Global Warming? Absolutely No Truth To It!

[I have been studying the Global Warming/Global Cooling controversy since the 1960s. Even when I was an evolutionist scientist and teacher, I knew that neither was true. I am completely convinced that the controversy is 100% politically motivated and not based on good science. The promoters of either view are either extreme socialists or extreme communists. Their sole primary purpose in promoting either view is to destroy Christian capitalism and replace it with extreme socialism/communism based upon the religion of Secular Humanism. Those who advance this agenda want to force us into bigger government, higher taxes, and loss of all personal freedoms, liberties and property rights. I have wanted to write on this subject for many years, but felt that the time was not right. I want to equip every partner of this ministry with the information to destroy every argument that is used to promote this anti-Christian agenda.]


Is “Global Warming” or “Global Cooling” a reality?

Is the earth heating up? Are we all going to die from this heat, causing the world to become a large desert? If we don’t stop using our cars, will we as a society survive the coming holocaust? What is the truth?


Our awesome Creator God has much to say in the Bible about global weather and climate change from the time of creation 6,000 years ago, to the present time, and even in the future. Many Christians have failed to think of these Biblical Scriptures when trying to evaluate whether or not they should be concerned about these issues. In addition, there is a massive amount of solid science that refutes any claim that “Global Warming” or “Global Cooling” are true.


God promises that the earth cannot and will not be destroyed by Man: Genesis 8:22 (NAS)


The promotion of “Global Warming” is purely a political agenda of the Far-Left. These people may be accurately classified as Environmental Terrorists. It is believed in even though such a belief is irrational. Note this quote attributed to the former Democratic Senator from Colorado, Tim Wirth:

“We’ve got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory is wrong, we will be doing the right thing - in terms of economic policy and the environmental policy.” [Emphasis added] (Fumento, Michael, Science Under Siege, 1993)


Further proof of the twisted philosophical reasoning of Environmental Terrorists is provided by “Global Warming” advocate Dr. Stephen Schneider. He is Professor, Department of Biological Sciences; Senior Fellow, Stanford Institute for International Studies; Co-Director, Center for Environmental Science and Policy; Co-Director, Interdisciplinary Program in Environment and Resources Stanford University; and, founder and editor of the journal Climatic Change.


In the October, 1989 issue of Discover magazine, he wrote:


“On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but – which means that we must include all doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not just scientists but human beings as well. And like most people we’d like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public’s imagination. That, of course, means getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. This ‘double ethical bind’ we frequently find ourselves in cannot be solved by any formula. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both.”


He wants to be both effective and honest, a noble goal; however, when it comes to promoting “Global Warming” he is quite willing to “offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have.”


This article could be filled with just such quotes, but space does not allow this. Thus, as a third and final example of the mental state of the current “crop” of Environmental Terrorists, I submit this irrational, illogical, unreasonable and unscientific statement by one of the “head gurus” of Environmental Terrorism, none other than Mr. Al Gore:


“We are dumping so much carbon dioxide into the Earth's environment that we have literally changed the relationship between the Earth and the Sun.” [Emphasis added] The Introduction to An Inconvenient Truth, 2006


God promises that the earth cannot and will not be destroyed by Man: Psalm 148:5-6 (NAS)


Is “Global Warming” True?


No! We are simply experiencing normal weather and climate fluctuations.


We are living at the end of the “20th Century Warm Period.” The “20th Century Warm Period” followed a time called “The Little Ice Age” that lasted from approximately 1250-1300 through 1850-1900. Prior to “The Little Ice Age,” the earth experienced a period referred to as the “Medieval Warm Period” (MWP) or “Medieval Climate Optimum.” The earth was significantly warmer during the MWP than it is today!


Even evolutionary climatologists have proven scientifically that the earth has experienced three periods of time much warmer than today’s warming trend. The various periods of warm and cold, that have been named, have been determined to be approximately:


The Minoan Warm Period - 1450 to 1250 BC


The Roman Warm Period - 250 BC to AD 100


The Dark Ages Cold Period - AD 100 to AD 850


The Medieval Warm Period - AD 850 to AD 1250


The Little Ice Age - AD 1250 to AD 1900


The 20th Century Warm - AD 1900 to AD 2010

Source: Grootes, P.M. (et. al.), “Comparison of oxygen isotope records from the GISP2 and GRIP Greenland ice cores,” Nature, 366 1993, pp. 552-4.


What is the historical evidence?


We have significant historical evidence with which to trace the major fluctuations in climate change over the past few millennia. These sources include, but are not limited to:

The thousands of years of records of the Nile floods

The 1st-century Roman wine production in England

The thousands of museum paintings that portray sunnier skies during the Medieval Warm Period

The thousands of museum paintings that portray the cloudier skies during the Little Ice Age

The physical evidence from oxygen isotopes, beryllium ions, tiny sea and pollen fossils, ancient tree rings, polar ice cores, sea and lake sediments, cave stalactites and stalagmites, glaciers, etc.


These and many other sources illustrate that the earth has had periods of climate much warmer than today.


God promises that Man cannot change the weather: Ecclesiastes 1:5-10


Is there scientific consensus that “Global Warming” is true?


NO! Consensus is not the same as truth. Consensus is not data, and it is not the same as a scientific fact.


NO! Dr. Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at MIT, former lead author of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC), wrote about global warming: “... the consensus was reached before the research had begun.”


NO! The current promotion of the global warming scare is purely a far left political agenda.


NO! “Global Warming” is simply the new home of socialism and communism.


NO! The earth’s temperature has been fluctuating up and down for thousands of years because of well established and documented variations in solar activity. These are:


The Schwabe Cycle: Sunspot activity follows an eleven year cycle that causes the sun’s temperature to fluctuate up and down 0.1%.


The Gleissberg Cycle: A cycle every 75 to 90 years.


The Suess Cycle: A cycle every 200 to 500 years.


The Bond Cycle: A cycle every 1,100 to 1,500 years.


NO! Dr. Timothy Patterson, Canadian geologist, wrote in the Canadian Financial Post, June 20, 2007:


“Climate stability has never been a feature of planet earth. The only constant about climate is change; it changes and, at times, quite rapidly. Many times in the past, temperatures were far higher than today, and occasionally, temperatures were lower.”


NO! Dr. Bert Bolin, Swedish meteorologist, for eight years the Chairman of the UN IPCC, noted: “The climate issue is not ‘settled’; it is both uncertain and incomplete.”


NO! Dr. Dennis Bray, Emeritus Professor, Department of Physiology, University of Cambridge, submitted the following to Science for publication on December 22, 2004 (but not accepted):


“The most recent survey [2004] of climate scientists ... found that while there had been a move towards acceptance of [man-made] global warming, only 9.4% of respondents ‘strongly agree’ that climate change is mostly the result of [man-made] sources. A similar proportion ‘strongly disagree.’ Furthermore, only 22.8% of respondents ‘strongly agree’ that the [UN] International Panel on Climate Change reports accurately reflect a consensus within climate science.” [Emphasis added]


NO! In an “open letter” to the Canadian Government entitled “Open Kyoto to Debate,” published in the Canadian National Post in 2006, 60 scientists said:


“When the public comes to understand that there is no ’consensus’ among climate scientists about the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, the government will be in a far better position to develop plans that reflect reality and so benefit both the environment and the economy.” [Emphasis added]


NO! Dr. Bob Carter, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Australia, wrote:


“[Al] Gore’s circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commending public attention.” [Emphasis added]


NO! As reported in PRNewswire-USNewswire, Washington, DC, September 12, 2007:


An analysis of peer-reviewed literature reveals that 500 scientists have published evidence refuting at least one element of current man-made global warming scares. More than 300 of the scientists found evidence that 1) a natural moderate 1,500-year climate cycle has produced more than a dozen warmings similar to ours, 2) present Modern Warming is linked strongly to the variations in the sun’s irradiance.


