Twenty “talking points” dealing with popular myths, misconceptions and lies about global warming.

“It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.” – Carl Sagan

“Faith may be defined briefly as an illogical belief in the occurrence of the improbable.” – H. L. Mencken

POINT 1:

Surface temperature records from the climate research unit of the University of East Anglia show that global temperature fell from 1875 to 1910. Temperature rose from 1911 to 1945. Temperature fell again from 1946 to 1976. During this period atmospheric carbon dioxide increased by 9% yet there was global cooling, not warming. Temperature rose from 1977 to 1998 as carbon dioxide levels continued to increase. The temperature peaked in the super El Nino of 1997/98. The temperature then stopped rising. During the period since 1998 atmospheric carbon dioxide has increased another 7% but there has been no warming. Half of the temperature rise in the last 160 years was from 1911 to 1944. This was before any significant human influence was possible due to such small man made carbon emissions prior to 1945. Contrary to myth and media reports there has been no rapid warming of the earth over the last 50 years. While earth’s temperature has gone up and down over the last 160 years carbon dioxide levels have only been rising. Carbon dioxide exhibits no statistical relationship to temperature in the last 160 years. At the current rate of temperature rise since 1850 the earth’s temperature would be 0.6 degrees Fahrenheit warmer by 2100. The United Nations Intergovernmanetal Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts a 7.0 degree Fahrenheit rise.

POINT 2:

There are 5 major centers that collect global temperature data, The Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, Remote sensing systems, The University of Alabama Huntsville, The Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the Nation Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. All of these centers show no warming since 1998. Phil Jones the director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia says “There has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995”. Alarmists are hard pressed to explain why the warming stopped. Some will say it’s just temporary but the trend is continuing with no end in site. Data from ice cores drilled in Greenland use isotopes of Oxygen as a substitute for temperature. This data indicate that the earth has experience 4 ice ages in the last 450,000 years. These ice ages last 75 to100 thousand years. We currently live in the warm time between the ice ages called the interglacial. The ice core data also reveals that during this warmer time the temperature of the earth has been 4 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than today 3 times. The last time the earth was that warm was 3,300 years ago. The temperature of the earth has fallen about 3.75 degrees Fahrenheit since that time. This is strong evidence that today’s global temperature is not unusually warm. In fact when you look at the trend of temperature over the last 3,500 years the obvious conclusion is that it is getting colder. There are warmer periods and colder periods but the overall trend is down. There have been 17 ice ages in the last 2 million years of the earth’s history. Some day another will descend upon us and the impact will be devastating.

POINT 3:

Using surface temperature records to track global temperature change has numerous problems. The number of worldwide climate measuring sites has dropped from 6,000 in 1970 to under around 1,500 today. Two thirds of the weather stations that were closed in this period were in the country or were at higher elevation or higher latitude. Those locations had the colder night time temperatures. They are gone. What we are left with is a higher percentage of urban weather stations with warmer night time readings due to pavement, buildings and general urban sprawl. This fact alone biases the temperature record warmer as the urban areas have grown around the climate measuring stations in the last 50 years. Fifty years ago many of the climate stations were in the country but urban sprawl has grown around them. Several studies indicate that perhaps half the warming in the data base in the last 50 years is due to these land use changes. So while there has been warming, the magnitude of it has been artificially magnified. That in itself is the real man made (made up) global warming.

POINT 4:

NOAA said that in the summer of 2009 the oceans were warmer than ever before. This was accomplished by subtracting the satellite measured ocean temperatures from the ocean temperature data base. The satellites showed an inconvenient cooling of the oceans. NASA GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies) also does not use the over 3307 ARGO buoys deployed around the world in their analysis. These buoys show global ocean heat content has been falling since they were deployed in 2003. This is powerful evidence that the oceans are not warming.

POINT 5:

There is a strong statistical relationship between the cyclic Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) and global temperature. The PDO is a 60 year cycle of warming and cooling of the Pacific Ocean. In every instance over the last 100 years when the PDO was in the cool phase the global temperature went down. When the PDO was in the warm phase the temperature went up. The PDO shifted back to cool around the year 2000 and the warming of the 1980s and 1990s has stopped. This is not surprising since the oceans contain more than 1,000 times more heat than the atmosphere. What appear to be relatively small ocean temperature changes cause relatively large atmospheric changes. This shift in the PDO indicates that global temperature will likely fall for the next two decades.

