Forums

100 reasons why climate change is natural and not man-made

100 reasons why climate change is natural and not man-made

100 reasons why climate change is natural and not man-made

HERE are the 100 reasons, released in a dossier issued by the European Foundation, why climate change is natural and not man-made:
1) There is “no real scientific proof” that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man’s activity.

2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 percent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the earth during geological history.

3) Warmer periods of the Earth’s history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

4) After World War II, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

5) Throughout the Earth’s history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher - more than ten times as high.

6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.

7) The 0.7°C increase in the average global temperature over the last hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

8) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favorable reviewers not the 4,000 usually cited.

9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists - in a scandal known as “Climate-gate” - suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming

10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.

11) Politicians and activists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming but sea levels rates have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 ago

12) Philip Stott, Emeritus Professor of Biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London says climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2 or clouds

13) Peter Lilley MP said last month that,
“fewer people in Britain than in any other country believe in the importance of global warming. That is despite the fact that our Government and our political class - predominantly - are more committed to it than their counterparts in any other country in the world”.
14) In pursuit of the global warming rhetoric, wind farms will do very little to nothing to reduce CO2 emissions

15) Professor Plimer, Professor of Geology and Earth Sciences at the University of Adelaide, stated that the idea of taking a single trace gas in the atmosphere, accusing it and finding it guilty of total responsibility for climate change, is an “absurdity”

16) A Harvard University astrophysicist and geophysicist, Willie Soon, said he is “embarrassed and puzzled” by the shallow science in papers that support the proposition that the earth faces a climate crisis caused by global warming.

17) The science of what determines the earth’s temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.

18) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas, unlike water vapour which is tied to climate concerns, and which we can’t even pretend to control

19) A petition by scientists trying to tell the world that the political and media portrayal of global warming is false was put forward in the Heidelberg Appeal in 1992. Today, more than 4,000 signatories, including 72 Nobel Prize winners, from 106 countries have signed it.

20) It is claimed the average global temperature increased at a dangerously fast rate in the 20th century but the recent rate of average global temperature rise has been between 1 and 2 degrees C per century - within natural rates

21) Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski, Chairman of the Scientific Council of the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, Poland says the earth’s temperature has more to do with cloud cover and water vapor than CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

22) There is strong evidence from solar studies which suggests that the Earth’s current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades

23) It is myth that receding glaciers are proof of global warming as glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for many centuries

24) It is a falsehood that the earth’s poles are warming because that is natural variation and while the western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer we also see that the Eastern Arctic and Greenland are getting colder

25) The IPCC claims climate driven “impacts on biodiversity are significant and of key relevance” but those claims are simply not supported by scientific research

26) The IPCC threat of climate change to the world’s species does not make sense as wild species are at least one million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles

27) Research goes strongly against claims that CO2-induced global warming would cause catastrophic disintegration of the Greenland and Antarctic Ice Sheets.

28) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels are our best hope of raising crop yields to feed an ever-growing population

29) The biggest climate change ever experienced on earth took place around 700 million years ago

30) The slight increase in temperature which has been observed since 1900 is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term natural climate cycles

31) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels of some so-called “greenhouse gases” may be contributing to higher oxygen levels and global cooling, not warming

32) Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures

33) Today’s CO2 concentration of around 385 ppm is very low compared to most of the earth’s history - we actually live in a carbon-deficient atmosphere

34) It is a myth that CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas because greenhouse gases form about 3% of the atmosphere by volume, and CO2 constitutes about 0.037% of the atmosphere

35) It is a myth that computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming because computer models can be made to “verify” anything

36) There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes

37) One statement deleted from a UN report in 1996 stated that “none of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases”

38) The world “warmed” by 0.07 +/- 0.07 degrees C from 1999 to 2008, not the 0.20 degrees C expected by the IPCC

39) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change says “it is likely that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense” but there has been no increase in the intensity or frequency of tropical cyclones globally

40) Rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere can be shown not only to have a negligible effect on the Earth’s many ecosystems, but in some cases to be a positive help to many organisms

41) Researchers who compare and contrast climate change impact on civilizations found warm periods are beneficial to mankind and cold periods harmful

42) The Met Office asserts we are in the hottest decade since records began but this is precisely what the world should expect if the climate is cyclical

43) Rising CO2 levels increase plant growth and make plants more resistant to drought and pests

44) The historical increase in the air’s CO2 content has improved human nutrition by raising crop yields during the past 150 years

45) The increase of the air’s CO2 content has probably helped lengthen human lifespans since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution

46) The IPCC alleges that “climate change currently contributes to the global burden of disease and premature deaths” but the evidence shows that higher temperatures and rising CO2 levels has helped global populations

47) In May of 2004, the Russian Academy of Sciences published a report concluding that the Kyoto Protocol has no scientific grounding at all.

48) The “Climate-gate” scandal pointed to a expensive public campaign of disinformation and the denigration of scientists who opposed the belief that CO2 emissions were causing climate change

49) The head of Britain’s climate change watchdog has predicted households will need to spend up to £15,000 on a full energy efficiency makeover if the Government is to meet its ambitious targets for cutting carbon emissions.

