largie.com » Manmade

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Manmade chemicals are proven to be the major cause of global climate change as such cause increased atmospheric temperature which can lead to unfavorable water patterns, growth patterns, and weather. Unfortunately, man cannot do away with such chemicals that easily as these are needed in producing and refrigerating goods, and in making lives easier.

As such, the U.S. and international governments are establishing regulations to limit the usage of manmade chemical substances that deplete the ozone layer, have a high global warming potential, or increase the fugitive emissions related to Greenhouse Gases (GHGs).

Refrigerant gas used to run commercial refrigeration units, as well as air-conditioning systems and heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems, is a chief cause of climate change because it is made up of hydrochlorofluorocarbons and chlorofluorocarbons. These gases contribute to global warming and also deteriorate the ozone layer. Because of the great harm refrigerant gas can cause to the Earth, the United States and many international countries are phasing out its usage, with complete removal by 2015.

Climate change is largely caused by fossil fuels as these release greenhouse gases in the air which heats up the atmosphere. Natural gas, oil and coal used to operate vehicles and generate electricity emit high levels of carbon dioxide, identified as a chief contributor to global warming. Fossil fuels also produce carbon monoxide, methane emissions, nitrous oxide and nitrogen oxides, all substances that impact air quality and global warming.

Scientists have found that methane is a significant cause of climate change. This greenhouse gas is discharged by cows, pigs, horses, sheep and other domesticated animals. Methane gas is also discharged from garbage in landfills, fertilizers, oil drilling and coal mining. In addition, when a gas leak occurs, a high volume of the dangerous chemical is discharged at one time.

Climate change is largely caused by the destruction of the ozone layer. It occurs from things we use every day. Commercial refrigerators, freezers, air conditioners, and heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems all contain harmful gases that continue to destroy the ozone layer. Damaging gases used in the operation of refrigeration and cooling equipment include hydrochlorofluorocarbons, chlorofluorocarbons, fluorine, chlorine, bromine, hydroxyl, nitric oxide and atomic chlorine.

Several factors are identified to be the cause of climate change. Such include animal agriculture, land use, deforestation, cement manufacturing and aerosols. These areas are being studied to identify measures that would limit their impact on global warming.

Many types of pollutants are a cause of climate change. Common pollutants are carbon dioxide, methane, black carbon and nitrous oxide. As these chemical pollutants increase, the ozone layer gets depleted, which results to global warming. Experts signify the need to address global warming, otherwise, planet earth will be totally destroyed.

Simply put, too much heat stored in the atmosphere is the cause of climate change. The amount of greenhouse gases in the air contributes to atmospheric heat. Increased heat on lands, oceans, and the atmosphere has changed the Earth's climate. As a result, human, animal, plant and marine life will be severely impacted.

Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) Energy Efficiency Scheme Introduction - The UK government is rolling out the Carbon Reduction Commitment legislation which forces over 5,000 organizations to take part in a "carbon cap and trade" scheme and to produce carbon emissions reports. Learn about Verisae's CRC Energy Efficiency support solutions at http://www.verisae.com/articles

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Man-made Global Warming is Tulip Bulb Mania

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Global warming research has become a very big business throughout the world. Each year billions of dollars are spent studying climate change. The United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), now has an annual budget that has reached more than 6 million. The Bush Administration has spent more than thirty billion dollars on federal programs involved in global warming in the last six years. In total, global warming proponents are estimated to have been funded by more than fifty billion dollars during the last decade.

This huge money stream is flowing directly into the pockets of the advocates of man-made global warming. It is a river of money that can only be shut off if it is discovered that man does not cause global warming and that climate change is really out of our control. In effect, the same people that benefit from the huge research funding pool would have to be motivated to shut it off.

The truth is that the business objective of the man-made global warming bandwagon is an increasing flow of scientific research grants and bureaucratic jobs. The worse the man- made global crisis, the better for the global warming business. In addition, the news media loves stories of fear. This makes man-made global warming a big business for television, magazines, and books as well.