POINT 6:

The total carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is 3.8 one hundredth of a percent. The total increase of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere in the last 160 years is 1 one hundredth of a percent. As a percentage of the atmosphere this is a very small change. This increase has benefited agriculture, trees, flowers and other plants. They grow faster with more carbon dioxide and are more resistant to drought. If you own a real greenhouse you already know this. Estimates are that world wide crop yields have increased 15% in the last 50 years from carbon dioxide enrichment and fertilization.

POINT 7:

Carbon dioxide is not pollution. A majority of The Supreme Court and many in congress don’t know this. This ignorance is why the EPA will soon try and push congress out of the way and regulate carbon dioxide as a “dangerous pollutant”. Many environmentalists will call carbon dioxide pollution but many of them must know it is not due to its benefit to all living things. Everything that grows on earth needs it, the source is irrelevant. Remove all the carbon dioxide from the air and the earth dies. Water in the atmosphere is 90% of the greenhouse effect. Therefore if water in the atmosphere is the major greenhouse gas then logically the EPA should regulate water vapor as a dangerous pollutant as well as carbon dioxide. As you can see regulating carbon dioxide or water vapor makes no sense since neither of them is pollution.

POINT 8:

There is big money in carbon dioxide. There are many large organizations including but not limited to governments, wallstreet brokerage houses, environmental groups (corporations), large publicly traded corporations, universities, media outlets and political parties that have a strong financial interest in having everyone believe carbon dioxide is pollution. A vast carbon trading market is being generated around the world that Al Gore is deeply involved in. Once again the news media will not report this. The goal is to capitalize financially on the fear of global warming using the regulation of carbon emissions as the basis for establishing an enormous market for carbon financial products. The idea is that carbon dioxide must be made to appear dangerous to the public. If carbon dioxide is dangerous than it must be regulated to protect the public. If something is regulated than it must have an inherent value that can be traded, bought and sold as a commodity. Through this deception carbon dioxide can be converted into a product that can be bought and sold. This is literally pulling money from thin air. Some estimates are that carbon based financial products could be the largest commodity to ever hit the markets. Current trends in the carbon markets don’t seem to support this notion. Recently the Chicago Climate Exchanged closed its doors. Back in August Reuters reported that the Climate Exchange was facing significant layoffs and an operational scaleback. This only a few months after being acquired by publicly traded Intercontinental Exchange Inc. for an all cash deal totaling nearly $600 million, a shocking valuation give the Climate Exchanges poor performance and the rapidly decreasing price of carbon. Cap and Trade is the legislation that would have given tremendous credibility to carbon markets but it now appears to be dead. Rest assured it will come back to life as soon as the opportunity presents itself, there is far too much money to made.

POINT 9:

Ice cores show that increases in carbon dioxide in the past were the result of warmer temperature, not the cause of it. The human component of carbon dioxide that is placed into the air each year is very small, on the order of 3 percent. Half the carbon dioxide emitted into the air by human activity each year is immediately absorbed into the biosphere. Carbon dioxide is 8 percent of the greenhouse effect. Water in the air is 90 percent of the greenhouse effect. By volume carbon dioxide is currently at about 390 parts per million in the atmosphere. It is increasing at about 2 part per million annually. In other words carbon dioxide is increasing at a rate of .5% per year. Since human activity only adds 3 percent of the carbon dioxide that gets into the air each year the human component of the increase in carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year is 3 % of .5% or .015%. Reducing this amount by some fraction will have no effect on global temperature. In March of 2011 a climate commissioner in Australia admitted that stopping all carbon dioxide emissions around the world today would result in some unknown temperature drop hundreds of years to perhaps a thousand years in the future.

POINT 10:

The sun is a major player in the earth climate fluctuations. There is a relationship between the strength of the solar wind and global temperature. Scientific evidence indicates a strong solar wind equals a warmer earth while a weak solar wind equals a cooler earth. Variations in cosmogenic isotopes of carbon 14 and beryllium 10 in ice cores prove this. Higher concentrations of these isotopes were found in ice cores dating to the Little Ice Age, 700 to 200 years ago meaning a weaker sun. Lower concentrations of these isotopes were found in ice cores during the medieval warm period indicating a stronger sun back 1,200 to 800 years ago. In the recent solar minima the solar wind was weaker than at anytime NASA has been able to measure it since the 1960s. The Average Magnetic Planetary Index (AP index) is a proxy measurement for the intensity of solar magnetic activity as it alters the geomagnetic field of the earth. AP index readings were started in 1932. During the solar minimums the AP index is usually low with very few if any sunspots. Anything below a reading 6 on the index is a low reading. The following is a list of the number of months with an AP index of 6 or less in the solar minimum leading into the next solar cycle.

