A reader posted a comment, which I’ve upgraded to a post (with some editing).
================================
Why there is global warming
by Harold Faulkner
People in the USA are being told by the U.S. government and media that global warming is man-made. If that is true, how can the government and media explain the high temperatures the Earth has experienced in past years when there were far fewer people?
Let us look back in the world’s history: for example, between roughly 900 AD and 1350 AD the temperatures were much higher than now. And, back then there were fewer people, no cars, no electric utilities, and no factories, etc. So what caused the Earth’s heat? Could it be a natural occurrence? The temperature graph shows the temperatures of the Earth before Christ to 2040.
In the book THE DISCOVERERS published in February 1985 by Daniel J. Boorstin, beginning in chapter 28, it goes into detail about Eric the Red, the father of Lief Ericsson, and how he discovered an island covered in green grass.
In approximately 983 AD, Eric the Red committed murder, and was banished from Iceland for three years. Eric the Red sailed 500 miles west from Iceland and discovered an island covered in GREEN grass, which he named Greenland. Greenland reminded Eric the Red of his native Norway because of the grass, game animals, and a sea full of fish. Even the air provided a harvest of birds. Eric the Red and his crew started laying out sites for farms and homesteads, as there was no sign of earlier human habitation.
When his banishment expired, Eric the Red returned to congested Iceland to gather Viking settlers. In 986, Eric the Red set sail with an emigrant fleet of twenty-five ships carrying men, women, and domestic animals. Unfortunately, only fourteen ships survived the stormy passage, which carried about four-hundred-fifty immigrants plus the farm animals. The immigrants settled on the southern-west tip and up the western coast of Greenland.
After the year 1200 AD, the Earth’s and Greenland’s climate grew colder; ice started building up on the southern tip of Greenland. Before the end of 1300AD, the Viking settlements were just a memory. You can find the above by searching Google. One link is: www.greenland.com/en/about-greenland/erik-den-roede.aspx.
The following quote you can also read about why there is global warming. This is from the book EINSTEIN’S UNIVERSE, Page 63, written by Nigel Calder in 1972, and updated in 1982:
The reckoning of planetary motions is a venerable science. Nowadays it tells us, for example, how gravity causes the ice to advance or retreat on the Earth during the ice ages. The gravity of the Moon and (to a lesser extent) of the Sun makes the Earth’s axis swivel around like a tilted spinning top. Other planets of the Solar System, especially Jupiter, Mars and Venus, influence the Earth’s tilt and the shape of its orbit, in a more-or-less cyclic fashion, with significant effects on the intensity of sunshine falling on different regions of the Earth during the various seasons. Every so often a fortunate attitude and orbit of the Earth combine to drench the ice sheets in sunshine as at the end of the most recent ice age, about ten thousand years ago. But now our relatively benign interglacial is coming to an end, as gravity continues to toy with our planet.”
The above points out that the universe is too huge and the earth is too small for the Earth’s population to have any effect on the earth’s temperature. The earth’s temperature is a function of the sun’s temperature and the effects from the many massive planets in the universe, i.e.:
The gravity of the Moon and (to a lesser extent) of the Sun makes the Earth’s axis swivel around like a tilted spinning top. Other planets of the solar system, especially Jupiter, Mars and Venus, influence the Earth’s tilt and the shape of its orbit, in a more-or-less cyclic fashion, with significant effects on the intensity of sunshine falling on different regions of the Earth during the various seasons.”
Read below about carbon dioxide, which we need in order to exist. You can find the article below at: www.geocraft.com/ice_ages.html.
FUN FACTS about CARBON DIOXIDE
– Of the 186 billion tons of carbon from CO2 that enter the Earth’s atmosphere each year from all sources, only 6 billion tons are from human activity. Approximately 90 billion tons come from biologic activity in earth’s oceans and another 90 billion tons from such sources as volcanoes and decaying land plants.
– At 380 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of the Earth’s atmosphere–less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to former geologic times, the Earth’s current atmosphere is CO2-impoverished.
– CO2 is odorless, colorless, and tasteless. Plants absorb CO2 and emit oxygen as a waste product. Humans and animals breathe oxygen and emit CO2 as a waste product. Carbon dioxide is a nutrient, not a pollutant, and all life– plants and animals alike– benefit from more of it. All life on Earth is carbon-based and CO2 is an essential ingredient. When plant-growers want to stimulate plant growth, they introduce more carbon dioxide.
– CO2 that goes into the atmosphere does not stay there, but continuously recycled by terrestrial plant life and earth’s oceans– the great retirement home for most terrestrial carbon dioxide.
– If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions and all other government proposals and taxes would have a negligible effect on global climate!
The government is lying, trying to use global warming to limit, and tax its citizens through “cap and trade” and other tax schemes for the government’s benefit. We, the people, cannot allow this to happen.
Nice article, but at the end you say “We the people cannot allow it”. Of course we should not allow it, but opposition to prevailing world view is troublesome. Although there are many who have figured this out, the vast majority have not done so and either don’t have the desire or don’t have the ability to do so.
It takes a lot to make people doubt their long term trusted information sources, especially if they have no alternative news sources, and even then it is hard to break out of group think, especially if the group does not also change.
Unfortunately, I think the scam has turned into a charade. Despite the confident words, they know it is over, but the game must continue to be played until a new enemy can be found, and then this will take the focus so the scam can die on the middle pages of the newspaper in a small paragraph.
