Dec. 1, 2015 Tavares, FL Updated March 20, 2017 (Scroll down to see updates labeled by date)
You can return to this page here: http://tinyurl.com/DebunkingClimateChange
This is a Climate Change, Global Warming skeptic page with alternative science references debunking Al Gore and his liberal cronies. Scroll down to see dated updates, and links to facts debunking climate change hysteria.
Obama, Al Gore, liberals and the press all constantly blame humans for global warming. When that didn't pan out because realists pointed out temperatures haven't changed in 18 years, the Climate Change alarmists now blame humans for "climate change", a nebulous environment that is always bad, and big government and favored businesses are needed to fix it.
Think about it. If temperatures are not changing or declining, and ice caps are growing, how can they blame COLD on man made actions or "green house gases".
The newspapers constantly print "science" articles on global warming or climate change from the Associated Press (AP), and insert phrases blaming humans or Republicans or elves. But their science doesn't hold up.
Almost everything Al Gore says is a lie and has been debunked in tedious detail. But he gets big fees and keeps with the same vitriole.
Scroll down to see other updates.
Right now, I am just posting links to alternative sources who explain it much better than I could. I have articles or videos by Ted Cruz, Judith Curry, John Coleman and a raft of other more logical analysts, so read or watch them and understand how biased the press is, especially the Lake County, FL area print media like the Daily Commercial and the Orlando Sentinel. One of my degrees is in journalism and I consider their conduct of printing the biased articles from the AP to be unbalanced and unprofessional too.
The preponderance of valid data seems to be that the liberal explanations are cooked numbers, biased, based on fake scientific models, or just emotional claptrap. It is all done to justify bigger government controls and enrich favored researchers, vendors, etc. Fear sells media headlines, so the main stream press perpetuates the hoaxes. Imagine the hundreds of millions of dollars wasted on closed solar panel "farms" funded by the Feds and Obama because fake science was used to justify their priority.
The main reason for the current DECLINE in temperatures seems to be a validated theory that sunspots vary in cycles and dramatically effect Earth temperatures, not "manmade green house gases". Numerous logical sources using REAL temperature databases predict a drop in temperatures into a mini-ice age for perhaps 25 years, then there will be an upswing. And these similar cycles have been tracked back thousands of years.
Other REAL scientists seem to agree that climate always changes, and to live with it because it cannot be easily predicted.
Update March 18, 2017: A very good place to find current opposition to climate change and global warming alarmists is the Townhall.com website, and their updated collections about CLIMATE CHANGE and GLOBAL WARMING hype.
"Part of your answer is focusing on efficiencies and focusing on doing what we do better. As to climate change, I think the President was fairly straightforward saying we’re not spending money on that anymore," Mulvaney said. "We consider that to be a waste of your money to go out and do that. So that is a specific tie to his campaign.”
Update March 13, 2017 - New EPA Secretary, Scott Pruitt, questions validity of liberal claims over climate change and global warming hype. He also challenged the validitity of claims that Carbon Dioxide (aka "Green house gases") are causing any changes. The article cites one source that existing Obama regulations would have increased taxpayer costs by billions, if not reversed by Trump.
"Climate regulations hold a vise grip on government and industry. According to the American Action Forum, President Obama’s policies to limit greenhouse-gas emissions cost at least $437 billion."
This first batch of references was sent out to the local press on Nov. 30, 2015 while Obama was attending a major "Climate Summit" run by the UN in New York.
Other readers should post comments on the Daily Commercial and Orlando Sentinel or other press websites when they publish biased AP Global Warming or Climate Change articles.
Here are some alternative sources – the press needs to print the truth, not biased “science” about climate change. Don’t just publish biased AP articles – that is not professional journalism.
March 20, 2017 - I added a section further down on debunking Al Gore sea level rising theories. Search on "sea level".
Feb. 6, 2017 Update #1: A highly credible whistleblower at the US NOAA agency revealed to a major UK newspaper, "The Daily Mail", that a Global Warming report used fake data to manipulate decisions at the "2015" Paris climate change conference.