Various "experts" on man-made global warming appear regularly on television to remind everyone of the upcoming global climate catastrophe in the next century. Unfortunately, its not in the interest of the media to cast doubt on man-made global warming. It is a very good business for them. The fact is that very little news media coverage is given to research that brings into doubt the so-called scientific man-made global warming consensus.

Therefore, it is not surprising that we have not heard much from the news media on the recent blockbuster report (December 2007) in the prestigious International Journal of Climatology (Royal Meteorological Society), of professors: David H. Douglass (of the University of Rochester), professor John R. Christy (of the University of Alabama), Benjamin D. Pearson and professor S. Fred Singer (of the University of Virginia). In this report the scientists found: "that observed patterns of temperature changes over the last 30 years disagree with what greenhouse models predict and can better be explained by natural factors, such as solar variability". Their conclusion was that climate change is "unstoppable" and cannot be affected or modified by controlling the emission of greenhouse gases, such as CO2, as is proposed in current legislation.

Dr. S. Fred Singer, said: “The current warming trend is simply part of a natural cycle of climate warming and cooling that has been seen in ice cores, deep-sea sediments, stalagmites, etc., and published in hundreds of papers in peer-reviewed journals. "Our research demonstrates that the ongoing rise of atmospheric CO2 has only a minor influence on climate change. We must conclude, therefore, that attempts to control CO2 emissions are ineffective and pointless — but very costly."

The news media has also not made us aware that data (2005) from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars' south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row. This means that both the Earth and Mars have been experiencing similar degrees of global warming. Of course, the problem for the man-made global warming crowd is that there are no humans on Mars for them to blame for that planet's warming.

In a National Geographic story on February 2007, Habibullo Abdussamatov, head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, says the Mars data is evidence that the current global warming on Earth is being caused by changes in the Sun. He reasons that "The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars."

The man-made global warming industry should remind us of the tulip bulb mania in Holland in 1636. The history books tell us that in 1593 tulips were brought from Turkey and introduced to the Dutch. The novelty of the new flower made it widely sought after. After a time, the tulips contracted a non-fatal virus known as mosaic, which altered them causing different colors to appear on the petals. The color patterns came in a wide variety and increased the popularity of the flower.

The increase in popularity of the tulip led to a rise in its price. Soon everyone began to deal in tulip bulbs. It became a very big business. Eventually things became so crazy that people were selling everything they owned, including their homes and livestock, to buy tulip bulbs. At the time, the consensus expectation was that the tulip bulb would continue to grow in value forever.

In 1636, tulips were listed on the Amsterdam stock exchange which further accommodated the tulip speculators who had become the primary market for tulip bulbs. The price of a tulip bulb at the height of this mania was ,000. In the next six weeks tulip bulbs would drop in value to less than one dollar.

Today, man-made global warming is similar to the tulip bulb mania in Holland in 1636. It is an issue that has been hyped into a huge business. The absurd consensus in Holland in 1636 was that tulips were so unique that they would continue to increase in value forever. The current global warming crowd wants us to believe that global warming is controllable and man-made. There is no conclusive evidence that global warming is man-made and all contrary evidence is dismissed and ridiculed. We are told that we must act now to save the planet or our world will be lost to a multitude of catastrophic events in the future.

The inconvenient truth of all this is that, like the Holland tulip bulb in 1636, man-made global warming hype has entered the world of the absurd. We may think the price of ,000 for a tulip bulb in Holland was silly. However, how silly is it when compared to the global warming hype of today? Indeed in the future people will look back with humor on a decade when tens of billions of dollars were spent in an attempt to convince society that the warming of Earth was due to man and not a function of the Sun.

James William Smith has worked in senior management positions for some of the largest financial services firms in the United States for the last twenty five years. He has also provided business consulting support for insurance organizations and start up businesses. Mr. Smith has a Bachelor of Science Degree from Boston College. He enjoys writing articles on political, national, and world events.Visit his website at http://www.eworldvu.com

Article from articlesbase.com

Man-made Climate Change – Its Supporters Ignore the Truth

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

An in-depth investigation of the pros and cons of man-made climate change must focus principally on the claims made by the Scaremongers - the supporters of this theory. The onus of proof has to be supplied by them. So far they've produced no sound evidence for that nor have they answered their critics.

