Global warming

From Conservapedia
(Redirected from Climate change issue)
Jump to: navigation, search
See also Counterexamples to global warming
A composite map of Antarctica showing areas of greatest warming in red. The Wilkins Ice Shelf lies off the peninsula in the top left corner, and shows extensive warming. Overall, Antarctica shows little warming, and many areas to the East (right) are almost cooling.[1]

The global warming theory is the liberal hoax[2] that the world is becoming dangerously warmer due to the emission of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and water vapor. Liberals have used the theory of man-made global warming to seek rationing by government of life-saving energy production and consumption.

The most accurate data—from satellites—confirms that there has been virtually no global warming since 1998.[3] The media insist otherwise by publicizing local variations in unscientific surface thermometers,[4] when the more scientific atmospheric temperature does not show such an increase.[5] Moreover, natural periods of global warming and global cooling are expected to occur regardless of human activity, and not long ago liberals were demanding more government control to combat an alleged cooling in temperatures, with some scientists warning of a possible ice age.[6] Global cooling, a theory that predates global warming, obviously occurs naturally many times throughout Earth's geological history.[7] The ease of refutation of anthropogenic global cooling claims foretells the eventual fate of the current global warming hysteria.

Many political activists use the term "global warming" to refer to anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW), which asserts that human activity such as spewing "greenhouse gases" is causing an increase in temperature and is more significant than natural causes and Flutterdragon. The AGW theory is supported by left-leaning political parties, as well as a majority of sovereign states, national agencies, and an intergovernmental panel (see IPCC). The reality is that there is no immediate global crisis, and even dire warnings by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) admit that significant effects will not be manifested for at least 100 years. Predictions made by climate models publicized by the IPCC have not come to pass in recent years. Many scientists, such as Hal Lewis, have decried global warming as a conspiracy for the purpose of securing trillions of dollars in grant money.

In November 2009, emails were disclosed that implicated a wrongful manipulation and concealment of data by scientists who have insisted that there is dangerous man-made global warming. Prior to ClimateGate, both the Republican and Democratic party Platforms in 2008 suggested that global warming is happening, that it is caused by human activity, and that it should be counteracted. For example, in 2007, the Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain called global warming "an issue we can no longer afford to ignore".[8] In 2010, an independent analysis cleared the scientists involved of any wrongdoing as scientists, but remarked upon their omissions as data-presenters. Accordingly, the effects of the scandal still linger.[9]

Former vice president Al Gore, won a Nobel Prize in 2007 for claiming that there is a dangerous man-made global warming that threatens the world. However, it has since been revealed that he convinced many people through inaccurate information in his "documentary," i.e., he only won the Nobel Prize by lying. [See Al Gore's claims below.]

Summary of arguments against anthropogenic global warming

The following facts can help dissuade even the most illogical of liberals from believing in the flawed theory of anthropogenic global warming.

Temperature flat

The overall temperature has been flat for about 16 years.[10]

Data manipulation

Climate data stating otherwise has been proven to be manipulated.[11]

Alternate causation

Even if global warming did actually exist, the overall effect of human activities on global warming are minimal, if not nonexistent.[12]

Science of global warming

Presence of CO2

One of the primary concerns of Global Warming research is the increased presence of carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere. Original claims stated that the increase in carbon dioxide—which is a greenhouse gas—were caused primarily through the burning of fossil fuels, and that such increases were the foremost cause of global temperatures rising. Historically, Global temperature changes precede changes in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.[13]

The most obvious way that this would occur would be through the heating of ocean water. The oceans are the single largest storage unit for carbon dioxide gas on the planet, containing about 93% of the Earth's carbon dioxide.[14] As the temperature rises, the solubility of carbon dioxide in ocean water is reduced,[15] causing the dissolved carbon dioxide gas to enter the atmosphere, and begin trapping radiation from the sun. Scientists now believe that this cycle causes a sort of chain effect, where increased temperature causes more carbon dioxide to enter the atmosphere, which in turn causes more temperature rise.

It is also noteworthy to point out that carbon dioxide, while not as abundant in the atmosphere, has a more significant effect on global warming than water vapor does. Carbon dioxide cannot form clouds, as water vapor does. When water vapor forms clouds, those clouds actually block some of the sun's radiation from reaching the Earth, causing water vapor to both contribute positively and negatively to global temperature rise. Carbon dioxide can only act as a greenhouse gas, causing the above-mentioned cyclic effect. According to the IPCC and others, the current concentration of carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere is about 392 ppm, which is the highest it has been in at about 800,000 years.[16]

But other scientists have disputed this claim of modern-day record-high carbon dioxide readings:[7]

Take Warsaw-based Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski, famous for his critiques of ice-core data. He’s devastating on the IPCC rallying cry that CO2 is higher now than it has ever been over the past 650,000 years. In his 1997 paper in the Spring 21st Century Science and Technology, he demolishes this proposition. In particular, he’s very good on pointing out the enormous inaccuracies in the ice-core data and the ease with which a CO2 reading from any given year is contaminated by the CO2 from entirely different eras. He also points out that from 1985 on there’s been some highly suspect editing of the CO2 data, presumably to reinforce the case for the "unprecedented levels" of modern CO2. In fact, in numerous papers prior to 1985, there were plenty of instances of CO2 levels much higher than current CO2 measurements, some even six times higher. He also points out that it is highly unscientific to merge ice-core temperature measurements with modern temperature measurements.

The Modern Warm Period

The average Earth surface air temperature has risen about 1 °F since 1970.[17] Studies have ruled out the possibility that errors in the measurements and sampling significantly affect the temperature trends detected over the past century. This accounts for spatial errors in the sampling and thus also incorporates errors associated with the urban-heating effect. According to Karl et al. (1994) "Results imply that the errors associated with century-scale trends of temperature are probably an order of magnitude smaller than the observed global warming of nearly 0.5°C per 100 years since the late nineteenth century" [18]

According to temperature reconstruction made within an Old Earth paradigm, there have been many cycles of naturally-caused global warming and cooling over many millions of years (see climate cycles). Some scientists, including Richard Lindzen of MIT, Sallie Baliunas of Harvard and Fred Singer (independent), say that the recent warming could be part of another natural cycle or random fluctuations in the atmosphere. However, many scientists also think that human activities were most likely the cause of the planet's recent warming.

Recent studies of the Milankovitch Cycles, which predict Earth's climate by studying changes in its orbit and axial tilt, suggest that we are currently 18,000 years into a 150,000 year period between ice ages. This would imply that we should expect the temperature to be rising anyway. A 2002 study by Berger and Loutre suggests 50,000 years of warmer weather before Earth begins to cool again, but that model incorporated anthropogenic forces and concluded:

While combinations of natural forcings produce a gradual warming up to about 1960, none of them leads to a warming over the last 30 years (this period containing three major volcanic eruptions). In contrast, simulations incorporating only anthropogenic forcings reproduce the warming over the last three decades at a rate consistent with that observed, but underestimate the early 20th century warming. As a consequence, only the use of both natural and anthropogenic forcings allows to reproduce much of the observed decadal scale variations of the annual mean hemispheric temperature over the last 150 years.[19]

It should be noted, however, that computer simulated climate models are often tweaked so they agree with the historical temperature record. There is no way to completely simulate all of the Earth's climate with a computer program.

