A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » Techniques
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Global warming OT)



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 7th 09, 07:55 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected][_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,594
Default Global warming OT)

This is just to toss some fuel into the fire and see how my namesake
and others respond. Notice an article in the journal Science, that ice
melting in the poles could lead to overflow of coasts to a much
greater detriment than previously predicted. Of course this was
published in the gossip column "Science" and not in the more respected
literature that was previously quoted in this group by global warming
foes. So, take it with the due skepticism.
Ads
  #2  
Old February 8th 09, 12:01 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Bill Sornson[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,541
Default Global warming OT)

The Amazing Story Behind The Global Warming Scam

By John Coleman
January 28, 2009

The key players are now all in place in Washington and in state governments
across America to officially label carbon dioxide as a pollutant and enact
laws that tax we citizens for our carbon footprints. Only two details stand
in the way, the faltering economic times and a dramatic turn toward a colder
climate. The last two bitter winters have lead to a rise in public awareness
that CO2 is not a pollutant and is not a significant greenhouse gas that is
triggering runaway global warming.

How did we ever get to this point where bad science is driving big
government we have to struggle so to stop it?

The story begins with an Oceanographer named Roger Revelle. He served with
the Navy in World War II. After the war he became the Director of the
Scripps Oceanographic Institute in La Jolla in San Diego, California.
Revelle saw the opportunity to obtain major funding from the Navy for doing
measurements and research on the ocean around the Pacific Atolls where the
US military was conducting atomic bomb tests. He greatly expanded the
Institute's areas of interest and among others hired Hans Suess, a noted
Chemist from the University of Chicago, who was very interested in the
traces of carbon in the environment from the burning of fossil fuels.
Revelle tagged on to Suess studies and co-authored a paper with him in 1957.
The paper raises the possibility that the carbon dioxide might be creating a
greenhouse effect and causing atmospheric warming. It seems to be a plea for
funding for more studies. Funding, frankly, is where Revelle's mind was most
of the time.

Next Revelle hired a Geochemist named David Keeling to devise a way to
measure the atmospheric content of Carbon dioxide. In 1960 Keeling published
his first paper showing the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and
linking the increase to the burning of fossil fuels.

These two research papers became the bedrock of the science of global
warming, even though they offered no proof that carbon dioxide was in fact a
greenhouse gas. In addition they failed to explain how this trace gas, only
a tiny fraction of the atmosphere, could have any significant impact on
temperatures.

Now let me take you back to the1950s when this was going on. Our cities were
entrapped in a pall of pollution from the crude internal combustion engines
that powered cars and trucks back then and from the uncontrolled emissions
from power plants and factories. Cars and factories and power plants were
filling the air with all sorts of pollutants. There was a valid and serious
concern about the health consequences of this pollution and a strong
environmental movement was developing to demand action. Government accepted
this challenge and new environmental standards were set. Scientists and
engineers came to the rescue. New reformulated fuels were developed for
cars, as were new high tech, computer controlled engines and catalytic
converters. By the mid seventies cars were no longer big time polluters,
emitting only some carbon dioxide and water vapor from their tail pipes.
Likewise, new fuel processing and smoke stack scrubbers were added to
industrial and power plants and their emissions were greatly reduced, as
well.

But an environmental movement had been established and its funding and very
existence depended on having a continuing crisis issue. So the research
papers from Scripps came at just the right moment. And, with them came the
birth of an issue; man-made global warming from the carbon dioxide from the
burning of fossil fuels.

Revelle and Keeling used this new alarmism to keep their funding growing.
Other researchers with environmental motivations and a hunger for funding
saw this developing and climbed aboard as well. The research grants began to
flow and alarming hypothesis began to show up everywhere.

The Keeling curve showed a steady rise in CO2 in atmosphere during the
period since oil and coal were discovered and used by man. As of today,
carbon dioxide has increased from 215 to 385 parts per million. But, despite
the increases, it is still only a trace gas in the atmosphere. While the
increase is real, the percentage of the atmosphere that is CO2 remains tiny,
about .41 hundredths of one percent.

Several hypothesis emerged in the 70s and 80s about how this tiny
atmospheric component of CO2 might cause a significant warming. But they
remained unproven. Years have passed and the scientists kept reaching out
for evidence of the warming and proof of their theories. And, the money and
environmental claims kept on building up.

