http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,220341,00.html

"That is, cloud cover changes over a 5-year period can have 85 percent of the temperature effect on the Earth that has been claimed to have been caused by nearly 200 years of manmade carbon dioxide emissions . The temperature effects of cloud cover during the 20th century could be as much as 7 times greater than the alleged temperature effect of 200 years worth of additional carbon dioxide and several times greater than that of all additional greenhouse gases combined."

Below is quoted directly from the 2001 IPCC report on Climate Change

14.2.3.1 Clouds (paragraph 2) http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/507.htm

“The single largest uncertainty in determining the climate sensitivity to either natural or anthropogenic changes are clouds and their effects on radiation and their role in the hydrological cycle”

“In spite of these improvements, there has been no apparent narrowing of the uncertainty range associated with cloud feedbacks in current climate change simulations.”
In other words, we have no idea about the effects of clouds on climate change!

Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power!, Follow the Money! Follow the Power!Follow the Money!

Dimethylsulfide Emission: Climate Control by Marine Algae?
(Released November 2003)

http://www.csa.com/discoveryguides/dimethyl/overview.php

Phytoplankton Cloud Dance (link between marine biology and cloud formation)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1737924/posts

Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements, Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements

Liquid water in the ice cores make the atmospheric data unreliable at best.

"Determinations of CO2 in polar ice cores are commonly used for estimations of the earth’s pre-industrial CO2 atmospheric levels. Perusal of these determinations convinced me that glaciological studies are not able to provide a reliable reconstruction of CO2 concentrations in the ancient atmosphere. This is because the ice cores do not fulfill the essential closed system criteria. One of them is a lack of liquid water in ice, which could dramatically change the chemical composition the air bubbles trapped between the ice crystals. This criterion, is not met, as even the coldest Antarctic ice (down to –73oC) contains liquid water. More than 20 physico-chemical processes, mostly related to the presence of liquid water, contribute to the alteration of the original chemical composition of the air inclusions in polar ice". Jaworowski.

Only select the data that supports our cause!

The notion of low pre-industrial CO2 atmospheric level, based on such poor knowledge, became a widely accepted Holy Grail of climate warming models. The modelers ignored the evidence from direct measurements of CO2 in atmospheric air indicating that in 19th century its average concentration was 335 ppmv[11] (Figure 2). In Figure 2 encircled values show a biased selection of data used to demonstrate that in 19th century atmosphere the CO2 level was 292 ppmv[12]. A study of stomatal frequency in fossil leaves from Holocene lake deposits in Denmark, showing that 9400 years ago CO2 atmospheric level was 333 ppmv, and 9600 years ago 348 ppmv, falsify the concept of stabilized and low CO2 air concentration until the advent of industrial revolution [13]. Jaworowski

"Improper manipulation of data, and arbitrary rejection of readings that do not fit the pre-conceived idea on man-made global warming is common in many glaciological studies of greenhouse gases. In peer reviewed publications I exposed this misuse of science [3, 9]. Unfortunately, such misuse is not limited to individual publications, but also appears in documents of national and international organizations. For example IPCC not only based its reports on a falsified “Siple curve”, but also in its 2001 report[14] used as a flagship the “hockey curve” of temperature, showing that there was no Medieval Warming, and no Little Ice Age, and that the 20th century was unusually warm. The curve was credulously accepted after Mann et al. paper published in NATURE magazine[15]. In a crushing criticism, two independent groups of scientists from disciplines other than climatology [16, 17] (i.e. not supported from the annual pool of many billion “climatic” dollars), convincingly blamed the Mann et al. paper for the improper manipulation and arbitrary rejections of data. The question arises, how such methodically poor paper, contradicting hundreds of excellent studies that demonstrated existence of global range Medieval Warming and Little Ice Age, could pass peer review for NATURE? And how could it pass the reviewing process at the IPCC? The apparent scientific weaknesses of IPCC and its lack of impartiality, was diagnosed and criticized in the early 1990s in NATURE editorials [18, 19]. The disease, seems to be persistent." Jaworowski

What does this all mean? The whole basis for the claim that man has increased the atmospheric level of CO2 is seriously flawed. But hey, an arbitrary 83 year shift in data solves it nicely!
What other data has been ignored or changed by the IPCC to make it “fit” the man produced CO2 & global warming hypothesis?

Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements, Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements

Ice core proof that a rise in atmospheric C02 levels actually follows a rise in global temperature by several hundred years.

In simple terms, the earth's temperature rises FIRST,

and then hundreds of years later, CO2 levels rise.

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V6/N26/EDIT.jsp

"On the basis of atmospheric CO 2 data obtained from the Antarctic Taylor Dome ice core and temperature data obtained from the Vostok ice core, Indermuhle et al . (2000) studied the relationship between these two parameters over the period 60,000-20,000 years BP (Before Present).  One statistical test performed on the data suggested that shifts in the air's CO 2 content lagged shifts in air temperature by approximately 900 years, while a second statistical test yielded a mean lag-time of 1200 years.  Similarly, in a study of air temperature and CO 2 data obtained from Dome Concordia, Antarctica for the period 22,000-9,000 BP -- which time interval includes the most recent glacial-to-interglacial transition -- Monnin et al . (2001) found that the start of the CO 2 increase lagged the start of the temperature increase by 800 years.  Then, in another study of the 420,000-year Vostok ice-core record, Mudelsee (2001) concluded that variations in atmospheric CO 2 concentration lagged variations in air temperature by 1,300 to 5,000 years."

Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power!, Follow the Money! Follow the Power!Follow the Money!

Read below how in 1958, George Callendar arbitrarily discarded C02 data in order to "prove" that pre-industialized C02 levels were only 292 ppm/v, instead of 335 ppm/v or higher.

http://www.aetherometry.com/global_warming/Section_I_6.html

"Here begins the story of one of the most egregious instances of scientific skulduggery.  All begins in 1958 with George Callendar 's dubious treatment of carbon dioxide data [ 29 ] . Callendar arbitrarily discarded, amongst other things, all measurements above 350 ppmv (parts per million by volume), most measurements above 320 ppmv, and all measurements taken in city environments (not even a comparison between rural and urban environments was carried out) - to arrive at the notion that the mean carbon dioxide concentration during the 19th century was 292 ppmv.  Inclusion of the data discarded by Callendar would have placed the 19th century carbon dioxide mean 15% higher, at 335 ppmv [ 30 ] .  If one accepts the Callendar treatment of the data, one accepts that there has been an increase in carbon dioxide in the past 100 to 150 years (but not in the 100 years before that), ie an upward variation of at most some 21% - from 292 ppmv to a maximum of 350-355 ppmv.  This is an essential tenet of 'global warming', but it is noteworthy that some critics of this myth accept this variation, or the existence of a variation that may be as high as 25% (eg Jorgensen ) or 50% (eg Lindzen ).  Typically, this increase is explained by deforestation (preponderantly before 1905) and increased fossil fuel burning (after 1905) - by coal-burning plants, internal combustion engines, etc." 

global warming = global socialism, global warming = global socialism, global warming = global socialism

AVHRR Image of Siple Dome

http://nsidc.org/data/waiscores/siple_avhrr.html

Arial photo of Siple dome

Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power!, Follow the Money! Follow the Power!Follow the Money!

Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/about/position/globalwarming.jsp

"In thus considering the seven greatest temperature transitions of the past half-million years - three glacial terminations and four glacial inceptions - we note that increases and decreases in atmospheric CO 2 concentration not only did not precede the changes in air temperature, they followed them, and by hundreds to thousands of years !  There were also long periods of time when atmospheric CO 2 remained unchanged, while air temperature dropped, as well as times when the air's CO 2 content dropped, while air temperature remained unchanged or actually rose .  Hence, the climate history of the past half-million years provides absolutely no evidence to suggest that the ongoing rise in the air's CO 2 concentration will lead to significant global warming."

Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power!, Follow the Money! Follow the Power!Follow the Money!