After a major set of temperature readings was found to be an incompatible mix of older and recent data (in the Climategate II scandal) in 2010, Judith Curry, chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Science at America’s Georgia Tech university examined new data causing her to state (as quoted by MailOnline):[10]

'Natural variability [the impact of factors such as long-term temperature cycles in the oceans and the output of the sun] has been shown over the past two decades to have a magnitude that dominates the greenhouse warming effect.
'It is becoming increasingly apparent that our attribution of warming since 1980 and future projections of climate change needs to consider natural internal variability as a factor of fundamental importance.'

The MailOnline article continued:

Professor Phil Jones, director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, who found himself at the centre of the ‘Climategate’ scandal over leaked emails three years ago, would not normally be expected to agree with her.... Prof Jones also admitted that the climate models were imperfect: ‘We don’t fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don’t fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming. We don’t know what natural variability is doing.’

Some scientists have attributed recent small-scale rises in global temperature as down to wind turbines. Beloved by the Green Left, these turbines are well known to be ineffective and overly-expensive[20] and actually induce a rise in global temperatures,[21] but the Liberals wouldn't tell you that. This phenomenon is caused by the blades on said wind turbine spinning in the opposite direction of the wind (due to the Astrophysikalisch Schattnerseffekt (Astrophysical Shatner Effect) caused at high altitude), thus causing a large amount of friction and heat loss.[22]


Sunspot activity is a factor in climate fluctuations, however, little details were known about how much of an impact these fluctuations had on the Earth's climate. During the deepest solar minimum ever recorded, from 2005 to 2010, NASA measured the Earth's energy balance, i.e. the amount of energy absorbed by the sun subtract the amount of energy lost to radiation into space. They concluded:

If the Sun were the only climate forcing or the dominant climate forcing, then the planet would gain energy during the solar maxima, but lose energy during solar minima. The fact that Earth gained energy at a rate 0.58 W/m2 during a deep prolonged solar minimum reveals that there is a strong positive forcing overwhelming the negative forcing by below-average solar irradiance. That result is not a surprise, given knowledge of other forcings, but it provides unequivocal refutation of assertions that the Sun is the dominant climate forcing.[23]

But heat energy is not the only force of the Sun affecting the Earth. The Sun also produces magnetic activity, the effect of which was not measured in this study, and which could affect the Earth's climate in little-understood ways.

Economics of global warming

Unnecessary expansion of government

The idea of dangerous anthropogenic (man-made) global warming (AGW) is promoted by liberals and socialists seeking greater government control over the production and use of energy, which is a substantial percentage of the economy. In economic terms, they would like to 'internalize' the 'externality,' which is to say that they think that producers of emissions should be directly connected to the consequences of those emissions, leading syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer to warn of an impending "environmental shakedown".[24]

Public stances on global warming

Politicization of the issue

Environmentalists and their political allies have presented a one-sided, anti-scientific account of global warming. They have ignored natural warming cycles and suppressed evidence which contradicts their theories. They have viciously attacked the credibility of any scientist daring to contradict them, creating a climate of fear where only a tiny handful of scientists dare speak out.

Bill Gray, Professor Emeritus of Atmospheric Science at Colorado State University, wrote:

  • The contrary views of the many warming skeptics have been largely ignored and their motives denigrated.
  • The normal scientific process of objectively studying both sides of the question has not yet occurred.[25]

Journalists in the West, dominated by liberal viewpoints, have painted a misleading picture of the science. They have publicized liberal slanders against scientists who dare to speak up against the fake "consensus"

Even organizations that are not normally biased towards leftist ideas have publicly supported the global warming theory. The oil company Exxon/Mobil official policy is that CO2 emissions pose risks to society and ecosystems. Exxon/Mobil has also committed to reducing their own CO2 emissions, and invested $600 million in algae based fuels.[26]

Agencies of the United States Government such as NASA, EPA & NOAA give selected information that strongly supports the global warming theory. At the same time, they reject freedom of information requests to see the raw data.[27] The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), for one example, states that CO2 levels in the atmosphere are rising due to human activity, and that the surface of the Earth has warmed, on average, quickly over the last 50 years, even though North America cooled slightly.[28] In 2008 The Bush Administration requested $4.1 billion of taxpayer money from Congress to fund NOAA, a 7.7 percent increase from 2008.[29]

The 2008 Democratic National Committee Platform stated:[30]

We must end the tyranny of oil in our time. This immediate danger is eclipsed only by the longer-term threat from climate change.


[C]limate change is not just an economic issue or an environmental concern—this is a national security crisis.

The 2008 Republican National Committee Platform stated:[31]

The same human economic activity that has brought freedom and opportunity to billions has also increased the amount of carbon in the atmospere. While the scope and long-term consequences of this are the subject of ongoing scientific research, common sense dictates that the United States should take measured and reasonable steps today to reduce any impact on the environment.

There have also been some Conservatives, such as John Bliese, Ph.D., who at one point believed that global warming is a critical problem, and that Conservatism and environmental conservation are fully compatible. Speaking to those who are skeptical of global warming, in the Summer of 2001, he wrote, "[T]here is nothing conservative about denying scientific evidence."[32]

On October 10, 2009, Republican Senator Lindsey Graham coauthored (with Democrat Senator John Kerry) an op ed piece in the New York Times which stated "Even climate change skeptics should recognize that reducing our dependence on foreign oil and increasing our energy efficiency strengthens our national security. Both of us served in the military. We know that sending nearly $800 million a day to sometimes-hostile oil-producing countries threatens our security. In the same way, many scientists warn that failing to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will lead to global instability and poverty that could put our nation at risk." [33]

In 2008 the Center for Naval Analyses empaneled eleven retired generals and admirals to prepare a paper titled "National Security and the Threat of Climate Change". They concluded that Global climate change presents a serious national security threat which could impact Americans at home, impact United States military operations and heighten global tensions.[34]

The Central Intelligence Agency has opened The Center on Climate Change and National Security to study the impact of climate change on US national security.[35]

Conservative activist and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has called for a Conservative Environmentalism to find solutions to global warming by free market mechanisms.[36]

Climate change as a cult

The zeal of climate-change advocates and lack of objectivity has led some observers to see it as a core belief in a new eco-theology, using themes of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs. Columnist Deon Feder warns,[37] that following other attempts such as Marxism, overpopulation, Silent Spring,

now we have the Church of Global Warming, under the leadership of Pope Albert I and his college of cardinals (the Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club and editorial board of The New York Times).
Its Office for the Propagation of the Faith works overtime, churning out books, movies (from the fictional “The Day After Tomorrow” to the fictional “An Inconvenient Truth”), textbooks, concerts, congressional hearings, media pleading and inquisitions.

Commenting on the tendency to hastily issue dire warnings of Climate Change, seen in the coming Ice Age scare of the 70's, Maurizio Morabito[38] asked, "Is the problem with the general public, who cannot talk about climate except in doom-laden terms, and for whom the sky is the last animist god?"

