The Great Global Warming Swindle

[Aaron]

sun and earth



The sun has so much effect on the Earth that if we didn't have the magnetic field to deflect much of the solar radiation around us, we' be dehydrated toast.

When there are CME's (coronal mass ejections) from the sun, they penetrate our world and cause all kinds of crazy wind storms, etc...

No matter what is happening, conserve energy, reduce pollution and lets breathe clean air and drink clean water.

I think we do need to remineralize the land masses with rock dust to get more luscious plant life to increase the oxygen content.

[theremart]

magnetic field..

The sun has so much effect on the Earth that if we didn't have the magnetic field to deflect much of the solar radiation around us, we' be dehydrated toast.

When there are CME's (coronal mass ejections) from the sun, they penetrate our world and cause all kinds of crazy wind storms, etc...

No matter what is happening, conserve energy, reduce pollution and lets breathe clean air and drink clean water.

I think we do need to remineralize the land masses with rock dust to get more luscious plant life to increase the oxygen content.

I agree 100% on the minerals. I think crop rotation is a great way of doing this with plants that have root system that go down to greater depths that pull up minerals from the lower strata... Our food is so deprived of minerals that it is very wise to take supplements and sea salt.

Many Russians believe that the space mission was faked by the US because of the radiation problems that you have mentioned.

The alarming thing is as I understand it every so often the magnetic field reverses ( North to South ) creating holes that allow the radiation to get thru.

Such a fragile existance...

[Aaron]

earth field flipping

This is on the magnetic field flipping:
Discovery Channel :: News - Earth :: Compass Needles to Flip, Models Show

And sun/earth interaction on NASA site:
Space Technology 5

And the sun's field flips:
CNN.com - Sci-Tech - Space - Sun flips magnetic field - February 16, 2001

I have those links here:
http://www.energeticforum.com/energe...ciousness.html

And on the minerals, check this out if you're not familiar with the rock dust:
http://www.energeticforum.com/agricu...ld-weaver.html
See the first post in that thread
I have the doc avail: Bread from Stones
and also I posted the patent on the way to turn the rock into fine enough dust for remineralization purposes.

[Vortex]

[IMG]
I think we do need to remineralize the land masses with rock dust to get more luscious plant life to increase the oxygen content.

Watch : Paul Stamets: 6 ways mushrooms can save the world
to see how to remineralize, doing it natures way.
We wouldn't be alive today, if it were not for the fungus among us.
Great Information about something that is extremely important to life
on this planet and lives mostly out of sight and out of mind.

Randy

[jibbguy]

I am not a Climatologist, certainly. However, in the last 5 years or so i have fought this debate at least a dozen times on the web at various places and done much research to try to win the debates, against some damn good opponents But it is not about winning or proving others wrong. It is, imo... About the future of our planet and i feel strongly enough about it to spend the time and ink.

Lol, living 3 feet from high tide sea level may be my incentive

The sun certainly matters All i am saying is, despite a lot of talk and nice graphics, there is no data to support the theory that the current melt-off of glaciers, polar ice packs, and permafrost is caused by an increased intensity of photons or other sub-atomic particles hitting the Earth; or even differences in the Van Allen belt or general magnetic field. Not saying it isn't possible, just that there is no data to support it. Just like the other totally unsupported claims that other planets in the Solar System are showing rises in temps.

Ah Greenland, i always loved this one :

The only data i am aware of to support a warmer Greenland comes from the Norse Sagas. Here's the thing: Ericsson was a businessman, trying to get colonists to come to his new colony. Much like real estate developers touting Florida swamp land, he lied to sucker-in new prospects

Basically that Saga was the 13th century equivalent of a glossy brochure showing dolphins, golf courses, pretty girls, and swimming pools

This is also a strong possibility regarding the U.K. "vineyards" in Roman days, because the Romans also wanted more of their people to come there and colonize. Hehehe after all would not be the first or last time that written history lied

Besides which, a slightly different path of the Gulf Stream could also cause minor COASTAL warming of Greenland, making the first few miles of some parts of the coast more habitable; while not seriously affecting the astronomically huge volume in the central area of ice (some of it over a mile thick and millions of years old). There is enough ice there, if it all melted, to raise the ocean level over 30 meters (in Antarctica, the figure is well over 200 meters of rise... Welcome to "Water World" lol).

