[ RadSafe ] Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle Swindle
Riely, Brian P.
brian.riely at ngc.com
Tue Mar 20 15:12:50 CDT 2007
Some statement from the above:
If we are in a global warming crisis today, even the most aggressive and
costly proposals for limiting industrial carbon dioxide emissions would
have a negligible effect on global climate!
Of the 186 billion tons of CO2 that enter 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 368 parts per million CO2 is a minor constituent of earth's
atmosphere-- less than 4/100ths of 1% of all gases present. Compared to
former geologic times, earth's current atmosphere is CO2- impoverished
During the last 100 years there have been two general cycles of warming
and cooling recorded in the U.S. We are currently in the second warming
cycle. Overall, U.S. temperatures show no significant warming trend over
the last 100 years (1). This has been well - established but not well -
In the 1970s concerned environmentalists like Stephen Schneider of the
National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado feared a
return to another ice age due to manmade atmospheric pollution blocking
out the sun.
Incidentally, earth's temperature and CO2 levels today have reached
levels similar to a previous interglacial cycle of 120,000 - 140,000
years ago. From beginning to end this cycle lasted about 20,000 years.
This is known as the Eemian Interglacial Period and the earth returned
to a full-fledged ice age immediately afterward.
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On
Behalf Of Kai Kaletsch
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2007 2:11 PM
To: Steven Dapra; radsafe at radlab.nl
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle Swindle
Ah, yes... I forgot about the Great Age of Volcanism from 1940 to 1970,
which blocked the sun, blew the trees off Easter Island and caused acid
rain. The puny humans had nothing to do with any of that. And besides,
it is a well known fact that acid rain does not pollute lakes, all the
dead fish do.
Maybe we can teach this to kids in history class, to 'counterbalance'
seeing An Inconvenient Truth that they were shown a few minutes earlier
in science class.
All joking aside, I am not a fan of trying to counterbalance nutty
statements from one side of the political spectrum with even nuttier
statements from the other side of the spectrum. This is not a healthy
way for society to make decisions. Eventually, we are left to choose
between 2 extreme lunatic positions.
I think we have a duty to point out inaccurate and misleading
statements, even if they support our political positions. When I go out
looking for information about the effect CO2 has on climate, I don't
appreciate being mislead about the cause and effect relationship between
CO2 and warming that the ice core data presents and I don't appreciate
being lied to about the correlation between solar activity and global
cooling. To me, it is absolutely insane that anyone can support this
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steven Dapra" <sjd at swcp.com>
To: <radsafe at radlab.nl>
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 8:18 PM
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Re: The Great Global Warming Swindle Swindle
> March 19
> If we are to believe the Independent it looks like someone is
> playing fast and loose with the truth. (Did anyone note the pro forma
> of the pejorative "right-wing" Washington think-tank to describe the
> George C Marshall Institute?) I have no views either way on the GCM
> Pollution blocking the sun -- well it's only a hypothesis.
> much pollution is produced by volcanoes and forest fires as compared
> that of humans? We humans could well be more puny than we like to
> we are.
> Steven Dapra
> sjd at swcp.com
> At 09:14 AM 3/19/07 -0600, Kai Kaletsch wrote:
>>it looks like the film The Great Global Warming Swindle [see
>>http://video.google.com:80/videoplay?docid=-4520665474899458831 ] may
>>itself be a fraudumentary [ see for example
>>I was wondering why all the data presented stopped in the 1980s. It
>>out that was when the data sets were discredited. It turns out that
>>neither solar activity or CO2 do a very good job of explaining the
>>observed after 1940 [ see
>>http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/aerosol.gif ]. One hypothesis is
>>that pollution was blocking the sun. --- So much for the assertion
>>puny humans can't possibly affect the climate.
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
> visit: http://radlab.nl/radsafe/
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
More information about the RadSafe