Global Warming and CO2
Carbon Tax – Another Government Money Grab
What this page is not about –
It is not about Pollution – I agree that everyone should work towards reduction and minimisation of pollutants in all forms
It is not about saving the Planet – I agree we should give this planet, our home, as much consideration as is possible to ensure an ongoing environment that preserves conditions for the natural survival of all species.
It is not about Renewable energy – I agree we should work towards cost effective renewable energy.
The facts are clear:-
- CO2 is a greenhouse Gas.
- Greenhouse gases make up 1% of the Atmospheric Gases. (comprising 0.95% water vapour, 0.036% CO2 & 0.015% Methane/other)
- Climate change does occur
- CO2 is not a Pollutant
What is not clear is that:-
- Human production of CO2 is responsible for over-heating of the Earth
- A Carbon Tax or alternatively and Emission Trading Scheme will prevent Climate Change
Facts about CO2:-
- It is colourless, odourless and non-toxic.
- It is necessary for photosynthesis and plant growth
- CO2 makes up only 0.036% of the atmospheric gases.
- Of this, only 3.4% of the CO2 is caused by humans!!
The make-up of Greenhouse Gasses
The Justification For a Carbon Tax??
Tax the use of Carbon based fuels so that Governments can then use these funds to promote cleaner energy or alternatively allow less cost competitive power sources to be developed??
What does this mean for Australia??
Of the 3.4% CO2 caused by human activity, 1.5% is thought to be the result of Australians.
Current objectives will reduce Australian production by 5%.
And to put that amount of CO2 in context :- Every few months China alone increases its CO2 emissions by as much as Australia`s total amount.
An Inconvenient Truth
- only 600 looked at the science involving CO2
- Of that 600, only 308 were a part of the second review process.
- Of that 308, only 62 reviewed the last chapter which looked at what to attribute the cause of Climate change to
- Of that 62 only 7 reviewers were independent; and
- Of the 7, 2 did not agree with the final statement saying they believed there was a 90% certainty CO2 caused climate change.
So the major statement of the review saying what climate change can be attributed to, was supported by just 5 independent scientists – a few less than 2,500.
On the other hand there are over 31,000 independent US scientists (including 9,029 PhDs) have signed a petition saying there is no conclusive evidence CO2 causes climate change. See this link www.petitionproject.org
As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this CO2 impact hypothesis. The Petition demonstrates that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climatological damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists.
It is evident that 31,487 Americans with university degrees in science – are not “a few.” Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,487 American scientists are not “skeptics.”
Is Climate Change a New Phenomena?
Well not really, over the last 1.000 years
and over the last 5,000 years there were THREE warm periods where it was warmer than today’s trends and the Earth survived.
A possible conclusion could be that Climate change is natural, and warmer periods occur without human CO2 emissions being the cause!.
And Finally over the last 150 years in more detail:-
From 1870 to 1915, fossil fuel use was fairly flat & temp went down
From 1915 to 1940, Fossil fuel use was flat, & temp went up
From 1940 to 1975, Fossil fuel use went up, & temp went down
From 1975 to 1998, Fossil fuel use went up, & temp went up
The first 3 of those periods contradict the idea CO2 emissions makes the climate warmer
Possible Conclusions from the above?
- CO2 increases rarely correlate with the Earths temperature rising.
- Any correlation is therefore coincidental
.
Alternative and Verified Research
In 2007 a Hungarian scientist Dr Ferenc Miskolczi published a peer reviewed paper and it has not been refuted.
He has also worked out new laws about the atmosphere.
He has shown from both atmospheric recordings and by theory that the greenhouse effect is saturated and extra CO2 will not effect the Earths temperature. Fellow Hungarian Scientist and IPCC reviewer Dr Miklos Zagoni now champions his work.
Miskolczi found the greenhouse effect (g) is a constant and equals 0.33 (of the available heat).
In other words the Earth`s temperature varies according to the amount of heat from the Sun and other sources. But extra greenhouse gases like CO2 will not change the Earth`s greenhouse effect.
And just to give you the full story, the following list is the list of Scientists who have found the opposite results to Miskolczi and can demonstrate CO2 is going to cause the Earth to overheat and make the sea levels rise 6 metres or more.
