but please abide by commonly accepted standards of courtesy and civility.
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 06, 2009
Votes: +0

Flu-Bird said:

	far away but still hot were 93 million mile away from the sun but it still effects our weather more then all the factories and SUVs in the world can ever do
	report abuse vote down vote up

April 27, 2009
Votes: +2