A Pair of Two-Millennia-Long Climatic Records

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V9/N2/C1.jsp

"What was learned
Plots of the two two-thousand-year series reveal the existence of the Dark Ages Cold Period (~400-800 AD), Medieval Warm Period (~800-1200 AD), Little Ice Age (~1500-1800 AD), and Current Warm Period, the roots of which can be traced to an upswing in temperature that began in the depths of the Little Ice Age "about 1700 AD."  Results of the statistical analyses showed a common 11-year oscillation in phase with the Schwabe cycle of solar activity, plus a second multi-decadal oscillation (of about 93 years for the shallow-water G. rubber series and 87 years for the tree-ring series) in phase with the amplitude modulation of the sunspot number series over the last 300 years."

Alarmism gets laws passed which transfer power and control. Alarmism sells newspapers, books and movies. Alarmism gets people to donate to your cause. Alarmism gets noticed!

Solar flare activity.
http://www.john-daly.com/solar/solar.htm

There is a very strong correlation between the sun’s solar flare activity and global temperature.
Below are some excerpt quotes from the above website:

Clouds have a hundred times stronger effect on weather and climate than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Even if the atmosphere’s CO2 content doubled, its effect would be cancelled out if the cloud cover expanded by 1%,
Recent studies show that solar variability rather than changing CO pressure is an important, probably the dominant climate forcing factor ... The current and anticipated fleet of spacecraft devoted to the study of solar and solar-terrestrial physics will therefore probably prove to have more bearing on the understanding and forecasting of climate change than the orchestrated assessments by politically motivated international panels biased towards global warming exclusively by the enhanced greenhouse effect.”
This is a confirmation of the result, elaborated by C. Kuo et al. [48] and H. Metzner [75], that warming of the atmosphere comes first and only five to seven months later the CO2 concentration follows.
A general survey of the given results indicates that climate variations are governed by the sun, not mankind.

Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power!, Follow the Money! Follow the Power!Follow the Money!

1951-1994 Trends in Total Cloud Amount Over China

http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/clouds/kaiser/kaiser98.html

Cloud cover has over a 100 times greater effect on global temperature "greenhouse effect" than minute percieved man-made changes in atmospheric C02 levels. The study below proves China has lost 4.5 to 9 % of its cloud cover during the study period. ( and there was no 83 yr data adjustment) Loss of clouds allows more sunlight to warm the earth.

China is BIG. 9,326,410 sq km. The USA is 9,191,923 sq km. Funny how the global warming alarmists, and politicians, fail to mention these facts. Is it because it would be difficult to actually TAX people for cloud loss? Remember: When is doubt: follow the MONEY!!

Have other areas of the globe lost cloud cover over the same period? This is a FAR BETTER, more believable explaination of any global warming trend than a 26% increase of the .035% atmospheric C02 level.

"Station and regional trends in annual and seasonal mean cloud amount clearly indicate decreasing total cloud amount over much of China from the early to mid-1950s through 1994. Trends in annual mean total cloud amount were found to be quite similar for midday and midnight observations. Since daytime cloud observations are generally considered more trustworthy, the analysis emphasis was placed on midday data. Most stations in central, eastern, and northeastern China show statistically significant decreases of 1-3% sky cover per decade. Annual and seasonal trends for selected regions of China show that the strongest and most consistent evidence for decreasing cloud amount is seen for the North and Northeast regions of China, where decreases ranging from 1-2% sky cover per decade (about 4.5-9% over the period of record) are observed."

Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements, Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements

National Geographic Promotes Global Warming Myths (oct 2004) http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=15726

An easy to read discussion of the fallacies of the global warming panic.
"Even assuming the worst-case scenarios, delaying substantial cuts in CO2 emissions for the next 25 years would produce an additional global temperature rise of no more than a few tenths of a degree C by the year 2100. (3) That means we have at least 25 years in which to sharpen our understanding of climate, seek more accurate predictions, and find new technologies to address the alleged problem. With the U.S. federal government alone spending some $3 billion a year on climate change research, it would seem to be a sure bet that our knowledge will be much more complete a quarter-century from now.
If an incremental warming of a few tenths of a degree, spread over decades, should in fact occur, it would constitute no hazard to ecosystems or human well-being. Economists and agricultural scientists say it would probably be beneficial. Hence, given all of these variables, policies made in haste or based on poor information are likely to have a destructive impact on the U.S. and world economies and the well-being of their citizens."