50) Wind power is unlikely to be the answer to our energy needs. The wind power industry argues that there are “no direct subsidies” but it involves a total subsidy of as much as £60 per MWh which falls directly on electricity consumers. This burden will grow in line with attempts to achieve Wind power targets, according to a recent OFGEM report.

51) Wind farms are not an efficient way to produce energy. The British Wind Energy Association (BWEA) accepts a figure of 75 per cent back-up power is required.

52) Global temperatures are below the low end of IPCC predictions not at “at the top end of IPCC estimates”

53) Climate alarmists have raised the concern over acidification of the oceans but Tom Segalstad from Oslo University in Norway , and others, have noted that the composition of ocean water - including CO2, calcium, and water - can act as a buffering agent in the acidification of the oceans.

54) The UN’s IPCC computer models of human-caused global warming predict the emergence of a “hotspot” in the upper troposphere over the tropics. Former researcher in the Australian Department of Climate Change, David Evans, said there is no evidence of such a hotspot

55) The argument that climate change is a of result of global warming caused by human activity is the argument of flat Earthers.

56) The manner in which US President Barack Obama sidestepped Congress to order emission cuts shows how undemocratic and irrational the entire international decision-making process has become with regards to emission-target setting.

57) William Kininmonth, a former head of the National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological Organization, wrote,
“the likely extent of global temperature rise from a doubling of CO2 is less than 1°C. Such warming is well within the envelope of variation experienced during the past 10,000 years and insignificant in the context of glacial cycles during the past million years, when Earth has been predominantly very cold and covered by extensive ice sheets.”
58) Canada has shown the world targets derived from the existing Kyoto commitments were always unrealistic and did not work for the country.

59) In the lead up to the Copenhagen summit, David Davis MP said of previous climate summits, at Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and Kyoto in 1997 that many had promised greater cuts, but “neither happened”, but we are continuing along the same lines.

60) The UK ’s environmental policy has a long-term price tag of about £55 billion, before taking into account the impact on its economic growth.

61) The UN’s panel on climate change warned that Himalayan glaciers could melt to a fifth of current levels by 2035. J. Graham Cogley a professor at Ontario Trent University, claims this inaccurate stating the UN authors got the date from an earlier report wrong by more than 300 years.

62) Under existing Kyoto obligations the EU has attempted to claim success, while actually increasing emissions by 13 per cent, according to Lord Lawson. In addition the EU has pursued this scheme by purchasing “offsets” from countries such as China paying them billions of dollars to destroy atmospheric pollutants, such as CFC-23, which were manufactured purely in order to be destroyed.

63) It is claimed that the average global temperature was relatively unchanging in pre-industrial times but sky-rocketed since 1900, and will increase by several degrees more over the next 100 years according to Penn State University researcher Michael Mann. There is no convincing empirical evidence that past climate was unchanging, nor that 20th century changes in average global temperature were unusual or unnatural.

64) Michael Mann of Penn State University has actually shown that the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age did in fact exist, which contrasts with his earlier work which produced the “hockey stick graph” which showed a constant temperature over the past thousand years or so followed by a recent dramatic upturn.

65) The globe’s current approach to climate change in which major industrialized countries agree to nonsensical targets for their CO2 emissions by a given date, as it has been under the Kyoto system, is very expensive.

66) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had emailed one another about using a “trick” for the sake of concealing a “decline” in temperatures when looking at the history of the Earth’s temperature.

67) Global temperatures have not risen in any statistically-significant sense for 15 years and have actually been falling for nine years. The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed a scientific team had expressed dismay at the fact global warming was contrary to their predictions and admitted their inability to explain it was “a travesty”.

68) The IPCC predicts that a warmer planet will lead to more extreme weather, including drought, flooding, storms, snow, and wildfires. But over the last century, during which the IPCC claims the world experienced more rapid warming than any time in the past two millennia, the world did not experience significantly greater trends in any of these extreme weather events.

69) In explaining the average temperature standstill we are currently experiencing, the Met Office Hadley Centre ran a series of computer climate predictions and found in many of the computer runs there were decade-long standstills but none for 15 years - so it expects global warming to resume swiftly.

70) Richard Lindzen, Professor of Atmospheric Sciences at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, wrote:
“The notion of a static, unchanging climate is foreign to the history of the Earth or any other planet with a fluid envelope. Such hysteria (over global warming) simply represents the scientific illiteracy of much of the public, the susceptibility of the public to the substitution of repetition for truth.”
71) Despite the 1997 Kyoto Protocol’s status as the flagship of the fight against climate change it has been a failure.

72) The first phase of the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), which ran from 2005 to 2007 was a failure. Huge over-allocation of permits to pollute led to a collapse in the price of carbon from €33 to just €0.20 per tonne meaning the system did not reduce emissions at all.

73) The EU trading scheme, to manage carbon emissions has completely failed and actually allows European businesses to duck out of making their emissions reductions at home by offsetting, which means paying for cuts to be made overseas instead.

74) To date “cap and trade” carbon markets have done almost nothing to reduce emissions.

75) In the United States , the cap-and-trade is an approach designed to control carbon emissions and will impose huge costs upon American citizens via a carbon tax on all goods and services produced in the United States. The average family of four can expect to pay an additional $1700, or £1,043, more each year. It is predicted that the United States will lose more than 2 million jobs as the result of cap-and-trade schemes.

