Sunday, June 22, 2008

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Video here.

Two of the best books on the environment: Trashing the Planet
Environmental Overkill


  1. Best documentary by far that I ever see related to global warming. Ty Mike!

  2. Good to have a counterpoint to any theories...but it is a stretch to imagine that melting polar caps & glaciers that haven't melted for thousands of years, now all of a sudden are due to natural causes.

    Sorry Mike, oddly enough, I totally buy you & Richard's lunar and Mars theories, but not this counterpoint on global warming's causes.

  3. First of all, these opinions are not Richard's, they're mine, but facts are facts.

    Glaciers and ice caps grow and receede all the time. It just depends on how far back you want to look. There are plenty of times in Earth's geological history where ice caps and glaciers were smaller than they are today, and plenty of times where they were much, much bigger. There have been numerous occasions when there was far more Co2 in the atmosphere than there is today, and there was no runaway Greenhouse Effect from it. None of these changes had anything to do with human activity, just as none of the climate changes going on today (assuming there are any, which I highly doubt) have anything to do with human activity.

    There is an anti-human lobby entrenched in the left-wing radical 60's element of the Democrat party which chooses to believe that people are evil. I don't. Not only that, I don't hold opinons that can't be backed up by facts, and on this question, there just aren't any facts to back up global warming.

    To me, the popularity of global warming is an excellent example of how we don't teach critical thinking skills in schools anymore.

  4. On the Lunar x-prize:

    It's possible, if they don't go splat!

    Remember the Al Worden quote from the book? If they are high enough, they may not even know what they are looking at.

  5. Yes, I recall the quote you mentioned. I am curious if they will get close enough.

    One thing that bothers me is public perception, which apparently is so easy to control: 1) when I bought Dark Mission, Barnes & Noble put it in the the "New Age" Section. C'mon, folks. This is about the most objective analysis of photographic evidence and lunar mission facts that I've found. Nice spin, B&N. 2) the sandbox images and spins thereof. If anyone read Hoagland's book about the face, they'd already know the mathematical synchronicities in the area alone were enough prove artificiality - regardless of whether the face was just that.

  6. I had this same discussion with a coworker and told him that "global warming" and Al Gore were full of it. Right away the discussion turned into "how could you not be concerned about the planet!?!?!"

    I'm 100% for ecology and all that, but not when it's misguided and misdirected.

    How about that sea of plastic garbage bigger than the US floating in the Pacific? Nobody is doing crapola about that!!! Oh wait, Poland Spring did do something, they use less plastic per bottle. BFD!!!

  7. Alright---"Global Warming"---

    Warming, shmarming....

    FACT #1: It was a lousy "1/2 degree" increase
    that took place nearly TEN YEARS AGO. And
    not only that, but THE DATA IS DISPUTED.

    FACT #2: The global temperature has since
    DROPPED SEVERAL DEGREES. Hence it is now
    COLDER than it was before. ("Global Cooling,"

    FACT #3: These events are being driven by
    THE SUNSPOT CYCLE. That includes planetary

    FACT #4: These same events have occured
    (UFO emissions? Alien SUVs?)

    FACT #5: I PERSONALLY ran the numbers
    on CO2, etc., and "Man's contribution" does
    not even amount to a ROUNDING ERROR!!!
    I even included your BREATHING for the entire
    world population. (Did you know that the
    average person uses 8 pounds of oxygen per
    24 hours?)

    I treated the Earth's atmosphere as a known
    gaseous solution for which there was a
    determination of total mass, etc.

    Do you know what a "teramole" is? *Hmmm?*
    DO YOU?

    Can you say PV=nRT?

    Can you say T = k [Q/m]?

    Have you determined the mass of the atmosphere?

    Can you say "differentiate with respect
    to time?"

    I'm talking to you, David, and you, Arian....

    I'm Chief Project Scientist for a high-tech
    startup company. I can run my own numbers.
    I don't have to listen to somebody else's B.S.
    and wonder if they know what they're talking

    I can tell you real quick.

    I state unequivocally, on the record, and
    for posterity (or perhaps "posteriority," in
    case the whole world is nothing but a bunch
    of asses anymore), that AL GORE'S "GLOBAL

    There. I'm okay now, Mike...I think I've
    vented enough....


    Hathor - The Calm in my Storm....


    P.S.: Oh, Mike---I hate to do it to you,
    I mean, right here on your own blog and
    everything, but---

    (1) greenhouses contain plants.
    (2) plants breathe CO2.
    (3) hence, CO2 is a "greenhouse gas."

    But that's a GOOD thing. More CO2 (inhaled
    by the plants) means MORE OXYGEN (exhaled
    for our use, and our furry friends).



    P.P.S.: The Arctic ice sheets have refrozen,
    and the Antarctic ice shelf has extended
    well beyond it's "original" known size....