Back in the 1960s, this global warming research came to the attention of a
Canadian born United Nation's bureaucrat named Maurice Strong. He was
looking for issues he could use to fulfill his dream of one-world
government. Strong organized a World Earth Day event in Stockholm, Sweden in
1970. From this he developed a committee of scientists, environmentalists
and political operatives from the UN to continue a series of meeting.

Strong developed the concept that the UN could demand payments from the
advanced nations for the climatic damage from their burning of fossil fuels
to benefit the underdeveloped nations, a sort of CO2 tax that would be the
funding for his one-world government. But, he needed more scientific
evidence to support his primary thesis. So Strong championed the
establishment of the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change. This was not a pure climate study scientific organization, as we
have been lead to believe. It was an organization of one-world government UN
bureaucrats, environmental activists and environmentalist scientists who
craved the UN funding so they could produce the science they needed to stop
the burning of fossil fuels. Over the last 25 years they have been very
effective. Hundreds of scientific papers, four major international meetings
and reams of news stories about climatic Armageddon later, the UN IPCC has
made its points to the satisfaction of most and even shared a Nobel Peace
Prize with Al Gore.

At the same time, that Maurice Strong was busy at the UN, things were
getting a bit out of hand for the man who is now called the grandfather of
global warming, Roger Revelle. He had been very politically active in the
late 1950's as he worked to have the University of California locate a San
Diego campus adjacent to Scripps Institute in La Jolla. He won that major
war, but lost an all important battle afterward when he was passed over in
the selection of the first Chancellor of the new campus.

He left Scripps finally in 1963 and moved to Harvard University to establish
a Center for Population Studies. It was there that Revelle inspired one of
his students to become a major global warming activist. This student would
say later, "It felt like such a privilege to be able to hear about the
readouts from some of those measurements in a group of no more than a dozen
undergraduates. Here was this teacher presenting something not years old but
fresh out of the lab, with profound implications for our future!" The
student described him as "a wonderful, visionary professor" who was "one of
the first people in the academic community to sound the alarm on global
warming," That student was Al Gore. He thought of Dr. Revelle as his mentor
and referred to him frequently, relaying his experiences as a student in his
book Earth in the Balance, published in 1992.

So there it is, Roger Revelle was indeed the grandfather of global warming.
His work had laid the foundation for the UN IPCC, provided the anti-fossil
fuel ammunition to the environmental movement and sent Al Gore on his road
to his books, his movie, his Nobel Peace Prize and a hundred million dollars
from the carbon credits business.

What happened next is amazing. The global warming frenzy was becoming the
cause celeb of the media. After all the media is mostly liberal, loves Al
Gore, loves to warn us of impending disasters and tell us "the sky is
falling, the sky is falling". The politicians and the environmentalist loved
it, too.

But the tide was turning with Roger Revelle. He was forced out at Harvard at
65 and returned to California and a semi retirement position at UCSD. There
he had time to rethink Carbon Dioxide and the greenhouse effect. The man who
had inspired Al Gore and given the UN the basic research it needed to launch
its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was having second thoughts. In
1988 he wrote two cautionary letters to members of Congress. He wrote, "My
own personal belief is that we should wait another 10 or 20 years to really
be convinced that the greenhouse effect is going to be important for human
beings, in both positive and negative ways." He added, ".we should be
careful not to arouse too much alarm until the rate and amount of warming
becomes clearer."

And in 1991 Revelle teamed up with Chauncey Starr, founding director of the
Electric Power Research Institute and Fred Singer, the first director of the
U.S. Weather Satellite Service, to write an article for Cosmos magazine.
They urged more research and begged scientists and governments not to move
too fast to curb greenhouse CO2 emissions because the true impact of carbon
dioxide was not at all certain and curbing the use of fossil fuels could
have a huge negative impact on the economy and jobs and our standard of
living. I have discussed this collaboration with Dr. Singer. He assures me
that Revelle was considerably more certain than he was at the time that
carbon dioxide was not a problem.