Mark Steyn writes in Macleans,[39]

Forty years ago conventional religious belief was certainly in decline in what we once knew as Christendom, but the hole was not yet ozone-layer sized. Once the sea of faith had receded far from shore, the post-Christian West looked at what remained and found “Gaia.”

And while, "When man was made in the image of God, he was fallen but redeemable", among these devotees of Gaia,

Anti-humanism is everywhere, not least in the barely concealed admiration for China’s (demographically disastrous) “One Child” policy advanced by everyone from the National Post’s Diane Francis to Sir David Attenborough, the world’s leading telly naturalist but also a BBC exec who once long ago commissioned the great series The Ascent of Man. If Sir David’s any guide, the great thing about man’s ascent is it gives him a higher cliff to nosedive off.

Politics of global warming and dissent

For a more detailed treatment, see Politics of global warming.

Christine Stewart—Canadian Environment Ministry, "No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits.... [C]limate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world." [40]

'Global Warming Now World's Most Boring Topic' [41]

The need to fight "global warming" has become part of the dogma of the liberal conscience.[42]

Clearly, "global warming" is a tempting issue for many very important groups to exploit. ... dealing with the threat of warming fits in with a great variety of preexisting agendas [like] dissatisfaction with industrial society (neopastoralism), ... governmental desires for enhanced revenues (carbon taxes), and bureaucratic desires for enhanced power.[42]

Mark Steyn writes in "Why climate change is hot hot hot",[39]

What’s also changed since the seventies is the nature of the UN and the transnational bureaucracies...“Aid” is a discredited word these days and comes with too many strings attached. But eco-credits sluiced through an oil-for-food program on steroids offers splendid new opportunities for bulking up an ambitious dictator’s Swiss bank accounts.

The IPCC is desperate to claim the 20th century—the warmest on record. Thus, tying the progress of modern mankind to our supposed planet imbalance problem. Unfortunately for the IPCC, that point is disputed as well. In 2008, it was discovered that tree rings in Finland were more accurate record of the warmest century. The current era was not the warmest period—it was the period between 931 and 1180.[43]

Assessments of climate science by the United Nations (see IPCCIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) have claimed that scientists are 90% sure that over 50% of the observed global warming in recent decades is human-caused, and that continued global warming should be expected over at least the next century.

Several prominent scientists have pointed out the politicized science of the UN's assessment methods. The scientific reports are submitted to a panel of representatives appointed by each country in the IPCC. Several scientists whose research demonstrates that climate change is taking place have complained about their work being misrepresented by the U.N.

In addition, a number of the participants have testified to the pressures placed on them to emphasize results supportive of the current scenario and to suppress other results. That pressure has frequently been effective, and a survey of participants reveals substantial disagreement with the final report.[42]

Richard Lindzen wrote:

Perhaps more important are the pressures being brought to bear on scientists to get the "right" results. Such pressures are inevitable, given how far out on a limb much of the scientific community has gone. The situation is compounded by the fact that some of the strongest proponents of "global warming" in Congress are also among the major supporters of science (Sen. Gore is notable among those).[42]

Christopher Monckton wrote an article entitled "Climate sensitivity reconsidered" which states that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change studies are flawed.[44]

The present analysis suggests the models failure to predict other climatic phenomena arises from defects in its evaluation of radioactive forcing, no-feedbacks climate sensitivity parameter and feedback multiplier. In conclusion, that there may be no "Climate Crisis" and for governments to reduce emissions may be pointless or even harmful.

This was published on a forum of the American Physical Society with the following disclaimers: "The article has not undergone any scientific peer review" and "the APS disagrees with the article's conclusions". In fact, the APS disagrees with the article without ever reviewing it.

Ryan N. Maue:

A doctoral student at the Department of Meteorology at Florida State University did a study of global tropical cyclone activity. Its conclusions state that global warming might be greatly overblown.[45] Mr. Maue found that tropical cyclone activity worldwide "has completely and utterly collapsed" during the past two to three years with energy levels sinking to those of the late 1970s.

Dr. Vincent Gray:

A member of the IPCC’s expert reviewers’ panel asserts, "There is no relationship between warming and the level of gases in the atmosphere," and "there is no serious threat to the climate" [46]

Joe D’Aleo: Climatologist:

The International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project says new data "show that in five of the last seven decades since World War II, including this one, global temperatures have cooled while carbon dioxide has continued to rise," and "The data suggest cooling, not warming, in Earth's future." [47]

Dr. John S. Theon:

Retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist, Dr. John S. Theon, the former boss of global warming alarmist James Hansen of NASA, rebukes him declaring “climate models are useless.” “My own belief concerning anthropogenic climate change is that the models do not realistically simulate the climate system because there are many very important sub-grid scale processes that the models either replicate poorly or completely omit,” “Furthermore, some scientists have manipulated the observed data to justify their model results." [48]

Sammy Wilson—Ireland's environment minister

He argues that global weather patterns are naturally cooling, not warming. He calls television ads that promote global warming as "an insidious propaganda campaign" peddling "patent nonsense." [49]

After the broadcast of his movie 'The Great Global Warming Swindle', filmmaker Martin Durkin's statements read [50]

  • “Everywhere you are told that man-made climate change is proved beyond doubt,” “But you are being told lies.”
  • “This is a story of how a theory about climate turned into a political ideology ... it is the story of the distortion of a whole area of science.”
  • “as the frenzy over man-made global warming grows shriller, many senior scientists say the actual scientific basis for the theory is crumbling.”

In late 2008, the AP published an article by its Science Writer Seth Borenstein, which is seen by skeptics as another example of one-sided, uncritical reporting on the issue by liberal media. The report stated that global warming was "a ticking time bomb that President-elect Barack Obama can't avoid", and that "We're out of time", with Al Gore calling the situation "the equivalent of a five-alarm fire that has to be addressed immediately."[51] In response, Fox News (December 16, 2008) reported that scientists skeptical of anthropogenic global warming criticized the report as "irrational hysteria," "horrifically bad" and "incredibly biased", containing sweeping scientific errors and being a one-sided portrayal of a complicated issue. Geology professor David Deming stated, "If the issues weren't so serious and the ramifications so profound, I would have to laugh at it", and accused Borenstein of "writing a polemic and reporting it as fact." Deming noted that "the mean global temperature, at least as measured by satellite, is now the same as it was in the year 1980. In the last couple of years sea level has stopped rising. Hurricane and cyclone activity in the northern hemisphere is at a 24-year low and sea ice globally is also the same as it was in 1980." The AP responded to criticism by stating that, "It’s a news story, based on fact and the clearly expressed views of President-elect Barack Obama and others."[52]

Also in the discussion of the biased AP report, Michael R. Fox, a retired nuclear scientist and chemistry professor from the University of Idaho stated, "There is little evidence to believe that man-made carbon dioxide is causing temperature fluctuation. Other factors, including sun spots, solar winds, variations in the solar magnetic field and solar irradiation, could all be affecting temperature changes."