In spite of the failed climate change theory of the 70s when many eminent scientists were predicting a colder future for the world, the 'Yes' case scientists and others cannot come up with any plausible data to emphatically prove their present position. They believe that if the UN says so, then it must be right, ignoring the fact that the UN has time and time again proved that it's completely out of its depth when it comes to dealing with serious issues.

Some of the issues ignored by the Scaremongers:
1) By general scientific consensus there has been at least 12 major periods of climate during the life of the earth. All have been part of the earth's natural life cycle. That being the case, why should the present period of global warming (if proven to be true) be anything other than a continuation of past events caused by Nature? If the first 12 were caused by Nature, why should the 13th be caused by man?

2) The UN in their reports on global warming skim over the huge contribution to the increase in greenhouse gases by the under-developed countries - deforestation and population growth. Why?

3) The 'Yes' people insist that global warming has been going on for at least a century, possibly 150 years. What they can't tell us is if this is unusual. They just don't have any figures to suggest that nothing like this has ever happened before. In fact the current figures of world temperature cannot be compared to the figure of 50 years ago because of the more sophisticated instruments in use today. So how can a comparison be made with figures from the 1850s or further back in time?

4) Scientists supporting the 'Yes' case point to the increase in carbon dioxide over the past 50 years. What does this mean? How does it compare to the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere 100 years ago, 1000 years ago, 10,000 years ago? They just don't know with any degree of certainty. So they cannot really say whether the earth is on the verge of a climatic crisis or whether Nature is just making the sort of minor adjustment that's been made since time began.

5) The Scaremongers base their whole argument on the theory that increasing CO2 in the atmosphere will lead to an increase in world-wide temperatures. They have yet to explain the situation that occurred between 1940 and 1975 when the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere increased, but temperatures throughout the world declined.

6) History has shown that melting of the ice-caps, and the lowering and raising of the snow-line of mountain ranges has been occurring from time to time. There is nothing unusual about the current melting of the polar regions - so why do the Scaremongers predict the worst because of this?

In the days of primitive man it was common for unusual natural phenomena to be accorded a special place in their lives. Early man didn't know what caused rain, so they invented there own reason. They ascribed it to the work of a Rain God. There was a god of thunder, fire, a god who controlled eclipses, a god for everything.

Today man doesn't know why the earth's temperature is rising, if indeed it has been rising. So like early man, they come up with a theory that seemingly may answer their questions but bears no relevance to reality.

Now into this intellectual vacuum created by the 'Yes' people steps the sort of person who cannot resist making this issue a personal crusade. Enter a politician, or should I say a failed politician. Enter Al Gore, the champion global warming theorist.

A man who thinks he has the power to halt and then reverse the work of Nature, or for the religious person, God, Allah, Jehovah etc. A man who thinks he's on a divine mission to help people saves themselves from themselves. A man who uses all sorts of lies, subterfuge, distortions to get his theory accepted. A man appealing to the gullible nature of people. A man using his political skill to deceive and distort. A politician being a politician.

In situations of uncertainty, being fearful of what may happen in the future, most people will grasp at anything that points the way to safety. And so it is with the theory that we're all doomed unless we make radical changes to our way of life. In situations such as this, some politicians will always seek to gain an electoral advantage.

Pressured by minority interest groups that want their positions accepted, politicians feel compelled to give the electorate what they want. Instead of leading from the front, politicians are more than happy to jump on the band wagon driven by the media. Power hungry politicians are at the vanguard of this controversial theory. And on the flimsiest of data, they could bring economic disaster on the world, because the remedial actions they propose will involve the expenditure of vast amounts of money. Money that could be spent to fix some of the more serious problems of the world.

The major issue the Idealists have about the incessant and unproven warnings from those who believe implicitly in the theory of man-made global warming is that this is not the most important threat to the future of mankind.

Not by any stretch of the imagination.

That position is held by the threat of the declining sperm count of males in western countries. This is a problem of such magnitude that it has the ability to devastate the world's population within a few generations.

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as a look at one of the best fat loss products and the increasing popularity of dish TV.

