Thursday, February 21, 2008

Ignorance Of Climate

Weather Channel founder John Coleman calls global warming the biggest scam in history. Unfortunately many politicians and journalists are gullible enough to fall for the false theory that carbon dioxide is causing what Coleman calls “the illusion of rapid global warming”.

The claim that carbon dioxide is a “greenhouse gas” with the power to control air temperature sounds like magic. Someone offering a product capable of doing what CO2 can supposedly do in the atmosphere would likely be arrested by the police for fraud. The evidence for “global warming” is of little value.

Those who talk about global warming claim a 1 F (0.5 C) increase in what they call the global average temperature over the last century indicates the earth is getting warmer. You don’t have to be a mathematician or physicist to recognize that one temperature cannot represent every place on earth from frigid polar regions to blazing deserts. Nor can a single temperature represent year round conditions in temperate regions where temperatures can range from 0 F (-18 C) in the winter to 100 F (35 C ) in the summer.

“It is impossible to talk about a single temperature for something as complicated as the climate of Earth,” according to thermodynamics expert Professor Bjarne Andresen, of the Niels Bohr Institute, University of
Copenhagen. “A temperature can be defined only for a homogeneous system. Furthermore, the climate is not governed by a single temperature. Rather, differences of temperatures drive the processes and create the storms, sea currents, etc. which make up the climate.”

The claim that a 1 F (0.5 C) increase is significant ignores the fact that the number represents only a 0.17% change over a century. (Note: Per cent changes in temperature must be calculated using the Kelvin
scale because of the arbitrary zero points of the Celsius and Fahrenheit scales.) Scientists might be able to obtain an accuracy within 0.17% in laboratory conditions, but not in the real world. Inadequate maintenance of equipment can reduce accuracy. Changes in the area near the site of the reading can affect temperatures.

Anthony Watts, Chief Meteorologist for KPAY-AM radio, has established a site that tracks poorly located weather stations. He has found temperature stations with sensors on the roofs of buildings; near air-conditioning exhaust vents; in parking lots; near hot automobiles, barbecues, chimneys and on pavement and concrete surfaces - all of which would lead to higher temperature recordings than properly located equipment. .

Ross McKitrick and Pat Michaels in an article published in the Journal of Geophysical Research-Atmospheres (December 2007) charge that temperature data have been processed in ways that allow inaccuracies to remain. Some temperature data are known to be subject to local environmental factors that may make the temperatures unrepresentative, but current procedures are inadequate to correct errors that can inflate temperature data and create the false impression of “global warming”

Dr. Nils-Axel Mrner is the former head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University in Sweden, past president (1999-2003) of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution and leader of the Maldives Sea Level Project. He claims that the IPCC has falsified data indicating a sea level rise. According to Morner sea levels rose from 1850 through 1940 but there is no recent trend of sea levels rising. In one case the IPCC used a tide gauge in an area of Hong Kong that is sinking because of the compaction of sediment to indicate that sea levels were rising even though other tide gauges in Hong Kong indicated no rise.

CO2 constitutes less than 0.04% of the atmosphere. How can anyone believe that an increase from 0.036% to 0.037%, for example, could possibly increase air temperature? CO2 is supposed to heat the ground by
re-emitting radiation it has absorbed. The idea that individual CO2 molecules can actually radiate enough energy to heat anything sounds so ridiculous that it’s hard to understand how any logical person could
believe it.

Greenhouse gas advocates claim the process involves trapping radiation produced by the ground, but physicist R. W. Wood, the inventor of both infrared and ultraviolet photography, proved in 1909 that greenhouses did not raise temperatures by trapping radiation.

One of the oldest scams in physics involves the perpetual motion machine. Such machines supposedly operate with little or no energy. The inventor may claim that his machine may produce nearly as much, if not as much, energy as it consumes. Claims about greenhouse gases imply they cause the atmosphere to function as a perpetual motion machine according to Dr. Gerhard Gerlich and Ralf D. Tscheuschner of the Institute for Mathematical Physics at the Carolo-Wilhelmina Technical University, Germany, in their essay “Falsification of the Atmospheric Greenhouse Effects Within the Framework of Physics”.

The only gas humans put into the atmosphere that might affect temperature is water vapor, but the effect doesn't involve radiation. Water vapor carries what physicists call latent heat which is the heat energy required to turn ice and liquid water into water vapor.

The fact that some scientists support the idea of greenhouses gases doesn’t make it valid. There are other scientists who say it is nonsense. Scientists are just as capable of being con artists as anyone else. Scientists once defrauded European nobles by claiming the ability to turn lead into gold. Modern scientist con artists seek funding for research to develop miracle cures or perpetual motion machines.

Police will tell you that if something sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Scam artists tend to oversell whatever they are peddling.

Business oriented scam artists overstate the benefits of what they are selling. Politically oriented scam artists like Al Gore and the IPCC overstate the dangers of whatever they are warning about. The people who warn of global warming are overselling claims about climate change and gullible politicians and journalists are buying what they are selling.

No comments: