Climate Science 3

This item exposes two of if not the biggest lies left wing climate change proponents tell. Quote: "Global warming campaigners aren't very good at being green. First, there's the bird and bat chopping wind turbines radical Greens are so proud of, then there's the lifeless fields covered over by solar panel silicon, and finally, let's not forget their insistence that we generate electricity by grinding trees into pellets and burn them up as "renewable" biomass.   Then there's their demonization of CO2, the gas you just exhaled.  CO2 is the gas of life.  Plants are green because they use chlorophyll to convert CO2 and water into glucose and oxygen.  That's where food comes from."   https://mailchi.mp/cfact/feel-free-to-exhale?
Global warming?   https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/03/scientists_surprised_that_formerly_shrinking_glacier_is_growing_again.html

About the myth that 97% of scientists agree human induced global warming is real.  This item revisits that hoax.  Quote: "We are confident that all of our readers have read or heard for a number of years that 97% of all scientists believe that mankind has played a role in changing the earth’s climate. While it should have been recognized long ago as an urban myth, one of those stories that hang around regardless of a lack of any supporting facts. Rarely a day goes that a global warming alarmists do not use it to promote their cause of enlarging government and reducing personal freedom through the promotion of fear about our future. Many articles have been written to refute this claim but they all dig into the statistical weeds. Common sense alone should set you straight. If the reader wishes he or she read could read the original paper by Naomi Oreskes that started it all in Science Magazine in December of 2004. Be aware you might die laughing. The biased folks who concluded from a truly bizarre survey of science literature that 97% of all authors believe in man caused global warming would have actually been better served had they concluded that 70% of all scientists believe in their premise. That would actually have been possible. However a little common sense should tell us that no large group of people on our planet could ever reach 97% agreement on anything. Yes anything, including the Earth being round rather than flat or the sun rising in the East rather than West, or even the Earth’s gravitational pull. Simple proof of this erroneous talking point is provided by the Global Warming Petition Project at the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine in 2015. They obtained signatures on a Declaration from 31,478 American scientists, including 9,021 with Ph.D.s that stated they did not believe man kind had a significant impact on his climate."    https://www.cfact.org/2019/04/10/its-time-for-us-all-to-recognize-the-97-con-game/? 

There is a lesson to be learned in this piece. Quote: "With no examination of the evidence, we don't know the truth of the matter.  It makes no sense to dismiss alternative ideas or to label someone a denier when the truth hasn't been established, but that's what has happened.  The IPCC can't examine the evidence it gathers because the organization's charter is to report on the human influence on climate and what might be done about it.  It was told to consider just one "suspect," so, naturally, it tries to find evidence to support a case against that suspect. Science as a whole has shown itself to be incapable of resolving disputes.  It has no forum in which the evidence can be questioned and evaluated, no forum that demands responses to questions and challenges.  Some scientific disputes have dragged on for years without resolution. It's true that scientific truths are provisional in case new evidence overthrows an old theory, but that shouldn't stop the open, impartial, and detailed examination of evidence so as to clarify what is known with reasonable certainty, what's speculation, and what flaws exist in a scientific claim."  And,  "Usually, when people believe their evidence to be compelling, they can't wait to get to court and show the truth of their claims.  The warmists tell us that their evidence is compelling, but they seem curiously reluctant to try to prove it in a formal inquiry.  Maybe their argument is far weaker than they've been claiming.  If that's the case, then it's all the more reason for an open, impartial, and objective review.     https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/03/its_about_time_to_review_the_evidence_for_manmade_global_warming.html

The global warming scheme takes a big hit.  Quote: "Once again, the progressive wing of the Democrat Party is left with egg all over its face when it comes to “climate change.” Failed presidential candidate and former Vice President Al Gore may just be the hardest hit, although he’s earned millions over the decades pushing the “global warming” lie to the uninformed. It is now being reported that the world’s largest glacier is now getting bigger."  And,  "The abstract for the study notes that the glacier “has been the single largest source of mass loss from the Greenland Ice Sheet over the last 20 years. During that time, it has been retreating, accelerating and thinning.” It links the growth and thickening of the glacier over the last two years to “to concurrent cooling of ocean waters in Disko Bay that spill over into Ilulissat Icefjord,” adding, “Ocean temperatures in the bay’s upper 250 m have cooled to levels not seen since the mid 1980s.” The scientists note that their information was gleaned from two NASA data sets: the radar altimetry of the Oceans Melting Greenland mission and the laser altimetry of Operation Icebridge. The study states, “Between 2016 and 2017, we observe ice thickening of 20 to 30 m in the vicinity of the front … Repeat Glacier and Ice Surface Topography Interferometer (GLISTIN) measurements in 2018 show that the thickening continued at a similar rate near the front, but has now extended as far as 80km upstream and has spread laterally.”    https://flagandcross.com/global-warming-scheme-faces-huge-setback-after-worlds-largest-glacier-expands/  

This item provides an informed congressman giving an uniformed lifetime politician a lesson in climate science. Quote: "At one point, Massie also questioned Kerry's qualifications as an expert witness on climate science, nothing that he holds a political science degree, rather than one in the hard sciences.  "So I think it is somewhat appropriate that someone with a pseudo science degree is here pushing pseudo science to this committee," Massie said of Kerry's credentials." And, "Massie explained that his questioning stemmed from Kerry's assertion in his prepared statement that the White House was "convening a kangaroo court" on the matter.  An engineer by trade and training before he ran for Congress, Massie also possesses bachelor's and master's degrees from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology."   https://www.theblaze.com/news/mit-educated-gop-congressman-grills-john-kerry-for-pushing-pseudo-science-on-climate-change. As most people know Kerry has long been a left wing political huckster. 

More about the Democrat's foolish green energy policies.  Truth is they do not believe their own unbelievable lying rhetoric. Like so many things pushed by the left it is mere propaganda for their real objective: complete control over us.  Here is an item which provides insight.  Many more examples are included at the links below the article.   http://cfif.org/v/index.php/commentary/44-energy-and-environment/4462-green-new-deal-exposes-climate-alarmists-insincerity  

George Burns