For most people, warning bells should go off when they find a 17 year old at the head of the climate change movement. Do we not remember how well the Children's Crusade went? Research has shown that children are easily influenced by outside sources--much more so than adults. If you take people from childhood to adulthood and ask them to rate the riskiness of something (let's say climate change), and after they rate it you tell them that a bunch of adults rated it much higher even though the adults did not really rate it higher, then you let the person rate the risk again, older teenagers change their original views significantly, even more so than younger teenagers.
Readings from thermometers that have been averaged confirm that temperatures on the earth have risen since the first global network of temperature readings was established in 1850. That is a fact taken in its entirety, however, there are a few problems with this fact, such as the source years for the "average." One would expect this is an average of every year from 1850 until today, but it is not. It is usually a subset range instead of the full range. In other words, the numbers have been hand selected to give these results. To make matters worse, climate change advocates do not stop there with that fact. Instead, they start to make a bunch of claims that are not scientifically supported.
Unsupported claim #1: Humans caused this change. There are fossils of tropical plants under ice flows. That is a fact. If tropical trees existed in arctic Norway, the climate has changed drastically with or without human interaction. In fact, if humans effect the climate, they apparently made it much colder in Norway that what it was initially. Some non-human reasons for climate change: continental plate movement which is not constant throughout time, the fact the sun is getting larger, the number of solar flares.
Unsupported claim #2: Since we have been recording temperatures since 1850 we have a long-term accurate record of temperatures showing that the climate is warming up. The first problem with this claim is that every scientist knows the more data points you have the more accurate your data. In 1850, there were relatively few data points to collect the global temperature of the earth. Livingstone had not even made it all the way across Africa nor had the entire continental coastline of America been charted. No there are about 30,000 points of data. At the same time, we have the second problem--thermometer accuracy. In the 1880s,weather thermometers were all mercury thermometers and the ones used were usually accurate to about +/-0.1 degree Celsius. Digital weather thermometers today are only accurate to about +/-1 degree Celsius. That is right--the temperature has supposedly changed about 1 degree Celsius since the 1900s and the weather thermometers today are only accurate (and require constant calibration to maintain their accuracy) to +/- 1 degree Celsius. The fact that mercury thermometers were being phased out right about the same time that global temperatures began to spike has not struck anyone as odd.
Unsupported claim #3: Methane/CO2 are causing climate change and increasing the Earth's temperatures.
Venus atmosphere (solar system poster child for global warming/climate change):
Readings from thermometers that have been averaged confirm that temperatures on the earth have risen since the first global network of temperature readings was established in 1850. That is a fact taken in its entirety, however, there are a few problems with this fact, such as the source years for the "average." One would expect this is an average of every year from 1850 until today, but it is not. It is usually a subset range instead of the full range. In other words, the numbers have been hand selected to give these results. To make matters worse, climate change advocates do not stop there with that fact. Instead, they start to make a bunch of claims that are not scientifically supported.
Unsupported claim #1: Humans caused this change. There are fossils of tropical plants under ice flows. That is a fact. If tropical trees existed in arctic Norway, the climate has changed drastically with or without human interaction. In fact, if humans effect the climate, they apparently made it much colder in Norway that what it was initially. Some non-human reasons for climate change: continental plate movement which is not constant throughout time, the fact the sun is getting larger, the number of solar flares.
Unsupported claim #2: Since we have been recording temperatures since 1850 we have a long-term accurate record of temperatures showing that the climate is warming up. The first problem with this claim is that every scientist knows the more data points you have the more accurate your data. In 1850, there were relatively few data points to collect the global temperature of the earth. Livingstone had not even made it all the way across Africa nor had the entire continental coastline of America been charted. No there are about 30,000 points of data. At the same time, we have the second problem--thermometer accuracy. In the 1880s,weather thermometers were all mercury thermometers and the ones used were usually accurate to about +/-0.1 degree Celsius. Digital weather thermometers today are only accurate to about +/-1 degree Celsius. That is right--the temperature has supposedly changed about 1 degree Celsius since the 1900s and the weather thermometers today are only accurate (and require constant calibration to maintain their accuracy) to +/- 1 degree Celsius. The fact that mercury thermometers were being phased out right about the same time that global temperatures began to spike has not struck anyone as odd.
Unsupported claim #3: Methane/CO2 are causing climate change and increasing the Earth's temperatures.
Venus atmosphere (solar system poster child for global warming/climate change):
CO2 96.5%
Methane (undetectable)
Avg daily temperature: 872 °F
Mars atmosphere (“normal” planet):
CO2 94.9%
Methane (undetectable)
Avg daily temperature: -81 °F
Earth atmosphere:
CO2 0.04%
Methane 0.00017%
Average daily
temperature: 58.62 °FYou may wonder why this hype about climate change is dangerous for the environment. For one, it takes the spotlight off true environmentally damaging activities done by corporations. These corporations can continue to pollute and still be labeled green because they have paid for carbon credits to eliminate the fictitious "carbon footprint" they are leaving. Instead, blame for the biggest evil on earth (i.e. "climate change") is placed on individual people and governments. Political action revolves around pushing for corporations to pay these fake "carbon credit" companies to continue their activities and for everyone to reduce our carbon emissions. Plants invariably resolve any excess carbon in the atmosphere. If you smoke in a green house, the smoke will effectively be dealt with by the plants.Instead of focusing on this silliness, we should focus on real pollution. I don't care how much carbon a factory is releasing; I care about how much the EMFs from power lines are polluting my environment. I care about dioxins and other cancer causing agents in my air, water, food, and household products. I care about an increase in sulfur in the air (something that climate change advocates want more of because they apparently feel anything they do no matter how damaging to the earth and its environment is better than doing nothing).
The climate will change. There is plenty of real scientific evidence showing us this. It is time people stopped focusing on one thing they cannot stop from happening and start focusing on pollution that happens and can be prevented from happening each day.
No comments:
Post a Comment