One thing these peeps did not mention in the documentary is the danger of "tipping points". We are already seeing this in the Arctic: When the albedo lowers because of ice/snow melts, and the darker, less reflective ground or water is now exposed to the sun & starts absorbing sun light that was previously reflected by the snow, then the warming increases at an even higher rate... Eh, "Snow balling" as it were

Also, there is the mainly unknown factor of the CO2 locked in the oceans. There are huge amounts of it there, and higher temps could start bringing it out rather quickly, and the total atmosphere CO2 level will suddenly rise dramatically when this happens. Deep-sea measurements, models, and experiments have shown it is a serious danger; but how long it will take for the additional heat to reach the lower ocean areas where the majority of it is locked.. No one really knows.

I don't think you will find many scientists that will say that CO2 can have NO effect on global temps.. There may be many that dispute that the PRESENT levels do (and they have some good points)... But lets be clear: If there was a 5% increase it WOULD affect temps; and these people know it. In fact i suspect that many of those scientists probably mentioned that in their interviews as a disclaimer... But it was edited out. I say this because i have read many interviews in print of the "dissenting scientific community"; and they usually do add the disclaimer (the credible ones, anyway).

But here's the point, imo:

Is the "carbon boogyman" being used by some to create division and "polarization" (excuse the pun lol)? Hell yes it is. Take for instance the Liberals / Progressives and the Libertarians / "Ron Paul Revolutionaries": We are in agreement about many of the most important issues that are confronting us today, such as the Constitutional crisis / rise of a police state, eliminating the Federal Reserve, and the desperate need for eliminating the power and corrupting influence of lobby's. Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich actually agree on more than they disagree on. That's why they were both heavily suppressed in the last primary elections, blacked-out by the corporate mainstream media, and not allowed to compete.

Take this "Carbon Tax" BS for instance: This was never to be considered an actual legislative "Starter"... It just ain't gonna happen: There is no significant political support for it in the Dem party, and certainly not in the Republican lol! Yet it is constantly used to scare people.... Why?

Using Al Gore as the face, and totality, of the GW awareness movement is another straw-man tactic. He is just a man, he doesn't speak for anyone but himself. But listen how they attack him constantly, how his private "carbon footprint" (how much energy he uses at home) becomes a "major issue" lol... To disclaim the entire subject?? Lol people ARE stupid

Can those in power tolerate an alliance of the far Left's and Right's?

They trot out Global Warming every few months and make sure we keep fighting each other, and not them

And they are damn good at it.

[Peter Lindemann]

Is This Your Winning Argument?

Dear Jibbguy,

I certainly appreciate your feistiness and your tidal incentive, but I am astonished at your post here.

Please correct me if I am wrong, but you support your intellectual position on the following points:

1) Lief Ericcson lied about the climate on Greenland to promote his new colony.
2) All of the records of wine production in England during Medieval times were falsified.
3) The "threat" of tipping points projected by computer models, based on unknown time frames.
4) The "threat" of the ocean belching up massive amounts of CO2 because of water temperature changes, when the science shows this takes 800 years.
5) All of the "serious" climate scientists who disagree with the current "Global Warming Model" should be adding disclaimers to their dissenting remarks, otherwise, they are not credible, while the Global Warming supporters can continue to promote their political agenda with no disclaimers.

From what I can tell, Jibb, this position of yours is 100% OPINION and PREJUDICE. All you are doing is calling dead people liars, repeating the "fear mongering" based on faulty computer models, and disregarding all other positions other than the one you currently believe.

I don't want to seem too obvious here, but none of the above is actually "Climate Science".

If you have "won arguments" with this POPPYCOCK in other threads, Congratulations!

But I doubt if it is going to work here!

Peter

I am not a Climatologist, certainly. However, in the last 5 years or so i have fought this debate at least a dozen times on the web at various places and done much research to try to win the debates, against some damn good opponents But it is not about winning or proving others wrong. It is, imo... About the future of our planet and i feel strongly enough about it to spend the time and ink.