……………………………………
……………………………………
……………………………………
Do we live in a special time in which the laws of physics and Nature are suspended? No, we do not. Can we expect relationships between the Sun’s activity and climate, that we can see in data going back several hundred years, to continue for at least another 20 years? With absolute certainty.
A number of scientists believe that the Sun drives climate, and they predict an imminent cooling!
Acknowledgement:-
A substantial amount of this information has been derived from a presentation by Leon Ashby, titled “Why an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) is not necessary” and released in 2008.
For more information contact
The Climate Sceptics
PO Box 721,
Mt Gambier SA 5290
1 Comment to “Global Warming and CO2”
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
By Rob, May 8, 2011 @ 2:56 am
Here’s details from a speech by one of the original
Dr David Evans’ address to the Anti-Carbon-Tax rally, Perth Australia, 23 March 2011.
“I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, understands the evidence, was once an alarmist, but am now a sceptic.”
It’s a Scam
Good Morning Ladies and Gentlemen.
The debate about global warming has reached ridiculous proportions and is full of micro thin half-truths and misunderstandings.
I am a scientist who was on the carbon gravy train, I understand the evidence, I was once an alarmist, but I am now a sceptic.
Watching this issue unfold has been amusing but, lately, worrying.
This issue is tearing society apart, making fools and liars out of our politicians.
Let’s set a few things straight.
The whole idea that carbon dioxide is the main cause of the recent global warming is based on a guess which was proved false by empirical evidence during the 1990s. But the gravy train was too big, with too many jobs, industries, trading profits, political careers, and the possibility of world government and total control riding on the outcome. So rather than admit they were wrong the governments,and their tame climate scientists, now cheat and lie outrageously to maintain the fiction about carbon dioxide being a dangerous pollutant.
Let’s be perfectly clear. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, and other things being equal, the more carbon dioxide in the air, the warmer the planet. Every bit of carbon dioxide that we emit warms the planet. But the issue is not whether carbon dioxide warms the planet, but how much.
Most scientists, on both sides, also agree on how much a given increase in the level of carbon dioxide raises the planet’s temperature, if just the extra carbon dioxide is considered. These calculations come from laboratory experiments; the basic physics have been well known for a century.
The disagreement comes about what happens next.
The planet reacts to the extra carbon dioxide, which changes everything. Most critically, the extra warmth causes more water to evaporate from the oceans. But does the water hang around and increase the height of moist air in the atmosphere, or does it simply create more clouds and rain? Back in 1980, when the carbon dioxide theory started, no one knew. The alarmists guessed that it would increase the height of moist air around the planet, which would warm the planet even further, because the moist air is also a greenhouse gas.
This is the core idea of every official climate model: for each bit of warming due to carbon dioxide, they claim it ends up causing three bits of warming due to the extra moist air. The climate models amplify the carbon dioxide warming by a factor of three – so two thirds of their projected warming is due to extra moist air (and other factors), only one third is due to extra carbon dioxide.
I’ll bet you didn’t know that. Hardly anyone in the public does, but it’s the core of the issue. All the disagreements, lies, and misunderstanding spring from this. The alarmist case is based on this guess about moisture in the atmosphere,and there is simply no evidence for the amplification that is at the core of their alarmism. Which is why the alarmists keep so quiet about it and you’ve never heard of it before. And it tells you what a poor job the media have done in covering this issue.
Weather balloons had been measuring the atmosphere since the 1960s, many thousands of them every year. The climate models all predict that as the planet warms, a hot-spot of moist air will develop over the tropics about 10km up, as the layer of moist air expands upwards into the cool dry air above. During the warming of the late 1970s, 80s, and 90s, the weather balloons found no hot-spot. None at all. Not even a small one. This evidence proves the climate models are fundamentally flawed and they greatly overestimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide.
This evidence first became clear around the mid 1990s.
At this point official “climate science” stopped being a science. You see, in science empirical evidence always trumps theory, no matter how much you are in love with the theory. If theory and evidence disagree, real scientists scrap the theory. But official climate science ignored the crucial weather balloon evidence, and other subsequent evidence that backs it up, and instead clung to their carbon dioxide theory — this just happens to keep them in high-paying jobs with lavish research grants, and gives great political power to their government masters.