The year 2008 turned out to be the coolest year since 2000, yet the seventh to tenth warmest year on record, according to the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.[53] According to a preliminary analysis by NOAA’s National Climatic Data Center, the average June–August 2009 summer temperature for the contiguous United States was below average—the 34th coolest on record.[54]

Richard S. Courtney, a U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) expert reviewer and a U.K.-based climate and atmospheric science consultant says "Rubbish! Global warming is not 'accelerating," and "...that anybody who proclaims that 'Global warming is accelerating' is a liar, a fool, or both."[55]

Don J. Easterbrook, Ph.D., emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, asked, "What does it take to ignore 10 years of global cooling....? The answer is really quite simple—just follow the money!"

Belief in global warming and political and religious views

The more religious an individual is, the more likely they are to disbelieve in global warming. In 2014, whereas 80% of American atheists believed in climate change, only 56% of all very religious Americans did.[56]

In 2014, 86% of Democrats accepted climate change, whereas half of all Republicans disbelieve in global warming.[56]


In 2008 86 evangelical pastors, including Rev. Dr.Rick Warren signed a statement titled "Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action", which called on Christians to acknowledge the moral importance of action to counteract man-made climate change. the statement includes specific support for market-based CO2 reductions such as a cap-and-trade program.[57] In contrast, a group of evangelical scholars, comprised of scientists, economists and theologians, contend that the liberal view of pending catastrophe caused by climate change is misleading and/or exaggerated.[58]

The Bill Nye challenge

In April 2016 science popularizer "Bill Nye the Science Guy" took the debate up to the "put your money where your mouth is" level. He issued two bets, of $10,000 each, with Joe Bastardi, a "climate change contrarian" and frequent critic of Nye. One bet was that "2016 will be in the top 10 of hottest years on record", and that "this current decade will be the warmest ever recorded".[59] As of late May Mr. Bastardi has not taken up the offer.

2008 Presidential candidates on climate change

Bob Barr is the only major 2008 Presidential Candidate who has not adopted wholesale the theory of human-caused global warming.

According to his website,[60] Republican Presidential candidate John McCain will take a more "aggressive approach" to global warming which he has declared as "undeniable and urgent." He was supported in this in June 2008 by Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger who said McCain was the "real deal on the environment".[61]

In his own words, McCain says "the overwhelming majority of scientific opinion in America today, and in the world, is that climate change is real. The fact is that it is real. The fact is that the solution to it is the development of technologies.... and a cap and trade proposal.... the debate is over."[62] Unless McCain believes that global warming is entirely or largely man-made, there would be no sense in supporting a cap and trade solution.

Barack Obama believes "that global warming is not just the greatest environmental challenge facing our planet—it is one of our greatest challenges of any kind." During his first 100 days in office, he would enact a giant and far-reaching tax "an economy-wide cap on U.S. carbon emissions that will reduce U.S. emissions by the amount scientists agree is necessary (80% by 2050). With worldwide cuts in emissions estimated to cost $45 Trillion dollars overall.[63] He comments "Putting a price on carbon is the most important step we can to take to reduce emissions."[64]

Inaccuracies of global warming evidence

Climate "science" fraud

For a more detailed treatment, see Climategate.

The Climategate scandal revealed how liberal scientists appeared to be deceiving the public with the use of fraudulent data for use as climate science. The liberal media has attempted to bury the story and discount it as the work of computer hackers illegally stealing data, however, Freedom of Information requests is likely what led to the data being leaked — intentionally.[65] Dr. Willie Soon, a physicist, astronomer and climate researcher at the solar and stellar physics division of the Harvard University-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, said in an interview, "[The Climatic Research Unit climate scientists] are making scientific progress more difficult now. This is a shameful, dark day for science." Dr. Soon also suggested that there has been systemic suppression of dissenting opinion among scientists in the climate change community, ranging from social snubs to e-mail stalking and even threats of harm.[66]

Al Gore's Schlockumentary under fire; An Inconvenient Truth found to be an inconvenient lie based on junk science and digitally enhanced, totally faked scenes of polar icecaps melting.

Liberal claims of "consensus"

Reports of a scientific "consensus" among scientists are similar to their one-sided support of other liberal policies and beliefs. For example, nearly 100% of political donations from professors are to Democrats rather than Republicans. Similarly, according to NASA, 97% of climate scientists believe that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.[67] These liberal scientists believe, or say they believe, that the Earth is warming overall, and that this warming, as well as other changes in climate patterns, is largely caused by human activities.[68] These allegations do not necessarily make the consensus true, as discussed throughout the referenced citation. Numerous scientists, especially those outside of university faculties, have been critical of anthropogenic global warming. However, according to some researchers, scientists who do not support the anthropogenic global warming theory offer a general lack of comparative credentials; proponents of man-made global warming argue that this has led to agreement that, among authorities in scientific disciplines, there is a "scientific consensus" supporting the theory for greater government control. Scientists skeptical of the theory question whether there is a financial incentive for supporting research.[69] It has also been documented that on most college campuses criticism of the global warming theory is silenced or censored; evidence shows that scientists skeptical of AGW are being suppressed.[70]

It is well understood that most media companies do not offer balanced reporting. Many politicians have bought into the liberal claim of consensus, for example Barack Obama's views, "Few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than fighting climate change. The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear." [71] In fact, many scientists disagree with the "facts," their certainty, and their interpretation. Over 100 of them have signed the statement that appears in the Cato Institute's newspaper ad. Liberals have failed to back up their claims with any scientific facts.


Past speculation

Speculation and warnings of catastrophic climate change are not unprecedented. In 2001 the Guardian noted that some 70s headlines shouted, "Brace yourself for another ice age". In 1971 the journal Science reported that the subsequent cooling effect resulting from a possible eightfold increased from atmospheric aerosol concentrations, "if sustained over a period of several years—is believed to be sufficient to trigger an ice age." [72]

Richard Lindzen wrote in 1992 on the doubtfulness of man-caused warming on Earth.

Indeed, a recent Gallup poll of climate scientists in the American Meteorological Society and in the American Geophysical Union shows that a vast majority doubts that there has been any identifiable man-caused warming to date (49 percent asserted no, 33 percent did not know, 18 percent thought some has occurred; however, among those actively involved in research and publishing frequently in peer-reviewed research journals, none believes that any man-caused global warming has been identified so far).[42]

Oddly enough, even though 82% of US climate scientists refused to support the global warming theory then, liberal activists were already claiming a scientific consensus for anthropogenic global warming. (It's hard to understand how 18 percent credence in any global warming translates into "consensus" support for human-caused global warming.)

The campaign to convince the public (and their elected representatives) that the "science is settled" began in 1988 or 1989.

By the 2008 elections both candidates for the Presidency of the United States were proposing plans to mitigate climate change.

