Is the Earth getting warmer or colder?


The IPCC, NASA and NOAA like to tell us that the earth is getting warmer and warmer and will soon be ice free. It seems to me that this is actually a very easy thing to prove or disprove. The reason I say this is because of the proven concept of conservation of energy, in this case angular momentum. This is the same principle that is shown in ice skating when a skater starts a spin with their arms out and then they bring them in and up over their head. The result is that their spin increases directly to how tight they can make their body; and we have all seen this many times over the years so there is no debate on this possible.

melting

So how does this relate to the earth getting warmer? Well it’s actually very simple the earth is spinning at one revolution every 24 hours, once a day, and we have the ability today to measure this 24 hours very, very accurately. Therefore if the poles are getting warmer, as we are being told, the ice there would be melting and contributing to the sea levels rising. According to the warmist’s this will flood low lying coastal cities and cause much disruption to humans. They give us many reports on how much the sea levels have risen since we started to use lots of fossil based fuels mostly in the past 100 years. And in fact in Paris in December they are going to give us a world tax on carbon to stop this at the end of the COP21 conference.

Well if this is true that the ice at the poles, on land, is in fact melting then the resulting water will enter the planets oceans and because of the spinning earth that water will quickly migrate to the equator. As it does so and because of the conservation of angular momentum the planets rotation will slow down; and this will be in direct relationship to the amount of ice above the Arctic and Antarctic circles that is there or not there. More ice at the poles will speed up the spin and less ice at the poles will slow done the spin there can be no debate about this principle the only issue would be do we have the technology to measure this.

If we do, and I think we do, then there is a very simple way to determine whether the planet is warming or not — we just measure this spin!

All things in nature have cycles and Climate is no exception!


Did Cycle Theory Begin With The Discovery of a Rhinoceros?

woolly rhinoceros

Global Warming CavemenYou may not realize it, but it was the discovery of a frozen rhinoceros in Siberia that introduced cycle theory and altered everything in science igniting the Age of Enlightenment. Cycle theory is responsible for just about everything in physics and illustrates why the global warming/climate change crowd is simply pursuing an agenda for government to raise taxes. To a great extent, there has always been this clash between people who simply believe in a straight line (I call them the uniformity crowd) and anyone who deviates, whom they see as somehow at fault and abnormal. Then there are the practical people who see catastrophe as part of nature (e.g. the burning of a forest that sparks new growth, as in Australia).

This clash has often been a heated emotional issue. The idea that systems just collapse in a catastrophic manner can be disquieting to say the least. For this reason, uniformitarianism soothes the senses and brings order to the future dominated by uncertainty.

frozen-cave-lion-Academy-of-Sciences-of-Yakutia-

baby-mammoth

A new discovery in Siberia of frozen extinct cave lions brings to mind the origin of cycle theory. These two clashing schools of thought lie at the core of just about everything, from the Big Bang to Charles Darwin’s (1809-1882) theory of evolution of change and survival of the fittest (aside from ape to man). This began with a discovery in 1772 near Vilui, Siberia, of an intact frozen woolly Rhinoceros, followed by the more famous discovery of a frozen mammoth in 1787. You may be shocked, but these discoveries of frozen animals with grass still in their stomach set in motion these two schools of thought since the evidence implied you could be eating lunch and suddenly find yourself frozen and only to be discovered by posterity.

George Hoggart Toulmin in his rare 1785 book, The Eternity of the World captured best the sense of the discovery that set cycle theory in motion.

” ••• convulsions and revolutions violent beyond our experience or conception, yet unequal to the destruction of the globe, or the whole of the human species, have both existed and will again exist ••• [terminating] ••• an astonishing succession of ages.”

(Toulmin 1785, 3)

Newton-Haley-Huygens

Yet the catastrophists could claim greater influence in the birth of the field of physics. Sir Isaac Newton (1642-1727) developed his laws of gravity and was inspired by his friend Edmund Halley (1656-1742), who underwrote the project, to publish the work. This was the same Halley who discovered the cyclical nature of comets. Halley believed that the comet that carries his name was the same comet reappearing throughout history at regular intervals recorded by contemporary historians of all ages. Halley saw, hidden within history, the same periodic intervals of a comet. Christiaan Huygens (1629-1695) discovered that light traveled, not in a uniform motion as a straight line, but in a cyclical pulsating motion of cyclical waves, albeit at a constant speed. Suddenly, there could be a steady uniformity to the speed of light, yet simultaneously, there was a violent swing of extremes within it taking place in a cyclical manner. This was the same pattern that emerged in the ice core samples. There may appear to be uniformity in the macro world, but cyclical violent swings at the micro level that could erupt catastrophically.

