The Great Global Warming Swindle

[bugler]

What is wrong with software patents that is not wroing with other patents?

[Peter Lindemann]

Off Topic

Lamare and Bugler,

No more discussion of "software patents" here. It is totally OFF TOPIC for this thread. If you wish to discuss it, please start a different thread.

Peter

[Peter Lindemann]

American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009

Hi Folks,

Well, here is the real story on the "political implications" of "global warming". If this bill passes the Senate, you will lose the "right" to sell your home without approval from the "Energy Czar".

Cap & Trade - A License Required For Your Home http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-2454 - VegHaven.org

Here is a link to the bill, so you can read it yourself:

H.R. 2454: American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (GovTrack.us)

Welcome to the New World. Can you feel the heat, yet?

Peter

[Aaron]

3 articles

Obama's unconstitutional czar....

Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren involved in unwinding “Climategate” scandal
Obama’s Science Czar John Holdren involved in unwinding “Climategate”  scandal

----------------------------------------------------------

Another part of the scandal is some of the "scientists" are claiming a
bunch of data was dumped years ago. But in the hacker files, it seems
that it is all there including evidence of tampering in the more recent
years:
The Strata-Sphere » CRU’s Jones Supposedly Lost Data Used In 2008

------------------------------------------------------------

And Congress to investigate EPA cover up of the facts.
Congress to investigate suppression of global warming report by EPA

[lamare]

Lamare and Bugler,

No more discussion of "software patents" here. It is totally OFF TOPIC for this thread.

@Peter: yes and no.

I totally agree that the subject "software patents" is totally off topic here, but that was not the point.

The point is that a grass-roots campaign may be the answer to the problem, just like it was an answer to what we experienced as a problem a few years ago.

It doesn't matter at all where someone stands on the subject of the previous problem I have been engaged in, what matters is that here on this forum there is a group of people that feel there is a problem someone should do something about. And, if part of that group is willing to do that, these could learn a lot from our experiences.

So, why not consider setting up a campaign? It really is not that difficult or expensive to do in this internet area.

All you really need is a website, some mailinglists and some volunteers.

What you need most of all, are three mailinglists. One filled with press contacts, one filled with politicians email adresses, and one for internal discussion and coordination.

If you want to be mentioned in the press, the first thing to do is to get e-mail adresses of journalists, websites, newspapers, TV shows, and so on. Using a mailinglist like mailman, one has a central database of press email contacts, that can be maintained by just a few volunteers so that your press-contact-list is a) centralised b) maintained and c) continually grows.

The same thing goes for polticians. If you want their attention, you have to mail them. If you fill a mailinglist with their e-mail adresses, you can contact all of them with one single e-mail.

Once you have these kind of mailinglists, you can start writing press-releases and informational messages to politicians. The more press contacts you have in your database, the bigger the chance someone publishes your press releases, or contacts you for more information.

That way, you can slowly gain momentum. Even if only some "obscure" websites publish your messages in the beginning, momentum is gained. As long as your messages are well written, reliable and correct, sooner or later more and more people will notice them.

Another trick is to setup an online petition. That comes in handy once you want to contact parliaments somewhere.

[Peter Lindemann]

Still Off Topic

Lamare,

Coaching for political activism is OFF TOPIC here, too. I'm happy that you know how to organize political "grass roots" movements, but PLEASE, go do it somewhere else!

The purpose of this thread is to be a PUBLIC RECORD of links to information on "global warming", "climate change", and the idea that these processes are primarily, natural cycles and not "man-made".

The recent "climategate" revelations are directly ON TOPIC here, since it supports the idea that the "man-made global warming" idea was promoted by manipulating the scientific data for political purposes. For all intents and purposes, this is the same idea proposed in the film The Great Global Warming Swindle Video, which is linked here, and at the beginning of this thread.

You can also BUY a copy of the film here: The Great Global Warming Swindle

There is also another film that discusses both the science AND the political implications called "Global Warming or Global Governance?"