Over 31,000 American scientists have signed the petition rejecting global warming.[73]

Global Warming Petition

In June, 1974, Time magazine published its front page article, Science: Another Ice Age?,[6] while a report by the CIA in the same year stated that, "The western world's leading climatologists have confirmed recent reports of a detrimental global climatic change”, noting such things as that the "world's snow and ice cover had increased by at least 10 to 15 percent", and in the "Canadian area of Arctic Greenland, below normal temperatures were recorded for 19 consecutive months", which was unique during the last 100 years. A "major climatic shift" was speculated, which would threaten the "the stability of most nations.” It further warned that "Scientists are confident that unless man is able to effectively modify the climate, the northern regions, such as Canada" to "major areas in northern China, will again be covered with 100 to 200 feet of ice and snow", within the next 2500 years—or sooner.[74]

Also in 1974, Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist and atmospheric researcher wrote in his book The Weather Machine, "One might argue that there is a virtual certainty of the next ice age starting some time in the next 2000 years. Then the odds are only about 20-to-1 against it beginning in the next 100 years."

In 1975 the liberal magazine Newsweek reported that "Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the cooling trend,...but they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century." These authorities were skeptical that political leaders would take any positive action to compensate for the climate change, and they conceded that the more dramatic solutions, such as melting the arctic ice cap, might create worse problems than that which they were designed to solve.[75]

Natural variability of the climate system

It is virtually universally accepted amongst secular climatologists that the earth has experienced numerous ice ages over two million years, during which global temperatures fluctuated created glacial and inter-glacial periods. The frigid temperatures allowed ice sheets to expand southward, covering much of Asia, Europe, and North America. The cooling associated with ice ages is gradual, while the terminations are relatively rapid. However, even the rapid terminations of ice ages take centuries to millennia.

Natural climate change on other planets

Since the Viking spacecraft reached Mars in the 1970s until recent readings were taken, the average temperature on Mars has risen 0.6 °C [1.1 °F] just as the average temperature on the earth has risen. Since human industrialization is clearly not to blame for the change on Mars, other causes are being considered. One possibility is that dust storms are changing the albedo of the planet, allowing it to warm, while another possibility is that solar variations from the sun are causing the warming.[76]

Recently, it has also been found that similar to the Earth and Mars, Neptune is also undergoing global warming. Measurements taken at the Lowell observatory in Arizona have shown an increase in Neptune's brightness and temperature since 1980 following the same pattern seen on Earth and Mars. The researchers who discovered this warming suggest there may be a correlation between the warming and solar variations.[77]

Pluto has also been found to be undergoing global warming. The overall temperature increase on Pluto has been greater than that on the earth.[78]

On the other hand, Uranus has had no net change in temperature since 1977. A rapid increase in temperature reversed itself. The reasons for this are not understood.[79]

Global temperatures change on other planets even when there is no life, something which strongly supports the idea that humans are not necessarily the cause of earth's global warming. Moreover, the temperature on Uranus has fluctuated back and forth. There is no reason that fluctuations cannot occur on earth, too.

Although measurements have been made of the temperatures of other planets these are by no means thorough or comparable with the measurements used for earth. The short space of time over which measurements have been taken and the very limited spatial coverage means that reliable average figures have not been obtained. They have certainly not been taken extensively enough to produce a five-year average temperature, which is the standard when determining temperature trends on earth.

However, if accurate measurements could be made, and their accuracy and reliability is improving over time, then they may prove useful to climate science. Their different atmospheres and distances from the sun provide natural laboratories to study climatic changes without human influences. Though of course they will not be directly comparable due to the vast differences.

Al Gore's claims

Gore GlobalWarming.jpg

The decision by the government to distribute Al Gore's film, An Inconvenient Truth, became the subject of a legal challenge by New Party member Stewart Dimmock. A school governor from Dover and father of two, Dimmock charged the Government with brainwashing children with propaganda by presenting Gore’s sci-fi film as science. In October 2007, Mr Justice Burton of London's High Court found that while the film was "broadly accurate", it contained nine significant errors,“in which statements were made that were not supported by the current mainstream scientific consensus”, some of which had arisen in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration”. He also found the Guidance Notes drafted by the Education Secretary’s advisers only worked to exacerbate the political propaganda in the film.[80]

Taken from the official transcript,[81] the nine errors the judge found were:

  • 1. Sea level rise of up to 20 feet (7 metres) will be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland in the near future. This is distinctly alarmist, and part of Mr Gore's 'wake-up call'. It is common ground that if indeed Greenland melted, it would release this amount of water, but only after, and over, millennia, so that the Armageddon scenario he predicts, insofar as it suggests that sea level rises of 7 metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus.
  • 2. Low lying inhabited Pacific atolls are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming. In scene 20, Mr Gore states "that's why the citizens of these Pacific nations have all had to evacuate to New Zealand". There is no evidence of any such evacuation having yet happened.
  • 3. Shutting down of the "Ocean Conveyor". According to the IPCC, it is very unlikely that the Ocean Conveyor (known technically as the Meridional Overturning Circulation or thermohaline circulation) will shut down in the future, though it is considered likely that thermohaline circulation may slow down.
  • 4. Direct coincidence between rise in CO2 in the atmosphere and in temperature, by reference to two graphs. In scenes 8 and 9, Mr Gore shows two graphs relating to a period of 650,000 years, one showing rise in CO2 and one showing rise in temperature, and asserts (by ridiculing the opposite view) that they show an exact fit. Although there is general scientific agreement that there is a connection, the two graphs do not establish what Mr Gore asserts.
  • 5. The snows of Kilimanjaro. The film asserted that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidenced global warming. The Government's expert was had to admit that this is not correct. Mr Gore asserts in scene 7 that the disappearance of snow on Mt Kilimanjaro is expressly attributable to global warming. It is noteworthy that this is a point that specifically impressed Mr Milliband (see the press release quoted at paragraph 6 above). However, it is common ground that, the scientific consensus is that it cannot be established that the recession of snows on Mt Kilimanjaro is mainly attributable to human-induced climate change.
  • 6. Lake Chad etc. The drying up of Lake Chad is used as a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming. However, it is generally accepted that the evidence remains insufficient to establish such an attribution. It is apparently considered to be far more likely to result from other factors, such as population increase and over-grazing, and regional climate variability.
  • 7. Hurricane Katrina. In scene 12 Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans is ascribed to global warming. It is common ground that there is insufficient evidence to show that.
  • 8. Death of polar bears. In scene 16, by reference to a dramatic graphic of a polar bear desperately swimming through the water looking for ice, Mr Gore says: "A new scientific study shows that for the first time they are finding polar bears that have actually drowned swimming long distances up to 60 miles to find the ice. They did not find that before." The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm.
  • 9. Coral reefs. In scene 19, Mr Gore says: "Coral reefs all over the world because of global warming and other factors are bleaching and they end up like this. All the fish species that depend on the coral reef are also in jeopardy as a result. Overall specie loss is now occurring at a rate 1000 times greater than the natural background rate." The actual scientific view, as recorded in the IPCC report, is that, if the temperature were to rise by 1-3 degrees Centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and widespread coral mortality, unless corals could adapt or climatize, but that separating the impacts of climate change-related stresses from other stresses, such as over-fishing and polluting, is difficult.