76) Dr Roy Spencer, a principal research scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, has indicated that out of the 21 climate models tracked by the IPCC the differences in warming exhibited by those models is mostly the result of different strengths of positive cloud feedback - and that increasing CO2 is insufficient to explain global-average warming in the last 50 to 100 years.

77) Why should politicians devote our scarce resources in a globally competitive world to a false and ill-defined problem, while ignoring the real problems the entire planet faces, such as: poverty, hunger, disease or terrorism.

78) A proper analysis of ice core records from the past 650,000 years demonstrates that temperature increases have come before, and not resulted from, increases in CO2 by hundreds of years.

79) Since the cause of global warming is mostly natural, then there is in actual fact very little we can do about it. (We are still not able to control the sun).

80) A substantial number of the panel of 2,500 climate scientists on the United Nation’s International Panel on Climate Change, which created a statement on scientific unanimity on climate change and man-made global warming, were found to have serious concerns.

81) The UK’s Met Office has been forced this year to re-examine 160 years of temperature data after admitting that public confidence in the science on man-made global warming has been shattered by revelations about the data.

82) Politicians and activists push for renewable energy sources such as wind turbines under the rhetoric of climate change, but it is essentially about money - under the system of Renewable Obligations. Much of the money is paid for by consumers in electricity bills. It amounts to £1 billion a year.

83) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had tampered with their own data so as to conceal inconsistencies and errors.

84) The “Climate-gate” scandal revealed that a scientific team had campaigned for the removal of a learned journal’s editor, solely because he did not share their willingness to debase science for political purposes.

85) Ice-core data clearly show that temperatures change centuries before concentrations of atmospheric CO2 change. Thus, there appears to be little evidence for insisting that changes in concentrations of CO2 are the cause of past temperature and climate change.

86) There are no experimentally verified processes explaining how CO2 concentrations can fall in a few centuries without falling temperatures - in fact it is changing temperatures which cause changes in CO2 concentrations, which is consistent with experiments that show CO2 is the atmospheric gas most readily absorbed by water.

87) The Government’s Renewable Energy Strategy contains a massive increase in electricity generation by wind power costing around £4 billion a year over the next twenty years. The benefits will be only £4 to £5 billion overall (not per annum). So costs will outnumber benefits by a range of between eleven and seventeen times.

88) Whilst CO2 levels have indeed changed for various reasons, human and otherwise, just as they have throughout history, the CO2 content of the atmosphere has increased since the beginning of the industrial revolution, and the growth rate has now been constant for the past 25 years.

89) It is a myth that CO2 is a pollutant, because nitrogen forms 80% of our atmosphere and human beings could not live in 100% nitrogen either: CO2 is no more a pollutant than nitrogen is and CO2 is essential to life.

90) Politicians and climate activists make claims to rising sea levels but certain members in the IPCC chose an area to measure in Hong Kong that is subsiding. They used the record reading of 2.3 mm per year rise of sea level.

91) The accepted global average temperature statistics used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change show that no ground-based warming has occurred since 1998.

92) If one factors in non-greenhouse influences such as El Nino events and large volcanic eruptions, lower atmosphere satellite-based temperature measurements show little, if any, global warming since 1979, a period over which atmospheric CO2 has increased by 55 ppm (17 per cent).

93) US President Barack Obama pledged to cut emissions by 2050 to equal those of 1910 when there were 92 million Americans. In 2050, there will be 420 million Americans, so Obama’s promise means that emissions per head will be approximately what they were in 1875. It simply will not happen.

94) The European Union has already agreed to cut emissions by 20 percent to 2020, compared with 1990 levels, and is willing to increase the target to 30 percent. However, these are unachievable and the EU has already massively failed with its Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), as EU emissions actually rose by 0.8 percent from 2005 to 2006 and are known to be well above the Kyoto goal.

95) Australia has stated it wants to slash greenhouse emissions by up to 25 percent below 2000 levels by 2020, but the pledges were so unpopular that the country’s Senate has voted against the carbon trading Bill, and the Opposition’s Party leader has now been ousted by a climate change skeptic.

96) Canada plans to reduce emissions by 20 percent compared with 2006 levels by 2020, representing approximately a 3 percent cut from 1990 levels but it simultaneously defends its Alberta tar sands emissions and its record as one of the world’s highest per-capita emissions setters.

97) India plans to reduce the ratio of emissions to production by 20-25 percent compared with 2005 levels by 2020, but all Government officials insist that since India has to grow for its development and poverty alleviation, it has to emit, because the economy is driven by carbon.

98) The Leipzig Declaration in 1996, was signed by 110 scientists who said:
“We - along with many of our fellow citizens - are apprehensive about the climate treaty conference scheduled for Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997” and “based on all the evidence available to us, we cannot subscribe to the politically inspired world view that envisages climate catastrophes and calls for hasty actions.”
99) A US Oregon Petition Project stated,
“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.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of CO2, 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.”
100) A report by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change concluded,
“We find no support for the IPCC’s claim that climate observations during the twentieth century are either unprecedented or provide evidence of an anthropogenic effect on climate.”

vperl | January 10, 2016

Plus,the Weather Hoaxers have tens of thousands of religious minded succubus worshipping at the feet of the "Clergy of the Weather Hoaxers", these "Bishops" are not scientists or have special knowledge these "Bishops " just articulate an agenda.

