Global warming is a myth:

Of course, the warming of the Earth during the last century is absolutely man-made if you listen to many of the devoted disciples of global warming. However, isn't it somewhat presumptuous to assume that humans have the power to control global climate change on Earth? Isn't it is also presumptuous to assume that global climate change is not part of a long term planetary cycle and that even the sun does not play a major role? No, the true believers of man-made global warming are devoted to a cause. Their cause is to save the planet from a global warming holocaust in the next century brought on by the release of CO2 emissions caused by the reckless consumption of man.

While many planets in our solar system are warming without any human intervention, the Earth has been experiencing dramatic cooling. Last year, dramatic global cooling was measured by all four agencies that track the Earth's temperature (the Hadley Climate Research Unit in Britain, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York, the Christy group at the University of Alabama, and Remote Sensing Systems Inc in California). It is now estimated that the Earth cooled by about 0.7C in 2007 which is the fastest temperature change on record. In addition, the global cooling trend has continued into the first five months of 2008.

Of course, faced with the current cooling trend, past climate predictions of global warming for our immediate future are suddenly at risk. In fact, as global temperatures fall, the 0.3°C global average temperature rise which had been the prediction for the next decade by the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change will soon have to be revised and explained. Already, some scientists are coming up with a possible reason to keep the true believers faithful to the cause. It is a sort of global warming interrupted rationalization because many researchers now expect a "lull" for up to a decade while natural variations in climate apparently cancel out the increases caused by man-made greenhouse gas emissions.

So, it now could be a much colder decade ahead even as the world continues to fight man- made global warming. Meanwhile, it will be increasingly difficult to explain to one billion starving people across the planet, that there is a global food shortage while nations grow corn to use as bio fuel to counter man-made global warming, even though the planet is in fact dramatically cooling.

However, a recent edition of Time Magazine has a recipe that may prove helpful to avoid world starvation while saving the environment at the same time. In another of their many stories on the environment and society, the magazine has a feature on eating insects. A video featured at Time.com actually shows people how to cook them.

Eating insects means the world would consume less meat. Eating less meat would result in less carbon emissions which would result in relief from man-made global warming. Time.com will show you how to cook beetles, grasshoppers, silkworms, and centipedes. Of course, eating the insects raw would use less energy and be even better for the environment.

If you want to listen to the proponents of man-made global warming, just forget the fact that other planets in the solar system are warming dramatically without any human inhabitants. Also, disregard the fact that the Earth is currently experiencing a dramatic cooling trend. So, fight to save the planet from global warming by ordering your new heavy winter coat and continue to advocate growing corn for use as bio fuel.

To the true believers of man made climate change, the next decade may be global warming interrupted but for the good of the planet people should be eating raw bugs anyway. The truth is that all of this man-made global warming hysteria continues to make very little common or economic sense to me.

Al Gore's claim to Hollywood trophies and a Nobel Peace Prize is entirely due to An Inconvenient Truth--conveniently, it has few truths. Gore's biggest case to link human activity to global warming is the theory that carbon dioxide levels are directly responsible for increases in temperature. His graphs and animations certainly looked sharp and gave an aura of authority. However, CO2 and rising temperatures are not related in the fashion Gore suggests. He would have you think that temperatures rise as a result of increased CO2 levels. Statistically, the warmer periods in Earth's history came about 800 years before an increase in CO2; that means CO2 levels increased after temperatures increased. In other words, adjusting our "carbon emissions" may not affect global temperatures.
It would also be wise to look back at grade school science. We know that plant life thrive in high CO2 environments. Increased plant life will lead to an increase in wildlife and the problem of starving nations could be more easily solved; the more places for agriculture, the more food we can produce.
That is some of the science and it has been known for years. Global warming fanatics have disregarded it and the public has blindly accepted their false science. Why? Because we want to do what is right and presenting global warming as a result of human activity puts the moral responsibility in our hands. Inconveniently for the global warming fear mongers, the war against global warming is largely immoral and chances are, human activity is not the cause of global warming.
Amongst the most immoral propositions in the war against global warming is the limit of carbon emissions from developing nations. People there do not have access to electricity, clean running water, or any of the luxuries we take for granted. Who are we in the developed world to tell these nations that they must adhere to "green" practices when we have built our lives on a carbon emitting system? It is immoral to forcibly keep people in poverty because of scientific theories. We have no right as a person or as a nation to tell any other person or nation how to live or run their own country.
The great ethanol lie is another derivative of global warming. One third of our corn crop in the United States this year will be consumed by ethanol production. Sounds like a lot except it will account for 3 percent of our total fuel usage while driving up the price of other grains and food. This reduces the amount of food we send over to those who are starving. And if you didn't already know, it takes more fuel to produce and transport ethanol than ethanol can provide. A losing strategy that only makes it harder for people to buy food, and reduces the supply of food to the starving and needy.
This war on global warming is largely a means to steal more money from ordinary folk. The government regulations and subsidies that have sprouted from this war such as carbon taxes and subsidized initiatives like corn-based ethanol are going to make us all poorer. The carbon tax is touted as a great idea so that the evil car drivers can pay for their crimes against the planet. The income tax was also sold to us as a means to tax those evil rich people and the last I checked, the IRS robs all of us every two weeks. These taxes are merely a means for one group to steal money from another group for their own agenda. A carbon tax is not backed by scientific fact and is going to be most destructive to regular people who rely on their car to make a living.
Absolutely no legislation or government regulation as a result of global warming is going to solve the "problem" or make any of us better off. Supporting government global warming initiatives is equivalent to starving and robbing other people. The war on drugs, the war on poverty, and the war on anything is another way to ensure the problem will never be solved. The war on drugs has not reduced drug use but has instead put enormous amounts of people in jail for non-aggressive crimes and has created a black market where the truly bad are benefiting.
If the Eco-fascists have their way not only will oil be off-limits in North America to new drilling but nuclear power, clean burning coal plants and other carbon based systems will be torn down. Added to this dislocation we have the eco-fascist cult lead by all-knowing seers such as the Useless Nations and Al Gore, screaming that we must do something now to stop the earth from collapsing thanks to man-made global warming. The fact that not a shred of evidence supports the idea that humans cause global warming is hardly important to the Eco-fascist cult. It is the idea that counts. Not only that but the immoral, bloody, dirty, degenerate and rich West will have to transfer to the poorer nations enormous monies under Global Warming agreements to limit CO2 and other Greenhouse gas emissions. So shout the Eco-fascists. The costs to industry will escalate, economic growth will contract and our society will become a whole lot poorer to appease a small, government funded lobby group that is divorced from reality and a threat to our own existence.