Dimmock's lawyer, Mr. Downes, argued that by schools making available such film to its teachers, and if teachers then showed such film to their pupils, then this would inevitably result "in the promotion of partisan political views in the teaching of any subject in the school, which is thus not only not being forbidden by the local education authority (and the DES), but being positively facilitated by them."

Mr Justice Barton stressed that the “apocalyptic vision” presented in the film was politically partisan and not an impartial analysis of the science of climate change. “It is now common ground that it is not simply a science film—although it is clear that it is based substantially on scientific research and opinion—but that it is a political film.

Justice Barton also stated that, “I conclude that the claimant substantially won this case by virtue of my finding that, but for the new guidance note, the film would have been distributed in breach of sections 406 and 407 of the 1996 Education Act.”[82]

In order for the film to be shown, the Government must first amend their Guidance Notes to Teachers to make clear that

  • 1. The Film is a political work and promotes only one side of the argument.
  • 2. If teachers present the Film without making this plain they may be in breach of section 406 of the Education Act 1996 and guilty of political indoctrination.
  • 3. Nine inaccuracies have to be specifically drawn to the attention of school children.[83]

Science and Public Policy took issue with the response to the ruling by Al Gore’s spokesman and environment adviser, and asserted that his film contains 35 Inconvenient Truths.[84]

Regarding his claims that the snow cap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame, the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine stated,

Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine."

Many conservatives see Al Gore as an example of liberals using deceitful tactics in important debates, in order to make a position seem more solid than it is.


Roger Revelle

Hal Lewis

Liberal claims of global warming led to the resignation in October 2010 by Professor Hal Lewis from The American Physical Society because of "the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist."[85]

Critique of the "Hockey Stick" reconstruction

See also : Climategate: hockey stick graph

Effects of global warming

Beneficial effects of global warming

Canoing on a Colorful Day, (NY).

Some researchers point out that benefits of health global warming have been overlooked, or minimized. As far back as 1996, Thomas Gale Moore, Senior Fellow at Hoover Institution (Stanford University) contended that positive health and amenity effects would be a result of projected increases in temperature.[86]

Another source notes,[87]

In areas that see extreme cold temperatures, deaths related to colder weather would drop significantly, leading to decreased health care costs, while areas that already have hot climates will see no increase. Warmer temperatures would also mean less energy use to heat homes and buildings, helping to conserve energy as cooling is much more energy efficient. With the changes brought about by global warming more land that is not lost to desert and/or rising sea levels would become available for uses like farming and living. Forests and plants would grow stronger, healthier, and more abundant because of the warmer weather, and this would mean more oxygen being released into the atmosphere.

Reported effects of global warming

Reported past or expected/possible future environmental and societal consequences of man-made global warming include global cooling,[88] decreased food production,[89] increased food production,[90] shrinking forest.,[91] increased tree foliage,[92] increased productivity of high-elevation forests,[93] melting glaciers.,[94] growing glaciers,[95] increasing landmass in Antarctica,[96] colder winters,[97] a new ice age,[98] prevention of an ice age,[99] taller mountains.,[100] a lop-sided planet,[101] stronger hurricanes,[102] weaker hurricanes,[103] shorter days,[104] earthquakes and volcanoes, and other geological disasters. Attempts to prevent climate change may do the same,[105] shrinking brains,[106] shrinking sheep,[107] tiger attacks.,[108] shark attacks,[109] walrus stampede deaths,[110] imminent cannibalism,[111] the need for a drastic reduction of the earth’s population,[112] a strong increase in people dying of AIDS,[113] increased risk of civil war in Africa,[114] child climate cops,[115] increase in depression,[116] increase in psychiatric illness[117] and increased anxiety and loss of sleep among many children.[118]