Number of Months with Solar Cycle AP Index of 6 or less
SC17 11 months
SC18 2 months
SC19 2 months
SC20 5 months
SC21 0 months
SC22 0 months
SC23 3 months
SC24 31 months and counting

As the very high number of weak geomagnetic months in this current period indicates there has been a significant change in the magnetic output of the sun. This suggests that the next two solar cycles will be very weak with cycle 25 being the weaker of the two. Solar scientists are comparing the next two solar cycles, 24 and 25 to cycles 5 and 6 during what was known as the Dalton Minimum, from about 1797 to 1820. This was a very cold period in the earth’s recent history and suggests we are entering another period like it. The Pacific Ocean is in its cool phase again and will be for at least another 20 years. The sun is weak and will likely be so for the next two solar cycles. We are likely heading for cooler temperatures, not warmer. Increasing volcanic activity could add to this cooling.

POINT 11:

The claim by alarmists is that global warming will melt the worlds glaciers. This will cause a dramatic and catastrophic rise of sea levels around the world flooding coastal cities and making climate refugees of millions. They point to the decrease in the amount of ice left in Arctic Ocean at the end of the summer as proof this is already underway. The downward trend in the amount of ice left in the Arctic at the end of the summer that began in the mid 1990s has ended. The ice data from polar orbiting satellites clearly shows the extent of arctic ice is increasing. Ice concentrations in the Arctic are strongly correlated to North Atlantic Ocean temperatures. The Atlantic warms and cools in a 60 year cycle. When the Atlantic is warmer ice thickness and coverage decreases in the Arctic. If the Pacific is warm at the same time as the Atlantic the loss of ice is greater. The Atlantic is still in its warm phase but the Pacific has cooled. The ice is showing a rebound since 2007. Many people use linear extrapolations of ice trends in making long range forecasts. Nature is almost never linear. Sea ice surround Antarctic continues to increase and was at a record high in 2007. Tidal gauges around the world have been measuring sea levels for over 100 years. If the glaciers were melting rapidly these gauges would pick up the rise of sea level and show an acceleration over the last several decades. The current rate of sea level rise as deduced from these gauges indicates a rate of about 8 inches per century. The rate of rise is not accelerating. Recently new data from the orbiting GRACE tandem satellite mission indicate a world average sea level rise of 4 inches per century. The IPCC says sea level will rise 7.5 to 23 inches in the next 100 years. Al Gore predicts 20 feet of rise. NASA GISS is forecasting an amazing 82 feet of sea level rise! There is no real world data to support anything other than the current rate of rise somewhere between 4 and 8 inches per century.

POINT 12:

In the 1960s there were an estimated 5,000 polar bears, today there are 25,000. In a typical biased story in April of 2009 TIME magazine reported there were “only” 25,000 left. Once again this story had major input from environmental groups. Polar Bears are not drowning, they are thriving. Most school children are being taught they are drowning and starving. Another example of how the environmental corporations have infiltrated our educational system. During the last 10,000 years the earth’s temperature has been as much as 4 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than today three times. The Polar bears survived and multiplied.

POINT 13:

The melting of glaciers is not new. The “Little Ice Age” was from about 1400 to 1850. The coldest temperatures were in the 1600s. Global temperature has been rising unevenly for about 200 years. Glaciers have been retreating and at time advancing unevenly during this 200 year period. Many global warming proponents point to shrinking glaciers as proof of global warming. Of the roughly 160,000 glaciers on earth only a very small percentage have been studied, less than one percent. To say that the majority of the world’s glaciers are retreating is a statement without scientific evidence. Studies of the Swiss Alps show a strong relationship with the warming and cooling of the Atlantic Ocean. The majority of the glaciers advance when the Atlantic is cooler for 30 years and the majority retreat when the Atlantic is warmer for 30 years. Studies indicate that in general glaciers around the world have been retreating since the world began to come out of the Little Ice Age 200 years ago.

POINT 14:

Computer models say that there should be a rapid warming of the upper troposphere between 30 degrees north and south of the equator if global warming is proceeding as they predict. This warming of the upper troposphere is the “fingerprint” of man made global warming. Measurements with weather balloons over the last 50 years show no warming at all. This real world data invalidates all computer model predictions. Climate modelers admit they have almost no understanding of how clouds work. Climate modelers don’t even know if clouds provide a negative or positive feedback (cooling or warming influence) although all the models assume a positive water vapor feedback (warming). The computer models do not understand how the climate system works. The models are failing even in the short range predictions. Computer model forecasts of warming are not evidence of climate change. Evidence is concrete and does not change. Computer models can be manipulated to give desired results. Computer models are tools for research institutions and universities to continue their funding from our government, private foundations, wealthy individuals and environmental groups. Careers depend on more money to study “the problem”. Science magazine recently said “the fundamental understanding of the climate system, although far from complete, is stronger than ever”. Editorial in Science magazine 3/10/10. The editorial admits the understanding of the climate system is “far from complete”. Far from complete translates to almost nothing. Stronger than almost nothing is still almost nothing.