Alarmism gets laws passed which transfer power and control. Alarmism sells newspapers, books and movies. Alarmism gets people to donate to your cause. Alarmism gets noticed!

A New Ice Core from North Greenland

http://www.co2science.org/scripts/CO2ScienceB2C/articles/V7/N41/C1.jsp

What it means
"These observations clearly indicate that it is possible to have much higher temperatures than those of the present with much lower atmospheric CO 2 concentrations (as much as 100 ppm lower, in fact), which makes one wonder why the current interglacial is so inordinately cool .  They also demonstrate that warmth promotes climatic stability, which is just the opposite of what the world's climate alarmists would have one believe.  In discussing this topic, for example, Cuffey (2004) notes that "the persistence of stable climate under such warm conditions is a key observation."  And why is that?  It is because climate alarmists would have one believe that CO 2 -induced global warming will trigger a collapse of the global ocean's thermohaline circulation that will bring on another ice age, as in The Day After Tomorrow ," the Hollywood movie that Cuffey describes as being most notable for "its public abuse of thermodynamics," where a new ice age starts in only one week.  In the real world, by contrast, Cuffey notes that the start of the last glacial period "was characterized by a mostly gradual cooling, lasting about five millennia "

Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power!, Follow the Money! Follow the Power!Follow the Money!

Accurate "Thermometers" in Space
10-02-97 NASA satellites prove no warming trend for 18 yrs, and actually shows slight downward temperature trend.

http://science.nasa.gov/newhome/headlines/essd06oct97_1.htm

What is the "Controversy"?

"Unlike the surface-based temperatures, global temperature measurements of the Earth's lower atmosphere obtained from satellites reveal no definitive warming trend over the past two decades. The slight trend that is in the data actually appears to be downward. The largest fluctuations in the satellite temperature data are not from any man-made activity, but from natural phenomena such as large volcanic eruptions from Mt. Pinatubo, and from El Niño. So the programs which model global warming in a computer say the temperature of the Earth's lower atmosphere should be going up markedly, but actual measurements of the temperature of the lower atmosphere reveal no such pronounced activity. "

http://www.nationalcenter.org/PRSatelliteData898.html

"The bottom line is that satellite data -- which has consistently shown no warming trend -- remains the most reliable means of measuring the earth's temperature. Satellites cover 99% of the surface of the planet. By contrast, reliable ground temperature data over the past 100 years covers just 18.4% of the planet."

Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements, Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements

CSPP relies on scientific experts in many nations and the vast body of peer-reviewed literature to help lawmakers, policy makers, and the media distinguish between scientific findings that are agenda-driven and those that are based on accepted scientific methods and practices. In a timely manner, the Center's Science Watch Team alerts policy makers, the media, and the public to unreliable scientific claims and unjustified alarmism which often lead to public harm. We strive for a fair and balanced examination of science.

http://ff.org/centers/csspp/library/co2weekly/20060823/

Alarmism gets laws passed which transfer power and control. Alarmism sells newspapers, books and movies. Alarmism gets people to donate to your cause. Alarmism gets noticed!

Is Earth's Temperature Up or Down or Both?

Scientists Investigate Reasons for Temperature Trend "Disagreements" Between Layers of the Atmosphere

http://www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/MSU/hl_temp_ud.html

"Instead, we believe the problem resides in the computer models and in our past assumptions that the atmosphere is so well behaved. These models just don't handle processes like clouds, water vapor, and precipitation systems well enough to accurately predict how strong global warming will be, or how it will manifest itself at different heights in the atmosphere," remarked Spencer.

Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power! Follow the Money! Follow the Power!, Follow the Money! Follow the Power!Follow the Money!

Global Climate Monitoring: The Accuracy of Satellite Data

http://www.ghcc.msfc.nasa.gov/MSU/hl_sat_accuracy.html

"In the March 13, 1997 edition of Nature , two scientists, James Hurrell and Kevin Trenberth, report that sea-surface temperatures monitored by buoys and ships at various locations in the tropics show, for the same period as the satellite record, a warming trend of +0.12 deg. C/decade, in apparent disagreement with the satellites. This so-called "disagreement" between satellite and surface temperature measurements is not new.

Despite the fact that Hurrell and Trenberth estimate of the temperature of the atmosphere through a simple linear regression model based only on the sea surface temperatures, and a global climate model simulation with the same sea surface temperatures but no stratospheric volcanic aerosols, while the MSU data actually measure the temperature of the free atmosphere, Hurrell and Trenberth conclude that the satellite data must be wrong."

***This is extremely important info: the surface temperature of the oceans is rising. This causes the oceans to release C02, causing the atmospheric C02 levels to rise. More than 70% of the earth is covered by water. THIS IS A GIGANTIC SOUCE OF C02! It responds to a temperature change, it DOES NOT CAUSE a temperature change!***

Alarmism gets laws passed which transfer power and control. Alarmism sells newspapers, books and movies. Alarmism gets people to donate to your cause. Alarmism gets noticed!

The global warming alarmists want you to blindly accept the following as "the truth": the average global temperature is rising, a slight global temperature rise is a very bad thing, causing a multitude of horrible catastrophes, AND industrialized man is totally responsible for the rising temperature because he burns fossil fuels, which increase the atmospheric levels of CO2, which causes global warming.

You MUST understand that there are, at minimum, three distinct questions regarding global warming:

1) Is the global temperature rising?

2) Is a slight global temperature rise a very bad thing?

3) Is man responsible by burning fossil fuels?

I have no trouble believing that the average global temperature has risen 0.6 deg C in the last 120 years. Big deal. The earth and our environment is a very dynamic system, constantly changing, since the beginning of time. The earth's environment will continue to change until the end of time. No surprise there. All very normal. Remember: "normal" does NOT get people motivated to donate to your "cause", buy your newspaper, book, magazine or movie, or support your controlling legislation! When was the last time your local news or TV headlined "Another normal, average day"?

I DO NOT believe a slight global temperature rise a bad thing. During the Medieval Warm Period from about 800 to 1300 AD, warmer temperatures helped man thrive. The Vikings settled and farmed Greenland, grapes grew in what is now England, and human life was very prosperous. Be very thankful we are not in a global cooling trend! http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/mandias/lia/little_ice_age.html

I DO NOT believe man is the cause of global warming. Just like man was NOT the cause of global cooling in the 1970's.

Realize that ALL the press / media "reports" about global warming have been extremely negative. Nothing but doom, gloom and disaster. This alone should warn the astute listener / reader that there is a hidden agenda. If the reports were honest and balanced, they would show how many areas of the globe stand to benefit from a warming trend. Russia, Northern Europe, Canada and the Northern USA for example. No...it MUST be ALL NEGATIVE, or they quickly loose the "extreme alarmism" effect.

Keep in mind; the global warming alarmists, and the United Nations, MUST have industrialized man ( primarily in the USA and Europe) responsible for global warming. Then they can control and tax those prosperous Americans which they love to hate.( Kyoto agreement) If global warming is found to be caused by lack of cloud cover, solar flares, or ANY other reason than prosperous industrialized countries burning fossil fuel, the United Nations looses ALL hope for power and control as a result of global warming. Kind of hard to blame, control and tax Americans for clouds or solar flares!

You don't believe me? Then explain this quote from the UN's Climate Change 2001 report, 14.3 The Human System, last paragraph;

"In sum, the human element probably represents the most important aspect both of the causes and effects of climate change and environmental impacts. Any policy intervention will have human activities as its immediate target." (bold added)

Read below what the press and politicians DO NOT tell you from the same report.