The list of these scientists may be found in the recent Avery and Singer book, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years.


The public needs to understand that there is no consensus among climate scientists about the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change.


Is there scientific consensus that “Global Warming” is true?


NO! Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte examined all research papers on climate change published between 2004 and February 2007. The results were submitted to the scientific journal Energy and Environment.


NO! Of the 528 papers, only 38 (7%) strongly endorsed consensus. The total for implied endorsement was 45%.


NO! Only 32 papers (6%) strongly rejected consensus.


NO! However, 254 papers (49%) were neutral, neither accepting nor rejecting consensus.


NO! Only 1 paper (0.2%) made any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.




Avery and Singer note: “... we have compelling evidence of a real-world climate cycle averaging 1,470 years (plus or minus 500) ... The climate cycle has above all been moderate, and the trees, bears, birds, and humans have quietly adapted.”


Al Gore’s movie “An Inconvenient Truth” - Is there any truth in it?


NO! The first casualty in this Environmental Terrorist movie is truth.


NO! The movie is full of half lies, lies and total misinformation.


Al Gore claimed that the drying up of Lake Chad was an example of global warming.


What is the truth?


The watersheds that feed Lake Chad - once the size of Vermont but now the size of Rhode Island - have been desiccated by drought since the mid-20th century. The reduction in the size of the Lake is a direct result of population increase, irrigation for agriculture, overgrazing and regional climate variability.


The Aral Sea dried up because the Russian government diverted 75% of the water going into it in order to irrigate agricultural lands.


Al Gore claimed that the disappearance of snow on Mt. Kilimanjaro was expressly attributable to human-induced climate change.


What is the truth?


Mt. Kilimanjaro is colder today than in 1970.


Studies reported in the journals Science in 2003; International Journal of Climatology in 2004; and, Journal of Geophysical Research in 2004 concluded that the snow cap of Mt. Kilimanjaro has been shrinking since 1880, the end of “The Little Ice Age,” because the forest around the mountain have been cut down, thus reducing the humidity needed to build the snow pack, and there has been a short term increase in solar heating.


Al Gore claimed that Hurricane Katrina was a direct result of global warming.


What is the truth?


It is impossible to link an individual hurricane to any type of weather or climate change. Single storms cannot be used to determine large scale long term changes. (Three strikes and you are out?)


The Environmental Terrorists are not primarily focused on the consequences of climate change. They are primarily interested in growing an industry that makes them very rich, very powerful and very famous.


Al Gore referenced the “Little Ice Age,” but not the Medieval Warm Period (“Medieval Optimum”) that preceded it.


Al Gore claimed that “... if you look at the hottest years ever measured in this atmospheric record, they have all occurred in the last 14 years. The hottest of all was 2005.” [Emphasis added]


What is the truth?


Actually, 1998 was perhaps the hottest year on record; however, since then ground temperatures have remained stable. In a similar way, ocean temperatures have not increased.


Dr. Bob Carter, noted that: “the official temperature records of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia (UK), [show] that for the years 1998-2005 global average temperature did not increase.”

[“There IS a problem with global warming … it stopped in 1998,” Daily Telegraph (UK), April 9, 2006.]


It should be noted that Al Gore used the extreme Canadian and United Kingdom predictions of temperature increases of 14.4 F and 5.4 F by the year 2100.


Al Gore did not use the lower increase of 1.8 F predicted by the US National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) and other modelers at The National Center for Policy Analysis found the NCAR model is far more sophisticated than the Canadian or UK models. The measured rate is only 0.17 C/decade (0.306 F/decade) for the past 37 years.


If the earth is warming because of human action; why are the polar ice caps on Mars getting smaller, at the same time? Might not this indicate that an increase in solar activity was responsible and that any warming on earth was not due to human action?


Al Gore claimed sea-level would rise up to 20 feet [7 meters] because of melting ice in either Western Antarctica or Greenland. A significant length of his film was devoted to showing alarming predictions of flooding in major coastal population centers, specifically Florida, San Francisco, New York, Bangladesh, China and the Netherlands.


What is the truth?


Even the far-left UN IPCC has reported that: “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea-level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” The UN IPCC predicts that sea-level will rise only about 38.5 cm [15 inches] by 2100.


“[a] 2005 joint statement by the science academies of the Western nations, including the U.S. NAS, actually estimates a worst-case scenario of 35 inches.”

[P. Stanway, “An Inconvenient Truth for Gore,” Edmonton Sun, July 7, 2006]


Question: If sea-levels are rising rapidly, why is the Maldives Island government lobbying the European Union to help fund ocean front development there?


Melting sea ice does not raise sea-level (it lowers it); only ice melting off the land will raise sea-level. Ocean levels have been rising for centuries. Each year on average, 1 cubic mile (4 cubic Km) of Juvenile Water is added to the earth's surface through geothermal events [volcanoes, mineral springs]. NASA found that the net ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica would raise sea-level 0.002 inches (0.05 mm)/year between 1992 and 2002: or, 2 inches (five cm)/1,000 years.


Greenland was about 1 C (1.8 F) warmer in 1925 than it is today. Yet this was only about 75 years after we came out of “The Little Ice Age.”


What is the truth?


Erik the Red sailed to uninhabited Greenland in 982 AD. Showing an intuitive flair for PR, Erik sent back word of a bountiful “green land” in order to entice others to follow him and colonize the southwestern tip of the island. Those Nordic settlements survived for nearly 500 years until disappearing at the beginning of the Little Ice Age.


An international team of scientists has drilled deep into the Greenland ice sheet and found DNA of spiders and trees. This indicates that Greenland’s ice is less susceptible to meltdown than had been predicted by computer models of climate change. “This may have implications for how the ice sheets respond to global warming. They may withstand rising temperatures.” [Emphasis added]

[Willerslev, Eske, evolutionary biologist, University of Copenhagen, Science, July 6, 2007]


An article reporting on ice core samples taken from 1.2 miles [2 Km] down (underneath the bottom of the ice cap) in Greenland found: “that the area [had once been] populated by diverse forests made up of alders, spruce, pine, and members of the yew family. Living in the trees and on the forest floor was a wide variety of insect life, including beetles, flies, spiders, butterflies and moths.” [Science, July 6, 2007, vol. 317, p. 11.]


Environmental Terrorists claim that the Polar Bears are dying from “global warming.” The truth is that Polar Bear populations are growing where it is getting warmer, and getting smaller where it is getting colder.

[Dr. Mitchell Taylor, Canadian Polar Bear Biologist, Depart. of the Environment, Gov. of Nunavut]


Grey Whale populations are also increasing in the warmer Arctic waters.

[J. Kay, San Francisco Chronicle newspaper, June 28, 2006]


Dr. Ian Stirling of the Canadian Wildlife Service said: “Swimming 100 miles is not a big deal for a polar bear, especially a fat one.” [Emphasis added]


Al Gore claimed in his movie that Polar Bears were dying as a direct result of global warming.


What is the truth?


The four dead polar bears shown in the movie died when they were unexpectedly caught by a severe storm.


Al Gore claimed in his movie that some Pacific atolls had to be evacuated because of rising sea water levels. 


What is the truth?


Pacific atolls have not been evacuated because of “rising” sea levels.