There are now several independent pieces of evidence showing that the earth responds to the warming due to extra carbon dioxide by dampening the warming. Every long-lived natural system behaves this way, counteracting any disturbances, otherwise the system would be unstable. The climate system is no exception, and now we can prove it.
But the alarmists say the exact opposite, that the climate system amplifies any warming due to extra carbon dioxide, and is potentially unstable. Surprise – surprise, their predictions of planetary temperature made in 1988 to the US Congress, and again in 1990, 1995, and 2001, have all proved much higher than reality.
They keep lowering the temperature increases they expect, from 0.30C per decade in 1990, to 0.20C per decade in 2001, and now 0.15C per decade – yet they have the gall to tell us “it’s worse than expected”. These people are not scientists. They over-estimate the temperature increases due to carbon dioxide, selectively deny evidence, and now they cheat and lie to conceal the truth.
One way they cheat is in the way they measure temperature.
The official thermometers are often located in the warm exhaust of air conditioning outlets, over hot tarmac at airports where they get blasts of hot air from jet engines, at wastewater plants where they get warmth from decomposing sewerage, or in hot cities choked with cars and buildings. Global warming is measured in tenths of a degree, so any extra heating nudge is important. In the US , nearly 90% of official thermometers surveyed by volunteers violate official siting requirements that they not be too close to an artificial heating source. Nearly 90%! The photos of these thermometers are on the Internet; you can get to them via the corruption paper at my site, sciencespeak.com . Look at the photos, and you’ll never trust a government climate scientist again.
They place their thermometers in warm localities, and call the results “global” warming. Anyone can understand that this is cheating. They say that 2010 is the warmest recent year, but it was only the warmest at various airports, selected air conditioners, and certain car parks.
Global temperature is also measured by satellites, which measure nearly the whole planet 24/7without bias. The satellites say the hottest recent year was 1998, and that since 2001 the global temperature has levelled off.
So it’s a question of trust.
If it really is warming up as the government climate scientists say, why do they present only the surface thermometer results and not mention the satellite results? And why do they put their thermometers near artificial heating sources? This is so obviously a scam now.
So what is really going on with the climate?
The earth has been in a warming trend since the depth of the Little Ice Age around 1680. Human emissions of carbon dioxide were negligible before 1850 and have nearly all come after WWII, so human carbon dioxide cannot possibly have caused the trend. Within the trend, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation causes alternating global warming and cooling for 25 – 30 years at a go in each direction. We have just finished a warming phase, so expect mild global cooling for the next two decades.
We are now at an extraordinary juncture.
Official climate science, which is funded and directed entirely by government, promotes a theory which is based on a guess about moist air and is now a known falsehood. Governments gleefully accept their advice, because the only way to curb emissions is to impose taxes and extend government control over all energy use. And to curb emissions on a world scale might even lead to world government — how exciting for the political class!
A carbon tax?
Even if Australia stopped emitting all carbon dioxide tomorrow, completely shut up shop and went back to the stone age, according to the official government climate models it would be cooler in 2050 by about 0.015 degrees. But their models exaggerate tenfold – in fact our sacrifices would make the planet in 2050 a mere 0.0015 degrees cooler!
Sorry, but you’ve been had.
Finally, to those of you who still believe the planet is in danger from our carbon dioxide emissions: sorry, but you’ve been had. Yes carbon dioxide is a cause of global warming, but it’s so minor it’s not worth doing much about.
————————————————————————————
Dr David Evans consulted full-time for the Australian Greenhouse Office (now the Department of Climate Change) from 1999 to 2005, and part-time 2008 to 2010, modelling Australia ’s carbon in plants, debris, mulch, soils, and forestry and agricultural products. Evans is a mathematician and engineer, with six university degrees including a PhD from Stanford University in electrical engineering. The area of human endeavour with the most experience and sophistication in dealing with feedbacks and analysing complex systems is electrical engineering, and the most crucial and disputed aspects of understanding the climate system are the feedbacks. The evidence supporting the idea that CO2 emissions were the main cause of global warming reversed itself from 1998 to 2006, causing Evans to move from being a warmist to a sceptic.