    We're clearly entering another "little ice age."

    Such ice ages are ALWAYS preceded by a
    brief upsurge in temperature, historically.

    Moreover, they track the sunspot cycles to
    perfection (tree ring data).

    So much for Al Gore.


  8. David 19.5,

    If there is no global warming taking place, and if the climate changes we do see are mild and natural, where is the security risk?

    Again, this is popular with the democrats because they can use it as an excuse to intrude more and more on our personal lives and take control of more and more of the money our economy generates.

  9. Well, on Amazon a bunch of wankers have put the book in the category "Science Fiction\Fantasy."

    What else are they going to do? They certainly can't debate on the facts. They'll lose.

  10. Okay everybody, let's tone down the rhetoric.

  11. I meant in the context of Asimov's "greehouse effect."

    And let's face it, the principle greehouse factor in greenhouses isn't the Co2, it's the glass enclosure.

  12. And let's face it, the principal greenhouse factor in greenhouses isn't the Co2, it's the glass enclosure.

    Oh, okay.

    "Greenhouse glasses"....



    Hathor - The very definition of Good Looking


  13. Well, at least you got us motivated to speak out about something controversial. didn't know global warming would dominate a blog predominately concerning extraterrestrial archeology - but that is cool.

  14. Deleted my previous post because I can't be bothered with this argument. I was hoping (vainly it seems) for sensible debate.

    Oh for the record - I too am a scientist, and I speak to lots of other scientists including atmospheric chemists, atmospheric physicists and climatologists. They ALL have differing opinions so marsandro needs to get over him or her self, and get out of his or her limited little world. Sure you can run your own numbers but if you are only dealing with the wrong data set you will get nothing but crap. What makes you better than any other of the scientists out there except your own ego?

    And we don't all live and work in the blinkered US ... some of us can see changes that need to be addressed.

  15. To provide a short answer to what the risk is for climate change - I don't know. Evidently the Pentagon does?

  16. David,

    There was absolutly nothing unusual about Katrina, other than it happened to hit New Orleans, which hadn't taken a direct hit in half a century or so. In fact, it's now known that when it hit land, it was only a category three. The problem was caused by the fact that the corrupt local governments used Federal money they were given to shore up the levies on graft, favors and anything else they could think of. It had nothing to do with Global Warming.

    And there have been exactly (cough cough) zero major hurricanes since then.

  17. My cough-laden Katrina comments were focused at the federal government's planning capabilities, not meant to augment hurricane frequency arguments. You do bring out an excellent point about local gov't corruption too.

    I also have heard from some N.O. residents who had the foresight to move out a week before it hit, that most of the ones who stayed did so in hopes of looting (not my words, theirs).

    Incidentally, there have been zero F-5 tornadoes here in Okla. since we got hit with one in our front yard here a few years back, but that doesn't make me feel any safer.

    :) cough cough! Hey - who else will play devil's advocate here but me? Don't take me too seriously - I just have fun debating.

  18. I was about to write something else, but just heard a John McCain commercial talking about his strong stance on greenhouse gasses, so apparently he's trying to out-liberal the liberals. (or distance himself from Bush)

    We could tie this "greenhouse" thing back to the book by thinking about the glass domes on the moon....

    Most green plants that do photosynthesis (take in Carbon Dioxide from the air and give off oxygen) also do a thing called "plant respiration" at night, where they take in oxygen from the air and give off carbon dioxide, although the sum of co2 given off is less than that taken in. (I learned that in high school biology class back during the Apollo program...)

    BTW what ever happened to that "great Biosphere II" experiment in Arizona?...


  19. Gort said:
    Most green plants that do photosynthesis (take in Carbon Dioxide from the air and give off oxygen) also do a thing called "plant respiration" at night, where they take in oxygen from the air and give off carbon dioxide, although the sum of co2 given off is less than that taken in.

    Am I wrong in this...
    ...but the carbon dioxide given of from automotive use - is in FACT BAD for plants - where is carbon dioxide from cow farts is good?

    Anyone have a distinction? ;-)


  20. I'd love to get a close-up shot of the glass structures on the moon. Don't know much about the Arizona biosphere and what it produced.

  21. "Deleted my previous post because I can't be bothered with this argument. I was hoping (vainly it seems) for sensible debate."

    Expat! You're back! :-))

    Damn clever disguise.... ;-))

    (Or it may simply be another self-righteous
    Brit...oh, where DO they all come from...oh,
    that's right: Brittain!)

    Must be the blinkers.... X-))))


    Hathor - You're just jealous of her!


    P.S.: There's been an abrupt increase in the
    number of primitives around here following
    your last post. Is it all those hominids you've
    been adding? X-))))


  22. The aliens must have come across the effects solor progression and they must have had a method of dealing with them. So we might want to take a look at what else is on the moon that could be helpful, if not designed to deal with this minor problem(by their standards). Remember how much the moon seems a part in hyper D reality on this planet; what do you want to bet they built the moon for more then just one purpose?