At a Senate hearing on Capitol Hill, Syun-Ichi Akasofu said that highly publicized climate models showing a disappearing Arctic were nothing more than “science fiction.”

[Syun-Ichi Akasofu, Director of the International Arctic Research Center, Fairbanks, AK, April 2007]


The Antarctic ice cap is not melting away. It is growing in its’ total amount of ice, only the surface area is changing.


“The net ice balance in Antarctica is positive; it is gaining ice.” Antarctica “will contribute to reduction in sea level because it is gaining ice … The net ice balance in Greenland is very close to neutral.  There have been three periods in the last 2,000 years in which Alaska was as warm as it is now.”

[Dr. Michaels, Climatologist] [Emphasis added]


The oceans have been cooling on average for the past 4,500 years; since the end of Noah’s Flood.


Al Gore claimed in his movie that glaciers around the world were all receding because of global warming.


The Upsala Glacier in Patagonia is retreating; however, 30 miles (50 km) away, the Perito Moreno Glacier is advancing. In fact, nearby medium-sized glaciers are stable and large-sized glaciers are advancing rapidly.


Pio XI, the largest glacier in South America is advancing very quickly.


The reason that glaciers are melting in some parts of the Andes: “climatic change in the Venezuelan Andes is linked to changes in solar activity during the Little Ice Age” and “… solar variability is the primary underlying cause of the glacier fluctuations.” [Emphasis added] [Dr. P. J. Polissar, “Solar Modulation of Little Ice Age Climate in the Tropical Andes,” June 1, 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA]


Hint: It is variations in the Sun’s temperature, not Man-made global warming, that is causing fluctuations in the glaciers!


“Glaciers are advancing in the European Arctic. These are episodic events. The Arctic does occasionally get warmer and colder. Climate change is the norm. If you want something to worry about, it would be if the climate were static. It would be like a person being dead.” [Emphasis added]

[Dr. Richard Lindzen]


For every glacier that is receding, there is one that is advancing.


Concerning consensus on “global warming” Al Gore stated, “A survey of more than 928 scientific papers in respected journals shows 100 % agreement.”


First, if there were “more than 928,” just how many were there?


Second, the 928 papers Gore mentioned were not unanimous on the issue at hand.


Third, the 928 papers were carefully hand selected and represented less than 10% of the over 11,000 relevant papers published during that time frame (1993-2006).


Al Gore claimed in his movie that Carbon Dioxide is a greenhouse gas that causes “Global Warming.”


Actually, temperature rise comes first, and then this causes Carbon Dioxide increases as more plants grow, and warmer oceans release more Carbon Dioxide than colder oceans.


NOAA has found no statistical increase in hurricanes, only the normal 40 to 50 year hurricane cycle. The increase in damages to man-made structures is due to humans continuing to build more and more buildings along coastlines and on known flood plains.


Al Gore claimed that hurricanes were continuously getting stronger and more frequent because of global warming.


The US National Hurricane Center found that 1941-1950 was the most active hurricane decade on record. Two-thirds of the largest hurricanes to hit the US between 1851 and 2004 occurred prior to 1950. Between 1961 and 2000 the number and intensity of hurricanes hitting the US fell significantly.


God uses weather to judge those who are His. [Amos 4:7]


In 2005, the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, made three points:


1) There is no established connection between greenhouse gases and the number of hurricanes.


2) Any future changes in hurricanes will be small and within normal variations.


3) The politics of linking hurricanes to global warming threatens to undermine support for legitimate climate research.


The Twentieth Century is neither unprecedented in its warmth nor historically aberrant.

Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, November 2005, pp. 1571-75


Al Gore claimed in his movie that global warming was going to stop the Gulf Stream from flowing.


What is the truth?


In order for the Gulf Stream to stop flowing, the earth would have to stop rotating! Such claims are extreme hyperbole used to promote the irrational belief system of Environmental Terrorists, like Mr. Gore.


Al Gore claimed in his movie that drought was increasing worldwide and that deserts were getting bigger because of global warming. But, since the mid-1980s, the Sahara Desert has been receding along its southern border as more rain has fallen because of “global warming.”


Al Gore claimed in his movie that “The debate is over … The scientific consensus has settled the issue of global warming.” This is obviously a false claim; there is no such consensus among scientists. The debate is contentious and going strong.


In his movie, Al Gore gave lengthy tribute to his Harvard science professor, Dr. Roger Revelle, for enchanting him with the concepts of carbon dioxide emissions causing global warming. However, Dr. Revelle has utterly rejected Al Gore’s global warming extremism.


Al Gore claims to be pro-science. However, as Vice President of the US he fired any scientist in the federal government who dared to question even the most extremist pro-greenhouse doomsayers.

(National Review editorial, June 1994.)


Al Gore smears anyone who disagrees with him by calling them “pseudo-scientists,” accusing them of being bought off by the energy industry. Nothing could be further from the truth! Many competent scientists, many of them evolutionists, disagree with Gore about “global warming.”


Even Patrick Moore, the cofounder of the radically left environmental group Greenpeace, now says that we should be considering going back to clean nuclear energy.


It was the Clinton-Gore administration that, without Congressional approval, declared America’s largest deposit of clean, low-sulfur coal in southern Utah to be part of a national monument and off-limits to mining. 


Dr. Don J. Easterbrook [a global warming proponent], Professor Emeritus of Geology, Western Washington University, gave remarks about Gore’s film to the annual meeting of the Geological Society of America in 2007. He said that Gore’s film has: “… a lot of inaccuracies in the statements we are seeing, and we have to temper that with real data.”


Gore claimed that: “our civilization has never experienced any environmental shift similar to this” threatened change.


Dr. Easterbrook showed a slide of temperature trends for the supposed past 15,000 years. It highlighted 10 major swings, including the Medieval Warm Period. He noted that these swings were up to “20 times greater than the warming in the past century.”


In the Wall Street Journal, Dr. Richard Lindzen accused Gore of “shrill alarmism.”


Al Gore claimed in his movie that global warming was causing the spreading of infectious diseases, such as malaria, around the world. He implied that because of this, we were all going to die.


Dr. Paul Reiter is the Director of the Insects and Infectious Diseases Unit of the Pasteur Institute in Paris. In the International Herald Tribune, January, 2007, Dr. Reiter faulted Gore’s portrayal of global warming as responsible for spreading malaria.


“For 12 years, my colleagues and I have protested against the[se] unsubstantiated claims. We have done the studies and challenged the alarmists, but they continue to ignore the facts.” [Emphasis added]


Dr. Richard S. Lindzen made this prophetic statement:


“Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early twenty-first century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.” [Emphasis added]


Al Gore claimed in his movie that temperatures were at their highest level in 1,000 years.


The National Academy of Sciences USA reported that the current highs appeared unrivaled since only 1300, the tail end of a temperature rise known as the Medieval Warm Period. (NAS report, June, 2006)



Dr. Benny J. Peiser is a Social Anthropologist; and, the founder and editor of the Cambridge-Conference Network. He noted that: “Hardly a week goes by without a new research paper that questions part or even some basics of climate change theory.” [Emphasis added] Some reports offer alternatives to human activity as the source of global warming.


Dr. Robert M. Carter wrote:


“Nowhere does Mr. Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet. Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change.” [Emphasis added]


Dr. James E. Hansen is the Director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and an advisor to Al Gore on environmental issues. He is the recipient of a $720,000 grant from George Soros. Commenting about Gore’s film, a film on which he was a paid advisor, Dr. Hansen wrote that the film may have “imperfections” and “technical flaws.”