Man-made Climate Change – Fact or Fiction?

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

In the past dozen years or so a major controversy has developed through out the world about changes that are supposedly taking place with the earth's climate. There is a large body of opinion that believes the earth's temperature is getting warmer due to the increase in greenhouse gases, especially carbon dioxide (CO2), caused by the burning of fossil fuels and increasing industrial activity, and unless governments take action to remedy the situation then mankind is in serious trouble.

This theory is not believed by everyone. Indeed there are many eminent scientists who have said that the theory has no credibility as the evidence presented by its supporters is inconclusive. So there are two schools of thought on this matter, each adamant that they're right:

1) Those who believe implicitly that global warming is taking place and that man is entirely responsible by increasing the amount of carbon dioxide ( a 'greenhouse' gas) in the atmosphere. I call these people the Scaremongers.

2) Those who believe that much more evidence is needed before any categorical claims can be made. I call these people Idealists.

So lets have a closer look at the issues raised by these two factions:

The Scaremongers predict doom and gloom.
The 'Yes' case says emphatically that the earth is getting warmer at an increasing rate, posing a dangerous threat to the future of mankind. They say that the increase in global temperatures over the past 50 years has been caused by a world-wide increase in industrial activity during that same period and earlier. They also suggest that the problem is getting progressively worse and that higher temperatures will lead to melting ice in the polar regions; higher sea levels causing world-wide flooding; more violent storms, hurricanes, typhoons etc; problems in the production of food; and a wide number of other circumstances that could pose problems for life on earth.

The 'Yes' case's solution is to take severe measures today to stop disasters from happening in the future.

They suggest halting and then reversing the situation by eliminating our dependence on oil and coal and embracing 'clean energy' such as wind, solar, tidal power; finding an alternative to using oil derivatives for transportation; and most controversially, heavily taxing users of 'dirty energy' to force them to switch over to 'cleaner' alternatives.
As the biggest users of 'dirty energy' the western nations would be exposed to the full impact of these severe impositions.

The Idealists, on the other hand, want more concrete evidence of this forecast change.

The 'No' case believes that more credible evidence is needed and collected over a longer period of time, before any definitive conclusion can be determined. They consider that statistically the 50 years period that the Scaremongers quote is nowhere near enough time to establish a long-term trend in the world's temperatures, taking into account that the age of the earth being 4.5 billion years. They point to the changes, both ups and downs, of the earth's temperature during its recent history. They also suggest that if a period of climate change is starting then it's part of a cycle that's been seen to occur periodically in the past.

The 'No' case says that the relationship between possible rising temperatures and man's industrial activity is at best nothing more than an unproven theory. They suggest that much more concrete evidence than what' has been presented so far is needed, and as the Scaremongers have been pushing this theory for at least 10 years without producing further evidence, then it's still a theory.

Some people even suggest that the Scaremongers are inciting public opinion to advance their political ambitions.

However, many of the Idealists agree that a switch to cleaner and renewable energy resources would be beneficial for mankind in the long term, but that the measures put forward by the 'Yes' people go too far. Generally, the Idealists agree with the need to find alternate means of energy for when the present sources of fossil fuels - coal, natural gas, oil, uranium - expire, and to get away from suppliers in politically sensitive areas.

The 'No' people suggest that as there is a very slim chance of the Scaremongers being proved correct, other world-wide problems should be tackled first and given a greater degree of emphasis than is the present case. Here the Idealists are referring to major issues of world-wide poverty; the ever-increasing gap between the rich and the poor countries; the decline in health services to poorer countries; the deterioration in the quality of political governance in Africa; threats of religious confrontation; as well as the many regionalized issues that have been a source of continuous friction between nations for decades.

This is an attempt to put some balance into the ongoing international controversy that is the theory of man-made climate change.

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Man-made Climate Change – a Campaign of Deception or Ignorance?

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The unproven theory of man-made global warming and its related issues presented by both those who believe in this theory - the Scaremongers - and those who don't - the Idealists - are the subject of much international controversy. Looking at the Scaremonger's position the question needs to be asked: are they scientifically ignorant, or are they engaged in deception?