The latest discovery of the frozen cave lion illustrates that climate can change abruptly and has been part of a natural cycle long before man started using combustion engines in the 1920s. Nevertheless, the agenda government pays these academics for is to raise taxes. Now, many states where taxes on energy has declined are moving to tax per mile driven and others are preparing to tax your use of the sun with solar panels since they are replacing power usage. They even want to tax electric cigarettes now. It’s always just about the money. They need excuses to pretend otherwise.

NOAA has to refuse — because they have NOTHING!


National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Will Not Release Documents To Prove Global Warming

NOAA_logo

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has been subpoenaed to turn over its documentation to prove global warming and they are REFUSING to show the data. They are claiming confidentiality when it is taxpayer money that funds them. How can this be confidential?

Friends of Science start new campaign for Paris #COP21


It would be nice to be able to stop this travesty but since all the politicians in power in the US and the EU want this it’s going to be next to impossible to stop.

tallbloke's avatarTallbloke's Talkshop

FoS

Friends of Science Society have a new billboard campaign – “Say NO to Climate CO2 Coercion” aimed at the upcoming COP-21 climate change talks that countries like Poland may agree with, as reported by Reuters, Oct. 13, 2015. The “Conference of the Parties” (COP) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change are meeting for the 21st time will meet in Paris Nov. 30 to Dec. 11, 2015, to try and hash out an international agreement on carbon dioxide reductions, which the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says causes global warming, despite reporting in 2013 that global warming was on ‘hiatus’ for 15 years (today more than 18 years), even though carbon dioxide concentrations had steeply risen.

Friends of Science Society propose in their report “Clear the Air in Paris” that non-OECD nations be required to meet pollution reduction standards similar to those Canada has met.
“From 1985 to…

View original post 410 more words

Debunking The “97%” Consensus Claims – Part I


Its good to get this out again as the 97% number is a total fraud.

NASA Has Nearly Doubled Global Warming By Data Tampering Since 2005


Have no doubt that this data manipulation is FACT — NASA once the premier agency of can do engineers and scientists is now nothing more than a Pravda and political engineering and science!

Tony Heller's avatarReal Climate Science

Almost half of claimed global warming is due to data tampering by NASA over the past 10 years.

NASA2005-2015Tampering
2005 version: Fig_A.pdf
2015 version: Fig.A.gif 

View original post

Lawmakers Probe Taxpayer-Funded Academic Who Wants Obama to Prosecute Climate Change Skeptics


One finds it’s always about the money , especially when government is involved!

Climate Rationalization, Beliefs and Denialism


A good summary of where we are but we are way to late to stop this match to the cliff the damage is now done as this December at COP21 a new climate treaty will be proposed, a draft version is available http://paristext2015.com/, and it will be sent to the UN and will be approved as has the support of the Pope and Obama.

In my opinion, the best we can hope for now is as the pause should continue until 2035, by my calculations, that we might me able to blame this travesty on the politicians more then the scientists.

Understanding The 97% Consensus


This all started when Al Gore had Will Happer fired back in the day when Gore was in Congress.

Tony Heller's avatarReal Climate Science

Barack Obama says that 97% of scientists agree with his mindless apocalyptic fantasy.  He pulled that number out from where the sun never shines, but just for a minute let’s see what he does with it.

screenhunter_776-jul-03-21-00 (1)

The White House abuses and threatens to fire any scientists who disagree.

2015-10-25-17-55-45

If that doesn’t keep them silent, they threaten to prosecute them.

2015-10-25-18-03-24

LetterPresidentAG.pdf

Not to mention cutting their funding off, ostracizing them, censoring them in the press, and making sure they don’t get published.

They create silence in the same way that all mafias do. Threats, harassment and $29 billion/year in bribes. Obama engages in the exact behavior which RICO was intended to target.

View original post

The United Nations 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) on Climate Change


COP21 will held in Paris France from November 30 to December 11 2015 with the stated objective of achieving a legally binding and universal agreement on climate, from all the nations of the world. The reason this is required is that, according to government scientists, global temperatures must not exceed 2 degrees Celsius (C) above pre-industrial levels; or there will be dire and irreversible consequences to the planet and humanity.