Environmental Terrorists: What Are Their Motivations?


1) The politicians and bureaucrats sell the issue as an “emergency” to justify huge increases in taxes, government power and government regulation.


2) Most atmospheric scientists work for government and their income and grants are dependant upon increasing the size of government.


3) The Hollywood liberals use “global warming” to plug their latest movies.


4) Environmental terrorists need crises to promote their huge fund-raising efforts.


What Are The Top Ten Myths Of Environmentalism?


1. It’s HOT in here!


This myth is promoted by any environmental terrorist groups, including the National Geographic Society. Consider what they said in 2006:


“The planet is heating up – and fast. Glaciers are melting, sea levels are rising, cloud forests are drying, and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace. It’s becoming clear that humans have caused most of the past century’s warming by releasing heat-trapping gases as we power our modern lives. Called greenhouse gases, their levels are higher now than in the last 650,000 years. … What will we do to slow this warming? How will we cope with the changes we’ve already set into motion? While we struggle to figure it all out, the face of the Earth as we know it … hangs in the balance.” [Emphasis added]

“What Is Global Warming?” National Geographic, [On-Line] 2006

It’s HOT in here! Compared to when? It is cooler now than it was in the 1930s or during the Medieval Warm Period. It was hotter in 1939 than it is today.

2. The 1990s were the hottest decade on record. The National Academy of Sciences USA debunked this myth in 2006. The year 1936 was considerable warmer in the US than it was in 2002. The 1990s was not the hottest decade on record.


3. “The science is settled”; carbon dioxide causes global warming. This is a myth and a travesty of “science.” Historically, carbon dioxide gas in the atmosphere increases only after global warming, not before it.


A University of Southern California (USC) study concluded that deep-sea temperatures rose 1,300 years before the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide gas, which would rule out this supposed “greenhouse gas” as the main agent of the meltdown.


“There has been this continual reference to the correspondence between carbon dioxide and climate change as reflected in ice core records as justification for the role of carbon dioxide in climate change. You can no longer argue that carbon dioxide alone caused the end of the ice ages.” [Emphasis added]

Stott, Lowell USC geologist, peer-reviewed study in Science, November 2007.


There was only a very slight rise in the parts per million concentration of carbon dioxide gas in the earth’s atmosphere from 1920 to 1960 (from 300 ppm to 320 ppm), hardly anything to be alarmed about.


If this is all so “settled” science, as environmental terrorists claim, why are we spending $5 billion more each year to research it? Attempting to stifle debate is inherently anti-scientific.


4. The climate was stable until Man came along. This is a totally mythological statement. The “poster child” of this myth is a supposed graph of the average temperatures on earth for the past 1,000 years, and presented in the shape of a “hockey stick” lying on its side. It is a disgrace and has even been thrown out by the United Nation’s IPCC.

The “hockey stick” graph was a total fabrication, an intentionally deceptive invention that erased the entire Medieval Warm Period. This is not just bad science, it is criminal intent.


5. The glaciers are melting. This is a myth that goes both ways. Glaciers are receding; and, glaciers are advancing all over the earth, even in the same areas that other glaciers are receding. Global warming and global cooling cannot both be true at the same time.


Data from the World Glacier Monitoring Service indicates that the number of receding and advancing glaciers is roughly equal.


6. Climate change is raising the sea levels. Even the UN IPCC found no statistically significant change in the rate of increase of sea level over the past century. Australia and New Zealand report no increase in sea level, and may even be seeing a sea level drop.


The latest research suggests that sea levels would decline, not rise, if temperatures rise, due to increased evaporation from the oceans and subsequent precipitation.


7. Climate change is the greatest threat to the world’s poor. This is an insidious myth that is without basis. Climate and weather patterns have always changed, and they always will! Advanced societies adapt best with superior infrastructures and non-rationed access to energy. Poor societies suffer because of the lack of infrastructure and the rationing of access to energy.

8. “Global warming” means more frequent, more severe storms. This is a myth that the UN IPCC no longer supports. Storms are cyclical and are not more frequent or more severe than in the past. Based upon grouping hurricanes that have hit the US into fifty year segments, the number and severity of hurricanes has gone down since 1950.


9. “Global warming” proposals are about the environment. This myth is only true if it means that “global warming” proposals will make the environment worse!


Actually, “wealthier is healthier, and cleaner.” The Kyoto Protocol has a negative effect on any nation that signs it. Even the European Union Environmental Commissioner admitted that Kyoto is “about competition, about leveling the playing field for big business worldwide.” It penalizes the successful and promotes those who pollute the environment most!

10. The U.S. is going it alone on Kyoto and “global warming.” THIS MYTH IS PURE NONSENSE! The U.S. and 155 other nations rejected the Kyoto Protocol’s energy rationing scheme.


These 156 countries represent most of the world’s population, most of the world’s economic activity, and most of the world’s areas of projected future economic growth. The Kyoto Protocol was signed by European nations, and about one dozen others (none of whom are in fact presently reducing their pollution emissions).


These ten myths, like any good story, are useful only to those who proffer them, but they have little grounding in facts. “Global warming” is not catastrophic, not man-made, nor global.


Is The 1997 Kyoto Protocol Good Or Bad?


The Kyoto Protocol treaty required that the G-8 nations had to reduce “greenhouse gas” emissions, but the treaty exempted: Communist China, India, Brazil and other large “developing nations.”


“Greenhouse gas” emissions from Communist China and India now exceed those of the US.

Communist China is expected to construct over 500 new coal-burning power plants between 2006 and 2016; that is, one a week.


The purchase of “pollution credits,” or “carbon credits” is merely giving someone money for nothing in return. Historically, this scheme may go down in history as the greatest con job ever devised.


In 2000, then President of France, Jacques Chirac, called Kyoto “the first component of an authentic global governance [a one world government].”


Please ponder these points:


1. Al Gore signed the treaty on behalf of the USA, but the US Senate refused to ratify it by a vote of 95 to 0. (Not one Democrat agreed to vote for it, even though it was during the time of the Clinton-Gore administration.)


2. In the 1990s, the US Department of Energy estimated that implementing the Kyoto Protocol in the US would:


a) Increase gasoline costs by 14 to 66 cents per gallon


b) Increase electric bills by an average of 86%


c) Increase coal prices by 153%


d) Decrease GNP growth to 1.9% instead of increase it to 3.5%


e) Increase costs by $77 to $338 billion per year


3. The Kyoto Protocol drives up prices, increases government control, limits use of energy, but will not prevent one-tenth of one degree warming over the next 50 years.


4. In May 2007, Canada dropped out of the Kyoto Protocol.


5. Russia signed the Kyoto Protocol only after being granted huge “pollution credits” that Russia could then sell back to the European countries for hard currency.


6. Dr. Richard S. Lindzen told President George W. Bush that even if alarmist predictions were to come true, “Kyoto would be to do nothing at great expense.”


7. Even the environmentalist Peter Roderick, of Friends of the Earth International, said “I think everybody agrees that Kyoto is really, really hopeless in terms of delivering what the planet needs.”

What Are The Problems In Measuring Global Warming Or Cooling?


The most powerful tools science has developed to predict climate and weather changes are computer models. Computer models are recognized as consistently and inherently flawed because of the bias of the computer model developers to get the desired results.


How can environmental terrorists predict climate and weather conditions 20, 50 or 100 years from now, when these models cannot predict if it will rain next Thursday? More than 30 major computer climate models exist; no two agree on the results.