Lol, living 3 feet from high tide sea level may be my incentive

The sun certainly matters All i am saying is, despite a lot of talk and nice graphics, there is no data to support the theory that the current melt-off of glaciers, polar ice packs, and permafrost is caused by an increased intensity of photons or other sub-atomic particles hitting the Earth; or even differences in the Van Allen belt or general magnetic field. Not saying it isn't possible, just that there is no data to support it. Just like the other totally unsupported claims that other planets in the Solar System are showing rises in temps.

Ah Greenland, i always loved this one.

The only data i am aware of to support a warmer Greenland comes from the Norse Sagas. Here's the thing: Ericsson was a businessman, trying to get colonists to come to his new colony. Much like real estate developers touting Florida swamp land, he lied to sucker-in new prospects

Basically that Saga was the 13th century equivalent of a glossy brochure showing dolphins, golf courses, pretty girls, and swimming pools

This is also a strong possibility regarding the U.K. "vineyards" in Roman days, because the Romans also wanted more of their people to come there and colonize. Hehehe after all would not be the first or last time that written history lied

Besides which, a slightly different path of the Gulf Stream could also cause minor COASTAL warming of Greenland, making the first few miles of some parts of the coast more habitable; while not seriously affecting the astronomically huge volume in the central area of ice (some of it over a mile thick and millions of years old). There is enough ice there, if it all melted, to raise the ocean level over 30 meters (in Antarctica, the figure is well over 200 meters of rise... Welcome to "Water World" lol).

One thing these peeps did not mention in the documentary is the danger of "tipping points". We are already seeing this in the Arctic: When the albedo lowers because of ice/snow melts, and the darker, less reflective ground or water is now exposed to the sun & starts absorbing sun light that was previously reflected by the snow, then the warming increases at an even higher rate... Eh, "Snow balling" as it were

Also, there is the mainly unknown factor of the CO2 locked in the oceans. There are huge amounts of it there, and higher temps could start bringing it out rather quickly, and the total atmosphere CO2 level will suddenly rise dramatically when this happens. Deep-sea measurements, models, and experiments have shown it is a serious danger; but how long it will take for the additional heat to reach the lower ocean areas where the majority of it is locked.. No one really knows.

I don't think you will find many scientists that will say that CO2 can have NO effect on global temps.. There may be many that dispute that the PRESENT levels do (and they have some good points)... But lets be clear: If there was a 5% increase it WOULD affect temps; and these people know it. In fact i suspect that many of those scientists probably mentioned that in their interviews as a disclaimer... But it was edited out. I say this because i have read many interviews in print of the "dissenting scientific community"; and they usually do add the disclaimer (the credible ones, anyway).

But here's the point, imo:

Is the "carbon boogyman" being used by some to create division and "polarization" (excuse the pun lol)? Hell yes it is. Take for instance the Liberals / Progressives and the Libertarians / "Ron Paul Revolutionaries": We are in agreement about many of the most important issues that are confronting us today, such as the Constitutional crisis / rise of a police state, eliminating the Federal Reserve, and the desperate need for eliminating the power and corrupting influence of lobby's. Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich actually agree on more than they disagree on. That's why they were both heavily suppressed in the last primary elections, blacked-out by the corporate mainstream media, and not allowed to compete.

Take this "Carbon Tax" BS for instance: This was never to be considered an actual legislative "Starter"... It just ain't gonna happen: There is no significant political support for it in the Dem party, and certainly not in the Republican lol! Yet it is constantly used to scare people.... Why?

Using Al Gore as the face, and totality, of the GW awareness movement is another straw-man tactic. He is just a man, he doesn't speak for anyone but himself. But listen how they attack him constantly, how his private "carbon footprint" (how much energy he uses at home) becomes a "major issue" lol... To disclaim the entire subject?? Lol people ARE stupid

Can those in power tolerate an alliance of the far Left's and Right's?

They trot out Global Warming every few months and make sure we keep fighting each other, and not them

And they are damn good at it.

