I
know many people believe global warming is a real threat and that human
activity is a major contributor to it.. I agree that man can and has
contributed to atmospheric pollution. But where I differ is with the
amount, if any, of that human activity contributes to climate change.
My personal belief based on extensive reading on the subject is that
whatever man contributes it is miniscule. Cycles of cold and hot are a
matter of history and man had nothing to do with them. So I find it
hard to accept as credible current global warming/climate change claims
of man's role in the process. My belief is that such claims are largely
driven by ideology, politics, funding sources and outcome expectation
from those sources as well as preservation of scientific careers.
Nonetheless, I am open to challenges and feedback from anyone
with differing opinions. In the meantime I will continue to share items
with you that I think contribute to the debate.
This man's expert opinion is worthy of consideration. http://americanprosperity.com/weather-channel-founder-debunks-global-warming-hoax/
This item provides a synopsis of presentations given at the Ninth
International Conference on Climate Change (ICCC9) held July 7th to
July 9th, 2014. The author provides brief background discussion and
context. The links add to the discussion. http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/08/inside_the_global_warming_skeptics_conference.html An especially informative link is here: http://americanthinker.com/2014/05/the_corruption_of_science.html
This item provides a synopsis of
one presentation at the ICCC9 conference. It is an analysis of two key
scientific components at the heart of the climate change debate. Here
is a most informative quote the presenter (a world class scientist and
reviewer of the IPCC reports) provided addressing the efficacy of UN
IPCC reports: "First,
we note that each report “Summary” is produced by a political
consensus, not like the underlying scientific report. [Doubting readers
can visit the web site]
As Rogers points out, the U.N. mandate is: “understanding the
scientific basis of risk of human-induced climate change…” There is no
mandate to consider any other causations, such as natural ones related
to solar change and ocean circulation cycles -- just presumptive human
causes, such as fossil fuels. The IPCC sees a human climate-fingerprint
everywhere because that is what they are looking for." (My comment:
The "IPCC Report Summary" is what the media use for reporting
purposes and governments use to form their climate change policies.) http://www.americanthinker.com/2014/08/climate_science_does_not_support_ipcc_conclusions.html
The vaunted claim that 97% of
consensus of scientists agree with man-caused climate change is under
assault. Saying it over and over again does not make it so. Critical
analysis of how that number was derived has established that the
underlying mythology used is fundamentally flawed. The link provides
details. Quote: “These types of ‘consensus’ surveys are meant to
provide talking points to politicians and the media in order to crush
dissenting voices and ban skeptics from the mainstream media. It frees
the climate crisis promoter from having to research any scientific
points and instead allows them to say: ‘90% of scientists agree. Case
closed!’” http://www.mrc.org/articles/liberal-media-love-flawed-studies-claiming-vast-scientific-consensus-climate
Some fun items to ponder. http://www.mrc.org/articles/five-climate-change-claims-ridiculous-sharknado
George Burns
No comments:
Post a Comment