Did Roger Revelle attend the Summer enclave at the Bohemian Grove in
Northern California in the Summer of 1990 while working on that article? Did
he deliver a lakeside speech there to the assembled movers and shakers from
Washington and Wall Street in which he apologized for sending the UN IPCC
and Al Gore onto this wild goose chase about global warming? Did he say that
the key scientific conjecture of his lifetime had turned out wrong? The
answer to those questions is, "I think so, but I do not know it for
certain". I have not managed to get it confirmed as of this moment. It's a
little like Las Vegas; what is said at the Bohemian Grove stays at the
Bohemian Grove. There are no transcripts or recordings and people who attend
are encouraged not to talk. Yet, the topic is so important, that some people
have shared with me on an informal basis.

Roger Revelle died of a heart attack three months after the Cosmos story was
printed. Oh, how I wish he were still alive today. He might be able to stop
this scientific silliness and end the global warming scam.

Al Gore has dismissed Roger Revelle's Mea culpa as the actions of senile old
man. And, the next year, while running for Vice President, he said the
science behind global warming is settled and there will be no more debate,
From 1992 until today, he and his cohorts have refused to debate global
warming and when ask about we skeptics they simply insult us and call us
names.

So today we have the acceptance of carbon dioxide as the culprit of global
warming. It is concluded that when we burn fossil fuels we are leaving a
dastardly carbon footprint which we must pay Al Gore or the
environmentalists to offset. Our governments on all levels are considering
taxing the use of fossil fuels. The Federal Environmental Protection Agency
is on the verge of naming CO2 as a pollutant and strictly regulating its use
to protect our climate. The new President and the US congress are on board.
Many state governments are moving on the same course.

We are already suffering from this CO2 silliness in many ways. Our energy
policy has been strictly hobbled by no drilling and no new refineries for
decades. We pay for the shortage this has created every time we buy gas. On
top of that the whole thing about corn based ethanol costs us millions of
tax dollars in subsidies. That also has driven up food prices. And, all of
this is a long way from over.

And, I am totally convinced there is no scientific basis for any of it.

Global Warming. It is the hoax. It is bad science. It is a high jacking of
public policy. It is no joke. It is the greatest scam in history.

John Coleman
1-29-09


  #3  
Old February 8th 09, 12:35 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected][_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,594
Default Global warming OT)

On Feb 7, 5:01*pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
The Amazing Story Behind The Global Warming Scam

By John Coleman
January 28, 2009

The key players are now all in place in Washington and in state governments
across America to officially label carbon dioxide as a pollutant and enact
laws that tax we citizens for our carbon footprints. Only two details stand
in the way, the faltering economic times and a dramatic turn toward a colder
climate. The last two bitter winters have lead to a rise in public awareness
that CO2 is not a pollutant and is not a significant greenhouse gas that is
triggering runaway global warming.

How did we ever get to this point where bad science is driving big
government we have to struggle so to stop it?

The story begins with an Oceanographer named Roger Revelle. He served with
the Navy in World War II. After the war he became the Director of the
Scripps Oceanographic Institute in La Jolla in San Diego, California.
Revelle saw the opportunity to obtain major funding from the Navy for doing
measurements and research on the ocean around the Pacific Atolls where the
US military was conducting atomic bomb tests. He greatly expanded the
Institute's areas of interest and among others hired Hans Suess, a noted
Chemist from the University of Chicago, who was very interested in the
traces of carbon in the environment from the burning of fossil fuels.
Revelle tagged on to Suess studies and co-authored a paper with him in 1957.
The paper raises the possibility that the carbon dioxide might be creating a
greenhouse effect and causing atmospheric warming. It seems to be a plea for
funding for more studies. Funding, frankly, is where Revelle's mind was most
of the time.

Next Revelle hired a Geochemist named David Keeling to devise a way to
measure the atmospheric content of Carbon dioxide. In 1960 Keeling published
his first paper showing the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and
linking the increase to the burning of fossil fuels.

These two research papers became the bedrock of the science of global
warming, even though they offered no proof that carbon dioxide was in fact a
greenhouse gas. In addition they failed to explain how this trace gas, only
a tiny fraction of the atmosphere, could have any significant impact on
temperatures.