You can watch that film here:

Global Warming or Global Governance

Peter

[dmonarch]

Hackers uncover emails

Check this videos out.
YouTube - Hackers Reveal Climate Change Fraud (1)
Damian

[lamare]

Hi all,

Just stumbled onto this:

http://www.free-energy-info.co.uk/Chapt15.html:

--::--

Knut Aabakken of Norway makes the following observations on the current carbon dioxide situation:

"David Archibald (pdf document) published the graph shown here in 2006:

This graph clearly shows that even a big increase in the carbon dioxide level has almost no impact on atmospheric temperature. It has also been calculated that an increase to 620 ppm would give a temperature increase of only 0.16OC. The graph shown above, together with its calculations should have ended any further discussion about reducing CO2 emissions. However, this has most definitely not been the case.

For political and financial reasons, a decision has apparently been taken to keep up the pressure on carbon dioxide reductions, resulting in senseless investments on new technology for capture and storing carbon dioxide, “beautiful” windmills absolutely everywhere and the mandatory use of biofuel. Don’t forget about all the revenue which governments are getting from "climate taxes".

All these taxes and the massive spending of taxpayers money, really threatens the economic foundations of the whole of the western world, but worse still are the consequences of the commitment to biofuel. This mad strategy has caused a near doubling of the cost of cooking oil and essential foods such as rice, because farmland is now being used for the production of biofuel. These increases are hitting poor countries the worst as the people can no longer afford to pay the price of basic necessities.

If the intention of the IPPC and the world’s politicians is to starve people to death, then they are definitely on the right track through their continued insistence on the supposedly harmful effects of carbon dioxide. In reality, the greenhouse gas which has the most effect is actually water vapour which accounts for about 98% of all warming. I wonder how the politicians are going to prevent water vapour from getting into our atmosphere !"

--::--

This is the pdf he talked about:
http://www.davidarchibald.info/paper...0to%202030.pdf

There's more interesting info on the website of David Archibald
Welcome to David Archibald.info

For example, "failure to warm":
http://www.davidarchibald.info/paper...0To%20Warm.pdf

"Warming or Cooling":
http://www.davidarchibald.info/paper...%20Cooling.pdf

"The first thing to be aware of is that the warming effect of carbon dioxide is strongly logarithmic. Of the 3° C. that carbon dioxide contributes to the greenhouse effect, the first 20 ppm has a greater effect than the following 400 ppm. By the time we get to the current level of 384 ppm, each 100 ppm increment will produce only about 0.1° of warming. With atmospheric carbon dioxide rising at about 2 ppm per annum, temperature will rise at 0.1° every 50 years.

If that is true, you will ask, how does the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) get its icecap-melting figure of 5° for doubling of the preindustrial level to 560 ppm? An equation called the Stefan-Boltzman equation tells us that in the absence of feedbacks, doubling would produce a rise of 1°. The IPCC climate modeling assumes that the feedback from this rise will be positive; that is, that the extra heat will cause more water vapor in the atmosphere, which in turn will cause more heat to be trapped, and the system compounds away until 1° gets turned into 5°. As described, the Earth’s climate would be tremendously unstable, prone to thermal runaway at the slightest disturbance.

The real world evidence says the opposite. In late 2007, a Dr. Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama published a paper analyzing data from the Aqua satellite. Based on the response of tropical clouds, Dr. Spencer demonstrated that the feedback is negative. He calculates a 0.5° warming for a doubling of the preindustrial carbon dioxide level. Global warming is real, but it is also minuscule. Atmospheric temperature rose 0.7° in the 20th century; it has also fallen by the same amount in the last 18 months. Global warming, as caused by carbon dioxide, will be lost in the noise of the system.
If carbon dioxide didn’t cause the warming of the 20th century, what did? Well, a good place to start is the sun. In the 20th century, the sun was more active than at any time in the previous 8,000 years. But what is happening now suggests that it will soon be much quieter. Two Danish researchers, Friis-Christensen and Lassen, demonstrated in a 1991 paper that there is a correlation between the length of a solar cycle and the temperature during the following solar cycle. The longer a solar cycle, the cooler the following solar cycle, and visa versa. In 1996, Butler and Johnson demonstrated the same relationship on climate data from the Armagh observatory in Northern Ireland. I have extended that to the 400 year Central England temperature record, the De Bilt data from Holland, and a number of temperature records from the northeastern US. In the latter, the relationship is that each 1-year increase in solar cycle length will cause a 0.7° decline of atmospheric temperature during the following cycle."