  23. t'zairis,

    I read that article about the "recent findings" about glass. They do talk about glass metals, but I wonder if it is possible for the reverse to be true (ie transparent aluminum). Food for thought.

  24. Starborne--

    Yes, they do hint very discreetly at transparent metallic glasses in the first paragraph of the article, where Wonder Woman's plane is mentioned. They don't want to come right out and say, 'Yeah, transparent glassy stuff that's stronger than steel is entirely possible', because they certainly don't want to hand lunar dome advocates the equivalent of a smoking gun.

    What just keeps cracking me up with all this stuff I run across is that it almost-seamlessly ties right in with what's been discussed for years at Enterprise Mission. I have to say that I personally don't buy the 'aw, shucks, we just now figured out we can make really super-strong metallic glasses all by our little wee selves' tone of the article. The acknowledgment that something like metallic glass is a real, live technology is as disingenuous-cum-obvious as lime-green day-glo lip-gloss on a hooker, if you will pardon the turn of phrase.

    If there are already metallic glass golf club shafts out there (and what a waste of state-of-the-art tech THAT is when we could be building Tom Corbett-style no-upkeep space-age houses for ourselves out of the stuff), then we've had knowledge of the substances and production techniques for a good while, I'm sure.



  25. tzairis said

    "....The bald fact is that the Martian icecaps are melting at near-same rates to the ones on Earth. If we posit that human activity alone is responsible for all climate warming, then who the heck is causing the changes on Mars? How is it happening when there are no car-choked freeways or coal-burning factories there? It is a serious question in need of a serious answer."

    My point exactly...strangely enough marsandro could not really grasp the notion of that :-) to busy spewing formalae with a Hathor-maiden running through his head :-)I guess

    No offence chummy..but next time take "a second longer" while reading before leaping of and fire at random :-)

  26. Hi gort,

    Re: BTW what ever happened to that "great
    Biosphere II" experiment in Arizona?...

    It went bust. They had problems with a drop
    in the oxygen level among other things as I
    recall from news stories at the time.

    Otherwise, it was fairly successful and met
    most of its objectives well enough.

    There's an article on it at WikiPedia:

    Aren't web searches wonderful....


    Hathor - The wind in my sails


  27. marsandro,

    Thanks for the articles on transparent alluminum! It makes one wonder what Roddeberry knew and when he knew it. It's either that or the military is full of trekkies. ;)

  28. What scientists don't understand is that political agendas control what they study, and how they come to their conclusions. Both left and right. By keeping them focused on what causes climate change, it feeds their agendas. It also doesn't solve the problems that unfold until it is too late.

  29. Hi David,

    That's why we have the *Scientific Method*
    for a guideline.

    Funny how so few people can even recite the
    steps involved....

    I have a saying:

    "The First Duty of Science is OBSERVATION."

    That, however, is where the fun begins---

    "If the observations don't fit the theory,
    then the observations must be disposed of."

    Academe is SHOT THROUGH with that kind of

    Talk about making manipulation and control

    Everybody has an agenda...and you end up
    with agendas within agendas....

    Throw in a little (or even a lot of) special
    interest money, and---voila!---

    Finally, all you have for "Science" is just
    one big mess.

    And when people don't know the Science
    themselves, they're suckers for every self
    serving b.s. artist that comes along---such
    as Al Gore.


    Hathor - setting the Wrongs back to Right


  30. All of which reminds me, "arianrhod,"

    Oh for the record - I too am a scientist,

    Oh, hooray for you. ZOOLOGY, I see....

    and I speak to lots of other scientists including atmospheric chemists, atmospheric physicists and climatologists.

    An education in itself, no doubt.

    They ALL have differing opinions so
    marsandro needs to get over him or her self,
    and get out of his or her limited little world.

    *Their* uncertaintly does not reflect on
    *me* one way or the other. Many of them are
    just agenda-ridden schmucks, as the media
    has shown us.

    Sure you can run your own numbers but if
    you are only dealing with the wrong data set you will get nothing but crap.

    You mean like, maybe the atmosphereic data
    for some other planet? I was using Earth's.

    1 - The composition of Earth's atmosphere is
    absolutely determinate.
    2 - The partial pressures of the gaseous
    components are absolutely determinate.
    3 - The pressure at MSL (that's Mean Sea
    Level) is absolutely determinate.
    4 - The pressure versus altitude is absolutely
    5 - The solar flux is measured 24/7 and is
    absolutely determinate.
    6 - Earth's man/animal/plant population is
    absolutely determinate.
    7 - Respiration rates across the board are
    absolutely determinate.
    8 - Man's industrial operations are absolutely

    And the physical laws don't bend even for
    you, arianrhod.