Short list, George Soros, Albert Gore Jr., son of racist Albert Gore Senior, and others that have financial ties to the weather Hoaxers money machine. Companies that can, and will prosper from the hoaxing

Brian H | January 10, 2016

+100^100

ray | January 10, 2016

and in any case;

Look at the mess *science* has made of nutrition. Firstly the fiasco with eggs
and cholesterol; remember that: don't eat eggs they contain cholesterol. Now,
of course, it's eat eggs they are good for you. and remember don't eat fat as
it will make you fat - what utter rubbish. All along saying "sugar is fine"
and you must eat fruit or at least drink fruit juice (if you want to kill
yourself). It is now well known that sugar (fructose) is worse for you than
tobacco.

Now that same self serving body of persons is telling us that carbon dioxide
produced by man is going to destroy the planet. Oh, all the evidence is there
in their *models*. They couldn't even model one human body so why do they
think they can model the whole planet.

I am now almost recovered from severe fructose poisoning inflicted by the
mis-information from the *science* community. My problem isn't with Climate
Science it is with any over promoted and under researched *science*. Get real;
so called climate science might be believable in thirty or forty years if the
theory lasts that long (which I doubt).

I support alternate energy because it makes economic sense not because I
believe any of that Global Warming/Climate change krap. I drive a Tesla
because it's the most advanced and most economical car there is not because of
some misguided climate science.

ampeep | January 10, 2016

Ooh, you're gonna get blasted by the global warmists! :)

buddyroe | January 10, 2016

Yep....absolutely DESTROYED by their superior knowledge....of everything!

If you don't think they are WAY smarter than everyone else, just ask them.

cweber | January 10, 2016

Cool - someone found a list (from 2009) on the internet. Let me see if I can do that too... Oh. Here's one!! You dudes are pathetically simple.

Here we take a quick look at the first 50 of their claims - and debunk each one.

1) There is "no real scientific proof" that the current warming is caused by the rise of greenhouse gases from man's activity.

Technically, proof exists only in mathematics, not in science. Whatever terminology you choose to use, however, there is overwhelming evidence that the current warming is caused by the rise in greenhouse gases due to human activities.

2) Man-made carbon dioxide emissions throughout human history constitute less than 0.00022 per cent of the total naturally emitted from the mantle of the Earth during geological history.

Misleading comparison. Since the industrial age began human emissions are far higher than volcanic emissions.

3) Warmer periods of the Earth's history came around 800 years before rises in CO2 levels.

In the past 3 million years changing levels of sunshine triggered and ended the ice ages. Carbon dioxide was a feedback that increased warming, rather than the initial cause. In the more distant past, several warming episodes were directly triggered by CO2.

4) After world war 2, there was a huge surge in recorded CO2 emissions but global temperatures fell for four decades after 1940.

In fact, temperatures fell during the 1940s and then remained roughly level until the late 1970s. The fall was partly due to high levels of pollutants such as sulphur dioxide counteracting the warming effect.

5) Throughout the Earth's history, temperatures have often been warmer than now and CO2 levels have often been higher - more than 10 times as high.

Which shows that higher CO2 means higher temperatures, taking into account the fact that the sun was cooler in the past. The crucial point is that civilisation is adapted to 20th century temperatures.

6) Significant changes in climate have continually occurred throughout geologic time.

Yes. And sea level has been up to 70 metres higher during warm periods. If that happens again, there'll be no more London or New York.

7) The 0.7 °C increase in the average global temperature over the past hundred years is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term, natural climate trends.

Wrong. The rapid warming since the late 1970s has occurred even though other factors that can warm the planet, such as the sun's intensity, have remained constant.

8) The IPCC theory is driven by just 60 scientists and favourable reviewers, not the 4000 usually cited.

Untrue, as even the briefest look at the scientific literature can establish.

9) Leaked e-mails from British climate scientists - in a scandal known as "climategate" - suggest that that has been manipulated to exaggerate global warming

Nothing in the emails undermines any of the key scientific conclusions. Independent groups have come to the same conclusions.

10) A large body of scientific research suggests that the sun is responsible for the greater share of climate change during the past hundred years.

The sun may have contributed to the warming in the first part of the 20th century but it has not caused the rapid warming since the late 1970s.

11) Politicians and activists claim rising sea levels are a direct cause of global warming, but sea levels have been increasing steadily since the last ice age 10,000 years ago.

Wrong. Sea level rose very rapidly as the North American ice sheet melted after the last ice age but levelled off and has been nearly stable for the past 2000 years or so. Now it is starting to rise rapidly again.

12) Philip Stott, emeritus professor of biogeography at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London says climate change is too complicated to be caused by just one factor, whether CO2 or clouds.

He is right. All sorts of factors affect climate, even the lead in petrol. However, the recent warming is mostly due to rising greenhouse gases, and if we pump out more CO2 it will get even hotter.