  1. Roberts, Greg (April 18, 2009). "Antarctic ice is growing, not melting away." Retrieved on September 25, 2014.
  2. Multiple references:
  3. Bailey, Ronald (December 26, 2012). "34 years of satellite temperature data show global warming is on a plateau". Hit & Run Blog/ Retrieved on September 25, 2014.
  4. Cole, Steve and McCarthy, Leslie (January 12, 2011). "NASA research finds 2010 tied for warmest year on record". NASA website. Retrieved on September 25, 2014.
  5. Tisdale, Bob (August 10, 2012). "Not so hot—ocean temperatures around the USA are not anywhere near record levels". Watts Up with That? Retrieved on September 25, 2014.
  6. 6.0 6.1 "Science: Another Ice Age?" (June 24, 1974). Time magazine. Retrieved on September 25, 2014.
  7. 7.0 7.1 "After any given warming phase begins, thousands of years later the cyclical Milankovitch decrease in the sun's heat kicks in. The warming stops, reverses and an ice age ensues." Cockburn, Alexander (June 9–11, 2007). "Dissidents against dogma". Counterpunch. Retrieved on September 25, 2014.
  8. "Issues" (September 1, 2007). [2008 senate campaign website] quoted in "John McCain on environment" Retrieved on September 25, 2014.
  9. Whiteman, Hilary (July 7, 2010). "'Climategate' review clears scientists of dishonesty". CNN World. Retrieved on September 26, 2014.
  10. 10.0 10.1 Rose, David (October 13, 2012). "Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released...and here is the chart to prove it". MailOnline. Retrieved on September 26, 2014.
  11. Multiple references:
  12. Byrne, Dennis (August 30, 2011). "The real science trashers". ChicagoTribune. Retrieved on September 26, 2014.
  13. "CO2 lags temperature-what does it mean?" (2007). SkepticalScience. Retrieved on September 26, 2014.
  14. "Carbon dioxide in the ocean and atmosphere" (2007). Water Encyclopedia. Retrieved on September 26, 2014
  15. "Carbon cycle" (2010). NASA Science. Retrieved on September 26, 2014.
  16. Tans, Pieter and Keeling, Ralph (2010). "Trends in atmospheric carbon dioxide". NOAA/Earth System Research Laboratory Global Monitoring Division. Retrieved on September 26, 2014.
  17. Hansen's group at the Goddard Institute wrote, "Global warming is now 0.6 °C [1.0 °F] in the past three decades and 0.8 °C [1.4 °F] in the past century." Hansen, J. E. and Reudy, R. et al. (January 12, 2006). "GISS Surface Temperature Analysis". NASA/Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Retrieved on September 26, 2014.
  18. Karl, Thomas R., Knight, Richard W. et al. (July 1994). "Global and hemispheric temperature trends: uncertainties related to inadequate spatial sampling" [abstract]. Journal of Climate, vol. 7, iss. 7, pp. 1144-1168. Abstract retrieved from The SAO/NASA Astrophysics Data System on September 26, 2014.
  19. Bertrand, Cédric, Loutre, Marie-France et al. (May 2002). "Climate of the last millennium: a sensitivity study". Tellus [Stockholm], vol. 54, iss. 3, pp. 221-244. Retrieved from Wiley Online Library on September 26, 2014.
  20. [1]; [2]
  21. [3];[4];[5]; [6]; [7]; [8]
  22. Erich Hau (14 December 2005). Wind Turbines: Fundamentals, Technologies, Application, Economics: Truth Versus Reality!. Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 978-3-540-29284-5. 
  23. Hansen, James, Sato, Makiko et al. (January 2012). "Earth's energy imbalance" Institute for Space Studies. Retrieved on September 26, 2014.
  24. Krauthammer, Charles (December 11, 2009). "The environmental shakedown". Real Clear Politics. Retrieved on September 27, 2014.
  25. Gray, Bill (February 19, 2008). "We are not in climate crisis". Fort Collins Forum website, "Area experts debate global warming" article. Retrieved from February 15, 2013 archive at Internet Archive of University Corporation for Academic Research/Climate and Global Dynamics/Climate Analysis Section on September 27, 2014.
  26. Dead link: //
  27. Hunter-Omar, Melanie (December 4, 2009). "Vitter, Inhofe ask NASA inspector general to probe possible obstruction of FOIA requests seeking climate change records". Retrieved on September 27, 2014.
  28. "Are greenhouse gases increasing?" (2002). NOAA/National Climatic Data Center. Retrieved from July 16, 2012 archive at Internet Archive on September 27, 2014.
  29. "NOAA budget to fund ocean, climate priorities" (February 4, 2008). NOAA website. Retrieved from February 23, 2009 archive at Internet Archive on September 27, 2014.
  30. "2008 Democratic party platform" (August 25, 2008). University of California Santa Barbara/The American Presidency Project/Political Party Platforms. Retrieved on September 27, 2014.
  31. "2008 Republican platform" (2008). Retrieved from September 11, 2008 archive at Internet Archive on September 27, 2014.
  32. Dead link: //
  33. Kerry, John and Graham, Lindsey (October 10, 2009). "Yes we can (pass climate change legislation)". New York Times website. Retrieved on September 27, 2014.
  34. "National security and the threat of climate change" [summary] (2007). The Center for Naval Analyses Corporation website [contains link to PDF file of report]. Summary retrieved from April 17, 2007 archive at Internet Archive on September 27, 2014.
  35. "CIA opens center on climate change and national security" (September 25, 2009). Central Intelligence Agency website. Retrieved on September 27, 2014.
  36. Gingrich, Newt (April 2008). "Entering the arena: Why conservatives must engage in the environment-energy policy debate". Retrieved from August 9, 2009 archive at Internet Archive on September 27, 2014.
  37. Feder, Don (July 31, 2007). "The cult of global warming". Retrieved from archive at on September 27, 2014.
  38. Morabito, Maurizio (December 5, 2009). "The CIA’s ‘global cooling’ file". The Spectator. Retrieved from The Spectator website on September 27, 2014.
  39. 39.0 39.1 Steyn, Mark (December 24, 2009). "Why climate change is hot hot hot". Macleans. Retrieved on September 27, 2014.
  40. Stewart, Christine (December 14, 1998). Calgary Herald. Reprinted at "Match these quotes" (December 2004). Resource Roundup, p. 8. Reprinted at "Use environmentalism to change the world". Accuracy in Media, "What liberals say" series. Retrieved on September 27, 2014.
  41. Sheppard, Noel (July 17, 2007). "Hysterical satire: 'Global warming now world's most boring topic'". MRC NewsBusters. Retrieved on September 27, 2014.
  42. 42.0 42.1 42.2 42.3 42.4 Lindzen, Richard (Spring 1992). "Global warming: The origin and nature of the alleged scientific consensus". Regulation, vol. 15, no. 2. Retrieved from Cato Institute website on September 29, 2014.
  43. Birdnow, Timothy (June 24, 2008). "The trees of Finland; temperature readings and historical reconstruction". Birdnow's Aviary blog. Retrieved on September 29, 2014. With links to actual data sources.
  44. Monckton, Christopher (July 2008). "Climate sensitivity reconsidered". Physics & Society newsletter. Retrieved from American Physical Society/Forum on Physics and Society website on September 29, 2014.
  45. Tribune-Review, The (March 21, 2009). "Global warming? More doubts". TribLive [Pittsburgh Tribune website]. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  46. Hendrickson, Mark W. (May 25, 2009). "A closer look at climate change". Retrieved on September 29, 2014. "The panic over global warming is totally unjustified" says Vice Chair, IPCC.
  47. "Shocker: 'Global warming' simply no longer happening" (March 22, 2009). WND. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  48. Blumer, Tom (January 28, 2009). "Former boss rebukes NASA global warming alarmist Hansen, is AGW skeptic". MRC NewsBusters. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  49. Pogatchnik, Shawn (February 9, 2009). "Belfast environment chief bans climate change ads". Associated Press. Retrieved from on September 29, 2014.
  50. Goodenough, Patrick (July 22, 2008). "UK broadcaster scolded for film on global warming". CNSNews. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  51. Borenstein, Seth (December 14, 2008). "Obama left with little time to curb global warming". Associated Press. Reprinted at Retrieved from December 15, 2008 archive at Internet Archive on September 29, 2014.
  52. "Scientists call AP Report on global warming 'hysteria'" (December 16, 2008). Fox News website. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  53. "2008 global temperature" (January 21, 2009). EO [Earth Observation]. Retrieved from July 25, 2011 archive at Internet Archive on September 29, 2014.
  54. "NOAA: Summer temperature below average for U.S." (September 10, 2009). NOAA. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  55. Brennan, Phil (December 16, 2008). "Global warming’s last gasp". NewsMax. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  56. 56.0 56.1 Statistics on belief in climate change, Randal S. Olson
  57. Evangelical Climate Initiative (2006). "ECI Statement". Climate Change: An Evangelical Call to Action. Retrieved from February 1, 2014 archive at Internet Archive on September 29, 2014.
  58. Vu, Michelle A. (December 4, 2009). "Evangelicals push back against global warming doom" The Christian Post website. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  59. The Bill Nye climate change bet.
  60. "What they're saying about John McCain's climate change speech" (May 14, 2008). McCain-Palin. Retrieved from December 23, 2008 archive at Internet Archive on September 29, 2014.
