Oct

False Logic: Man Made Global Warming !

The cover of the August 13, 2007 issue of Newsweek sports a picture of a very active sun with a title “Global Warming is a Hoax.” But the cover story isn’t about how the man-caused global warming hysteria is a hoax. Oh, no, it is just the opposite. It is a diatribe about how those who are skeptical about man’s influence on climate are denying the truth and are undermining the true science. Science that allegedly shows without a doubt that man is causing global warming. The article’s title, “The Truth About Denial,” provides the lead-in for the accusation that the skeptics are receiving millions of dollars (primarily from big oil, of course) to provide research disproving man-caused global warming. The author, Sharon Begley, accused Exxon alone of giving $19 million to such efforts.

Nineteen million dollars since 1990 is a lot of money – until it is compared to the whooping $50 billion that has fed the man-caused global warming hysteria. You read it correctly, that is $50 billion. Of course, Newsweek conveniently left that bit of information out of its article. The conventional wisdom that man is responsible for the cataclysmic warming over the past 100 years was bought and paid for with your tax dollars and huge foundation grants. Although $50 billion has bought big headlines and doomsday rhetoric, the actual research has shown almost no connection between earth’s CO2 and its temperature.

If you enjoyed this post share it with:

A list of related entries:

Best of Louisyagera.com 2008

Around The Web – 11 November 2007

Being in the Matrix: Who told you that your personality exist ?

Why Is The Mainstream Media Scared Of This Man?

Global Consiousness

Star Wars and False Flag attack

False Logic: Money is The Root of All Evil

False Logic: Fluoride in tap water is good for health

Categories : Video, Wellness

House

Although I appreciate skeptics for what they offer, I prefer skeptics who aren’t guilty of the same shams they distaste so much.

CO2 vs Temperature – myth? ‘Sort of’. What you failed to mention (or educate yourself about?) is that we measure the effect of ALL gases in the atmosphere and offer an approximate relative amount in terms of CO2. For instance, on a molecular scale, soot is a known absorber of infrared radiation – approximately 3000 times more so than CO2. So, for every molecule of soot, one would equate that to 3000 molecules of CO2. This is a common method for measuring relative effects, and should be used as a source for identifying particularly impactful emmissions for reduction.

So no, CO2 and temperature are not directly related. It is misquoted that, when discussing global warming, we are concerning ourselves with CO2 primarily. That is just the unit of measure, nothing else. And since we’re talking about emissions that didnt eve eist when dinosaurs roamed the earth, predicting the consequences is futile. Out of logic, we should all do something to minimize our impact.