This increase in global temperature is claimed, by these same scientists to be directly caused by CO2 levels going from just under 300 parts per million (ppm) 200 years ago to almost 400 ppm today because of the use of fossil fuels i.e. coal, oil and natural gas. The term they use for this theory is Anthropogenic Climate Change meaning man made climate change. To achieve this stated goal Carbon Dioxide CO2 emissions must be quickly stopped since according to NASA current temperatures are at 14.81 degrees C and pre-industrial temperatures were around 13.5 degrees C. If we add 2.0 degrees C to 13.5 degrees C we get 15.5 degrees C only .69 degrees C above where we are now and that means at their current rates of increasing we will exceed that 2 degrees C level before 2050.

The expected proposal from the COP21 conference will be a legally binding international treaty that will place a heavy carbon tax on the developed world i.e. North America and the European Union (EU). This tax will make carbon based fuels very expensive in these countries which will therefore drive down their use and allow alternative energy to take their place. Since this will be a United Nations tax it will go to the United Nations and be used to offset dislocation problems in the developing world. According to the proposed draft agreement dated October 5, 2015 the sign up dates for the states are from March 2016 to March 2017 and the agreement goes into effect 30 days later according to article 17 and article 18.

President Obama has stated that he will take the treaty developed by the COP21 conference to the United Nations as soon as he gets it and since the Catholic Pope has also supported this effort it’s unlikely that the UN will not approve it. It’s very likely that processes much like what was used to get the Treaty with Iran will be used to get congress to approve this treaty since all the Washington elitists want this to happen; more tax money. This means that congress will pass a bill that they must be involved in the process and the President will sign it. The net result of this will be that it will take a 2/3 vote to stop instead of a 2/3 vote to pass.

These are the major (but not all) steps leading to the COP21 conference.

The creation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 1970 and the Clean Air Act 42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq. (1970) The Clean Air Act (CAA) is the comprehensive federal law that regulates air emissions from stationary and mobile sources. Among other things, this law authorizes EPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to protect public health and public welfare and to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants.

This perceived problem of CO2 had its beginnings in the United Nations (UN) Conference on the Human Environment, which met at Stockholm from June 5th to June 16th 1972. What happens over the next 45 years can be directly traced to this conference! The following discussion highlight only a few of the major events that have led many to believe that all life on earth is threatened by there being too many people a principle first proposed by Thomas Malthus, an early English economist. Malthus published and essay in 1798 titled An Essay on the Principle of Population where he proposed that sooner or later population growth will be checked by famine and disease, leading to what is known as a Malthusian catastrophe; which later technology prevented from happening.

The 1972 Stockholm conference led to European studies on the role of Carbon Dioxide and the environment such as the SCOPE 13 The Global Carbon Cycle paper published in 1979 by the Scientific Committee On Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) in Paris. This paper showed very dire results for increased levels of Carbon Dioxide, and reignited the old Malthusian catastrophe concept of too many people for the planets scarce resources.

Next was the National Academy of Science (NAS) study on the issue also published in 1979 which is now called the Charney Report, which agreed that there was a problem and justified their conclusions by defining a key number need in the science. They looked at the work of a young scientist working at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) James E. Hansen’s high estimate of 4.0 C and added .5 degrees C to it for uncertainty. Then they took another scientist working a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Syukuro Manabe’s low estimate of 2.0 C and subtracted .5 from it for uncertainty. Lastly they average the two which then gives us a 1.5 C Low value, an 3.0 C expected value and a 4.5 C high value as the CO2 sensitivity values which are what are still used today thirty five years later.

Next was the creation of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which was set up in 1988 by the United Nations (UN) at the request of two of its other organizations; the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) formed in 1950, and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) set up after the Stockholm Declaration in 1972. The IPCC’s mission is to provide comprehensive scientific assessments of current scientific, technical and socio-economic information worldwide about the risk of climate change, specifically Anthropogenic Climate Change. A key point here is the IPCC was never charged with proving whether the anthropogenic assertion true or not it was only charged with determining how bad it would be; in essence assuming it was true.