In the 1990s, “global warming” coincided with the closing of thousands of temperature reporting stations, mostly in the colder parts of Russia. If you leave out temperatures from the colder parts of the world, the average will obviously go up. [From 1989 through 2000, about two-thirds of the world’s temperature recording stations were closed, mostly in the former USSR. At the same time, the average global temperature, for the decade of 1990-2000, went up about two-thirds of a degree C.]


Weather stations in poorer countries are maintained differently than in wealthier countries. The “global mean surface temperature” means about as much as the “global mean telephone number.”


Global warming may produce the counter-effect of global cooling. Global warming would produce more evaporation leading to increases in rain, snow and perhaps trigger a sudden new ice age.


What Is The Historically Correct Perspective?


The earth was significantly warmer thousands of years ago. Many dinosaur fossils have been found recently near the South Pole. Dinosaur bones and tracks have been found on Svalbard (north of Norway); on the North Slope of Alaska; in northern Canada from the Yukon Territory to the Queen Elizabeth Islands; and, in central Siberia.


In 1883, fossil Breadfruit leaves and fruit were found in western Greenland. Breadfruit only grows between temperatures of 59 to 101 F (+15 to +38 C).


The Medieval Warm Period was produced by a “solar maximum” that occurs in roughly 1,000-1,500 year cycles. From 1350 AD to 1850 AD we had the “Little Ice Age,” Frost Fairs on the frozen River Thames, and in 1816 “The Year Without Summer.”


Another solar warm cycle began around 1850 and we are at the end of it now, with a cooling trend to be expected soon.


In 1999, Duck-billed dinosaur bones were found on the North Slope of Alaska. A duck-bill dinosaur tooth was recently found on James Ross Island. Eight types of dinosaurs have now been found on the North Slope in Alaska. All eight have also been found at lower latitudes.


In 2004, cores of the Alpha Ridge (bottom of the Arctic Ocean) proved that in the past the water temperature had been 59 to 68 F (+15 to +20 C).


At this time, the Southern Hemisphere is cooling and the Northern Hemisphere is warming slightly.


At this time, the Antarctic is getting measurably colder! At the South Pole temperatures have fallen since 1957.


During the American Dust Bowl, people were talking about global warming, but the temperatures were dropping.


In 1895, the New York Times newspaper warned of a coming new ice age. Subsequently, it ran these five headlines:

The sinking of the RMS Titanic had a supposed link to a coming new ice age. On October 7, 1912, the New York Times headline was: “Prof. Schmidt Warns us of an Encroaching Ice Age”


Sept. 18, 1924: “MacMillan Reports Signs of New Ice Age”


March 27, 1933: America in Longest Warming Spell Since 1776; Temperature Line Records a 25-Year Rise”


May 21, 1975: “Scientists Ponder Why World’s Climate Is Changing; A Major Cooling Widely Considered to Be Inevitable”


Dec. 27, 2005: “Past Hot Times Hold Few Reasons to Relax About New Warming”


Wait a minute. If in 1895 and 1924 we had signs of a coming ice age, how in 1933 could we have the longest warming period since 1776; and, how could temperatures have been rising for 25 straight years (since 1908)? The first answer is simple. We had just come out of the Little Ice Age. The second answer is that this was the political agenda of Environmental Terrorists 90 years ago.



On April 11, 2007, Dr. Plimer (Geology Professor at Adelaide U.) spoke to the Australian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy: “When meteorologists can change the weather then we can start to think about humans changing climate.” [Emphasis added]


In 1801, British astronomer William Herschel reported that when sunspots were numerous, grain prices fell; when sunspots were few, grain prices rose.


In 2001, a study of cloud cover over the USA from 1900 to 1987, found that average cloud cover increased and decreased in lock step with the sun’s 11-year sunspot cycle. The most plausible cause, they said: changes in the UV light the sun delivers to the stratosphere.


The amount of cosmic rays that reach deep into the atmosphere change the amount of cloud cover. The valve controlling the flow of cosmic rays from deep in space is the sun’s magnetic field. The sun’s magnetic field fluctuates in direct proportion to the fluctuating strength of solar sunspot activity.


Clouds can cool the earth, or clouds can heat the earth. Depending on how thick and how high or low they are in altitude: low clouds cool the planet by reflecting sunlight back into outer space; high clouds act as a blanket and trap heat in the atmosphere.


Peak periods of sunspot activity deliver more sunlight to the top of the atmosphere than minimum periods of sunspot activity. During swings in sunspot cycles, the largest change is in UV light.


Much of this UV light is absorbed by ozone in the stratosphere (6 to 30 miles up). The rise and fall of UV light alters the amount of heat-trapping ozone. Instead of warming the troposphere (0 to 6 miles up), changes in solar UV output redistribute heat, cold, rain, etc. Clearly, it is the sun that is driving weather and climate fluctuations.


1970 - Birth of the Modern Environmental Terrorist Movement


The first Earth Day was April 22, 1970.

The EPA was formed in July, 1970.

The Clean Air Act was enacted in 1970.

The Clean Water Act was enacted in 1972.

The Endangered Species Act was enacted in 1973.

The environmental extremists of the 1960s and 1970s now hold powerful political positions and their ideas permeate public policy.

Since 1970, a flood of environmental propaganda and eco-myths have followed:

Hairspray is depleting the Ozone!

The internal (infernal) combustion engine is evil!

Technology contaminates the environment!

Capitalism is evil, evil, evil!

Humans are unnatural and a cancer on the land!

To the true blue environmental terrorist the issue is their irrational religion.


Friends of the Earth International (2007): “[T]he Earth is a creation to be honored and respected as our Mother.”


Their religion drives them into a form of insanity. For example:


Researchers in Norway claim that their national animal, the moose, is harming the climate by emitting over 2,000 kilos (over two tons) of carbon dioxide per year. (Spiegel, August 21, 2007)


But, Australian scientists are very happy because kangaroos produce almost no methane. (Fox News, December 6, 2007)


The environmental terrorist group, Optimum Population Trust, insists that children are the greatest threat to the planet; that parents should have one less child in order to stop global warming and save the planet. (The Australian, March 7, 2007)


In the 1970’s these Environmental Terrorists, and their ilk, told us boldly that we were about to enter the “Twilight Zone of Humanity” because we were heading irrevocably into the next “Ice Age.”


1974 Global Cooling Disaster Remembered


In 1974, Time magazine warned its readers that the world may be on the verge of a catastrophic climate disaster: Global Cooling! Time reported a three decade-long cooling and other “weather aberrations.”


In 1974, Time magazine, a University of Toronto climatologist [referring to global cooling] said:


“I don’t believe that the world’s present population is sustainable if there are more than three years like 1972 in a row.” [Emphasis added]


On July 24, 1974, Time magazine published an article entitled: “Another Ice Age?” The first paragraph included:


“… However widely the weather varies … when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatologically Cassandra’s are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.” [Emphasis added]


The last paragraph of the article was:


“Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a 1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth’s surface could tip the climate balance, and cool the planet enough to send it sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred years.” [Emphasis added]


1975 Global Cooling Disaster Remembered


In Science Digest, 1975, Douglas Colligan wrote: “[T]he world’s climatologists are agreed. … Once the freeze starts, it will be too late.” [Emphasis added]


In 1975, Newsweek warned: “There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production … The drop in food production could begin quite soon. … The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it.” [Emphasis added]


On April 28, 1975, Newsweek magazine printed an article entitled “The Cooling World” in which it quoted the National Academy of Sciences, USA:


“A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale.”