"The Mail today reveals astonishing evidence that the US organisation that is the world’s leading source of climate data rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change" led by Obama.
Yup, the Obama administration cooked the numbers to continue to justify global warming when that was not true, according to a highly credible scientist whistleblower from NOAA. Read all about it, and every time you hear Al Gore, Obama or the Democrats cite the "crisis" of global warming or climate change, remember this lie by the Obama administration, which justifies Trump's decision to discontinue supporting global warming or climate change "research".
It is sad that US whistleblowers have to go to UK newspapers to describe bureaucratic lies and what are the odds US newspapers won't cover this?
Feb. 6, 2016 Update #2: I discovered a major new source of information debunking "global warming & climate change" crisis whining. It is the "Climate, Inc." blog by Judith Curry, a scientist specializing "Earth Science" and has testified before Congress and on news shows. Her Wordpress blog "Climate, Inc." is HERE. Curry also wrote a story about the NOAA whistleblower.
Jan. 20, 2017 Update: President Trump removes references to Climate Change from White House website. (This was the first day of his inauguration and holding office).
A leftist scientist renounces Obama’s Climate Change approach Sept 23, 2014 http://www.climatedepot.com/2014/09/23/politically-left-scientist-dissents-calls-president-obama-delusional-on-global-warming/
Nov. 5, 2015 - John Coleman on how Climate Change is a LIE - in UK paper
Mr Coleman said he based many of his views on the findings of the NIPCC, a non-governmental international body of scientists aimed at offering an 'independent second opinion of the evidence reviewed by the IPCC.
Nov. 30, 2015 - Meet Professor Judith Curry - The Climate Scientist Barack Obama Wants Silenced
Read more at http://dcwhispers.com/meet-the-climate-scientist-barack-obama-wants-silenced/#DVvetbUkJGmTF41Q.99
"It (Climate Change) is the single greatest scientific sham in the history of humankind and Judith Curry is putting the entirety of her academic career on the line as she works to expose the fraud."
May 19, 2015 - Forbes Magazine "Updated NASA Data - Global Warming not causing any polar ice retreat" http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2015/05/19/updated-nasa-data-polar-ice-not-receding-after-all/
Oct. 7, 2015 - Ted Cruz on video grills President of Sierra Club, Aaron Mair, re Climate Change and crushes him <<< Very clear source
"The Earth is cooking up and warming"
Used the debunked "97% of scientists agree" argument, which even Cruz said was debunked and a lie.
"Global temperatures are rising"
Cruz: Sierra Club should issue a retraction about the "Pause"
Oct. 6, 2015 - Australian mathematician finds flaws in climate change formula
When errors were fixed, CO2 was only 1/5th the effect of the incorrect formula
- NASA REPORT: Antarctic Ice Sheet is Actually…Growing By Billions of Tons?
- FAIL: Scientist That Predicted Ice Caps Would Melt in 2013…Now Claims 2016?
- Myth Busted: Climate Change ‘Consensus of Scientists’ is Idiotic
Oct. 7, 2015 - article from WSJ May 26, 2015 regarding Myth of 97% consensus
http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303480304579578462813553136 <<<< Best source, along with Cruz video, to share
May 26, 2014 7:13 p.m. ET
Last week Secretary of State John Kerry warned graduating students at Boston College of the "crippling consequences" of climate change. "Ninety-seven percent of the world's scientists," he added, "tell us this is urgent."
Where did Mr. Kerry get the 97% figure? Perhaps from his boss, President Obama, who tweeted on May 16 that "Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous." Or maybe from NASA, which posted (in more measured language) on its website, "Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities."
Yet the assertion that 97% of scientists believe that climate change is a man-made, urgent problem is a fiction. The so-called consensus comes from a handful of surveys and abstract-counting exercises that have been contradicted by more reliable research.