"Though the climate models can simulate many aspects of climate variability and extremes, they are still characterised by systematic simulation errors and limitations in accurately simulating regional climate such that appropriate caveats must accompany any discussion of future changes in weather and climate extremes." Climate change 2001: 9.3.6.6 Conclusions

Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements, Tax and spend, power and control, global welfare entitlements

Ignore the sleight of hand politicians……

FOLLOW THE MONEY! FOLLOW THE POWER!
Global warming is fast becoming a gargantuan political money generating machine that has the potential to wield incredible future political power and control. Why do you think the UN and so many politicians are supporting it???

global warming = global socialism

Jacques Chirac, the president of France and a leading voice of both global warming and the United Nations, has stated that global warming is a vehicle to create “authentic global governance.”

Already funding for government sponsored global warming research has increased from about 170 million during GH Bush's term to over 2 Billion ( thats 2,000 million) today. Think of the phenomenal political power global warming wields as virtually anything we Americans do, could conceivably be regulated by a new “Global Warming Act” (remember the Endangered Species Act?)

That’s right….you heard it coined hear first…The Global Warming Act!

( possibly called The Global Warming Tax, or the Kyoto Agreement)
There is literally no end to the money "needed", as it is simply a “problem” we can’t possibly “fix.”
The tax and spend politicians will have unlimited power. Do NOT let the global warming alarmists tax YOU back into the Dark Ages.

I forsee a future Global Warming Tax for all Americans. Just like the water or electric bill, you will have to pay a fee to be used to "fix" the global warming "problem" , which is completely ludicrous to begin with.

The United Nations HATE the USA. The Kyoto Agreement would be a way to TAX the wealthy Americans and Europeans, then using the money to pay 3rd world countries to NOT DEVELOPE!

Can you say, "welfare entitlements on a GLOBAL SCALE?"

Don't take my word for it. Do your own Google research. Pay particular attention to the sources and dates of the data.

The TRUTH should never be inconvenient for those who seek it!

Speaking of "inconvenient truths" ...check this out about Mr. Gore! http://www.counterpunch.org/reviews.html

My ultimate solution? Greatly reduce CO2 emissions by stopping all the UN politicians from exhaling. Not only would this greatly reduce CO2 emissions, but would solve a multitude of our other problems as well! ;-)

Return to Tamarack's Home Page

Politicians & Alarmists: They scream "The sky is falling. The sky falling" or

"Wolf , Wolf" ... while trying to control your life and reaching for your wallet.

The Mainstream Press: " If it bleeds, it leads!" Alarmism & extreme views sell papers, books and magazines.

Let your common sense guide you.

Be sensible, be skeptical ...be very, very skeptical!

Alarmism gets laws passed which transfer power and control. Alarmism sells newspapers, books and movies. Alarmism gets people to donate to your cause. Alarmism gets noticed!

The following really should scare the heck out of you!

The movement by global warming advocates to "stifle" the voices of skeptics!

Cullen's aggressive remarks continued a recent trend of global warming alarmists seeking vengeance on scientists who disagree with their theories. In 2006 Dave Roberts, prominently featured in the December 17, 2006 episode of Cullen's The Climate Code , called for Nuremburg-style trials to convict and execute global warming skeptics.

Similarly, university-appointed state climatologists in Delaware, Oregon, and Virginia have been threatened with dismissal from their positions because they have raised questions about suspect global warming assertions. (See story, page 10.)

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=20817

Alarmism gets laws passed which transfer power and control. Alarmism sells newspapers, books and movies. Alarmism gets people to donate to your cause. Alarmism gets noticed!

"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.”   H.L. Mencken

Remember...we trusted the Government with or Social Security and they are failing with it...now the Government wants us to trust them with our Health Care?

On the Lighter Side...

The Sheep Albedo Feedback

Why the reduction of sheep numbers in New Zealand is causing Global Warming!

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/04/the-sheep-albedo-feedbacki/

http://www.ecoenquirer.com/