[jibbguy]

Something about methane and melting permafrost, that i can only wish was "prejudicial":

TerraNature | Methane from melting Siberian permafrost

Regarding U.K. vineyards (item #2); what i have read about it were from the late Roman occupation (as i mentioned); if by "Medieval" you mean a later period, than the answer would be "no" i am not claiming it is all a lie. But i would state this: There is no more evidence that the Gulf Stream was not to "blame" for it, than some vaguely implied hundred-year variation in the Sun's output. And in fact, the former is much more likely than the latter; since there was no ocean level rise in that period... As we are clearly facing now in this period.

In this case, as many others here it really comes down to "opinion" on both sides, doesn't it...?

The real science questions on this issue as i understand them are about albedo, carbon and other chemical /photonic reactions in the atmosphere (including how carbon monoxide converts to dioxide), how the upper atmosphere temps in the polar regions actually translate to the rest of the planet, at what temp will the oceans start dumping the sequestered CO2, how accurate is the 350,000 year record in the ice showing carbon levels being now highest.... These are all partially answered, not fully, and many of the results controversial and disputed. Yet what has been seen is very disturbing.

I guess the point of discussing what many call "scare tactics" is that even if only some of this stuff proves true.... Then Planet Earth is in for some very serious climate change. Not including these things in the discussion would hardly seem a better way to go.

The whole point of the anti-GW Greenland and UK Medieval warming period stuff is that "it all happened before" so "we shouldn't worry".... My point regarding it is that what ever these events were, they are not the same as what is going on now: Millions of acres of permafrost that had remained frozen for over 10,000 years before the first Viking ever set foot in Greenland, are now melting in the Arctic... And this is significant.

As for #5; Why is there there an automatically implied political activism aspect for all aspects of global warming awareness...? It is assuming that the people who have studied this professionally and who happen to be on the other side have an agenda or ulterior motive. They do not. They are concerned citizens trying to do their jobs, and are reporting about a danger they believe is important to our very survival as a species. You could certainly disagree and call them "wrong", and prove them wrong if you can....

...But those who characterize honorable and respected members of the scientific community, people who are doing good work in the name of Humanity at large, as "political activists"... Are imo either attempting to discredit them with negative labeling, or they really don't know what they are talking about.

The GW awareness movement has only been politicized by it's opponents (often via the constant ad hominem attacks on Al Gore by people like Rush Limbaugh)... And not by it's proponents who go out of their way to keep politics out of it. It certainly should not be partisan or nationalistic. It is about building consensus and awareness around the world, then finding solutions before it's too late.

Peter, i regret if i gave you a wrong impression. I am not interested in sparring for the sake of it. I am only interested in helping those others who read this understand that it is a very complex subject that defies easy answers or definitions. And that this issue is being manipulated by many unseen people, on both sides, for their own interests.

Yet this does not negate the fact that these things, for what ever reason, are happening and should be addressed.

[Peter Lindemann]

Climate is Changing

Jibbguy,

I also have no interest in sparring with you. It is obvious that we have different points of view on this issue. I do believe that we agree on a number of major points, though, and they are as follows:

1) The climate is changing.
2) CO2 levels are rising due to the burning of prehistoric carbon that was previously stored in the ground.
3) 95% of ALL heat trapping properties of the atmosphere are caused by water vapor.
4) The data shows that the atmosphere is not heating in the mid-elevations as all of the Global Warming computer models predicts it should.

These are simultaneous facts, but the question remains, are any of them related as "cause and effect" or are they simply corollaries of each other within a larger context?

The answer to this can only be discovered by an OPEN SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY where all of the data is considered dispassionately. In the current social climate, this inquiry is being skewed by selective funding and reporting.

I encourage everyone to educate themselves by exposure to all of the information, which is why I posted the link to the film.

In my opinion, we should stop burning carbon based fuels as soon as possible because of the pollution associated with this practice and because for every atom of carbon we burn we are tying up two atoms of OXYGEN. I believe the oxygen depletion is a much more serious problem than any "greenhouse warming" effects caused by CO2 formation.

Peter

[h20power]

Something else to think about.

There is another thing that I have looked into that could be causing all of these changes, for it is not just our planet that is heating up it seems to be every planet in the solar system. There seems to be some evidence of a tenth planet in our solar system called Nibiru Nibiru / Planet X photos taken January 2008 Video

This planet is said to come around every 3,600 years, and by the time it returns it is all but forgoten for 3,600 years is a long time to tell a story. May 9th or 19th it should be visiable in the southern sky.

