Global Warming or Global Government

Al Gore, Congressional Testimony, March 21, 2007 

Then the DVD video shows Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma, Environmental and Public Works Committee) testifying on the 183 new cold records of winter, 2007.

Scientists interviewed or testifying re: the problems with global warming alarmism include:

1) Professor Tim Patterson, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carlton University, testifying before Canada’s House of Commons, Subcommittee on the Environment and Sustainable Development, Feb., 10, 2005.

2) Dr. Robert C. Balling, former Director of Climatology, Arizona State University, “it has always been easy to go around the world and find evidence of damaging hurricanes and tornadoes, whatever, they are not linked to the buildup of greenhouse gases.”

3) Dr. Tim Ball, Dept. of Climatology, University of Winnipeg, Canada’s first Climatology Ph.D..

4) Dr. Ian Clark, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa, “we can’t say that CO2 will drive climate; it certainly never did in the past…. In fact there is not evidence of humans the cause (of global warming). There is, however, overwhelming evidence of natural causes, such as changes in the output of the sun.”

5) Dr. Patrick Michaels, University of Virginia: “People have to understand that the entire global climate change hysteria is driven by computer models, it is not driven by reality. Reality is not warming up like those models said it would.”

6) Dr. Vincent Gray, Expert IPCC reviewer: “This summary for policy makers isn’t a summary for policy makers at all. It is a summary by policy makers. It is a summary which is agreed line by line by government representatives. The IPCC is a political organization, set up by the United Nations….to provide evidence to support the framework convention on climate change which has been signed by governments, it’s entirely political….. They (the IPCC) has not established that greenhouse gases are warming the earth.

7) Professor John Christy, Lead Author, IPCC, “I’ve often heard it said that there is a consensus of thousands of scientists on the global warming issue and that humans are causing a catastrophic change to the climate system. Well, I am one scientist and there are many that think that that is not true.” 

8) Dr. Richard Lindzen, IPCC and MIT, “And to build the number up to 2500 they have to take start taking reviewers and government people and so on, anyone who ever came close to them, and none of them are asked to agree, many of them disagree, but since no scientist disagrees, you shouldn’t disagree either. Whenever you hear that in science, that’s pure propaganda.”

Conservative politicians speak out:

1) Senator Chuck Hegel, “This cuts right at the heart of national sovereignty of the United States of America. We in essence would be saying, “we would allow an international body to come in and dictate to our industries, our businesses, our people, what they could do and what they couldn’t do, use of what energy, which sources of energy, the cost of energy.” 

2) Congressman Don Young (R-Alaska): This is an awakening call. That we are facing a battle against those who want to destroy a great United States of America.”

3) Phyllis Schafly, Eagle Forum: “All these treaties are dangerous attacks on American freedoms, national security, land ownership and private property. Every one of these treaties involves setting up a new global bureaucracy that would have some kind of obnoxious control over American citizens or our families or our schools or our businesses or our use of natural resources and energy, or our land. And together they add up to what is meant by global governance. Treaties are one road to global governance. United Nations conferences are another. These global conferences pretend to be democratic conventions of representatives of more than 100 nations who come together to vote for plans they all agree on. Nothing could be further from the truth. The policies are all written ahead of time. And the so-called delegates are manipulated to produce what is called “consensus.” The consensus is never submitted to Congress.” 

The consensus in Kyoto would will us to reduce US energy consumption by one fourth. And that would have a devastating effect on America’s standard of living, on the ability of US wage earners to support their family.“

Dr. Michael Coffman: The Vostok ice core data that gives a climatic record of the past 650,000 years comes from cores drilled to nearly 12,000’, or 2.2 miles at the Vostok station in Antarctica. In “An Inconvenient Truth,” Al Gore uses the Vostok ice core to demonstrate a correlation between CO2 and temperature. However, a correlation does not mean causation. For example, all people who breath oxygen eventually die, but breathing oxygen does not cause death.

In the movie, “The Great Global Warming Swindle,” Dr. Clark shows that in the Vostok ice core record, CO2 increases lag behind temperature increases by about 800 years.“So temperature is leading CO2 by 800 years.”

Dr. Fred Singer, Atmospheric physicist, Emeritus, George Mason University: “So obviously, CO2 is not the cause of that warming. In fact, you can say that the warming produced the increase in carbon dioxide.” 

Dr. Tim Ball: “The ice core record goes to the very heart of the problem we have here. They said if the CO2 increases, the temperature will go up. But the ice core shows exactly the opposite, the most fundamental assumption of the whole theory of climate change due to humans is shown to be wrong.”

Dr. John Christy: “Humans produce a small fraction in the single digits percentagewise of the CO2 that is produced in the atmosphere.”

