22 December 2008

A Canadian on the Ball

Canada Free Press has published an interesting article by climatologist Dr Tim Ball. Excepts follow:

How many failed predictions, discredited assumptions and evidence of incorrect data are required before an idea loses credibility? CO2 is not causing warming or climate change. It is not a toxic substance or a pollutant...

Proponents of human induced warming and climate change told us that an increase in CO2 precedes and causes temperature increases. They were wrong. They told us the late 20th century was the warmest on record. They were wrong. They told us, using the infamous “hockey stick” graph, the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) did not exist. They were wrong. They told us global temperatures would increase through 2008 as CO2 increased. They were wrong. They told us Arctic ice would continue to decrease in area through 2008. They were wrong. They told us October 2008 was the second warmest on record. They were wrong. They told us 1998 was the warmest year on record in the US. They were wrong it was 1934. They told us current atmospheric levels of CO2 are the highest on record. They are wrong. They told us pre-industrial atmospheric levels of CO2 were approximately 100 parts per million (ppm) lower than the present 385 ppm. They are wrong. This last is critical because the claim is basic to the argument that humans are causing warming and climate change by increasing the levels of atmospheric CO2 and have throughout the Industrial era. In fact, pre-industrial CO2 levels were about the same as today, but how did they conclude they were lower?


In a paper submitted to the Hearing before the US Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski explains,


The basis of most of the IPCC conclusions on anthropogenic causes and on projections of climatic change is the assumption of low level of CO2 in the pre-industrial atmosphere. This assumption, based on glaciological studies, is false.”


Ice cores provide the historic record and data collected at Mauna Loa the recent record. Both records are drastically modified to produce a smooth continuous curve with little variability. This was necessary to confirm the evidence falsely concluded from many 19th century measures that pre-industrial levels were approximately 280 ppm and didn’t vary much. So how did they engineer the smooth curves and ignore the fact the 19th century record shows a global average of 335 ppm and considerable variability from year to year.


Most people don’t know that thousands of direct measures of atmospheric CO2 were made beginning in 1812. Scientists took the readings with calibrated instruments and precise measurements as the work of Ernst-Georg Beck has thoroughly documented. Guy Stewart Callendar ... rejected most of the records including 69% of the 19th century records and only selected certain records that established the pre-industrial level as 280 ppm. ...


...as with all known records the temperature changes before the CO2, in this record by approximately 5 years.



In another article, Ball contends:

[Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections] are based on the unproven hypothesis that human produced CO2 is causing warming and or climate change. The evidence is based solely on the output of 18 computer climate models selected by the IPCC. There are a multitude of problems including the fact that every time they run them they produce different results. They use an average of all the runs. The IPCC then take the average results of the 18 models and average them for the results in their Reports...


So they create an appearance of certainty about a human cause of warming. But what is the reality? The only place where CO2 is causing temperature increase is in the IPCC computer models. In every record of any duration for any time period in the history of the Earth, temperature increase precedes CO2 increase. So an incorrect assumption that a CO2 increase will cause temperature increase is built into the computer models. That is damaging enough, but the computer models themselves are completely inadequate to represent global climate or make any predictions about future climate. But don’t believe me. The IPCC Technical Report (“The Physical Science Basis”) produced by Working Group I and released in November 2007, says so.



And we are going to completely remake our economy on the basis of this "science"?

1 comment:

victorsleeps said...

IT'S ALL A LIE!

GLOBAL "WARMING" IS A BIG FAT LIE!

We've been told that vehicles and pollution make CO2 gas, which causes the world to warm.

Some people have even seen that film by that guy that used to be Vice President.

Well guess what?

IT'S ALL A LIE!

If you didn't know already, and that film about "Inconvenience" and the word "Truth" in there somewhere already had you convinced because "they" said that in the ice core sample, it was clearly identifiable that whenever CO2 went UP, the Earth WARMED? Remember that graph?

WELL GUESS WHAT

It's the other way around! Whenever the Earth warms, CO2 goes up..... after! After the Earth has already warmed. The Earth has been much warmer and much cooler before.

But how can this be? How did the Earth WARM?

IT'S THE SUN

There are major cycles of the sun, and this affects the oceans and the clouds dramatically. The biggest producer of CO2 is, of course, THE OCEAN.

But Why the Lies?

Reason is simple. Carbon Tax. Carbon Credit trading Schemes. Personal Carbon Credits. More Control. More regulations over your life. Carbon "taxes" are a big fat stinking lie. They all go into general revenue accounts anyway.

Now hey, I don't like pollution. But in Kyoto, there is no regulation at all for "particulate matter" which is the actual pollution part. They only care about CO2. Sure, we should have zero emission if we can. But before we do, you have to know the real truth and the real truth is, you've been lied to. Again.

Sorry for the rant on your blog Tony. It's just that the the followers of the "Cult of the Carbon Footprint" get my blood boiling. By the way that's the only thing warming around here, my blood.