The Great Global Warming Swindle

I know this has been posted at a number of other sites. I think we need to spread the word. This should be required viewing for anyone interested in the truth of climate change.

Global warming is not a crisis --- DUH!

This is news! ABC running an article denouncing the alarmism of the global warming crowd. I'm not thrilled with the way that this article begins but I certainly agree with the premise. Climate change has become a religion with the head witch doctor, Algore, exclaiming that it's a moral issue on the alter of Hollywood.

In the 1970s, the fear was "global cooling." The Christian Science Monitor then declaimed, "Warning: Earth's climate is changing faster than even experts expect," while The New York Times announced, "A major cooling of the climate is widely considered inevitable." Sound familiar? Global warming represents the latest doom-laden "crisis," one demanding sacrifice to Gaia for our wicked fossil-fuel-driven ways.

But neither history nor science bolsters such an apocalyptic faith.

The climate on this planet has been in a constant state of flux since the beginning of time. The current warm temperatures are not even as high as temperatures during medieval times. We know this from historical accounts of how the Vikings colonized Greenland in areas that are not inhabitable now.

There are real crises on that we have to deal with. Terrorism, Malaria, Starvation, drinkable water shortages. These are real problems that humans have to deal with.

Herein lies the moral danger behind global warming hysteria. Each day, 20,000 people in the world die of waterborne diseases. Half a billion people go hungry. A child is orphaned by AIDS every seven seconds. This does not have to happen. We allow it while fretting about "saving the planet." What is wrong with us that we downplay this human misery before our eyes and focus on events that will probably not happen even a hundred years hence? We know that the greatest cause of environmental degradation is poverty; on this, we can and must act.

The effects of global warming are long term not to be manifested for 100 years or so. Malaria has killed over 5.5 million people in the past 2 years. Terrorism is a real problem NOW. Hunger, starvation and safe drinking water supply are real problem that can be solved now. If the left invested the energy and money into solving the real problems of today we could make a real change. Hot summers and mild winters do not a crisis make.

The best solution to these problems is to help encourage real economic growth. Of course that goes against the real agenda of the left.

Climate change is a norm, not an exception. It is both an opportunity and a challenge. The real crises for 4 billion people in the world remain poverty, dirty water and the lack of a modern energy supply. By contrast, global warming represents an ecochondria of the pampered rich.

The "crisis" is the global warming political agenda, not climate change.

Cherry picking the global warming data

I'm seeing a pattern here. Every time a qualified, respectable scientist reviews the data on climate change and comes to the conclusion that it is mostly or completely natural, there is a flurry of reports on how the IPCC report, which has yet to be issued, has confirmed that there is nothing but doom and gloom ahead unless CO2 emissions are cut back.

Research said to prove that greenhouse gases cause climate change has been condemned as a sham by scientists. In fact global warming could be caused by increased solar activity such as a massive eruption.

The Polar Bears are not dying, but are thriving in most areas in the Arctic. As a matter of fact, it has now come to light that the picture of the Polar Bears "stranded" on the melting iceberg is actually an ice sculpture formed by the wave action of the sea. The bears are just having fun. Polar Bears can swim over 100 miles and are not likely to be stranded on any ice floes.

The climate change alarmists and their media mouthpieces are reaching for whatever straws they can grasp. And as more scientists speak out and denounce the alarmism surrounding every gust of wind we can expect the MSM and Hollywood to fight back. It's a loosing battle on their part but all that matters is the cause. Don't confuse anyone with the facts.

Global Warming on Mars

In 2005 data from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey missions revealed that the carbon dioxide "ice caps" near Mars's south pole had been diminishing for three summers in a row.

Global Warming on Mars can only mean one thing:

Solid proof that there is life on Mars and that the Martians are driving SUV's.

Could there be any other possible conclusion?

The Earth has been warming steadily since the end of the Little Ice Age, noticeably to its most arrogant inhabitants since the 1970's when we all panicked about the imminent ice age to come within 10 years.

Mars too has been warming. Mars has polar ice caps of frozen carbon dioxide (also known as dry ice - Those of us who are old enough remember when Lou Costello asked that immortal question: How do you dry ice anyway? - but I digress). The polar ice caps have been melting. We know this because our satellites have observed this for the past three years. Has the temperature been increasing longer than three years? Most likely but we don't know because we weren't there to record it.

So if you have similar behavior in two locations within the same system (Earth and Mars within the solar system) then the logical conclusion is that those common behaviors are caused by the same phenomenon.

Therefore... there must be life on Mars causing the observed global warming OR global warming is a natural phenomenon caused by the variances in the output of the Sun and other cosmic radiation.

Ya Think?!??!





Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, The Virtuous Republic, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, Overtaken by Events, The Right Nation, Renaissance Blogger, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Random Dreamer, A Blog For All, 123beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Phastidio.net, Cao's Blog, Conservative Cat, Jo's Cafe, Conservative Thoughts, Faultline USA, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, and Blue Star Chronicles, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Improved hurricane forecasting possible

There are two aspects of forecasting hurricanes, where and how strong.

The path of a hurricane or tropical storm is fairly well predicted within a 3 - 5 day window. Storm tracks across the water or as the storm approaches landfall prove to be rather accurate. The critical period, of course, is as the storm makes landfall. As bad as the destruction of New Orleans was, it would have been worse had the Hurricane Katrina not veered slightly to the east just before landfall. Rita was predicted to make landfall around Freeport Texas (just west of us here). Instead it took a sharp right hook and hit Sabine Pass (at the border of Texas and Louisiana). While this difference of around 150 miles seems like a lot, it was well within the "cone of uncertainty". Basically if any part of the shaded area of the forecast track is heading towards you there is a potential that the storm will make landfall in your area - So get out!

The other part of the storm's prediction is its intensity. Just how strong a storm is when it makes landfall determines just how much damage it may do and even if evacuation is required. Just because a storm hits Cat 4 or 5 while over water does not mean it will be that strong at landfall. Both Katrina and Wilma in 2005 hit Category 5 status before dropping to a Cat 3 before making landfall. Likewise a storm can build suddenly as it approaches land as Wilma initially did when it crossed the Yucatan earlier in its existence.

Predicting the intensity of a storm is much more difficult. The intensity of a strong can be estimated from the radar echoes but the only true measure of the storms winds is for a "Hurricane Hunter" aircraft to fly through the eye of the storm and take on the spot measurements. Typically one plane at any given time flies through the storm and measures the wind speeds and barometric pressures along the radius of the storm.

In 2005, two planes from NOAA and one from the Navy flew in and around hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Ophelia. "It marked the first time that three Doppler radar-equipped aircraft flew simultaneously in and around these parts of a hurricane."

Data from Hurricane Rita showed for the first time that rapid intensity changes can occur when clouds outside the wall of the eye of the hurricane coalesce to create a new eyewall.

They saw a band of dry air develop around the existing eyewall as the hurricane swirled into a tighter spin -- similar to a moat around a castle.

A new ring of thunderstorms then formed around the existing eyewall, and the new outer eyewall contracted and strangled the inner eyewall, leading to a weakening of the storm. But as the new eyewall contracts, the storm may re-intensify quickly.

In less than a day, Rita grew from Category One, the least intense ranking, to a Category Five, the most intense.

"We comprehensively documented the processes that were taking place in the storm during the eyewall replacement," Robert Houze, a University of Washington atmospheric sciences professor and the study's lead author, said in a telephone interview.

"And we did this by flying the aircraft in a unique pattern, a circular pattern, with the plane flying between the two eyewalls and looking out either side with its onboard radar."

The researchers also developed a conceptual model to assist computer simulations to predict hurricane intensity changes.

Houze said these storms undergo intensity changes in a span of about 12 hours with an eyewall replacement cycle.

If a hurricane is within half a day of making landfall, it would be valuable to know how intense it will be when it comes ashore to guide authorities in their emergency management decisions such as evacuations, the researchers said.

Hurricane expert Hugh Willoughby of Florida International University, who was not involved in the research, said the findings represent a key milestone on the road to more skillful intensity forecasting. He said current intensity forecasts are not much better than simple statistical extrapolations.

Reuters Photo (right)A computer model image shows outer rainbands starting to form a new eyewall around the existing eye (top) and then the new eye forming over a large area (bottom). Scientists using data from planes flying into a large hurricane have documented changes inside these swirling storms that can quickly alter their intensity, and say these insights can improve forecasting. (University of Miami/Handout/Reuters)

The insights obtained from this study will help to improve hurricane forecasting. Knowing the intensity of a storm as well as its track will improve the ability of local officials to make the correct decisions in the proper amount of time to save lives and protect property.



Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Is It Just Me?, The Virtuous Republic, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, Leaning Straight Up, Rightlinx, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, The Uncooperative Blogger ®, stikNstein... has no mercy, Pirate's Cove, Overtaken by Events, The Right Nation, Renaissance Blogger, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, Random Dreamer, A Blog For All, 123beta, Adam's Blog, basil's blog, The Bullwinkle Blog, Phastidio.net, Cao's Blog, Conservative Cat, Jo's Cafe, Conservative Thoughts, Faultline USA, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, The World According to Carl, and Blue Star Chronicles, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.