In 2006, US Senator James Inhofe, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, commented on Fox News that the current global warming climate scare had no more basis in reality than the last climate scare (Global Cooling 1954-1980).


“This whole concept of another Ice Age is probably the greatest single hoax ever perpetuated on the American people … And it was until this thing [meaning the current scare over “global warming”] came along.” [Emphasis added]


1976 Global Cooling Disaster Remembered


In 1976, Newsweek warned that because of global cooling: “… this trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century.”


Back in 1954, Fortune, had published an article saying: “Despite all you may have read, heard, or imagined, it’s been growing cooler – not warmer – since the Thirties.” [Emphasis added]


In 1976, Lowell Ponte wrote in The Cooling:


“It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with … Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species.”


While using poor science and grossly overstated, he gives us the essence of the concern that Environmental Terrorists had about “Global Cooling” in 1976.


2006 Global Cooling Disaster Predicted?


In November 2006, the Russian Academy of Science warned about the ice age returning.


What Is The Historically Correct Perspective?


What causes climate changes?


In the September 2006 New Scientist they wrote that it was: “prolonged lulls in the sun’s activity – the sunspots and dramatic flares that are driven by its powerful magnetic field.” [Emphasis added]


The “sun still appears to be the main forcing agent in global climate change.” [Emphasis added]

Svensmark, H. and E. Friis-Christiensen, The persistent role of the Sun in climate forcing, Danish National Space Center Scientific Report, March 2007


With apologies to the Democratic Party pundit, James Carville, maybe: “It’s the sun, stupid.”


What Are The Facts About Recent Global Temperatures?


The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has accurate US temperature measurements from 1895 to 2008. Things got warmer from 1895 to the 1940s. The steepest trend was from 1910 to 1935. This was before significant use of fossil fuels. The US cooled for the next three and a half decades, sparking the “global cooling” panic that ended in the late-1970s.


The rate of warming from 1910 to 1934 (a period of limited fossil fuel use) is steeper than the rate of warming from 1975 to 1998 (a period of significant fossil fuel consumption).


1934 and 1998 were the two hottest years on record: 1934 was the height of the Dust Bowl and 1998 was an extreme El Nino spike. From 1975 to 1998, the country warmed. During that time, fossil fuel consumption went up and solar heating increased because of an increase in sun activity.


There has been a slight cooling trend since 1998 despite fossil fuel consumption increases in China and India. In 2007, the U.S. absorbed more CO2 than it emitted, while the EU countries emission of CO2 has gone up steadily since the Kyoto Protocol was signed.


In summary, according to environmental terrorists:


From 1895-1930: We Experienced Catastrophic Natural Global Cooling


From 1930-1954: We Experienced Catastrophic Natural Global Warming


From 1954-1980: We Experienced Catastrophic Man-made Global Cooling


From 1980-2008: We Experienced Catastrophic Man-made Global Warming


NOTE: They change their opinion in 25 to 35 year cycles!


Man is not in charge of the climate and the weather. God is in charge of the weather!


“… for He maketh His sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.” Matthew 5:45


What Are Some The Potential Benefits If Global Warming Were True?


1) The fabled Northwest Passage between the Atlantic and Pacific would become a reality cutting shipping time in half. In August, 2005, the Russian ship Akademik Fyodorov, became the first ship to cross the North Pole without the use of an icebreaker.


2) If Arctic ice melted significantly, 25% of the earth’s oil and natural gas reserves would become available for extraction.


3) Less Arctic ice would open new fishing grounds and tourist destinations.


In 2001, Russia applied to the UN to annex one half of the Arctic Ocean, including the North Pole, as a part of Russian territory based on the new ability to map the ocean floor. In 2007, two Russian research submarines attempted to plant flags on the Arctic Ocean floor in a bid to further the Russian claim to the North Pole as a part of their sovereign territory.


4) Melting icebergs calved from glaciers release nutrients yielding a five fold increase in phytoplankton and higher predators out to a distance of 2.3 miles. (Science News, July 7, 2007, Vol. 172, p. 13)


5) Perhaps the Vikings could reestablish their settlements in Greenland that they had to abandon 600 years ago at the beginning of the “Little Ice Age.”


6) Cold kills while heat kills less often. According to the UK Department of Health, if the southern UK warmed by 3 C by 2050, then 2,000 more would die from summer heat waves while 20,000 fewer would die from cold in the winter.


7) If the temperature in Canada were to rise only about 3 F, the wheat growing area would reach as far north as Hudson Bay, and grapevines could be cultivated in southern Canada.


8) If the Earth were warming, more water would be evaporating, producing more rain for food crops and timber production; and, producing more snow that would rebuild the polar ice caps; and, more glaciers would be advancing.


9) If the Earth were warming, there would be longer growing seasons and warmer winter nights.


Every global warming period of the past has produced a net increase in economic and social benefits!


“Two thousand years of published human histories say that the warm periods were good for people. It was the harsh, unstable Dark Ages and Little Ice Age that brought bigger storms, untimely frost, widespread famine and plagues of disease.” [Emphasis added]

(Avery, Dennis and S. Fred Singer, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years)


What Actually Causes Global Warming?


1) Natural processes such as sunlight, heat released by volcanoes and the heat released by radioactive decay in the earth’s crust.


2) The four solar cycles; combined with the increase and decrease in sun spots and the increase and decrease in the sun’s magnetic field.


“Humans have long known since the invention of the telescope that the earth’s climate variations were linked to the sunspot cycle, but we had not understood how. Recent experiments have demonstrated that more or fewer cosmic rays hitting the earth create more or fewer of the low, cooling clouds that deflect solar heat back into space - amplifying small variations in the intensity of the sun.” [Emphasis added]

(Avery, Dennis and S. Fred Singer, Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years)


3) The Earth’s wobble and eccentric orbit exposes the surface to varying amounts of heat at different periods of time.


4) Snow and ice reflect heat, but water absorbs it.


5) A clear sky allows solar heating of surfaces.


6) Land use changes, natural or Man-made.


7) The older the Sun gets, the hotter it burns!


8) Surface temperatures rise in city areas as more asphalt and cement are poured in those areas. (Atmospheric temperatures are not increasing!)


9) “Greenhouse Gases,” such as naturally occurring water vapor (70%), CO2 (26%), methane (9%), ozone (7%) and nitrous oxide have a warming effect. CO2 is NOT a major “Greenhouse Gas,” it is a natural by-product of human beings and animals; it is released by plants upon death! Nitrous oxide is produced by microbes in the soil; methane is produced in swamps, bogs, rice paddies, cows and human beings.


“Greenhouse gases” are necessary for life to exist on earth, without them we would freeze to death!


Man-made combustion of fuels causes only 2% of the greenhouse gases that keep our atmosphere habitable - the other 98% are produced by purely natural causes!




‘There will be significant cooling very soon,’ asserted solar scientist David Archibald at the ‘Greener Skies 2008’ conference designed to persuade the airline industry to cut back on production of greenhouse gases to fight global warming. Archibald asserted climate change is mostly dictated by solar cycles, not CO2 levels, and he warned they should figure ways of increasing CO2 output. ‘In a few short years, we will have a reversal of the warming of the 20th century. There will be significant cooling very soon. Our generation has known a warm, giving sun, but the new generation will suffer a sun that is less giving, and the earth will be less fruitful ... CO2 is not even a little bit bad it’s wholly beneficial.’” [Emphasis added] (World Net Daily April 03, 2008)


What Actually Causes “Global Cooling”?