  61. Marinucci, Carla (June 30, 2008). "Schwarzenegger now backs McCain on environment". SFGate website [San Francisco]. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  62. "Sen. John McCain refutes a global warming denier" (February 22, 2007). YouTube video, 1:21, posted by The Heat Is On. Retrieved on September 29, 2014.
  63. Lewis, Leo (June 6, 2008). "World needs $45 trillion energy revolution". The Times Online [London]. Retrieved from August 12, 2011 archive at Internet Archive on September 29, 2014.
  64. "Senator Barack Obama (D)" (2007). '08: On the record/League of Conservation Voters. Retrieved from October 17, 2007 archive at Internet Archive on September 29, 2014.
  65. (December 12, 2009). Retrieved from December 12, 2009 archive at Internet Archive on September 29, 2014.
  66. Koprowski, Gene J. (December 1, 2009). "Global warming scandal makes scientific progress more difficult, experts say". Fox News website. Retrieved on September 30, 2014. See Fox News.
  67. NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory-California Institute of Technology Earth Science Communications Team (2013). "Consensus". NASA website/Global Climate Change. Retrieved on September 30, 2014.
  68. Multiple references:
  69. Chesser, Paul (October 25, 2007). "Be wary of climate policy development". Seattle Post-Intelligencer website. Retrieved on September 30, 2014.
  70. Multiple references:
  71. "Climate change reality" (March 2009). Cato Institute website. Retrieved on September 30, 2014.
  72. George, Alison (June 28, 2001). "Breaking the ice". The Guardian website. Retrieved on September 30, 2014. See Guardian (UK).
  73. "Global warming petition project" (2008). Global Warming Petition Project. Retrieved on September 30, 2014.
  74. Central Intelligence Agency (August 1974). A Study of Climatological Research as it Pertains to Intelligence Problems, pp. 1, 5, 7, 16. Retrieved from Climatemonitor [Italy] on September 30, 2014.
  75. Gwynne, Peter (April 28, 1975). "The cooling world". Newsweek. Retrieved from on September 30, 2014. Caution: Copyrighted material; for fair educational use only.
  76. Multiple references:
  77. Hammel, H. B. and Lockwood, G. W. (April 8, 2007). "Suggestive correlations between the brightness of Neptune, solar variability, and Earth's temperature". Geophysical Research Letters. Retrieved from Wiley Online Library on September 30, 2014.
  78. Britt, Robert Roy (October 9, 2002). "Global warming on Pluto puzzles scientists". Retrieved on September 30, 2014.
  79. Young, Leslie A., Bosh, Amanda S. et al. (October 2001). "Uranus after solstice: Results from the 1998 November 6 occultation". Icarus, vol. 153, iss. 2, pp. 236-247. Retrieved from Southwest Research Institute [Boulder, CO] website on September 30, 2014.
  80. Multiple references:
  81. Burton, Mr Justice Michael (October 10, 2007). "Stuart Dimmock and Secretary of State for Education and Skills". United Kingdom of Great Britain's High Court of Justice/Queen's Bench Division/Administrative Court. Retrieved from Not Evil Just Wrong on October 1, 2014.
  82. "Gore climate film's nine 'errors'" (October 11, 2007). BBC News website. Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  83. "Inaccuracies in Al Gore's 'An Inconvenient Truth'" (October 2007). The New Party [U.K.]. Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  84. Monckton, Christopher (October 19, 2007). "35 inconvenient truths: The errors in Al Gore's movie". The Science and Public Policy Institute website. Retrieved from September 15, 2014 archive at Internet Archive on October 1, 2014.
  85. Lewis, Hal (October 8, 2010). "Hal Lewis: My resignation from the American Physical Society". The Global Warming Policy Foundation website. Retrieved from February 12, 2014 archive at Internet Archive on October 1, 2014.
  86. Moore, Thomas Gale (May 30, 1996). "Health and amenity effects of global warming". Stanford University/Thomas Gale Moore webpage. Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  87. "What are the benefits of global warming?" (November 3, 2008). Retrieved from December 21, 2008 archive at Internet Archive on October 1, 2014.
  88. 72Jag (August 25, 2014). "Is global warming causing global cooling?" NowPublic. Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  89. Fred Pearce (April 26, 2005). "Climate change warning over food production" Newscientist website. Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  90. Booth, William (May 17, 1990). "Global heating could benefit U.S. farmers; prices seen rising as production falls". The Washington Post. Retrieved from HighBeam Research website on October 1, 2014.
  91. Adam, David (March 11, 2009). "Amazon could shrink by 85% due to climate change". Theguardian [U. K.]. Retrieved on October 1, 2014. See The Guardian.
  92. "Global warming causes greening" (2008). Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  93. Oregon State University (Oct. 20, 2009). "Global warming may spur increased growth in Pacific northwest forests". ScienceDaily. Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  94. Asian News International (June 6, 2007). "Global warming causing hundreds of Antarctic Peninsula glaciers to melt". Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  95. "Global warming causing California glacier to grow, scientists say" (July 9, 2008). CBCnews. Retrieved on October 1, 2014. Located by Sub-Driver of Free Republic.
  96. "Antarctic ice: A global warming snow job?" (May 27, 2005). World Climate Report. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  97. "Climate change could bring colder winters" (March 13, 2003). CBCNews. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  98. McGuire, Bill (November 13, 2003). "Will global warming trigger a new ice age?" The Guardian website. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  99. Thompson, Andrea (September 10, 2007). "Global warming may cancel next ice age". Fox News website. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  100. Than, Ker (August 4, 2006). "Taller mountains blamed on global warming, too". LiveScience. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  101. Britt, Robert Roy (June 29, 2005). "Global warming might create lopsided planet". LiveScience. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  102. Florida State University (Sep. 4, 2008). "Global warming: Warmer seas linked to strengthening hurricanes, according to new research". ScienceDaily. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  103. Schmid, Randolph E., AP Science Writer (April 17, 2007). "Study: Global warming may diminish Atlantic hurricane activity". USA Today. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  104. Atkins, William (April 11, 2007). "Researchers say global warming should cause shorter days". iTWire. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  105. Fisher, Richard. (September 23, 2009). "Climate change may trigger earthquakes and volcanoes" [preview]. Newscientist website. Preview retrieved on October 2, 2014. Subscription required for full article.
  106. "Study: Global warming could be reversing a trend that led to bigger human brains" (March 15, 2007). State University of New York at Albany. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  107. Connor, Steve (July 3, 2009). "How global warming shrank St Kilda's sheep". The Independent [U. K.] website. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  108. Dhar, Sujoy (October 20, 2008). "Tiger attacks linked to global warming". Reuters. Retrieved from OneWorld South Asia on October 2, 2014.
  109. Johnston, Bruce (August 31, 1998). "Shark attack on boat 'result of global warming'". Electronic Telegraph (U.K.) Retrieved from JunkScienceArchive on October 3, 2014.
  110. Associated Press (December 17, 2007). "Global warming is blamed for walrus stampede deaths". 6abc Action News website. Retrieved from October 3, 2014 archive at Internet Archive on October 3, 2014. Located by digger48 of Free Republic
  111. Baker, Brent (April 2, 2008). "Turner: Global warming will cause mass cannibalism, insurgents are patriots". MRC NewsBusters. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  112. "One less child? Environmental extremists warn that overpopulation is causing climate change and will ultimately destroy the Earth" (November 17, 2009). The End of the World. Retrieved on October 2, 2014.
  113. McLean, Tamara (April 29, 2008). "Global warming hoax set to fan the HIV fire". Retrieved from August 31, 2011 archive at Internet Archive on October 1, 2014. Located by Skeptics Global Warning.
  114. "Global warming increases risk of civil war in Africa" (November 23, 2009). Stanford Report. Retrieved from Stanford News on October 1, 2014.
  115. "Beware your children: They might be 'climate cops'" (July 28, 2008). WND. Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  116. Sohn, Emily (December 10, 2009). “Mental health to decline with climate change”. News. Retrieved from Google Search on October 1, 2014.
  117. Press Trust of India (April 8, 2008). "'Climate change leads to psychiatric illness'". Sify News. Retrieved on October 1, 2014.
  118. Jones, Alan (February 22, 2007). "Children losing sleep over global warming". The Scotsman website. Retrieved on September 30, 2014.

See also

External links