    "Wrong data set?" Yeah. Right.

    All I did was total up the CO2 counts and
    compare them to the "claims" of the "global
    warming" crowd. Conclusion? Their claims
    are absolute b.s.

    Besides---it's already known AND published
    that CO2 increases FOLLOW the historical
    increases in global temperature, rather than
    preceding them.

    What makes you better than any other of the scientists out there except your own ego?

    Well, let's see...:

    clarity, conciseness, completeness,
    attention to detail...and, of course, a
    strict adherence to the Scientific Method.

    Not to mention I don't have any tie-ins to
    money-driven agendas like those of one
    Al Gore, or any of his cronies....

    There's a term for my position. It's called

    Have a nice day, arianrhod.


    Hathor - Her eyes FLASH in the night


  31. Sometimes analysis is paralysis. It is probably too late to assess who, when and why. Rather, what? For how long? What are some relatively immediate bottom lines here...? To the left I'd say, don't be alarmist. The the right I'd say, don't ignore it completely.

    Seems there may possibly be a largely ice-free North Pole in the first half of the 21st Century. [rebuttable] That also means newly available oil drilling areas where many countries will/are claim(ing) as theirs...i.e. Russia planting a flag at the bottom of the ocean in a prime oil area. That is, yes, assuming that the evidence is genuine. You've seen the satellite images though.

  32. Most of the available satellite images are
    MONTHS out of date (if not years).

    According to A Friend:
    A couple years ago someone (China ?) attacked our earth imaging satellites and now the only Landsat satellites still producing up to date images are older ones with circa 1984 or earlier resolution. In order to get high resolution sat pictures of recent origin, one must purchase images from India, Brazil, or elsewhare.

    This was passed on to me from a highly qualified professional satellite image user...

    I hope he is wrong about this...


  33. That's a good insight - particularly that there may be a tendency for media to focus on one particular region.

    Is there any credibility, do you think, to the lack of sun flare activity I've heard of that could bring a cooling trend (another minor ice age like in medieval times I believe)?

  34. Well, there is the story that came out today about the Heliosheath being bent out of shape from what was previously known (or assumed).

    This is due to the gasses and magnetic fields of interstellar space squashing the shape of the heliosphere. If what folks are saying is correct about the ecliptic planes of the solar system and the galaxy aligning by 2012, that could have a big effect on our highly magnetic sun.

  35. yoohoo david 19.5...said

    ""Northern winters became ferocious: in particular, the rout of Napoleon's Grand Army during the retreat from Moscow in 1812 was at least partly due to the lack of sunspots.""

    really :-) It was due to the fact that Napoleon Buonaparte lost the campaign against his friend and foe Alexander I, by leaving his Grande Armee into the claws of a logistic nightmare and a Russian winter after he hastely fled to France.

    By Jove!!:-) have we already come so far that historical wars supposedly where won or lost due to sunspots?? Pathetic to coin an understatement.

  36. Yo D-19.5,

    The Wilkins Ice Sheet is recipient of some
    warm ocean currents that other Earth changes
    have routed there.

    There's also a 200-year warm-current cycle in
    Earth's oceans that the phytoplankton tend to
    follow, which is why there is a precipitous
    drop in atmosphereic O2 levels.

    Of course, "trash islands" floating on the
    ocean surfaces don't help matters, but they
    are not the controlling factors in the O2
    produced reaching the surface.

    The Earth's climate is sun-driven. And every
    so often, the Sun goes bonkers.

    Watch out for Solar Cycle's gonna
    be a doozy.


    Hathor - Sun bathing at Wreck Beach


    P.S.: I think Mike covered the other points
    quite nicely. Thank you, Sir Mike!


  37. Yo Dave,

    "The United States is the only major industrial nation to reject the Kyoto Protocol that mandates cuts in carbon emissions, with Bush arguing that it is unfair as it makes no demands of fast-growing emerging economies."

    Al Gore, busted.

    Hear, hear!

    (Nice to see you agree!)


    Hathor - Balancing the balances


    P.S.: My point? And how did Al Gore get
    into it?

    Simple---he ain't got no "buds" in China---
    which is probably why he went there recently.
    (Same story in India.)

    I hear he came back well
    as empty-headed!

    The U.S. is the only place on Earth where he
    can play his "carbon credits" game! Oh, you
    know---his latest money scam!


  38. re: my previous post about Landsat
    (June 30, 2008 11:16 PM):

    I spoke with my friend on Sunday, July 6, 2008, and he said the U. S. Landsat cameras with better-than 1984-era resolution are all still out of order.

    He uses high resolution satellite images to analyse and document such things as crop damage from adjacent landowners' mis-application of herbicides and pesticides, and is currently required to purchase contemporary images from foreign spsce entities.



Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.