The great Web site known as Right Scoop linked me to this awesome video below:
Marc Morano runs a Web site called Climate Depot, which I definitely recommend you take a look at so you can arm yourself with facts to prove that this whole manmade climate change thing is a bunch of crap.
Now all this reminds me of a very detailed column I wrote years ago about this topic of climate change, right when the ClimateGate scandal had just happened. I wanted to share that today, as it still shares information relevant to today’s discussion of climate change and how climate change is an excuse to steal your liberty via cap-and-trade. Take a look at it below. Read it and weep Al Gore.
Published on CC Spin:
The environment is something that concerns everyone, and there are problems that certainly need to be addressed. But there is growing skepticism about whether or not global warming is a real environmental concern, and so it is disturbing that politicians are using it as an excuse to impose economic regulations like cap-and-trade.
Supporters of the man-made global warming theory have pointed to the rise of temperature within the past 15 years as evidence, but this evidence is clearly not credible.
According to a Washington Times article on Dec. 9, NASA had recalculated its data to determine that 1934, not 1998 as it originally said, was the hottest year in its records, weakening the evidence of a rise in temperature.
Further strengthening the argument of global warming skeptics, a Nov. 20 New York Times “Climate-Gate” article reported the uncovering of several e-mails from Britain’s Climate Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia containing information indicating that the scientists don’t understand why there has been a lack of rising temperatures.
Recently, Dr. Phil Jones admitted that he may have lost the relevant data that shows warming since 1995 and resigned as the director of CRU because of the controversy over the Climate-Gate e-mails.
At a meeting of climate scientists on Feb. 22, the British weather office suggested the world’s climatologists should start over and produce new data open to public scrutiny and peer review.
In addition, politicians such as Al Gore and President Barack Obama who support the man-made climate change theory base their data on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Recently though, the IPCC’s claims about climate change have lost their legitimacy.
According to a Feb. 16 Wall Street Journal article, the IPCC has based climate change claims on the World Wildlife Fund’s data, such as climate change will destroy “40 percent of the Amazon rainforest” and “glacial lake outbursts causing mudflows and avalanches”.
The article describes the World Wildlife Fund as a “green lobby that believes in global warming, and its ‘research’ reflects its advocacy, not the scientific method.”
Despite the illegitimate evidence, scientists like Princeton University Professor Michael Oppenheimer believe that climate change is caused by man-made carbon dioxide trapped by greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.
Oppenheimer points to the increase of total greenhouse emissions from 28.7 billion tons per year in 1970 to 49 billion tons in 2004, which has trapped heat and raised temperatures by nearly 1.5 degrees the past 100 years.
The science of carbon dioxide suggests that carbon dioxide is not harmful to the atmosphere.
According to a April 9 article from AmericanThinker.org, carbon dioxide only makes up 4/1000 of the Earth’s atmosphere, and according to the Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, only 3 percent of the carbon dioxide that makes up the atmosphere is man-made.
Furthermore, water vapor is a greenhouse gas that makes up 95 percent of the atmosphere, while the remaining 5 percent is made up of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
Of these greenhouse gases, methane and nitrous oxide are 21 times and 310 times more powerful than carbon dioxide, respectively.
Therefore, carbon dioxide is a very small part of the atmosphere, and has little effect on global warming.
However, there are other ways to explain climate change.
According to climate scientists Dr. David Legates from the University of Delaware and Dr. Willie Soon from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center of Astrophysicists, climate change is a natural cycle caused by the sun.
Legates explains this is because 99.9 percent of the Earth’s energy that goes into the climate originates from the sun.
He also says that as temperature rises, carbon dioxide rises, leading to the misconception that carbon dioxide has caused global warming.
Since there is clearly skepticism on whether or not global warming is an environmental concern, why would politicians want to create “solutions” to global warming?
Their “solutions” are just another word for unnecessary economic regulation.
For example, one solution is cap-and-trade.
Cap-and-trade puts a limit on the amount of greenhouse gases that a company can emit, and if this limit is breached, then the company must pay fines or buy extra emissions credits from companies that have a surplus of emissions credits.
Cap-and-trade would result in new energy taxes and companies passing on higher prices to the consumer.
Since cap-and-trade seems unlikely to pass, the government has circumvented it with the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new “solution.”
The Clean Air Act was amended on Jan. 14 to give the EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases, resulting in even higher costs than there would be under cap-and-trade.
And to even further burden taxpayers, the Obama administration plans to give $2.6 billion for global warming research.
Given the “Climate Gate” e-mails and the growing skepticism among scientists about man-made global warming, these economic regulations are unnecessary burdens for our already crippled economy.
There should be widely reviewed data based on sound scientific methods on the environment before politicians churn out environmental legislation.