93
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 17:
Line 17: + + Line 23:
Line 25: + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone."<ref>Borenstein, Seth (2007), "Warming 'Likely' Man-Made, Unstoppable." Associated Press, as published by Forbes[http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/02/02/ap3388409.html]</ref>
The observed widespread warming of the atmosphere and ocean, together with ice-mass loss, support the conclusion that it is extremely unlikely that global climate change of the past 50 years can be explained without external forcing, and very likely that is not due to known natural causes alone."<ref>Borenstein, Seth (2007), "Warming 'Likely' Man-Made, Unstoppable." Associated Press, as published by Forbes[http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/02/02/ap3388409.html]</ref>
In fact, Al Gore does not even follow his own advice and actually made a lot of money with oil stocks, and uses private jets that pollute CO2. <ref>http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-08-09-gore-green_x.htm</ref> Plus Al Gore does not have a science degree, but one in government and an undergraduate degree and not a PHD, and Gore scored low in his science tests and classes. <ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A37397-2000Mar18</ref> So why is Al Gore the leading expert on global warming if he doesn't even have a degree in science or had good grades in science?
It should be noted that these scientists are motivated by a need for grant money in their field of climatology. Therefore, their work can not be considered unbiased, though no more than any scientist in any other field .<ref>FOX News: "On Global Warming: Follow the Money Indeed!" Feb 12, 2007[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,251458,00.html]</ref>.
It should be noted that these scientists are motivated by a need for grant money in their field of climatology. Therefore, their work can not be considered unbiased, though no more than any scientist in any other field .<ref>FOX News: "On Global Warming: Follow the Money Indeed!" Feb 12, 2007[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,251458,00.html]</ref>.
Avery, "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years" (Rowman & Littlefield, 2007)</ref> Though, it must be said, that no scientist denies that CO<sub>2</sub> has lagged behind temperature at certain times in Earth's history. They maintain this doesn't negate in any way CO<sub>2</sub> influence on temperature. It merely means it wasn't a first cause of temperature increase at particular times in Earth's distance history.."<ref>What the lag of CO<sub>2</sub> behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming
Avery, "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years" (Rowman & Littlefield, 2007)</ref> Though, it must be said, that no scientist denies that CO<sub>2</sub> has lagged behind temperature at certain times in Earth's history. They maintain this doesn't negate in any way CO<sub>2</sub> influence on temperature. It merely means it wasn't a first cause of temperature increase at particular times in Earth's distance history.."<ref>What the lag of CO<sub>2</sub> behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming
[http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/]</ref>
[http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/]</ref>
In fact, many experts call global warming a big scam to scare people into giving away millions to billions of dollars to the companies promoting global warming <ref>http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20070306-122226-6282r.htm</ref> <ref>http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=11548</ref> It would appear many businesses are making a large fortune selling carbon credits. <ref>http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/03/survey_of_carbo.php</ref> So this appears to be a motive in promoting global warming as true.
If global warming is a theory, there is no need to force it on others. Yet the Weather Channel and the AMS was going to decertify weather people who don't strongly agree with the global warming theory. Thus trying to force the theory on others. <ref>http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming011807.htm</ref>
Despite global warming scientists making claim that the globe is getting warmer, they cannot explain the colder temperatures like the Russian winters having record low temps. <ref>http://www.heatisonline.org/contentserver/objecthandlers/index.cfm?id=5739&method=full</ref>
The global warming theory may not be a science theory, but seems to be more of a political theory. <ref>http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/97175/Global_Warming_Or_Political_Warming_</ref>
Using the same data, as far back as a hundred or more years ago, scientists argued over if the globe was cooling or warming using the same data. <ref>http://www.saveportland.com/Climate/index.html</ref>