I am not a firm beliver in this, but it does answer a lot of what is happening in our solar system right now. Like I said all the planets are being affected, not just earth. If this planet does exist this time around it will not be forgotten it will be recorded in high Def .

I for one will be looking in our southern skies on those dates to see if it does exist.

h2opower.

[tstorey]

With research you will discover

that Al Gore is a Dupont. I hope none of you lives near one of their plants. Ugh.

[dutchdivco]

Proof that Aliens are "living" among us

Thats what I've always figured Al Gore is! Maybe the Du Ponts are aliens! That would sure explain a lot!! Jim

[vzon17]

Great Movie

I love that movie to as it blows most of the EnviranMENTALists out of the water. The globe has been cooling for over a decade now so why are they still talking about global warming, doesn't make sense at all. Global warming is always more preferable to global cooling I can promise you that. So why stop global warming if we can do that at all anyway. I don't think man kind has any say over it and buring fossil fuel has nothing to do with it either.
What I like about the movie is it shows how the whole idea of global warming came from England as a political move and has no bearing on reality. Its all political, the globe is going to warm and cool however it sees fit regardless of what we do here as humans on earth. It warmed in the past without our help and it cooled in the past without our help and I,m sure its doing what it wants right now without our help also. We are not the cause but we certainly need to adapt to the change, for our own sake. And adapting to the change does not involve us trying to change the change. Thats like a sailboat trying to change the dircetion of the wind so it can go where it wants to. It rediculous. and I think that there are some many highly educated people that are totally convinced about what the situation is but they start from a false promise. and as we all know, no matter how good your logic is, if you start from a false premise your conclusion will always be false. They are victims of their own intelligence.
If you start from the false premise that global warming is man made then the conclusion you will come to is that you need to control mans actions. And that is what the global warming hysteria is all about in a nut shell. mass control of people... and thats all. it has nothing to do with the climate change. It has to do with controlling people because of something they can't do anything about. its the same concept of original sin. Make people feel gulity over something they have no control over and then you can control them from now on till the end of time. And I see all those that promote it as inwitting accomplises in the effort of total political domination fo the people and there for agents of evil bent on removing mans freedom and rights. Whetehr they know it or not. and usually they don't know it or they would not spout that crap.

[Shamus]

An important thing to keep in mind is that the Club of Rome talked about this long ago--they said, in their own book that they put out ("The Coming Global Revolution" I believe), that they were struggling to come up with something to fight against that would unite all mankind and that man-made climate change would "fit the bill".

Also notice how the language has changed from "global warming" to "climate change"--this is no accident. They've gone from something easily disprovable to something more easily manipulable. Also interesting is that before the media started pushing this phony agenda is that they were saying we were going into another ice age.

Aye, swindle indeed.

[byjoveoldchap]

Nibiru or a Brown Dwarf ???

There is another thing that I have looked into that could be causing all of these changes, for it is not just our planet that is heating up it seems to be every planet in the solar system. There seems to be some evidence of a tenth planet in our solar system called Nibiru Nibiru / Planet X photos taken January 2008 Video

h2opower.

Whether it is Nibiru or a Brown Dwarf is not clear, but the evidence is clear that ALL Planets in the Solar System are experiencing Major changes!

~ read my previous post here:
~ Project Camelot ~

[vzon17]

Whether it is Nibiru or a Brown Dwarf is not clear, but the evidence is clear that ALL Planets in the Solar System are experiencing Major changes!

~ read my previous post here:
~ Project Camelot ~

And if that is true then its just another bit of evidence to show man has nothing to do with global warming. He isn't he cause so its not somethnig he can change. the earth and its atmosphere are about as thin as paint on a golf ball ratio wise and us humans are at the bottom small fraction of percent of that thin layer how we colud have any effect on the temp of the globe is beyond any rational likelihood. its more likely that the hair on dogs tail can wag the dog. I think people forget how small we are in relation to the earth, the modern ability to transmit images from cameras all over the place and drive cars across country makes us think its a much smaller world than it is, just try to walk to work sometime, or across the country. Vast Vast areas of this earth are deserted with no humans there.