Global Warming/Climate Change, Lies Having No Factual Basis
By Tony Elliott - 3 years 3 days ago
By Tony Elliott
At least three articles per day come out in the mainstream news, warning of the dangers and catastrophes that will happen in association to Global Warming/Climate Change from some so called climate scientist at various institutions throughout the world. With each article in the hundreds that have been released thus far, there are three major discrepancies that most average people do not realize which are the credibility of the scientists themselves, the institutions making the claims and the evidence of the claims themselves.
First of all, most so called climate scientists in reality. aren't really qualified to make claims related to meteorology, climate, or geophysical science. In addition to this, most of the establishments related to GW/CC end up being environmental organizations passing themselves off as climate change institutions.
One recent article warning of rising seas because of GW/CC is based on a study by Will Steffen. This is a classic example of how the public is misled into believing in the myth. First, this man has no formal education in meteorology or climate science. Instead, he is a PhD in Chemical Engineering and has written several published papers on climate change. Yet, we are supposed to believe, just because he has a PhD in Chemical Engineering that he is an expert in the field of meteorology. The institution Will Steffen is primarily associated with is the
Climate Change Institute at the Australian National University, which gives the impression to the reader that it is an organization dedicated to the study of climate. However, this part of the university deals with the study of the environment rather than actual weather and climate curriculum. Thus, here we have an environmentalist with a PhD unrelated to climate and weather, passing himself off as a climate scientist.
The same is found with all organizations promoting the GW/CC lie. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and all other United Nations organizations dealing with climate science are staffed from the top down with individuals who have no degree in meteorology or climatology. Both the WMO and the IPCC are headed by men who have PhDs in fields entirely unrelated to weather and climate. For example, David Grimes, President of the WMO is only an honorary meteorologist. The same goes with the staff at these organizations as well, as most are PhDs in unrelated fields having nothing to do with weather or climate and some are only environmental activists having no science degree at all. So, credibility of the GW/CC machine itself simply doesn't exist.
Christina Figueres, who heads all climate related organizations at the UN, is only an economics major with no education in meteorology or climate science. Yet, we are supposed to believe in GW/CC because, as Al Gore puts it, the majority of climate scientists around the world agree that GW/CC is real. The only problem with this statement is there really isn't a majority of climate scientists proclaiming GW/CC as fact, only what amounts to Enviroclowns masquerading as climate scientists agreeing with it. Most of the real meteorologists and climate scientists do not believe in the hype, simply because the evidence doesn't exist.
The claim of sea levels rising has been replaced with predictions of rising seas. This is because there hasn't been any increase in sea levels officially recorded anywhere. Since humanity has become technologically advanced enough to take and keep accurate records of ocean levels, no rise has been recorded. Any claim of seas having risen beyond the 1900's to the 1700's cannot be used since the technology to record such rises did not exist before this time. The only cases where ocean levels rises have been recorded in the past hundred years were flooded coastal areas of the world, resulting from either storm surges or Tsunami activity.
Claims of melting glaciers can also be dismissed because as with natural changes in weather and climate the world's glaciers will vary with time. While some will be in a decline, others will be increasing; this is part of a natural cycle and it has been going on for thousands of years.
The ice at both poles currently have more ice in thickness and area than 10 years ago. Polar ice will also vary over time as was seen in the late 1950's and early 1960's, when the US and the USSR played cat and mouse games at the north pole, with submarine surfaces in areas normally too thick for such feats. Today, this would be impossible.
The hottest decade from 2000 to 2010, as claimed by the climate propagandists had to be revised since actual records showed the 1930's to be the hottest ever actually scientifically recorded. The various claims for the hottest year on record anywhere from 1998 to 2010, depending on what idiot made the claim, had to also be revised because actual recorded temperatures showed 1934 to be the hottest ever. These types of discrepancies can be expected when the climate clowns use their computer models manipulated to show a desired outcome rather than actual physical data.
The whole CO2 scam is totally without any basis at all, since the actual amount of CO2 in the earth's atmosphere is only at less than 1% of 1% and hasn't actually increased at all even with the rise of industry over the last 150 years. The reason the false climate experts at the UN can claim a substantial rise in CO2 is because of the areas of the world where CO2 readings are taken. Readings are recorded and monitored at stations in or near natural CO2 producing areas, such as near volcanoes, coastal areas where CO2 producing sea mounts exist and in areas near active fault zones. Thus, higher than normal CO2 amounts are recorded, giving the impression that the overall amounts are higher than what they actually are.
I could go on filling a book's worth of examples of the lies told to the world by these snake oil sales individuals. Come to think of it? I have already filled a book with examples of these lies, where I aptly named these con artists as Enviroclowns, but the bottom line is not a single claim made by them has any physical proof to back it up.
GW/CC has nothing to do with climate or weather but all to do with politics and the financial gain of those who stand to benefit from green investments. What better an investment could they have than one where the government forces the use of a green scheme idea or product on the public? The end result would guarantee a healthy financial gain, regardless of whether it really works or not for the green investor.
Wind farms are a prime example of an idea that has no physical product. From the manufacturing of the wind turbines themselves and their internal mechanisms, they have already used more fossil fuels at the factory than they will ever generate in electricity during their lifetime. There are also the fossil fuels used for their transportation from factory to field.
The grid electricity necessary for maintaining them during long periods of calm winds, start ups when the wind is favorable, and shut downs when the wind is too high automatically keeps them at a large deficit in ever producing enough electricity to go above that already used. Currently, the wind industry admits that all wind farms only generate less than 1% of the total amount of electricity used in the US. The wind industry is only an idea, since there is no product to market.
Solar power is also very similar to the wind industry in the fact that no marketable product really exists. The manufacture of batteries necessary for electricity storage and other equipment have already used more fossil fuel than will ever be produced during the entire life of the product. Realistically, as it is now, we are being taxed because of government subsidies and paying much higher electrical bills because wind and solar generated electricity costs so much more than traditional grid power. When in fact, these two energy sources are not sources of electricity production at all but just ideas of production at an infantile stage of development.
As with all the GW/CC nonsense, not a single claim can be substantiated as actual physical proof. Only assumptions and predictions made with manipulated computer models and deliberately corrupted data exist. Actual meteorological records and geophysical records destroy any credibility of everything ever said by the GW/CC shysters.