13) Peter Lilley MP said last month that "fewer people in Britain than in any other country believe in the importance of global warming. That is despite the fact that our government and our political class - predominantly - are more committed to it than their counterparts in any other country in the world".

Irrelevant and incorrect on all counts.

14) In pursuit of the global warming rhetoric, wind farms will do very little to nothing to reduce CO2 emissions.

There are arguments over how much wind power can contribute, but there is no doubt they are already helping reduce emissions in many countries.

15) Professor Plimer, professor of geology and earth sciences at the University of Adelaide, stated that the idea of taking a single trace gas in the atmosphere, accusing it and finding it guilty of total responsibility for climate change, is an "absurdity".

See (1). And note that Plimer is a geologist, not a climatologist.

16) A Harvard University astrophysicist and geophysicist, Willie Soon, said he is "embarrassed and puzzled" by the shallow science in papers that support the proposition that the Earth faces a climate crisis caused by global warming.

Many scientists think Soon should be embarrassed by some of the papers he has published.

17) The science of what determines the Earth's temperature is in fact far from settled or understood.

There are still lots of details to fill in but the big picture is increasingly clear. The uncertainties that do exist swing both ways: there could be more warming than predicted.

18) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, CO2 is a minor greenhouse gas, unlike water vapour, which is tied to climate concerns, and which we can't even pretend to control.

Water vapour is a feedback, not a cause of warming. The amount of water in the atmosphere depends on temperature; any excess rains out within days.

19) A petition by scientists trying to tell the world that the political and media portrayal of global warming is false was put forward in the Heidelberg Appeal in 1992. Today, more than 4000 signatories, including 72 Nobel prizewinners, from 106 countries have signed it.

That's not what the Heidelberg Appeal really said, and 1992 was a long time ago.

20) It is claimed the average global temperature increased at a dangerously fast rate in the 20th century but the recent rate of average global temperature rise has been between 1 and 2 °C per century - within natural rates.

Incorrect. Over the past 1000 years temperature has never changed nearly as fast.

21) Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski, chairman of the scientific council of the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, Poland, says the Earth's temperature has more to do with cloud cover and water vapour than CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.

See (18). And why believe someone whose work was rejected by the scientific community?

22) There is strong evidence from solar studies which suggests that the Earth's current temperature stasis will be followed by climatic cooling over the next few decades.

The Earth is still warming and even if the sun's intensity does fall, it will not outweigh the effect of rising greenhouse gases.

23) It is a myth that receding glaciers are proof of global warming as glaciers have been receding and growing cyclically for many centuries.

Incorrect. The current retreat is unprecendented.

24) It is a falsehood that the Earth's poles are warming because that is natural variation and while the western Arctic may be getting somewhat warmer we also see that the Eastern Arctic and Greenland are getting colder.

Illogical and incorrect. Warming is warming whatever causes it. And all parts of the Arctic are warmer compared with the average from 1951 to 1980. The extent of the warming is contributing to the rapidly shrinking in the extent of sea ice cover during summer.

25) The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change claims climate-driven "impacts on biodiversity are significant and of key relevance", but those claims are simply not supported by scientific research.

There is already clear evidence that the distributions of many species are changing as the planet warms (PDF). If it gets much warmer, some will have nowhere to go.

26) The IPCC threat of climate change to the world's species does not make sense as wild species are at least 1 million years old, which means they have all been through hundreds of climate cycles.

Many species are less than 1 million years old. In any case, during the past 3 million years, the Earth has got a lot colder than it is now during ice ages but never much hotter.

27) Research goes strongly against claims that CO2-induced global warming would cause catastrophic disintegration of the Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets.

Depends on what timescale you are talking about. Scientists differ on how quickly they think the ice sheets will melt, but studies of warm periods leave no doubt that if the temperature gets much higher and stays higher, all the ice sheets will melt completely after several centuries or millennia, causing sea level to rise by 70 metres.

28) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels are our best hope of raising crop yields to feed an ever-growing population.

Higher CO2 levels do boost growth of some plants, but only if there's enough water throughout the growing season and the temperature is appropriate for particular plants. Overall, climate change is expected to reduce yields once the temperature rise exceeds 3 °C.

29) The biggest climate change ever experienced on Earth took place around 700 million years ago.

So what?

30) The slight increase in temperature which has been observed since 1900 is entirely consistent with well-established, long-term natural climate cycles.

Repetitive and incorrect. See (10).

31) Despite activist concerns over CO2 levels, rising CO2 levels of some so-called "greenhouse gases" may be contributing to higher oxygen levels and global cooling, not warming.

Burning fossil fuels produces CO2 and consumes oxygen, and thus lowers oxygen levels, though the decrease is too tiny to matter.

32) Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain-top observations made over the past three decades have not shown any significant change in the long-term rate of increase in global temperatures.

The rate of increase is in line with predictions.

33) Today's CO2 concentration of around 385 ppm is very low compared with most of the Earth's history - we actually live in a carbon-deficient atmosphere.

And when CO2 levels were higher there were no ice sheets and sea levels were 70 metres higher. Plus, the sun was cooler in the past.

34) It is a myth that CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas because greenhouse gases form about 3 per cent of the atmosphere by volume, and CO2 constitutes about 0.037 per cent of the atmosphere.