1) Volcanic eruptions: In 1991-1992 Mt. Pinatubo, in the Philippines, cooled the earth 1.26 F (0.7 C) in only one year. The eruption dumped between 20 and 30 megatons of sulphur dioxide (SO2), other aerosols and gases into the atmosphere. These aerosols and gases encircled the earth between the tropics in only three months, blocking out and reflecting heat and light back into outer space. In addition, there was a loss of 15% of the Ozone Layer to record lows in 1992-1993.


2) Dust Storms: During the American Dust Bowl (1930 to 1938), the dust blocked out 15% of sunlight and dropped the temperature 1.8 F (1 C). The American Dust Bowl was caused by an extended El Nino.


3) The Variations of the Earth’s Orbit: The earth’s orbit isn’t a perfect circle; therefore the earth is slightly closer and or further from the sun at different times.


4) Smoke from Forest Fires: Whether started by natural causes (lightening strikes) or the activity of human beings, large quantities of  aerosols and gases are injected into the atmosphere by forest fires.


5) The Earth is Cooling Down: The earth is radiating more heat into outer space every day than it receives from the sun. The center core temperature of the earth is 13,000 F (7,200 C). The earth has consistently lost heat since it was created.


6) Variations in Solar Activity: The sun is not a totally uniform heat source. The sun undergoes periodic increases and decreases in sunspot activity and magnetic field activity! These variations have a direct, significant and demonstrable effect on weather and climate changes on earth.


Nature Is Not Pristine!


Volcanic eruptions are perhaps the worst “offenders.” Here is a quick review of some of the record holders:


1) The eruption of the volcano Laki, in Iceland, in 1783 is considered to be Britain’s forgotten disaster. The event was catastrophic. The volcano spewed out such a large amount of sulphur dioxide and sulfuric acid that Britain was enveloped in a thick smog and the sun was described as “covered like it was soaked in blood.” The naturalist Gilbert White said it was “unlike anything known within the memory of man.” The poet William Cowper lamented in the summer of 1783 that, “such multitudes are indisposed by fevers in this country that farmers have difficulty gathering their harvest, the labourers having been almost every day carried out of the field incapable of work and many die.”


The eruption lasted for weeks and covered much of Western Europe. About one third of the population of Iceland died. Recent research by Dr. John Grattan of Aberystwyth University, Wales, has established that it was the greatest natural disaster in modern British history.


2) The eruption of the Indonesian volcano Tambora in 1815 killed 92,000 people, hundreds of thousands of animals, spewed ash up to 800 miles away, and produced “The Year Without Summer” in 1816.


3) The eruption of the Indonesian volcano Krakatau (Krakatoa), in 1883, produced “The Sound Heard ‘Round The World.” The sound of the eruption was heard in downtown London, England. The eruption killed 36,000 people.


Nature Is Not Pristine!


High winds are powerful, destructive and polluting.


On November 13, 1970, a hurricane hit Bangladesh: killing between 500,000 and one million people.


On March 18, 1925, a tornado touched down from southeastern Missouri, passing through southern Illinois and lifting up in southwestern Indiana staying on the ground for 219 miles. The result was that 625 people died, 2,000 more were injured and there was $1.7 billion in property damages (in 2007 dollars).


Nature Is Not Pristine!


Floods are powerful, destructive and polluting.


In 1887, the Huang He (Yellow River) in China flooded: between 900,000 and two million people died.


In 1931, the Huang He flooded: 1 to 3.7 million people died.


Nature Is Not Pristine!


Earthquakes are powerful, destructive and polluting.


In 1556, the earthquake in Shensi, China, killed 830,000 people.


On Boxing Day, December 26, 2004, an earthquake measuring between 9.1 and 9.3 occurred off the coast of Southwestern Indonesia killing over 230,000 people in 11 countries. The earthquake released 9,560 giga-tons (9.56 billion tons) of TNT energy (equivalent to 550 million times that of the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima), or about 370 years of energy use in the United States at 2005 levels. Between 3,300 ft. and 16,500 ft. under water, it lifted a section of land 600 miles long upward 13 to 16 feet and sliding it 33 feet sideways.


Therefore, the question must be asked: “If volcanoes, winds, floods and earthquakes can accomplish so much in so little time, why is supposed human activity receiving the full blame for supposed and unproven global warming?”


One volcanic eruption may release more toxic gases in a given year than all human activity in that same year. Perhaps the blame is placed on human beings because you cannot tax nor legislate against a volcano or an earthquake. Could it be that the promotion of left-wing politics is the real reason that the truth is being withheld from the general population?


Global Warming? New Data Shows Ice Is Back!

On July 10, 2007, it snowed in Buenos Aires, Argentina, for the first time since June 22, 1918 = 89 YEARS




“The Northern Hemisphere has endured its coldest winter in decades. The snow cover is the greatest since 1966. … the one exception - Western Europe, which had, until the weekend of Feb. 16–17 when temperatures plunged to as low as -10 C in some places, been basking in unseasonably warm weather.

Around the world, vast areas have been buried under some of the heaviest snowfalls in decades. Central and Southern China, the US and Canada were hit hard by snowstorms. In China, snowfall was so heavy that over 100,000 houses collapsed under the weight of the snow.”


Jerusalem, Damascus, Amman and northern Saudi Arabia reported the heaviest snow falls in years and below-zero temperatures. Baghdad had a snowstorm, the first in the memory of most residents.”

(Feb. 18 2008 London Daily Express)


At the same time; Athens News reported that a raging snow storm blanketed most of Greece, plunging the country into subzero freezing temperatures. The agency reported that public transport buses were at a standstill in the wider Athens area, ships remained in ports, public services remained closed, and schools and courthouses were closed.


Are the world’s ice caps melting because of climate change, or are the reports just “scare mongering” by the advocates of global warming?


It is scare mongering! The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reports that almost all the allegedly “lost” ice has come back. The report reveals that ice levels which had shrunk from 5 million sq. miles in Jan. 2007 to just 1.5 million sq. miles in October 2007 are almost back to their original condition.


The Feb. 18 2008 London Daily Express report showed that there is nearly one third more ice in Antarctica than usual; challenging global warming crusaders and buttressing arguments against global warming!


The Maldives are not drowning and sea levels are not rising according to Swedish geophysicist, Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner (March 28, 2009). He is Emeritus Professor of Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics, Stockholm University, and an expert on sea levels. He said that the alarming warnings of Al Gore and the UN’s IPCC are "the greatest lie ever told. ... the sea is not rising. It hasn’t risen in 50 years." He was asked to be an expert reviewer of the last two UN IPCC reports and was "astonished to find that not one of their 22 contributing authors on sea levels was a sea level specialist: not one."

On March 9, 2009, England’s Prince Charles and the Archbishop of Canterbury said that the industrial west must send funds to the poor drowning people of the Maldives. The plea was totally unnecessary. Mörner reminds us of a real problem - the climate change debate has been hijacked by politicians and journalists.

The Antarctic Ice Cap is growing according to satellite imaging by the British Antarctic Survey (May 2/3, 2009). The Antarctic Sea Ice is growing by approximately 100,000 sq km (39,000 sq mi) per decade for the last 30 years. Ian Allison, head of the Australian Antarctic Division’s glaciology program, commented that there was no indication the Antarctic ice cap was melting. Given that 90% of the world’s ice is in the Antarctic this is even more important. The May report noted that the temp trend in the Antarctic has been "Cooling 0.45 degrees per decade."