Don’t rely on Europe to stop this. True to their colonial past, they are spear-heading the way in this junk science. The ball is clearly in the hands of the Republican Congress. It’s time for them to step up to the plate and defund the nonsense.
Europe in its’ current form is incapable of stopping this scam. It would need a complete change of européen politcians before we will see even the beginnings of a roll back.
Won’t happen in my lifetime or my childrens’ but maybe my grandchildren’s.
Like Robert (Bob) Carter use to say: “That depends”.
If somehow PDO and AMO work together and brings the temp down, then may be…..
Could be interesting here in the US – Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), an adamant opponent of AGW. climate Change, etc., is reported today likely to take over the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.
Not getting my hopes up, but I think there’s a good chance of some fireworks. Love to see Sec’y John Kerry, the administration’s go-to guy on climate change, have to face this guy.
Source: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/white-house-faces-big-foreign-policy-battles-gop-controlled-senate
Scientists say, two thirds of cancer cases are just bad luck, cannot be prevented by attempts of living healthily, just an effect of speed of cell division.
German article
http://www.focus.de/gesundheit/ratgeber/krebs/forschung/lebenswandel-hat-wenig-einfluss-zwei-drittel-aller-krebsfaelle-sind-pech_id_4378866.html
Thankfully, some system journalists have now learned to LINK BACK to their source!
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/347/6217/78
Unfortunately Dirk, Vogelstein and Tomasetti’s 2015 article that you refer to in the AAAS journal Science is paywalled (summary is free: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/347/6217/12.summary).
A 2013 preview in PNAS is found here:
“Half or more of the somatic mutations in cancers of self-renewing tissues originate prior to tumor initiation” Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Feb 5, 2013; 110(6): 1999–2004. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3568331/
From all that I’ve been able to find, most media reports seem to be pretty much on target. For once.
If you eyeball the graph it appears to show decreasing amplitude warm periods and increasing amplitude cold periods. Also, I, adn many of our current scammers , will not be alive to see the next plunge into a cold disaster.
A very minor quibble given the seriousness of the subject, but…..CO2 is not tasteless. At least, there is a taste and a “feeling” associated with CO2 gas, possibly related to some CO2 gas dissolving in saliva and triggering a taste. This is something that I interpret as CO2 having a taste. Comments?
Call it “tasty” instead of “tasteless” from now on. Or, call it a healthy food ingredient, essential for the baking of bread and brewing of beer.
“Made with pure natural CO2 produced from pristine Natural Gas of the deep Taiga wells of Siberia”
I posted my review of this article here:
http://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.com/2015/01/notrickszone-review-too-many-tricks-in.html
Spoiler alert: It didn’t do well.
Looks like you feel pissed as soon as someone talks about carbon instead of CO2 because the tonnage is lower; hey, your own friends talk about carbon footprints all the time; hypocritical much?
Do you have articles discussing the predictive skill of climate models as well, or is that over your head?
Wow! Is the word ‘civility’ in your vocabulary? Do you think being rude makes you look somehow smarter?
Here is my posting on models.
http://dialoguesonglobalwarming.blogspot.com/2014/08/lets-talk-about-climate-models.html
Keep the faith, brother. Gaia bless you.
“The abstract pretty much says it all – models have been steadily improving and are getting pretty good.”
Oh, so they hope they’re getting there? And the hindcasting was good?
Well, so they’re not there yet. They’re GETTING there. So, we currently wind-turbinize our countries following the advice of an older, brokener generation of climate models of which we already know that they run too hot, and the climate mechanics meanwhile make newer better models.
What do you say Chrissy? Shouldn’t we sit back, give the new models another 15 years to compare their output to reality, and only if they actually work, see if we need to do something? Sounds like a good idea to me. Instead of spending trillions following the advice of the older brokener models.
Yeah I know, that would be rational, and we don’t do rational when we can profit more by being panicky right?
[…] Why Has There Been #globalwarming? Because warming-cooling #climatechange are entirely normal,natural, http://t.co/4AYlmtEx7m @sharethis […]
So, your argument is to deny science, deny reality, deny the evidence and be rude too. Good luck to you.
Aww… and I thought I made a perfectly reasonable suggestion to validate that NEW and IMPROVED bunch of models you’re talking about.
BTW – First you show how FLAWLESS the old broken models are (by offsetting their prophecy by an arbitrary amount), then you explain the need for BETTER models? How does THAT rhyme?
What I did miss was any mention of the alleged positive water vapor feedback and its total absence in reality.
Oh, and BTW, you call people who don’t agree with you “deniers” in your drivel and *I* am the rude one? You guys are so full of yourself; it’s no wonder your crackpot science falls flat on its face. *NO* self awareness.
“The government is lying, trying to use global warming to limit, and tax its citizens through “cap and trade” and other tax schemes for the government’s benefit. We, the people, cannot allow this to happen.”
I fear it is more sinister than that. I fear they are Malthusian misanthropes. Carbon is life, it is not pollution. They see people as a “problem” and they see the number of people as the reason for practically all other problems. They believe that they must reduce the population.
They’re rather ineffective these days, as industrial destruction of people is frowned upon these days EVEN by proud Fabian outlets like the BBC. Long gone are the glory days of Bertrand Russell who in 1945 suggested industrial depopulation of the entirety of Russia by nuclear bombs.
http://www.punchdrunkonco2.com
The author hits the nail on the head!