(exerpts from an artical i had lying around)
Quotes from the article: “Global Warming? Hot Air!” by John Loeffler
In 1992, over 400 scientists from around the world signed the Heidelberg Appeal prior
to the UNCED conference in Rio [the “Earth Summit”]. They expressed their doubts about
global warming and asked the delegates not to bind the world to any radical treaties based on
global warming. Today scientists agreeing with the Heidelberg Appeal number over 4,000!
The UN’s IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] report on climate
change put together by atmospheric scientists meeting in Bonn, Germany [in 1996] had
significant sections by atmospheric scientists who said there is not enough data to suggest
that man is radically altering the temperature on the planet.
When the report was published, however, the United Nations had systematically
removed that information in over a dozen pages to eliminate the appearance of disagreement.
[some scientific perspective from same article]
From about 800 AD to 1200 AD, the earth’s average climate was warmer than it is
today — at least 1ºC warmer — the same amount everyone is panicked about. It was the
period when Vikings crossed the oceans in open boats without cabins and were able to settle
and raise crops in Greenland, because it wasn’t covered with a sheet of ice. Note that the
oceans didn’t flood the continents. Scientists refer to this period of time as the “climactic
optimum” — an optimum and not a disaster! [warmer than it is now]
From 1200 AD onward, the earth began to cool. The period between 1450 and 1850 is
the period scientists refer to as the “little ice age.” The Vikings had to abandon Greenland
since it became covered with perpetual ice.
By 1850, the cooling cycle reversed and the earth began warming to the temperature
norms we see today. It is clear the earth passes through normal long-term cycles, attributed to
sunspot cycles and other factors. Our current fluctuations are normal variations not caused by
human activity.
Not all scientists agree on global warming
1. Predictions of global warming are based on computer climate modeling, a branch of
science still in its infancy. The empirical evidence of actual measurements of Earth's
temperature shows no man-made warming trend. In fact, over the past two decades,
when CO2 levels have been at their highest, global average temperatures have actually
cooled slightly.
2. A chart from book, The True State of the Planet, published 1995. Available at
Chesterfield Central Library. Book is full of very interesting scientific data that refutes
many of the popular claims. Chart: Satellite-Based Monthly Global Temperatures,
January 1979 to April 1994
a. solid line shows temperature increase predicted by those claiming global
warming
b. dashed line shows actual trend -- decrease in average global temperature, 1979
to 1994, based on satellite measurements; same period during which CO2
emissions increased significantly. according to people’s claims, increased CO2
supposedly will increase the earth’s temperature; in reality the opposite has
happened
3. Petition signed by over 18,000 American scientists:
a. We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement
that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar
proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the
environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the
health and welfare of mankind.
b. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide,
methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable
future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of
the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that
increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon
the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
. [Note: this petition signed by over 18,000 American scientists, many with
advanced degrees in their fields; these people know what they’re talking about]
4. I saw a program on Discovery Channel a few months ago that briefly showed a chart of
data collected at weather station in Ireland, beginning over 200 years ago, I think.
Chart plotted average annual temperature in Ireland and plotted sunspot activity levels.
Direct correlation. Sunspot cycle is 11 years long; every peak in sunspot activity
coincided with peak in average temperature. Gradual increase in sunspot activity over
duration of the records was reflected by corresponding increase in average temperature.
I’ve searched Internet and library shelves: widespread agreement that sunspot activity
directly affects earth’s temperature, but cannot find that data or chart.
5. Another program on Discovery Channel about global warming declared the 1990s the
hottest decade on record in over 900 years. Sounds alarming until you think what that
means: 900 years ago there was at least one decade that was hotter than 1990s! You
have to listen to what people say, in some cases read between the lines.
6. You’re familiar with theories about ice ages based on geological evidence. In the most
recent major ice age, polar ice cap extended into America’s central plains, as far as
Virginia on east coast; northern half of Europe was under ice. Obviously, the earth
warmed and ice cap retreated; not a result of man’s actions. It’s a natural cycle for
earth’s temperature to swing up or down.
7. Another claim relates to the disastrous effects of increased CO2 levels on plants and
animals. Plants consume CO2 and produce oxygen as they grow. Several years ago,
studying hydroponics and greenhouses: in Israel, test performed in a sealed
greenhouse: doubled amount of CO2 in the greenhouse and the plants grew at record
rates and produced record amounts of fruit, as you would expect. Conclusion:
increased CO2 levels would not be harmful to plants as claimed; actually beneficial,
makes plants healthier and more productive.
--Basically i believe that we do have some negative affect on the atmosphere but the evidence as to how great this is is inconclusive.
Hey...here's another one...Most modern vehicle produce less than half of the greenhouse gases than the ones built 30 years ago, but a properly tuned 30 year old vehicle produces less greenhouse gases than an improperly tuned new vehicle.