The next major event was the UN Conference on Environment and Development (Earth-Summit), held in Rio-de-Janeiro on June 13, 1992, where 178 governments voted to adopt the program called UN Agenda 21. This was a comprehensive blueprint for creating a “sustainable” world which went from world governance to local school boards and zoning boards which meant that “every” aspect of a person’s life was to be controlled by UN Agenda 21. This program based on Carbon Dioxide rising world temperatures beyond the point where humans could maintain a civilization completed all that was needed for implementation and we were off on a Quest to save the planet.

President George H. W. Bush signed the Agenda 21 agreement in 1992 after it was passed at Earth-Summit and the US House of Representative then passed a Concurrent Resolution 353 on October 2, 1992 after being introduced by Nancy Pelosi indicating support for UN Agenda 21. Then a few months later the US Congress started the process of funding Agenda 21 in 1993 under a Clinton executive order 12852 establishing the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (PCSD)

Next is Al Gore who was a Congressman from Tennessee (1977–85) and from 1985 to 1993 served as one of the state’s Senators. While in Congress became interested in Climate Change and he was instrumental in getting James E. Hansen funding from Congress to study the problem of Climate Change which was known as Global Warming back then and removing Will Happer and eminent scientist that opposed it.

Gore was very active in the environmental movement while he was Bill Clinton’s VP. Gore continued to promote the movement, after leaving office, and his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” was released in 2006; this documentary was a story about how the burning of fossil fuels was destroying the planet. It seemed to be targeted at young adults without the education to discern truth from fiction and it was very successful in achieving negative awareness on the subject. Gore’s work in climate change activism earned him the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. Unfortunately, the message in that documentary was not factually correct and appeared to be only an emotional appeal to support the regulation of Carbon Emissions’ (CO2) in some form of Carbon Tax.

On April 2, 2007 in Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency, 549 U.S. 497 (2007), the U.S. Supreme Court in a case from twelve states and several cities of the United States against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was decided 5-4 to force that federal agency to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases (GHGs) as pollutants. This case legally made CO2 a pollutant and set the stage for the EPA to shut down coal power among other things.

An interesting fact, Al Gore was one of the investors that had helped set up a Carbon Trading exchange in Chicago along with a then young Barack Obama (on the board of the major investor The Joyce Foundation located in Chicago) that they named the Chicago Carbon Exchange CCX in 2003. When the American Clean Energy and Security Act was not passed by the US Senate in 2009 the CCX exchange folded the following year, 2010. Gore had been very vocal on this subject and if HR 2454 had been passed by the US Congress Gore would have become very wealthy; so the question is was his involvement in the movement because he believed what he was promoting or because what he was promoting would have made him very wealthy?

April 2009 published in nature V 458 is the justification for the 2 degree Celsius limit on global temperatures. Meinshausen et al. (2009) found that if we limit cumulative CO2 emissions from 2000-2050 to 1,000 Gt (approximately an 80% cut in global emissions),

This brings us to Bill Gates with his Gates Foundation that has taken up the cause of stopping Anthropogenic Climate Change which they believe will cause the planet to overheat and create a mass extinction and possibly even ending human life. This movement has now taken the look of a religion and therefore no debate allowed. Bill Gates gave a presentation at TED2010 (Technology Entertainment Design) where as part of that presentation he described a simple equation to show what was needed to reduce Carbon Dioxide to save the planet. Gate’s equation is CO2 = P x S x E x C which is the amount of CO2 emitted is equal to the number of people (P), times the service they use (S), times the energy per service (E), times the CO2 per unit of energy. Gates after explaining this equation goes on to describe the need for “miracles” to avoid planetary catastrophe from CO2 and the necessary goal of Zero carbon emissions globally by 2050. The only way to get to Zero emissions is that one of the numbers in Gate’s equation needs to go to ZERO.

On June 23, 2014 the Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision that the Obama Administration’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is free to regulate carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, as long as the source of emissions in question is a traditional polluter, like a factory or a power plant, rather than a school or a shopping mall.

Sadly very little of any of this is actually true. There was real concern for pollution in the 1970 when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created but as the hard core believers took over the agency they went way beyond the legitimate initial goals and they are now in the process of forcing a shift to wind and solar energy by taxing carbon out of existence. The COP21conference was to be the crown jewel of the movement but a number of years ago NASA global temperatures stopped moving up and the satellite data supported the pause as they called it. Based on analyzing the NASA temperature data it appears that a serious effort was made in to manipulate the temperatures first in 2009 and then again in 2014.   This data manipulation by NASA (at the demands of the administration) is in the process of totally destroying the credibility of the worlds scientific community.