POINT 15:

Data from the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment Satellite show outgoing longwave radiation (heat) increased by 4 watts per square meter in the 1980s and 1990s while the oceans were undergoing a cyclic warming. This real world data showed that there has been no increase in the amount of heat being trapped by the atmosphere. In other words the greenhouse effect has not become stronger. Computer models predicted outgoing longwave radiation would decrease as oceans warmed due to a stronger greenhouse effect. All the models used by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) were wrong. This means the models make the wrong assumptions about how the climate system works and are useless in making any climate predictions. Amazingly these same models are driving global warming energy policy.

POINT 16:

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was formed in the mid 1980s to prove human burning of fossil fuels causes global warming. From the beginning it was never a scientific organization. It was formed with a biased political agenda. Their true goal is to capture power through climate treaties partly to insure the United Nations own survival. These treaties give the UN the legal power to redistribute the developed Nations wealth as they see fit. They will use the concept of “climate debt” owed to third world countries as justification. The debt will be retribution for the industrialized Nations sin of “polluting” the climate with carbon dioxide and using all the available carbon space in the air. It is the UN’s goal to use global warming to extract money from developed nations without having to work for it. Recently the chairman of the IPCC Rajendra Pachauri announced “We’re at a stage where the warming is happening at a much faster rate.” Apparently he does not look at real world data. It has been revealed that Pachauri is heavily invested in companies that will financially benefit from the findings of the IPCC. This is a blatant conflict of interest and he should step down or be removed from his position as chairman of the IPCC. Ottmar Edenhofer is a United Nations IPCC official. On November the 16th 2010 he made this rather remarkable if not honest statement. “First of all, developed countries have basically expropriated the atmosphere of the world community. But one must say clearly that we (the UN IPCC) redistribute de facto, the world’s wealth by climate policy. Obviously the owners of coal and oil will not be enthusiastic about this. One has to free oneself from the illusion that international climate policy is environmental policy. This has almost nothing to do with environmental policy anymore.” Many are not happy he made this statement in Der Spiegel magazine but it certainly shed a bright beam of truth on the dark intentions of the UN and the IPCC.

POINT 17:

Large environmental groups, political “leaders” and eco-activists believe the climate system is so simple that it behaves like a room in your house. Simply turn down the thermostat (reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere) and we can regulate the world temperature. People who think this way are far more dangerous than any global warming because some of these people are in power. The environmental movement has worked to change the public view of global warming to “climate change”. This effort is due to the fact that the climate is not cooperating with the forecasts of warming. The goal is to use the term “climate change” to cover the total range of weather. In this way any weather event that takes place can be explained in the context of climate change. In other words if you forecast everything you can’t be wrong. If a TV meteorologist used this technique he or she would be fired.

POINT 18:

Al Gore…He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. His message of fearing global warming has reached the third world. The nations of the third world are now demanding “climate reparations” for damage the western world has inflicted on the climate system over the last 160 years. They now say we owe them “climate Debt” because we have used up all the carbon space in the air. This is not promoting peace, it is causing more tension and anger in the developing countries towards the west. Gore’s “peace prize” is having the opposite effect. As for Gore’s financial investments in “green companies” I say “beware of the prophet seeking profits”. The urge to save the world is always a cover for the need to rule it.

POINT 19:

The “Climategate” emails prove that there is at best blind ambition among some of the worlds leading climate scientists and at worst criminal activity. The reaction of much of the mainstream media in the United States has proved to be very revealing. They either don’t report the story or they defend the actions of the climate scientists. Some of these leading scientists were caught intimidating scientific journals to keep skeptics from publishing in those journals. One of the leading scientists then claimed skeptics had no credibility because they did not publish in the very same science journals. The emails also reveal that these scientists have deleted data or refused freedom of information requests and have deleted emails relevant to those requests, a criminal offence. NASA’s Goddard Institute of Space Studies has also been stonewalling freedom of information efforts. It is clear from the emails that a small but powerful group of leading climate scientists is using their lofty positions to pervert the science of climate change. There is a large body of evidence that NOAA/NASA has been "adjusting" the United States climate data. These adjustments make the past cooler and the more recent temperature warmer. This accentuates and even creates an upward trend of temperature and makes any modest warming look more alarming. The Climate Research Unit in England has adapted this technique as well. This is a good example of “man made” global warming. If this “cooking the books” technique was used in a public corporation the CEO and the board of directors would be in jail.