[ashtweth]

Hi Peter/ALL

Just stumbled across this one, has a lot of FACTS regarding our little scam going on:

Global Warming Science and Public Policy - Home

Ash

OT -I agree, even tho the best way to police the politicians is to make them accountable to the public. EDUCATION (as this thread) as well a the grass roots stuff.

[Aaron]

get resource Ash!

Great site Ash!

35 serious scientific errors in Gore's powerpoint mockumentary.
Global Warming Science and Public Policy - 35 Inconvenient Truths: The errors in Al Gore’s movie

Global Warming Science and Public Policy - 450 Peer Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism of AGW-Caused Global Warming
Direct link to pdf with all these references, which by their very existence
proves there is no such thing as a scientific consensus on global warming
regardless of what Gore's misleading and fake propaganda have to say
about it.

This document is a must have!
Global Warming Science and Public Policy - Climategate: Caught Green-Handed!
Direct link to pdf:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/im...%20Scandal.pdf

[lamare]

Inquiries Begin on Climate Files; Head of British Climate Unit Steps Aside

This is going in the right direction:

Head of Climate Unit Steps Down Pending Inquiry - BlackListed News :

" Prof. Phil Jones has today announced that he will stand aside as director of the Climatic Research Unit until the completion of an independent review resulting from allegations following the hacking and publication of e-mails from the unit.

Professor Jones said: “What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible. After a good deal of consideration I have decided that the best way to achieve this is by stepping aside from the director’s role during the course of the independent review and am grateful to the university for agreeing to this. The review process will have my full support.”

Vice Chancellor Prof. Edward Acton said: “I have accepted Professor Jones’s offer to stand aside during this period. It is an important step to ensure that CRU can continue to operate normally and the independent review can conduct its work into the allegations. We will announce details of the independent review, including its terms of reference, timescale and the chair, within days. I am delighted that Prof. Peter Liss, F.R.S., C.B.E., will become acting director.”"


Also see:

Inquiries Begin on Climate Files; Head of British Climate Unit Steps Aside - Dot Earth Blog - NYTimes.com

Right from the horeses mouth:
CRU Update 1 December - University of East Anglia (UEA)

"Professor Phil Jones has today announced that he will stand aside as Director of the Climatic Research Unit until the completion of an independent Review resulting from allegations following the hacking and publication of emails from the Unit."

[dmonarch]

Hi Lamare i would be suprised if anything came of it. For most people stepping down means that you realize youve done something wrong and you want to save face for who you work for. He however gets a nice golden parachute and does very well what was asked of him. Anothing person of similar breeding will fit into the job easily. Most normal people tend to have a week long memory span so after a week they will forget. Also the jo blog is bombarded with crap called news all the time. He/she has become decesitized to it such that if anything important does come along it will just wash straight over.
Damia

[brenie]

Hi Lamare, have you noticed no one resigns anymore, they take gardening leave!
Don't suppose there will be any prosecutions for Fraud?

Regards, Bren.

[Peter Lindemann]

Australian Senate Rejects Carbon Trading Scheme

Hi Guys,

Here is an article from the BBC reporting on developments in Australia.

BBC News - Australian Senate rejects Kevin Rudd's climate plan

Perhaps the Global Warming bulldozer is losing momentum.

Peter

[Aaron]

Big Drop in Those Who Believe That Global Warming Is Coming

Peter,

Seems the scam has been losing some serious steam
even before the hacker files were released.

Check out the Harris Interactive poll.

Harris Interactive: Your full service research partner for ensuring improved business performance. With global capabilities including Internet-based market research enabled by our panel, Harris Poll Online.

http://www.harrisinteractive.com/har...2009_12_02.pdf

Global warming believers dropped from 71% two years ago to 51% now.

This is the LOWEST it has been since they started doing this poll
12 years ago.

The poll was done between Nov 2 and Nov 11...9 days before the hacker
files were released. I wonder what it would be now? Probably much higher
in the disbeliever group.