You can only get close to the 3 per cent figure by counting water vapour, which as we have already said is a feedback not a cause.

35) It is a myth that computer models verify that CO2 increases will cause significant global warming because computer models can be made to "verify" anything.

No, they can't, because climate models are based on the physical laws that apply in the real world. In any case, the crucial evidence that CO2 warms the planet comes from physics and chemistry, not from general climate models.

36) There is no scientific or statistical evidence whatsoever that global warming will cause more storms and other weather extremes.

Incorrect. For instance, while there is much uncertainty in this area, there is growing evidence that hurricanes will get stronger, though there may not be more of them.

37) One statement deleted from a UN report in 1996 stated that "none of the studies cited above has shown clear evidence that we can attribute the observed climate changes to increases in greenhouse gases".

Meaningless taken out of context, without knowing what studies the statement was referring to.

38) The world "warmed" by 0.07 +/- 0.07 °C from 1999 to 2008, not the 0.20 °C expected by the IPCC.

Actually temperature rose 0.19 ºC, but global warming does not mean natural variation goes away. Periods of cooling are still to be expected.

39) The IPCC says "it is likely that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense" but there has been no increase in the intensity or frequency of tropical cyclones globally.

Incorrect. Some studies have found an increase.

40) Rising CO2 levels in the atmosphere can be shown not only to have a negligible effect on the Earth's many ecosystems, but in some cases to be a positive help to many organisms.

Incorrect and contradictory. Either the effect is negligible or helpful: it can't be both. In fact, rising CO2 will lead to big temperature increases, which will have a dramatic effect on Earth's ecosystems. Some species will benefit as their range expands, others will run out of suitable space. The speed of the change - far faster than natural climate change in the past - will make it very difficult for plants and animals to move fast enough.

41) Researchers who compare and contrast climate-change impact on civilisations found warm periods are beneficial to mankind and cold periods harmful.

Which researchers? Where were their findings published? In any case, over the past two millennia, warm periods have generally involved tiny changes compared with the changes we can expect over the next century.

42) The Met Office asserts we are in the hottest decade since records began but this is precisely what the world should expect if the climate is cyclical.

Er, why?

43) Rising CO2 levels increase plant growth and make plants more resistant to drought and pests.

Yet more repetition. See (28).

44) The historical increase in the air's CO2 content has improved human nutrition by raising crop yields during the past 150 years.

According to who? This statement is impossible to prove or disprove. What we can say is that the bulk of the increase in yields over this time are due to improved plant varieties and techniques, many of which are heavily reliant on the use of fossil fuels. If we don't start planning for the end of cheap oil, food prices could soar.

45) The increase of the air's CO2 content has probably helped lengthen human lifespans since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

How exactly, and according to who?

46) The IPCC alleges that "climate change currently contributes to the global burden of disease and premature deaths", but the evidence shows that higher temperatures and rising CO2 levels has helped global populations.

Incorrect. Excessive heat during summers is already killing more people than are being saved by milder winters.

47) In May of 2004, the Russian Academy of Sciences published a report concluding that the Kyoto protocol has no scientific grounding at all.

See here for the political background. Russia signed up to the Kyoto protocol later that year.

48) The "climategate" scandal pointed to a expensive public campaign of disinformation and the denigration of scientists who opposed the belief that CO2 emissions were causing climate change.

Or it points to a relatively cheap public education campaign and efforts by responsible scientists to ensure political decisions are based on sound science rather than on papers that have been shown to be flawed.

49) The head of Britain's climate change watchdog has predicted households will need to spend up to £15,000 on a full energy efficiency makeover if the government is to meet its ambitious targets for cutting carbon emissions.

Even if he has - no source is given - no one can be forced to spend money they don't have and such spending is an investment that will save householders thousands of pounds in the long term. If energy prices rise sharply as demand for oil and gas exceeds supply, we may all be wishing we had invested more in energy efficiency.

50) Wind power is unlikely to be the answer to our energy needs. The wind power industry argues that there are "no direct subsidies", but it involves a total subsidy of as much as £60 per MWh, which falls directly on electricity consumers. This burden will grow in line with attempts to achieve wind power targets, according to a recent OFGEM report.

Repetitive and incorrect. See (14). No, wind power is not the answer to our energy needs but it is one of the answers, and it would be very short-sighted not to invest in alternative energy sources as peak oil nears, even if there was no issue with global warming.

There are another 50 "reasons" listed but they are even less credible than the ones we've already dealt with...

vperl | January 10, 2016

Tell Gore and Soros, they can make a few hundred million bucks off the hoaxing

flight505 | January 10, 2016

Thanks for answering 50 of the 100.

I am a Tesla P85D owner and also have a degree in mathematics and physics.

I believe global warming is real and C02 is a major cause.

However, I am reminded of Dale Carnegie's line from his best selling book, "How To Win Friends & Influence People."

He wrote, "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

Having different opinions is good in a free society. I continue to read articles and books on this matter and cannot see any way out of the reality of the greenhouse effect warming our planet.

I would change my mind if I could find evidence.

Is there a way to reflect sunlight back into space and lessen effects of global warming?