One frequently cited source for the consensus is a 2004 opinion essay published in Science magazine by Naomi Oreskes, a science historian now at Harvard. She claimed to have examined abstracts of 928 articles published in scientific journals between 1993 and 2003, and found that 75% supported the view that human activities are responsible for most of the observed warming over the previous 50 years while none directly dissented.
Ms. Oreskes's definition of consensus covered "man-made" but left out "dangerous"—and scores of articles by prominent scientists such as Richard Lindzen, John Christy, Sherwood Idso and Patrick Michaels, who question the consensus, were excluded. The methodology is also flawed. A study published earlier this year in Nature noted that abstracts of academic papers often contain claims that aren't substantiated in the papers.
The "97 percent" figure in the Zimmerman/Doran survey represents the views of only 79 respondents who listed climate science as an area of expertise and said they published more than half of their recent peer-reviewed papers on climate change. Seventy-nine scientists—of the 3,146 who responded to the survey—does not a consensus make.
"We could go on, but the larger point is plain. There is no basis for the claim that 97% of scientists believe that man-made climate change is a dangerous problem."
Do a Google search on “Hockey Stick weather” to see many articles about an early Al Gore pushed theory and how it was entirely debunked. There are many books on it.
The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulate, at Bergen, Norway.
Reports from fishermen, seal hunters and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hither to unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone.
Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.
Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm.
Great masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.
Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds.
Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.
- * * * * * * * *
I must apologize.
I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported
by the AP and published in The Washington Post - 93 years ago
March 20, 2017 - Claims about Ocean levels or Sea levels rising - this section added
Al Gore, in his "mockumentary" Inconvenient Truth and others now claim the ice is melting and ocean or sea levels will rise significantly, resulting in the need for huge government programs and spending.
I will insert their claims here when found.
However, here is an article citing specific scientists debunking that claim and describing how ocean level measurements were "adjusted" to make it look bad.
"One of his ( Swedish geologist and physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, formerly chairman of the INQUA International Commission on Sea Level Change ) most shocking discoveries was why the IPCC has been able to show sea levels rising by 2.3mm a year. Until 2003, even its own satellite-based evidence showed no upward trend. But suddenly the graph tilted upwards because the IPCC’s favoured experts had drawn on the finding of a single tide-gauge in Hong Kong harbour showing a 2.3mm rise. The entire global sea-level projection was then adjusted upwards by a “corrective factor” of 2.3mm, because, as the IPCC scientists admitted, they “needed to show a trend”."
"When I spoke to Dr Mörner last week, he expressed his continuing dismay at how the IPCC has fed the scare on this crucial issue. When asked to act as an “expert reviewer” on the IPCC’s last two reports, he was “astonished to find that not one of their 22 contributing authors on sea levels was a sea level specialist: not one”. Yet the results of all this “deliberate ignorance” and reliance on rigged computer models have become the most powerful single driver of the entire warmist hysteria."
The IPCC has released its latest assessment of the state of climate science, and this time it's even more dire than their 2007 assessment.
BREITBART.COM - NYT SMEARS SCIENTIST WILLIE SOON FOR TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT ‘GLOBAL WARMING
The reason for the latest attack on Soon is that he is the co-author, with Christopher Monckton et al, of a paper published earlier this year in the prestigious Chinese Academy of Sciences journal Science Bulletin.
This study — Why Models Run Hot — infuriated the alarmist establishment, first because it was unusually popular (receiving over 10,000 views — thousands more than most scientific papers get) and second because it made a mockery of their cherished computer models.
As Paul Driessen explains:
Results from an irreducibly simple climate model,” concluded that, once discrepancies in IPCC computer models are taken into account, the impact of CO2-driven manmade global warming over the next century (and beyond) is likely to be “no more than one-third to one-half of the IPCC’s current projections” – that is, just 1-2 degrees C (2-4 deg F) by 2100! That’s akin to the Roman and Medieval Warm Periods and would be beneficial, not harmful.
The warmists are losing their argument. Their desperation is beginning to show.