The whole position and argument put forward by the 'Yes' case to support their position comes from data collected over the past 50 years. This data is then compared with data collected since the 1890s - when world-wide climatic data first became of interest to scientists - and from the changes a wholly unrealistic assumption is made.

There are two major issues with this:

Firstly, the instruments and equipment used today to measure such factors as air temperature, sea temperature etc. are considerably more accurate than those in use 50 years ago, let alone 110 years ago. So that raises the question - how accurate is any data collected more than 10 years ago? The 'Yes' case needs to clarify this point.

The second issue concerns the number of years over which the current data has been collected. 110 years may provide a start, but it's nowhere near long enough from which to predict the future . Realistically though, 110 years in comparison to the scientifically recognized age of the earth - 4.5 billion years - is meaningless.

To get a valid and significant understanding of the recent changes in the worlds' temperature - if indeed there has been any abnormal changes - and to try to determine future trends in the area of climate change, the absolute minimum period from which such data is collected should be no less than a thousand years.

Of course this is not possible, but it doesn't give the 'Yes' case the right to give credibility to the limited data they have by suggesting something that can't be proven. All this approach does is give ammunition to the emotionally immature.

Whilst all of this may point to an incorrect and highly contentious interpretation of the available facts, the role of the UN could be considered as blatant deception.

Recent reports issued by the UN's committee on man-made climate change laid the blame for this perceived problem clearly at the feet of the industrial western world. Two reports presented in early 2007 pointed to the damage being caused by the burning of fossil fuels leading to an increase in greenhouse gases, and an imbalance between the CO2 and oxygen in the worlds' atmosphere. The UN said quite clearly that this problem was caused by the ever-increasing expansion of industrial activity by the established western nations and the emerging industrial countries, notably China and India.

The other factors that could be responsible for this atmospheric imbalance - factors that could have a profound influence - were not mentioned at all or were given little attention.

Firstly no mention was made of the practice prevalent in third world countries of mass deforestation by burning thus emitting carbon dioxide into the air. Trees and plants emit oxygen and take in CO2 and therefore play a critical role in helping to keep in balance the relationship between these two gases.

The other factor the UN failed to mention was the explosion in the worlds' population over the past 50 years. In that time world population has grown from 2 billion to over 6 billion and third world countries have been responsible for the greater part of this.

If the increase in greenhouse gases has been caused by man's activities then all of man's actions should be taken into account. The UN do themselves no justice by highlighting only the actions of the industrialized and emerging nations. If the UN is to enjoy any credibility on this issue, then it must mention that deforestation and an unregulated population explosion may also be to blame.

The Scaremongers insist that their proof is strong and convincing. That's what they insist on, but closer examination shows otherwise. Most of the 'proof' they offer is weak and totally unconvincing.

Why do they continually repeat the lie that of the ten hottest years on record, six have occurred within the past 10 years? This has been seen to be false - it's recently been reported that the 10 hottest years occurred before 1950, with the hottest decade being the 30s.

But what's so important about the last 110 years, the number of years that climatic data has been collected? Now if those years had been the hottest in the last 1000 years, then that would have greater importance.

Why does the 'Yes' case refuse to ignore the one question that would give their theory credibility - what caused climate change in the 12 previous occasions it's occurred during the life of the earth?

After 12 periods of climate change caused by Nature, why should the activities of man be responsible for present events?

And this last point raises a very interesting question - what gives the 'Yes' case the right to think they can reverse the work of Nature or God? What gives Al Gore and his like the right to think they can undo God's work?

And why are the worlds' religious leaders saying nothing about this?

This is a look at the international controversy concerning the cause of climate change, and an attempt to put some balance into the argument.

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

In 2008, scientists from all over the world are jumping off the man-made global warming bandwagon. This is due to the fact that environmental study after study concludes that the behavior of man is not the cause of significant global warming.

In a recently released Geological Society of America abstract, Dr. Don Easterbrook, Professor of Geology at Western Washington University, presented data showing that the global warming cycle from 1977 to 1998 is now over and that we have entered into a new global cooling period that should last for the next three decades.