Thanks.

atljunkcars | January 10, 2016

So what if global warming is natural. We still need to get rid of the smog and make fuel ultimately free or close to it. These oil people have control over the whole world. I own my vehicle yet I have to spend money to drive it every time i drive it. Thats not ownership thats rent.

atljunkcars | January 10, 2016

These oil people have found a way to collect money from an unavoidable essential part of any developed economy. We wont be free until we get out of there control

jordanrichard | January 10, 2016

Global warming is natural. What do you think caused the planet to warm up and end the ice age? That is all that I ask of those that keep swearing up and down that we caused/are causing the planet to warm up.

vperl | January 10, 2016

Who is the royal we who wants to get these countries real cheap fuel?

Brian H | January 10, 2016

Global Warming is natural. So is Global Cooling; you will soon hate it.

MitchP85D | January 10, 2016

Hey BH,

It is a multi-decadal cycle. Don't worry. It will warm up again after about 30-40 years.

Red Sage ca us | January 11, 2016

Every single sentence in the OP's list begins with rhetoric.

Evidence would be nice.

Ø | January 11, 2016

atljunkcars, thumbs up :-)

Ø | January 11, 2016

Brian H....another thumbs up !

Dont forget the old saying...."follow the money"

stackgenerator | January 11, 2016

Tell those 100 reasons to NOAA...

vperl | January 11, 2016

atljunkcars | JANUARY 10, 2016
So what if global warming is natural. We still need to get rid of the smog and make fuel ultimately free or close to it. These oil people have control over the whole world. I own my vehicle yet I have to spend money to drive it every time i drive it. Thats not ownership thats rent.

==========**

Reminds me of someone that thinks free stuff, you want car get a job buy car. You want the car to work, pay for maintenance, fuel of any type get a job.. Pay for it yourself.

No one is requiring, you a free loader to buy a vehicle.

Maybe where you are.. you think others should foot the bill, free stuff.

Your stove, oven, lights in your shack, require you to pay a fuel bill.

Do you live in government housing, food stamps, Welfare, ADC,get free healthcare for nothing, what you want next a free cell phone, and internet service .. Whoops.... Done and done

I pay for everything and am happy.

Living off the larjest of government feeding at the trough is your way to go.

stackgenerator | January 11, 2016

Tell those 100 reasons to NASA too...

Brian H | January 11, 2016

NASA has been ordered to suck up to Muslims like O, and push AGW. Its public data is corrupt.

Nov., 2015:
"Now, if the data for individual years are changed in the heating or cooling zones, [it] offers ... completely different climate scenarios. Ewert has collected, for 120 randomly selected stations, the tens of thousands of data items that were specified for each year by NASA before and after of 2010. So the changes in the air [temperature] seven phases were clear. The manipulations are visible in the diagrams. His print data would result in a 6-meter-long list."

Google translation, http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2... ,
of http://www.achgut.com/dadgdx/index.php/dadgd/article/sind_die_klimadaten...

MitchP85D | January 11, 2016

Dr. Don Easterbrook and Dr. Richard Keen have confirmed this as well.

bb0tin | January 12, 2016

What an echo chamber this thread is.
Ø
Brian H
ampeep
vperl
MitchP85D
But where is bigd et al?

science-isbetter | January 12, 2016

@ray: Science is, indeed, better. If you don't think so, don't get vaccinated, don't look at pictures of the earth from the moon, don't use a GPS (especially those corrected for the Theory of Relativity), don't use the Internet. I could probably find other examples :>}

science-isbetter | January 12, 2016

@flight505: My kids constantly remind me that you cannot win an argument over the Internet. So, I ask myself, "why do I post?" And the conclusion I come to is that if the fallacious posts are not rebutted, they risk being absorbed into the general consciousness. At least 50 of he 100 so-called reasons have been rebutted (take a look at 43-45, they are not even "reasons." They are tacit admissions that CO2 is increasing...now they're saying that's good for you). You can't blame someone for ignoring the remaining 50.

I came to the site because I saw some articles that seemed plausible denials of Anthropogenic Global Warming. A little research, including links to peer reviewed articles posted on this site, dissuaded me.

As to your question, "Is there a way to reflect sunlight back into space and lessen effects of global warming?" The short answer is "yes." Google "sulfur particles global warming"

Brian H | January 12, 2016

Sure, CO2 is increasing. So what? The "basic science" is debunked. CO2 is no kind of "blanket". More like a thermal railroad to space.

bb0tin | January 12, 2016

@Brian H
You have been supplied with the science of greenhouse gases including CO2. I have even supplied you with a lengthy article containing the mathematics and physics and experimental information. You showed yourself to be incapable of understanding it. Why are you so persistent in your display of ignorance and lack of understanding?

holidayday | January 13, 2016

Brian: "Sure, CO2 is increasing. So what?"

Well, you keep doubting the studies that say CO2 is increasing, and now you say "Sure, CO2 is increasing."
Others keep questioning the fact that CO2 is increasing.
OF COURSE CO2 is increasing, and it's increasing because of pollution. Decrease pollution, and the CO2 levels will decrease as well.

