Featured Post

The Kingdom of Católica America Series

Here is a list of all posts from The Kingdom of Católica America series.  Just follow the links.  There are more to come in the future, and ...

Wednesday, December 31, 2014

Global Warming is Junk Science

Here is a picture of a sad polar bear drifting into the ocean on a lone iceberg.

Funny thing is that this picture was found to be photoshopped in Science magazine. It's a complete and utter fake, designed to gin up pity and support for "the cause." The polar bear, ice floe, ocean and sky are real—they're just photoshopped into a collage. 

Oh! And another funny thing about polar bears! It seems that Al Gore's polar bear scientist has been forced to retire! Scientist scamster Charles Monnett was forced to retire at around this time last year because of his lies about polar bear drownings. This tends to happen when you use false data.

One more thing about Al Gore. Rumor has it that he had a prediction that in ten years, if people of the world didn't get their act together, then the Earth will turn into a total frying pan. That was in 2006. So, in over a year we're all dead, I guess.

I am not assuming I know everything about this. It is simply that the fruits-of-deceit from Climategate are many, and one need only reach up to the tree of lies to pluck down an example.

What troubles me greatly is the likelihood that so many young'uns were cornered into watching An Inconvenient Truth in high school, and they never took the time to disagree or question it. And so now, "man-made climate change" shall serve as the axiom upon which many further compounded lies and bad policies shall be built.

I want to reiterate that I am not wanting to gin up fear about a conspiracy theory.  I will let some other noble soul with more time than I do that.  I have not set out to demonstrate that there is an evil cabal out there who has set up the global warming hoax so that they can transform the world into a Communist utopia. I am merely pointing out lies on the part of tax-funded "professionals." After all, there are many grants to be had for a climate scientist who travels in the right circles.

Now, let's look at "20th Century global warming."




Here we see something that appears to be century-wide global warming. It makes sense, after all, that rising temperatures (if they truly come from CO2) would correlate with the rise of industry in the world. Right?

So, if we have had a steady increase in industry throughout the world, why is it that rising temperatures decided to take a break between World War 2 and 1978? Did industry just suddenly stop for those three decades? If it is true that global warming has been occurring in conjunction with the world's industrialization, then how come the rise in temperature has not steadily increased without dipping? Why does the correlation of temperature increase and industrialization take a break after WWII?

Hint: Earth has cycles.

For more perspective, let's look at more boring unemotional charts:





The above chart was presented by Dennis Avery at the 2009 International Conference on Climate Change in New York. Notice all of those bumps above and below the center line? Those are what we call cycles. We even have nicknames for them, such as "Medieval Warm Period" and "Little Ice Age."

And look at this next one:




The above chart by Don Easterbrook demonstrates the likelihood that we might actually be cooling down again. Indeed, it is conceivable that we have finished one of the warmer cycles that have occurred throughout history, and we are going to cool off again.




The above are two of my favorites of the boring charts. It is a comparison of temperature with solar activity as well as CO2 emissions. Notice how the temperature spikes seem to mysteriously correlate with the activity of the sun?




Observe how our planet has been pretty much in a steady path of temperature change from 1880 to 2000, and then look at the wacky wild prediction by the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. I guess they also liked Al Gore's docu-comedy.

But at this moment, let's leave the sciencey stuff behind us.

I was asked over at Fisheaters today:
I would say that it is Man's duty to be a steward of God's Creation, much like it is our duty not to poison our bodies with something that is toxic, wouldn't you agree?
Yes. (I feel like a broken record on this.)  There is nothing wrong with keeping things clean. I think it's a fine idea to have advanced public transport and perhaps even electrical car requirements for cities that are prone to smog (hello Los Angeles and Beijing). Oil spills should be cleaned up if they are harmful to the environment (sometimes spills are not harmful; stay away from Corexit dispersant). Garbage should be dealt with appropriately. Recycling ain't bad. "Captain Planet, he's a hero. Gonna take pollution down to zero!" and all that. Yeah.

However, caring for the environment should not be an end unto itself.