POINT 20:

"CO2 for different people has different attractions. After all, what is it? - it’s not a pollutant, it’s a product of every living creature’s breathing, it’s the product of all plant respiration, it is essential for plant life and photosynthesis, it’s a product of all industrial burning, it’s a product of driving – I mean, if you ever wanted a leverage point to control everything from exhalation to driving, this would be a dream. So it has a kind of fundamental attractiveness to bureaucratic mentality." - Richard S. Lindzen, Ph.D. Professor of Atmospheric Science, MIT

Partial list of References:

A 2000-year global temperature reconstruction based on non-treering proxies (Energy and Environment, Volume 18, Numbers 7-8, pp. 1049-1058, December 2007)
Craig Loehle.

A comparison of tropical temperature trends with model predictions (International Journal of Climatology, Volume 28, Issue 13, pp. 1693-1701, December 2007) David Douglass, John Christy, Benjamin D. Pearson, S. Fred Singer.

Altitude dependence of atmospheric temperature trends: Climate models versus observation (Geophysical Research Letters, Volume 31, Issue 13 July 2004) David Douglass, Benjamin D. Pearson, S. Fred singer.

Are there connections between the Earth’s magnetic field and climate? (Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volume 253, Issues 3-4, pp. 328-339, January 2007) Vincent Courtillot, Yves Gallet, Jean-Louis Le Mouel, Frederic Fluteau, Agnes Genevey.

Climate Change Re-examined (Journal of Scientific Exploration, Volume 21, Number 4, pp. 723-749, 2007) Joel M. Kauffma

Climate outlook to 2030 (Energy and Environment, Volume 18, Number 5, pp. 615-619, September 2007) David Archibald.

Differential trends in tropical sea surface and atmospheric temperatures since 1979 (Geophysical Research Letters, Volume 28, Number 1, pp. 183-186, January 2001) John R. Christy, D.E. Parker, S. J. Brown, I. Macadam, M. Stendel, W.B. Norris.

Environmental effects of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide (Climate research, Volume 13, Number 2, pp. 149-164, October 1999) Arthur B. Robinson, Zachary W. Robinson, Willie H. Soon, Sallie Baliunas.

How dry is the tropical free atmosphere? Implications for global warming theory (Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Volume 78, Issue 6, pp. 1097-1106, June 1997) Roy W. Spencer, William D. Braswell.

Limits on CO2 climate forcing from recent temperature data of earth (Energy and Environment, Volume 20, numbers1-2, pp. 177-189, January 2009) David H. Douglass, John H. Christy.

Nature of observed temperature changes across the United States during the 20th century (Climate Research, volume 17, number 1, pp. 45-53, July 2001) Paul Knappenberger, Patrick J. Michaels, Robert E. Davis)

On the determination of climate Feedbacks from ERBE data (Geophysical Research Letters, Volume 36, issue 16, August 2009) Richard S. Lindzen, Yong-Sang Choi.

Proxy climatic and environmental changes of the past 1000 years (Climate Research, volume 23, number 2, pp. 89-110, January 2003) Willie H. Soon, Sallie L. Baliunas.

Trends in middle and upper level tropospheric humidity from NCEP reanalysis data (Theoretical and Applied Climatology, volume 98, numbers 3-4, pp. 351-359, February 2009) Garth Paltridge, Albert Arking, Michael Pook.

Does the earth have an adaptive infrared iris? (Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, volume 82, issue 3, pp. 417-432, March 2001) Richard S. Lindzen, Ming-Dah Chou, Arthur Y. Hou.

Hockey sticks, principal components and spurious significance (Geophysical Research Letters, volume 32, issue 3, February 2005) Stephen McIntyre, Ross McKitrick.

Global warming and sea level rise (Energy and Environment, volume 20, number 7, pp. 1067-1074, 2009) Madhav L. Khandekar.

Variations of cosmic ray flux and global cloud coverage. A missing link in solar-climate relationships (Journal of Atmospheric and Solar-Terrestrial Physics, volume 59, number 11, pp. 1225-1232, July 1997) Henrik Svensmark, Eigil Friis-Christensen.