He also suggests that since the IPCC climate models are now so far off from what is actually happening that their projections for both this decade and century must be considered highly unreliable.

Meanwhile, David Douglass and John Christy, in a paper just accepted for publication and now available on the internet, have come to the conclusion that natural changes in global water temperature are responsible for an increase in global temperature. Here is their scientific conclusion:

"El Nino and La Nina effects in the tropics have a more significant affect on global temperature anomalies than carbon dioxide, in particular it was an El Nino event that drove the 1998 global temperature maximum".

At NASA, Dr. Roy Spencer, believes natural cycles account for most of last century's warming, with carbon dioxide increases contributing only a modest amount.

His new research, which was submitted to Geophysical Research Letters for publication, shows that climate models overstate the positive feedback from an increase in carbon dioxide, and therefore grossly overstate the projected warming during the next century

In addition, two new studies (article in Science Magazine) point to wind-induced circulation changes in the ocean as the dominant cause of the recent ice losses through the glaciers draining both the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets, not 'global warming.'

In June, Dr. David Evans, an architect of Australia's Kyoto compliance, and for years a noted climate change alarmist, became the latest man-made global warming doubter. Evans outlines the four main reasons why 2008 has become the year of the global warming skeptic and why he recently jumped off of the global warming bandwagon.

1.The missing "greenhouse signature", which would be a hot zone about 10 km up in the atmosphere. It's been sought for years - hundreds of measurements using radiosondes (a sort of temperature measuring weather balloon). It would constitute the smoking gun . Hundreds of tests have returned the same answer - it's not there. It is statistically impossible that the hundreds of tests missed the spot. The existing models on greenhouse warming do not work without this hot zone.
2. "There is no evidence to support the idea that carbon emissions cause significant global warming" says Evans. "None". There is plenty of evidence that global warming has occurred, and theory suggests that carbon emissions should raise temperatures (though by how much is hotly disputed) but there are no observations" constituting evidence that carbon emissions are a significant driver in warming trends.
3. Satellites measuring the world's temperature uniformly show that the warming trend stopped in 2001 and that in the past year the temperature actually returned to 1980 levels. Satellite measurements are the only truly reliable method for capturing the data as land-based measurements are vulnerable to encroachments of expanding cities and "urban heat island effect."
4."The new ice cores show that in the past six global warmings over the past half a million years, the temperature rises occurred on average 800 years before the accompanying rise in atmospheric carbon. Which says something important about which was cause and which was effect."

As global temperatures continue to cool and research against man-made global warming continues to pile up, as scientists abandon the man-made global warming bandwagon, one thing is becoming increasingly clear. The cause of global climate change should be based on facts and evidence and not just our fear.

James William Smith has worked in Senior management positions for some of the largest Financial Services firms in the United States for the last twenty five years. He has also provided business consulting support for insurance organizations and start up businesses. Visit his website at http://www.eWorldvu.com or his daily blog at http://www.eworldvublog.blogspot.com

Global Warming Scientists Dispute Man-made Greenhouse Effects

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Man-made Global Warming is Tulip Bulb Mania

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Article from articlesbase.com

Man-made Climate Change – Its Supporters Ignore the Truth

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

Man-made Climate Change – Fact or Fiction?

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Man-made Climate Change – a Campaign of Deception or Ignorance?

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

Global Warming Scientists Dispute Man-made Greenhouse Effects

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

largie.com » Manmade

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Man-made Global Warming is Tulip Bulb Mania

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Article from articlesbase.com

Man-made Climate Change – Its Supporters Ignore the Truth

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

Man-made Climate Change – Fact or Fiction?

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Man-made Climate Change – a Campaign of Deception or Ignorance?

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

Global Warming Scientists Dispute Man-made Greenhouse Effects

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

largie.com » Manmade

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Man-made Global Warming is Tulip Bulb Mania

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Article from articlesbase.com

Man-made Climate Change – Its Supporters Ignore the Truth

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

Man-made Climate Change – Fact or Fiction?

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Man-made Climate Change – a Campaign of Deception or Ignorance?