Fr. Chad Ripperger says: 
Today we tend to see that people panic at the slightest bad report about the environment, and it's a sign of rejection of Divine Providence.
...
God created the planet which we live on--the material universe--to be able to sustain us in our activities. And to deny that--that is, to be panicking about every little thing that happens in the material-created universe, is nothing short of a denial or a lack of faith in God's prominence.

I, for one, rest comfortable with the idea that God has things under control. I wonder if Pope Francis will say the same sort of thing as Fr. Ripperger.

In any event, I am fully aware of what trash holes other 3rd world nations are like. I'm fully aware of how bad Latin America, China, and Russia are like. Like a broken record, I've been citing the Philippines for the last three days. And, again, this falls in line with my "let's keep things clean" attitude.

Localized and regional pollution are real problems that need addressing. We could talk about those matters all day. I can think of ten real and significant problems right at this moment.
But wringing our hands over the myth of man-made global warming is silly, and it's one of the Left's most laughable follies. I strongly urge the "global warming believers" to reconsider the matter.

Here is a part of a sermon by Father Chad Ripperger, exorcist and FSSP priest:

(The emphasis is Fr. Ripperger's.)

We have come across today a false environmentalism. Which has this idea that the environment is something that should be sought for its own sake, and that ultimately man is there for the sake of the environment. Not the environment for the sake of man.

These things are not there for themselves. They're there for us. God created the material things for ouruse and our benefit. Not the other way around. Today we tend to see that people panic at the slightest bad report about the environment, and it's a sign of rejection of Divine Providence. God created the material universe for our use. Which means that He designed it for the type of use that we're making of it.

So, what's this mean?
It means, in the end, as I tell all the seminarians, God wanted us burning fossil fuels. He wanted us to eat animals. Not before the Fall, which we'll talk about in a bit, but after the Fall, He had every intention for us to burn fossil fuels. If He didn't want us burning fossil fuels, He wouldn't have put them there--and He put a lot of them there, which means He wanted us burning a lot of them.

Now, that doesn't mean that you waste them. It just means that God created the planet which we live on--the material universe--to be able to sustain us in our activities. And to deny that--that is, to be panicking about every little thing that happens in the material-created universe, is nothing short of a denial or a lack of faith in God's prominence.
He provides.

Now, that doesn't mean, again, that we don't abuse the environment inappropriately.
Why?
Not because it's an end in itself. But because when we affect the environment, we affect other human beings. So, what we do to the environment, we have a proper moral outlook on it--not for the sake of the environment, but because of the effect it has on other human beings. So, you don't pollute the environment in a way that's going to have a very adverse effect on human beings.
But at the same time, God still intended for us to use the environment for our benefit.
So we have to have a proper balance, which is moderated according to prudence and according to virtue, which seems to be in short supply these days.

Here is the entire sermon of Father Ripperger:



For further reading, I would like to recommend some items mentioned by a long-time online associate, james03.  I mentioned him over at Te Deum, a new lively forum that I've been frequenting.

James03 is in the middle of being blackballed by moderation staff over at the Echo Chamber, but in spite of their squealing emotional noise, he manages to put out a few good points of consideration.  I list them here for you readers to investigate at your leisure:




1. The Upside down Tiljander.

2. Graybill and strip barked tree ring chronologies. Dendro scientists warn not to use them due to increased growth from CO2 fertilization, thus making them a poor temp proxy.

3. The Lonely yamal tree.

4. Law Dome (excellent proxy again showing the medieval warm period, but left out of studies).

5. Climategate.

6. Hide the Decline: proxies that showed an hockeystick diverged significantly from some temperature data showing they were poor proxies for temperature. Sure enough, they were used to get the hockey stick.

7. Satellite data such as RSS vs. "adjusted" data. The divergence between very accurate satellite data and "adjusted" land data is getting pretty dramatic.

8. Urban Heat Island effect.

9. Weather station siting. Putting your temperature recorder in the middle of a runway is not a good idea. This was not intentional fraud, but once discovered, the data should be kicked.

10. Archaeological evidence such as Greenland. Also rare photos from the 30s showing the Arctic with little sea ice.



No comments:

Post a Comment