Now let me take you back to the1950s when this was going on. Our cities were
entrapped in a pall of pollution from the crude internal combustion engines
that powered cars and trucks back then and from the uncontrolled emissions
from power plants and factories. Cars and factories and power plants were
filling the air with all sorts of pollutants. There was a valid and serious
concern about the health consequences of this pollution and a strong
environmental movement was developing to demand action. Government accepted
this challenge and new environmental standards were set. Scientists and
engineers came to the rescue. New reformulated fuels were developed for
cars, as were new high tech, computer controlled engines and catalytic
converters. By the mid seventies cars were no longer big time polluters,
emitting only some carbon dioxide and water vapor from their tail pipes.
Likewise, new fuel processing and smoke stack scrubbers were added to
industrial and power plants and their emissions were greatly reduced, as
well.

But an environmental movement had been established and its funding and very
existence depended on having a continuing crisis issue. So the research
papers from Scripps came at just the right moment. And, with them came the
birth of an issue; man-made global warming from the carbon dioxide from the
burning of fossil fuels.

Revelle and Keeling used this new alarmism to keep their funding growing.
Other researchers with environmental motivations and a hunger for funding
saw this developing and climbed aboard as well. The research grants began to
flow and alarming hypothesis began to show up everywhere.

The Keeling curve showed a steady rise in CO2 in atmosphere during the
period since oil and coal were discovered and used by man. As of today,
carbon dioxide has increased from 215 to 385 parts per million. But, despite
the increases, it is still only a trace gas in the atmosphere. While the
increase is real, the percentage of the atmosphere that is CO2 remains tiny,
about .41 hundredths of one percent.

Several hypothesis emerged in the 70s and 80s about how this tiny
atmospheric component of CO2 might cause a significant warming. But they
remained unproven. Years have passed and the scientists kept reaching out
for evidence of the warming and proof of their theories. And, the money and
environmental claims kept on building up.

Back in the 1960s, this global warming research came to the attention of a
Canadian born United Nation's bureaucrat named Maurice Strong. He was
looking for issues he could use to fulfill his dream of one-world
government. Strong organized a World Earth Day event in Stockholm, Sweden in
1970. From this he developed a committee of scientists, environmentalists
and political operatives from the UN to continue a series of meeting.

Strong developed the concept that the UN could demand payments from the
advanced nations for the climatic damage from their burning of fossil fuels
to benefit the underdeveloped nations, a sort of CO2 tax that would be the
funding for his one-world government. But, he needed more scientific
evidence to support his primary thesis. So Strong championed the
establishment of the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change. This was not a pure climate study scientific organization, as we
have been lead to believe. It was an organization of one-world government UN
bureaucrats, environmental activists and environmentalist scientists who
craved the UN funding so they could produce the science they needed to stop
the burning of fossil fuels. Over the last 25 years they have been very
effective. Hundreds of scientific papers, four major international meetings
and reams of news stories about climatic Armageddon later, the UN IPCC has
made its points to the satisfaction of most and even shared a Nobel Peace
Prize with Al Gore.

At the same time, that Maurice Strong was busy at the UN, things were
getting a bit out of hand for the man who is now called the grandfather of
global warming, Roger Revelle. He had been very politically active in the
late 1950's as he worked to have the University of California locate a San
Diego campus adjacent to Scripps Institute in La Jolla. He won that major
war, but lost an all important battle afterward when he was passed over in
the selection of the first Chancellor of the new campus.

He left Scripps finally in 1963 and moved to Harvard University to establish
a Center for Population Studies. It was there that Revelle inspired one of
his students to become a major global warming activist. This student would
say later, "It felt like such a privilege to be able to hear about the
readouts from some of those measurements in a group of no more than a dozen
undergraduates. Here was this teacher presenting something not years old but
fresh out of the lab, with profound implications for our future!" The
student described him as "a wonderful, visionary professor" who was "one of
the first people in the academic community to sound the alarm on global
warming," That student was Al Gore. He thought of Dr. Revelle as his mentor
and referred to him frequently, relaying his experiences as a student in his
book Earth in the Balance, published in 1992.

So there it is, Roger Revelle was indeed the grandfather of global warming.
His work had laid the foundation for the UN IPCC, provided the anti-fossil
fuel ammunition to the environmental movement and sent Al Gore on his road
to his books, his movie, his Nobel Peace Prize and a hundred million dollars
from the carbon credits business.

What happened next is amazing. The global warming frenzy was becoming the
cause celeb of the media. After all the media is mostly liberal, loves Al
Gore, loves to warn us of impending disasters and tell us "the sky is
falling, the sky is falling". The politicians and the environmentalist loved
it, too.