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

Global Warming Scientists Dispute Man-made Greenhouse Effects

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Article from articlesbase.com

largie.com » Manmade

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Man-made Global Warming is Tulip Bulb Mania

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Article from articlesbase.com

Man-made Climate Change – Its Supporters Ignore the Truth

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

Man-made Climate Change – Fact or Fiction?

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Man-made Climate Change – a Campaign of Deception or Ignorance?

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

Global Warming Scientists Dispute Man-made Greenhouse Effects

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

largie.com » Manmade

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Man-made Global Warming is Tulip Bulb Mania

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Article from articlesbase.com

Man-made Climate Change – Its Supporters Ignore the Truth

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

Man-made Climate Change – Fact or Fiction?

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Man-made Climate Change – a Campaign of Deception or Ignorance?

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

Global Warming Scientists Dispute Man-made Greenhouse Effects

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

largie.com » Manmade

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Man-made Global Warming is Tulip Bulb Mania

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Article from articlesbase.com

Man-made Climate Change – Its Supporters Ignore the Truth

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

Man-made Climate Change – Fact or Fiction?

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Man-made Climate Change – a Campaign of Deception or Ignorance?

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

Global Warming Scientists Dispute Man-made Greenhouse Effects

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

largie.com » Manmade

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Man-made Global Warming is Tulip Bulb Mania

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Article from articlesbase.com

Man-made Climate Change – Its Supporters Ignore the Truth

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

Man-made Climate Change – Fact or Fiction?

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Man-made Climate Change – a Campaign of Deception or Ignorance?

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

Global Warming Scientists Dispute Man-made Greenhouse Effects

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

largie.com » Manmade

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Manmade Chemicals a Major Cause of Global Climate Change

largie — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 00:03:20 +0000

Article by Daniel Stouffer

Man-made Global Warming is Tulip Bulb Mania

largie — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:05:56 +0000

Article from articlesbase.com

Man-made Climate Change – Its Supporters Ignore the Truth

largie — Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:00:05 +0000

Man-made Climate Change – Fact or Fiction?

largie — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 07:07:35 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

Man-made Climate Change – a Campaign of Deception or Ignorance?

largie — Sat, 01 May 2010 04:49:15 +0000

The world-wide controversy over the warming of the earth and the causes has led the author to research this phenomena and give his thoughts about the shortcomings of the evidence in support. He also has an interest in more down to earth issues such as how to lose weight and the increasing popularity of satellite TV.

The Year of the Man-made Global Warming Skeptic

largie — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:03:21 +0000

Global Warming Scientists Dispute Man-made Greenhouse Effects

largie — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 02:57:33 +0000

In February 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) stated in their Fourth Assessment Report that human actions are "very likely" (i.e. with 90% or greater probability) the cause of global warming, indicated by an increase of 0.75 degrees in average global temperatures over the last 100 years. This statement is the result of very tough discussions on a worldwide scale between thousands of climate researchers whether human activity is the main cause of global warming. The results of this discussion were presented to the public in many publications, for instance in Martin Durkin´s documentary “The Great Global Warming Swindle”, presented in March 2007 at UK´s Channel 4. The main message of this production was that man-made global warming is "a lie" and "the biggest scam of modern times." Martin Durkin and coworkers argue that the scientific consensus on climate change is the product of "a multibillion-dollar worldwide industry, created by fanatically anti-industrial environmentalists, supported by scientists peddling scare stories to chase funding and propped up by complicit politicians and the media". The documentary showcases scientists, politicians, economists, writers, and others who are sceptical of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic (or man-made) global warming. Some of the scientists, opposing the main stream of greenhouse gas theories, simply argue that it has not yet been ascertained whether humans are the primary cause of global warming or if there are other natural variations responsible for this phenomenon like increased solar activity, cosmic rays or variations in natural climatic cycles. There is also a series of scientists questioning the temperature records used in the databases as temperature differences attributed to the greenhouse effect are reasonable small (fractions of a ºC). The so-called “urban heat island” effect leads to a local warming in more populated areas, showing slightly higher temperatures due to to increased heat generated by cities, rather than a global temperature rise. Anyhow, this argument was confuted by the IPPC, indicating that the effect of the urban heat island on the global temperature trend is no more than 0.05 °C (0.09 °F) degrees through 1990.