Australian Minister for the Environment, Peter Garrett (responsible for Antarctica) claimed the breakup of the Wilkins Ice Shelf would cause sea-level rises of 6 m (20ft) by the end of the century, and that ice was melting across the continent. However, the photo used in support of his view was taken 13 months earlier (March 2008) and recent studies have revealed the ice is increasing. Some of his colleagues were annoyed at him for "weighing into the climate change debate with exaggerated claims;" and, Craig Emerson, Minister for Small Business has "cast doubt on the assertion that scientific evidence was conclusive for a catastrophic meltdown of the polar ice caps if global warming was not curtailed." Hopefully this crack in political solidarity may let in some more truth that may hopefully restrain politicians from taxing people to solve a problem that doesn’t exist!



Dr. Donald Easterbrook, Professor Emeritus of Geology at Western Washington University, Bellingham (and university climate mentor of Mr. Al Gore), has studied the historical records of climate cycles using data from the Greenland ice cores, the Pacific and North Atlantic Oscillations, sunspot activity and concludes that the earth is entering a cooling period that could last up to 30 years.


He wrote an article for Global Research published on January 17, 2009. In the article he stated: "Alternate warming and cooling has occurred about every 27 yrs since 1470AD, well before atmospheric CO2 began to increase …"


He concluded: "Global warming (i.e, the warming since 1977) is over. The minute increase of anthropogenic (manmade) CO2 in the atmosphere (0.008%) was not the cause of the warming - it was a continuation of natural cycles that occurred over the past 500 years. The PDO cool mode has replaced the warm mode in the Pacific Ocean, virtually assuring us of about 30 years of global cooling, perhaps much deeper than the global cooling from about 1945 to 1977. Just how much cooler the global climate will be during this cool cycle is uncertain. Recent solar changes suggest that it could be fairly severe, perhaps more like the 1880 to 1915 cool cycle than the more moderate 1945-1977 cool cycle. A more drastic cooling, similar to that during the Dalton [roughly 1790 to 1830] and Maunder [roughly 1645 to 1715] Minimums, could plunge the Earth into another Little Ice Age, but only time will tell if that is likely."


According to a report published by the National Snow and Ice Data Center, University of Colorado, Boulder (NSIDC) on February 18, 2009 and on February 20, 2009 the ice cap that covered the Arctic Ocean during the winter of 2008-2009 was grossly underestimated. The amount of the discrepancy was 193,000 sq. miles (500,000 sq. Km), or an area the size of the State of California. The problem turned out to be due to “sensor drift” onboard a satellite tasked to measure polar ice coverage. The problem was “discovered” when satellite pictures showing portions of the Arctic Ocean covered with ice were compared to the readings from the sensor which showed the same areas as open water. When the NSIDC was asked about the discrepancy, a spokesman replied: "There is a balance between being as accurate as possible at any given moment and being as consistent as possible through long time-periods. Our main scientific focus is on the long-term changes in Arctic sea ice."


In The Register, February 25, 2009 scientists at the Japan Society of Energy and Resources (JSER) disagreed strongly with the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 4th Evaluation Report which claimed that atmospheric temperatures would continue to rise because of human actions. Instead, the Japanese scientists claimed that the recent changes in climate and weather patterns were strictly driven by natural cycles. Kanya Kusano, Program Director and Group Leader for the Earth Simulator at the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology, criticized the UN for using computer models to prove man-made warming and compared using computer models to astrology: garbage in, garbage out.


Kusano concluded: “[The IPCC's] conclusion that from now on atmospheric temperatures are likely to show a continuous, monotonic increase, should be perceived as an unprovable hypothesis.”


Shunichi Akasofu, head of the International Arctic Research Center in Alaska, commented, "We should be cautious. IPCC's theory that atmospheric temperature has risen since 2000 in correspondence with CO2 is nothing but a hypothesis. Before anyone noticed, this hypothesis has been substituted for truth ... The opinion that great disaster will really happen must be broken."


An article containing new findings about the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was published in New Scientist on April 2, 2009 and in Science, vol. 24, p. 78, on April 2, 2009. The MWP lasted from about 850/900 to roughly 1250/1300. The Little Ice Age (roughly 1250 to 1895) immediately followed the MWP. The climate scientists studied tree rings in Morocco and stalactites in Scotland to reconstruct the European and North African climates during the MWP. They found that during the MWP the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) become stronger, increasing the speed of the Gulf Stream’s warm waters and resulted in a warming of Europe of North Africa. They suggested that at the same time there had been a La Nina (a cool region) in the tropical Western Pacific which in combination with the NAO had set up a positive feedback loop that kept the MWP going for 400 years.


A recent report describes the coldest winter since the end of the MWP. It was 1709-1710 according to research published in New Scientist on February 7, 2009, p.46. The temperatures from Scandinavia to Italy hit bottom. That winter the sea froze around Europe, the soil froze to over three feet of depth, the combs of chickens froze and fell off, trees exploded, travelers and seamen froze to death in their ships. William Derham, one of England's most meticulous meteorological observers at the time wrote, “I believe the Frost was greater (if not more universal also) than any other within the Memory of Man.”


What were the culprits that caused this bottoming of the Little Ice Age? It was a combination of low Sunspot activity and the eruption of several volcanoes in 1707 and 1708, including Mt Vesuvius, Mt Santorini and Mt Fuji.


According to the Snow and Ice Center at Boulder, Colorado, in March 2009, the sea ice off the coast of Alaska had increased to such an extent that it was greater than in 1979. 1979 is the year that Environmental Terrorists like to use as the start of our Modern Warm Period.


There is more good news for the NO Truth to Global Warming/Climate Change deniers! According to a Gallup Poll on March 11, 2009 which surveyed American attitudes about supposed global warming a "record-high 41%" believed that the seriousness of global warming was exaggerated. The survey also found that "fewer Americans believe the effects of global warming have begun to occur. The figure is now 53%, down from 61% in March 2008. At the same time, a record-high 16% say the effects will never occur." When asked about their concern on other environmental issues, such as pollution of water, deforestation, or the protection of endangered species, the Poll found: “Not only does global warming rank last on the basis of the total percentage concerned, but it is the only issue for which public concern dropped significantly in the past year."


The Gallup Poll summarized the survey results this way: "Americans generally believe global warming is real. That sets the U.S. public apart from the global-warming sceptics who assembled early March in New York City to try to debunk the science behind climate change. At the same time, with only 34% of Americans saying they worry ‘a great deal’ about the problem, most Americans do not view the issue in the same dire terms as the many prominent leaders advancing global warming as an issue."


Mark Morano of the Heartland Institute commented that: "The only place where this alleged climate catastrophe is happening is the virtual world of computer models." (New Scientist Soundbites, March 14, 2009, p10.)


Research at the University of Wisconsin – Milwaukee, published in Discovery News, March 2, 2009, found that: "according to a new study in Geophysical Research Letters, global warming may have hit a speed bump and could go into hiding for decades. Earth's climate continues to confound scientists. Following a 30-year trend of warming, global temperatures have flat-lined since 2001 despite rising greenhouse gas concentrations and a heat surplus that should have cranked up the planetary thermostat."


We have entered a prolonged period of minimal solar sunspot activity. In 2008, there were 266 spotless days. In 2009, there were 260 spotless days. From January 1 to April 10, 2010 there were only 7 spotless days, however, the number of sunspots remained very low. The last time there was such a low sunspot count was in 1913. 2008 had the lowest solar wind measurements since monitoring began in the 1960's and the lowest radio emissions since measurements began in the 1950's. All this indicates a continuing cooling trend until sunspot activity restarts in earnest.


If global warming gets any worse we’ll all freeze to death!

Please login or register to comment