It's not prudent to say "So what?" when so much science correlates CO2 levels to mean global temperatures. Most changes in global temperatures take millenia. If changes go faster, then mass extinctions result (see: huge meteor theory and dinosaurs.)

At what stage DO YOU agree that CO2 and temperature are related? When global temperatures raise 1 degree? 2 degrees? 3 degrees?
At what stage DO YOU think would be prudent to take action to reduce CO2 to prevent those temperature changes?

Juggernaut | January 13, 2016

If you want to buy a carbon credit. Don't send a check to Al Gore or George Soros. Plant a tree. This is a ridiculous thing to put on this forum. Leave Tesla fans alone...

MitchP85D | January 13, 2016

Hey Holiday, check out "Remote Sensing Systems." bb Brain thinks it is a good site and supports your side of the AGW issue. I say "whatever." Check the data out. It shows that CO2 forcing is overstated by our climate models. Just scroll down the page a little bit and the data is right there, plain as daylight.

bb0tin | January 13, 2016

@Juggernaut
Many Tesla owners ordered a Tesla primarily because of Climate Change, myself included. Sustainable transport is the reason that Tesla was created and funded by Elon Musk et al. It is their mission.
It would be ridiculous for this not to be on this forum.

Brian H | January 13, 2016

CO2 increase is neither component nor result of pollution. Vital natural fertilizer, responsible for ~14% ag yield increases in the last century, and more to come. Yay!

bb0tin | January 13, 2016

@Brian H
You seem to not realise that your beliefs are preposterous. You also have the belief that people on the Tesla forums are interested in your deluded opinions. You are acting like a mentally disturbed man on a soapbox in a town square.

ampeep | January 13, 2016

Am curious, how many of you got a Tesla cuz of global warming?

MitchP85D | January 14, 2016

ampeep, Sure as shoot wasn't me!

bb0tin | January 15, 2016

@vperl
I looked at your first link. What makes you think the papers withdrawn were not from Climate Change deniers? Did you even bother to check? I bet the answer is of course not.

I have responded to your second link before. It does not stand up to scrutiny.

Your third link is a call to "investigate corporations and other organizations that have “knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”
I guess since you like to deceive, you think it is OK for corporates to deceive as well. That is a sad indictment of your attitude to a civilised society.

Red Sage ca us | January 15, 2016

Brian H: Ignoring science is not the same as debunking it.

bb0tin | January 16, 2016

@Red Sage ca us
Ignoring questions is not the same as debunking them

Brian H | January 16, 2016

Warmists think all data and statements disagreeing with their credo must be devil's deceptions. Their type arises from time to time, unfortunately.

RedShift | January 16, 2016

BrianH

Time to time? No, it's our time. Your time was in the early 20th century.

Your dream of Obama going the way of Lucifer? Not happening. Two term president, much better than any of your ilk could hope to elect.

Rockefellers, most investors are on board. Get with the program, or not, no one cares.

MitchP85D | January 16, 2016

Hey Redshift,

Doubling our national debt with a 2% annual GDP growth. Great legacy!

RedShift | January 16, 2016

Mitchy,

I don't want to digress from the main subject at hand, as odious as the posts are on that! However, I will offer a single response, no more.

It's better than whatever Dubya did. (Negative numbers!) It's better than many other western nations in the world today. You can keep hating Obama. I have no issue with that. Hey, each one to his own, man! I don't agree with him all the time either, as a centrist. You just can't argue with facts though. The moment you start doing that, you expose yourself, and your innards. (Ideologically narrowed innards)

vperl | January 16, 2016

21 trillion here, 30 trillion soon..

Your kids will thank-you.

Your welcome.

RedShift | January 16, 2016

@vperl

Learn proper grammar. You may have valid points, but your constant use of 'your' instead of 'you are', and general lack of civility means I am envisioning an adolescent who doesn't own a Tesla (from what I gather about you)

Mike83 | January 16, 2016

For the fossil fuel worshipers an unusual hurricane with H20 temperatures 1 degree over normal. A harbinger of a warmer ocean?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/hurricane-alex_56985704e4b0b4eb759df88a

bb0tin | January 16, 2016

@Brian H
You said “Warmists think all data and statements disagreeing with their credo must be devil's deceptions.”
I did not doubt the UAH data. I accepted it and I used it to prove that you were wrong. Why don’t you use it to try and prove you are correct. You won’t try because you are wrong, and you know it.

EVolution | January 17, 2016

Probably if there were forums 1500 years ago during the dark ages there would be OP like you believers in God posting the 100 reasons why God exists and most of them would include reasons like "I had a discussion direcly with God yesterday, God sent me a message to spread, I had multiple signs directly from God, etc..."

In the end, you suffer from schizophrena or psychosis and you just haven't been diagnosed yet. It's not really your fault since your mental illness precludes you from keeping contact with the reality.

MitchP85D | January 17, 2016

Oh, but get this. EV has the power to accurately diagnose those whom he disagrees with as having schizophrenia or psychosis. And he has self-appointed ontological powers to judge others with to boot!

Yep, must be yet another plain 'ol know-it-all secular progressive!

Brian H | January 18, 2016

Necessary; they're afraid of public, recorded debate with sceptic experts, and refuse all the many invites they've gotten. So witless put-downs are what they rely on.

Pages