Other facts presented by the film were shown to be incorrect or misinterpreted. The film asserts for instance that records of atmospheric CO2 levels since 1940 show a continuing increase, but during this period, global temperature decreased until 1975, and has increased since then. Anyhow, it is well recognized that this cooling was driven mostly by aerosols (i.e. pollution) in the atmosphere. There is nothing contradictory about this cooling when all sources of radiation changes are considered. A second argument that easily can be invalidated is the impact of the so-called “solar variation theory” on global warming. According to the authors, solar activity (and involving cosmic rays as well as heat from the sun aiding cloud formation) is currently at an extremely high level and directly linked to changes in global temperature. The film argues that solar activity is far more influential on global warming than any other anthropogenic or natural activity on Earth. What the film does not mention is that solar activity has declined over the last 30 years - at the same time as the major spike in global temperature.

But there are some statements related to the influence of the oceanic mass and water vapour on climate change which are more difficult to confute. Water vapour makes up about 98% of the greenhouse gases by volume and provides something between 40 to 80 percent of the natural greenhouse effect. It probably has the largest impact on the planet's temperature and climatic conditions, much larger than CO2. Water particles in the form of clouds act to reflect incoming solar heat, but the film argues that the effects of clouds cannot be accurately simulated by scientists attempting to predict future weather patterns and their effects on global warming. This argument probably is correct and it is well recognized that water vapor is responsible for the natural warming up of the surface temperature to approximately 30-35ºC. Anthropogenic greenhouse effect, according to the film’s argumentation, is only about 2% of the total “natural” greenhouse effect, which corresponds to a 0.6-0.7 ºC increase in temperature. This estimate is somewhat smaller compared to the results of much more sophisticated simulations (0.9 – 2.7ºC), but there is undoubtedly an anthropogenic effect of CO2 increasing the average surface temperature.

One example of the complexity of climatic simulations is the prediction of future storm events considering global warming effects. According to a recently published study, published online by research meteorologist Tom Knutson in the journal Nature Geoscience and resumed in the New York Times (May 18, 2008), global warming isn't to blame for the recent jump in hurricanes in the Atlantic. The study predicts that by the end of the century the number of hurricanes in the Atlantic will fall by 18 percent. In the past, Knutson has raised concerns about the effects of climate change on storms. His new paper has the potential to heat up a simmering debate among meteorologists about current and future effects of global warming in the Atlantic. And Knutson is not alone with this view. Another group of experts, those who study hurricanes and who are more often skeptical about global warming, also say there is no link between global warming and hurricane frequency. They attribute the recent increase to a natural multi-decade cycle. According to the prediction, the number of hurricanes touching land in the US and its neighbors will drop by about 30 percent because of wind factors. However, the biggest storms, those with winds of more than 110 mph, would only decrease in frequency by 8 percent. The biggest decrease is forecasted for storms with winds between 39 and 73 mph (normal tropical storms), who would decrease by 27 percent.

It's not all good news from Knutson's study, however. His computer model also forecasts that “hurricanes and tropical storms will be wetter and fiercer. Rainfall within 30 miles of a hurricane should jump by 37 percent and wind strength should increase by about 2 percent”, Knutson's study says.

There are already critical reactions on this new publication. MIT hurricane meteorologist Kerry Emanuel claims that the computer model used by Knutson is not adequate enough to look at storms and according to Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., Knutson's computer model is poor at assessing tropical weather and ''fail to replicate storms with any kind of fidelity.'' It also does not considering well enough the intensity, duration and size of the storm events, as not only the number of hurricanes is important to evaluate.

Positive feedback comes from NOAA hurricane meteorologist Chris Landsea , who wasn't part of this study, praised Knutson's work as ''very consistent with what's being said all along.'' ''I think global warming is a big concern, but when it comes to hurricanes the evidence for changes is pretty darn tiny,'' Landsea said.

Dr. Oswald J. Eppers is manager of the company E&R InterConsult and owner of the Two-Approach Job Assistant and Career Guide with daily updated job opportunities for renewable energy specialists.