But the tide was turning with Roger Revelle. He was forced out at Harvard at
65 and returned to California and a semi retirement position at UCSD. There
he had time to rethink Carbon Dioxide and the greenhouse effect. The man who
had inspired Al Gore and given the UN the basic research it needed to launch
its Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was having second thoughts. In
1988 he wrote two cautionary letters to members of Congress. He wrote, "My
own personal belief is that we should wait another 10 or 20 years to really
be convinced that the greenhouse effect is going to be important for human
beings, in both positive and negative ways." He added, ".we should be
careful not to arouse too much alarm until the rate and amount of warming
becomes clearer."

And in 1991 Revelle teamed up with Chauncey Starr, founding director of the
Electric Power Research Institute and Fred Singer, the first director of the
U.S. Weather Satellite Service, to write an article for Cosmos magazine.
They urged more research and begged scientists and governments not to move
too fast to curb greenhouse CO2 emissions because the true impact of carbon
dioxide was not at all certain and curbing the use of fossil fuels could
have a huge negative impact on the economy and jobs and our standard of
living. I have discussed this collaboration with Dr. Singer. He assures me
that Revelle was considerably more certain than he was at the time that
carbon dioxide was not a problem.

Did Roger Revelle attend the Summer enclave at the Bohemian Grove in
Northern California in the Summer of 1990 while working on that article? Did
he deliver a lakeside speech there to the assembled movers and shakers from
Washington and Wall Street in which he apologized ...

read more »


As I said, Science is a gossip magazine so we shouldn't take their
articles seriously. OTOH, your reference most likely comes from a
highly respected peer reviewed journal on climatology, geophysics ore
geography.
  #5  
Old February 8th 09, 03:35 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
[email protected][_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,594
Default Global warming OT)

On Feb 7, 7:37*pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
wrote:

{snip}

As I said, Science is a gossip magazine so we shouldn't take their
articles seriously. OTOH, your reference most likely comes from a
highly respected peer reviewed journal on climatology, geophysics ore
geography.


The author is a ground-breaking, board-certified meteorologist and the
founder of The Weather Channel. *He knows his stuff.

FYI.


I don't doubt it. That is the reason that his piece must have been
published in a leading scientific journal.
  #8  
Old February 8th 09, 07:27 AM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
Dan O
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,098
Default Global warming OT)

On Feb 7, 8:21 pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
wrote:
This is just to toss some fuel into the fire and see how my namesake
and others respond. Notice an article in the journal Science, that ice
melting in the poles could lead to overflow of coasts to a much
greater detriment than previously predicted. Of course this was
published in the gossip column "Science" and not in the more respected
literature that was previously quoted in this group by global warming
foes. So, take it with the due skepticism.


When a coast -- ANY coast -- floods due to melting ice, think how proud
you'll be.

Meantime, keep drinking the Koolaid.

BS


Dude, you are *such* a dumbass!
  #9  
Old February 8th 09, 04:18 PM posted to rec.bicycles.tech
di
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 847
Default Global warming OT)


"Dan O" wrote in message
...
On Feb 7, 8:21 pm, "Bill Sornson" wrote:
wrote:
This is just to toss some fuel into the fire and see how my namesake
and others respond. Notice an article in the journal Science, that ice
melting in the poles could lead to overflow of coasts to a much
greater detriment than previously predicted. Of course this was
published in the gossip column "Science" and not in the more respected
literature that was previously quoted in this group by global warming
foes. So, take it with the due skepticism.


When a coast -- ANY coast -- floods due to melting ice, think how proud
you'll be.

Meantime, keep drinking the Koolaid.

BS


Dude, you are *such* a dumbass!


Why? because he doesn't buy the propoganda BS that is being but out by the
likes if Al Gore


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Global Warming Tom Kunich Racing 308 May 10th 08 03:54 PM
A little global warming WeaselPoopPower Racing 1 November 16th 07 06:47 AM
Global Warming Tom Kunich Racing 212 November 16th 07 02:41 AM
Global Warming and RBR Experts Tom Kunich Racing 69 June 26th 07 04:55 PM
Global Warming Richard Bates UK 84 July 25th 04 11:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.