The nonsense surrounding the global warming theory is thick and dense. But here is quick overview of why it is eco-cult garbage.

The Eco-fascist cult, lead by chief hypocrite Al Gore, believes that CO2, water vapor and Methane emissions will cause the earth to warm. This increased temperature will have catastrophic environmental impacts; such as melting ice caps, rising sea levels, ecological devastation and species reduction. Al Gore and his friends predict that without a massive reduction of about 30 % of CO2 and Methane from human induced non-renewal energy burning sources, the earth’s temperature will increase by 1-5 Degrees Celsius by 2100. Apparently this would cause a massive calamity. The culprits are rich countries who burn non-renewal fossil fuels. Developing countries including China and India are not to blame. In addition to policies and measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, nations should use other mechanisms to meet their commitments in a cost-effective way. Such mechanisms include international emissions trading, the clean development mechanism and joint implementation. In other words, don’t reduce your emissions; just pay someone else to buy their ‘credits’.

The philosophy is badly flawed and utopian – like any fascist cult. The science behind global warming is so bad that 18.000 Climatologists and Scientists have signed a petition stating that it is junk science. Politicians tell you that the scientific community is united on global warming. It isn’t. Only 800 environmental activists and government scientists support the idea. The idea that somehow the earth is not going through a natural climate cycle has never been seriously refuted. Data seems to indicate that there are regular occurrences like the little ice age and the medieval warm period in a rough 1500 year cycle. This cycle has repeated itself endlessly over the past 140.000 years. For example the earth was much warmer during the Medieval Warm Period 900-1400 AD. This warm spell ended around 1350-1400 and the temperature decreased precipitating the ‘Little Ice Age’ [1400-1900]. IPCC models can’t explain these temperature swings.

In the 20th century any temperature increase apparently occurred in two phases, during 1910-1945 and from 1975-2000. The first period is impossible to align with greenhouse emissions. The second phase can be aligned with emissions but 25 years does not constitute a meaningful long term trend, especially when between 1945-1975 there were rising emissions but no corresponding increase in temperature. Dr. Tim Patterson, professor of earth sciences at Ottawa's Carleton University, Dr. Pat Michaels, professor of climatology at the University of Virginia, Dr. John Christy, Professor and Director, Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama, and many others explain that these far more accurate and comprehensive satellite temperature sensors reveal only a very small temperature rise since measurements began in 1979. Dr. Christy says the trend is about 0.07C per decade, right at the edge of statistical significance and certainly far too small to be noticeable. As well climatologists Marcel Fligge and Sami Solanki demonstrated in the respected journal, Geophysical Research Letters, that the warming or cooling of the Earth during the past four centuries closely matches variations in the Sun's brightness.

Besides the above we have common sense. Most importantly -- Ninety five percent of CO2 emissions come from natural sources and the earth releases 210,000 mega tons each year of CO2 gas. Only about 5 % of this comes from industrial and human activity. Even if you wiped out the human race the effect on CO2 emissions would be only 5 % of the total released yearly. Why then worry about it? Then there is the catch all nature of the Eco-fascist cult. Much like other cults – everything is attributed to the cult of global warming. Cold winter? Damn that global warming. Hurricanes? Blame CO2. More ice in Antarctica’s eastern fringe? – Well that is global warming at work too.
The debate about global warming is one that will continue for many years to come. Neither side can provide substantial evidence that fully supports their position.

However, many scientists argue that what the Greens say about global warming and pollution is wrong. Professor Wilfred Beckerman, a former member of the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, was himself an enthusiastic environmentalist until he started examining the facts. He told Against Nature: "Within a few months of looking at the statistical data, I realized that most of my concerns about the environment were based on false information and scare stories."
According to Piers Corbyn, Director of Weather Action, many scientists do not accept the idea that pollution is causing global warming. Environmentalists claim that world temperatures have risen one degree Fahrenheit in the past century, but Corbyn points out that the period they take as their starting point — around 1880 — was colder than average. What's more, the timing of temperature changes does not appear to support the theory of global warming. Most of the rise came before 1940 —before human-caused emissions of 'greenhouse' gases became significant.

Read More