Dr. Michael Coffman: “Of the 210 billion metric tons emitted into the atmosphere each year, humans contribute on 6.3 billion tons or about 3 percent. Other sources like vegetation, soils, and the ocean dwarf the amount produced by man. The importance of carbon dioxide is diminished even further by the never-mentioned fact that the overwhelming majority of all greenhouse gases are water vapor and clouds. Water vapor comprises approximately 97% of all greenhouse gases. Carbon dioxide comprises less than 2% and the balance is made up of methane (CH4), Chloroflourocarbons (CFCs), and nitrous oxide. Many proponents of man-caused global warming claim that water vapor is highly variable across the earth and from season to season and therefore is unimportant. Additionally, they claim that CO2 has far more potential as a greenhouse gas than its small amount would otherwise indicate. While there is some truth to these claims….

At anyone time water vapor accounts for 36 to 70% of the total greenhouse gas effect and if you clouds are included this jumps to 66 to 86%. Carbon dioxide comes in a distant third by accounting for only 9 to 27%. And remember man’s activities accounts for less than 3% of the total carbon dioxide. For at a maximum, man is responsible for less than 1% of all the potential greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.”

Canadian climatologist, Dr. Tim Ball’s work became the basis for the 1995 IPCC temperature graph showing temperature variations over the past 1000 years, including the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice. In the 1998 IPCC report, this graph was replaced by the famous “hockey stick” graph of Mann, et al., which removed any trace of the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice and exaggerated the importance of modern warming. Subsequently, Canadians MacIntyre and McKitrick (Dept. of Economics) recompiled Mann’s data and arrived at quite different answers. They found the 15th century to be just as warm as the 20th century and so “the hockey stick disappeared. It’s a computer programming error that yields this hockey stick.”

In response, the U.S. Congress authorized the National Academy of Sciences to study and report on the issue. Their study supported the MacIntyre and McKitrick report but did so in an apologetic way, so that the media interpreted this a vindication of Mann et al. and the ‘hockey stick” graph. The U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce commissioned another study by a statistician, Dr. Wegmen. This study also upheld the conclusions of MacIntyre and McKitrick. Despite this, Al Gore displays the “hockey stick” graph in his movie, An Inconvenient Truth, as does the 2004 Arctic Climate Impact Assessment.

Dr. Ian Clark: “Recent research shows that 8000 years ago, temperatures were 6 to 8 degrees C higher in the Arctic than they are today. Nevertheless, polar bears and other Arctic wildlife obviously adapted and survived, and so also are not threatened today.”

The Urban Heat Island Effect

Dr. Coffman: Most cities of the world have hotter temperatures than the surrounding countryside. This has nothing to do with carbon dioxide and everything to do with land use.” 

Dr. Tim Ball (University of Winnipeg) did a study 25 years ago and found as much as 10 degrees C difference between the coldest part of Winnipeg and the airport 8 km away.

Dr. Robert C. Balling, Arizona State University: Balloons go up into the atmosphere twice each day. These records are in almost perfect agreement with the satellite data.

Dr. Coffman: There has been no statistical increase in the earth’s temperature since 1998 even as carbon dioxide has continued to increase. After MacIntyre found errors in NASA temperature data, NASA corrected these data. And new data showed that 1934, not 1998, was the hottest year on record. Then 1998 was second hottest, 1921 the third hottest, then 2006 and 1933. So out of five hottest years, three occurred in the 1920s and 1930s. Also, 6 of 10 hottest years occurred between 1920 and 1953 while only 4 occurred from 1990 to 2006.

Chris Horner: Summary for policy makers are written by bureaucrats. The summary is released months before the rest of the document is actually written.

Another problem with the man-caused greenhouse warming theory.

Lindzen: “If it’s greenhouse warming, you get more warming in the middle of the troposphere- the first 10 to 12 km of the atmosphere than you do at the surface. There are good theoretical reasons for that having to do with how the greenhouse works.” 

Singer: “All the models, every one them, calculates that the warming should be faster as you go up from the surface into the atmosphere. And in fact the maximum warming over the equator at 10 km. In fact most observations do not show an increase with altitude. In fact most observations show a slight decrease with altitude. So in a sense you can say that the hypothesis of man-caused global warming is falsified by the evidence.”

The more cosmic radiation the more low cloud formation. Svensmark: When a sun goes supernova, it emits a burst of cosmic radiation. Low clouds are highly reflective and the earth’s temperature drops. When sun becomes more active, plasma (solar wind) streams out from the sun and shields the earth from cosmic radiation. Mars and other planets also appear to be experiencing global warming just like the earth.

Elevated carbon dioxide may be very beneficial. CO2 has been on the planet since the very beginning. Plants evolved when CO2 levels were very much higher than today. Relative to the past, carbon dioxide content is relatively low. All plants we have today evolved in a period when the carbon dioxide level was much higher than today. Levels were about 10 or more times higher than now when the dinosaurs were here.

Atmosphere- 766 billion metric tons

Soils and vegetation- 2,100 metric tons

Fossil fuels- 4000 metric tons

Oceans- nearly 39,000 metric tons.

Sedimentary rock- 80 trillion metric tons of carbon! (Limestone, etc.) This is 100 times the amount currently in the atmosphere.

Agriculture sprang up all over the world about 9,000 years ago. At a time when CO2 increased from bout 200 to 250 ppm. More carbon dioxide gives us more biomass. Increased carbon dioxide means plants grow better.

In a real greenhouse, we grow vegetables in atmosphere with 700 to 1400 ppm carbon dioxide. Yleld is about 25% higher. A doubling of carbon dioxide increases cereal crops by 20 to 50%. Helps them overcome harsh growing conditions like drought and pollution. It means you don’t need as much water. Crop uses water more efficiently. It lengthens the growing season.

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant it is a miracle gas that acts like a free fertilizer and alleviates drought and famine. Increases of 2 to 5 times would not have detrimental effect on biosphere. Up to 1500 ppm- no negative effects on human health. You need over 5000 to 10,000 ppm to have negative effects on humans.

Debate in NYC, reversed the perceptions. Pre-debate- 30% to 46% (post-debate) that global warming is not a crisis. GW is a crisis-

Government spending on man-caused global warming research has increased from about $2 billion/year in early 1990’s to over $4 billion/year today. The scientists who get this money are on soft money and if they don’t show positive results they stop getting funded.

Sen. James Inhofe: March 21, 2007: based on Congressional investigation a number of companies stand to make billions if the government intitiates cap and trade policies or reductions on carbon dioxide.

The question is why? Don Young- R-Alaska, Chairman of the Resources Committee- “The environment is being used for a power struggle. The environment is being used for centralized government. The environment is being used to make a one-world government. And if you don’t think this is occurring, just see what is happening in the United States. This is an awakening call – that we are facing a battle against those who want to destroy a great United States of America.’

Congressman Roscoe Bartlett (R-Maryland: “What troubles me about this is that there is a general tendency on the part of our leadership that we need to submerge the goals and sovereignty of United States to the goals and sovereignty to the goals and sovereignty of the United Nations.” 

French President Jacques Chirac. “For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance, one that should find a place within the World Environmental Organization which France and the European Union would like to see established…. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working or a dialogue of peace.” 

The United Nations “Consensus” Process

Kathy Adams, the Eagle Forum: the Consensus process was so firmly planted before the meeting even began that the on the opening day of the conference, there was consensus formed. That tells me that the United Nations is not a place for open debate. It is not a place for people to share different ideas and for freedom to ring. It is a place instead where the United Nations has an agenda and they have set the agenda beforehand and people come to the table in order to find out what their working orders, what their marching orders are. And then they are to go back home to implement what the U.N.’s agenda is.

Senator Chuck Hegel (R-Nebraska): “there are essentially five major problems with the global warming treaty (Kyoto Protocol) as it is now being conceived. One, there is no clear concise science. At best the science is contradictory, it’s inconclusive, it’s unclear. Second, the economic consequences. The economic consequences we know for sure would be disastrous, would be devastating to this country, driving industries out of this country. We would lose millions of jobs. Energy costs would go up, productivity would go down. Standard of living would go down. Third, if in fact you want to curb greenhouse gas emissions, you certainly don’t do that by binding the developed nations and let all the other countries- 130 of the so-called non-developed countries, including China, India, Mexico, south Korea, and others off. Fourth, national sovereignty. This cuts right at the heart of national sovereignty of the United States of America. In essence, if we sign this treaty, we’d be saying we would allow an international body to come in and dictate to our industries, to our businesses, our people, what they could do and what they couldn’t do. Use of what of energy, which sources of energy, the costs of energy. And fifth, national security implications. IF this treaty was signed it would have disastrous implications on our national security. It would mean that we would have to fly less. Would shut down many of our military training activities.” 

This is a massive income redistribution plan to provide money for third world nations.

Geogetown University Historian Carol Quigley, in Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time (1966),exposed the plans of a small cabal bent on world conquest. Quigley stated:

These private groups, meetings and conferences, they include the Round Table, the core of the CFR, the Club of Rome, the Trilateral Commission, the Bilderberg Group, and many others (all have the goal of world government, one-world community, new world order). They see themselves as head-hunters. They are globalist leaders who believe that politics should not be in the hands of the politicians.

The commission on global governance formed in 1994 by UN. It’s report was ublished as “Global Neighborhood” in 1995- which acknowledges that environment is key to creating global. Provides flexible set of justifications and strategies needed to implement global governance.

“Considerable strides have been made in creating a system of international environmental governance to achieve global sustainable development through the management of cross-border environmental disputes and protection of the global commons.”

Man-caused global warming fits perfectly within the framework of international environmental governance. This report recommends:

The Congressional Budget Office says that such a CO2 tax would be “regressive in that poorer households would bear a larger burden relative to their income than the wealthier households would.”

Re-inventing Government-

Public Private Partnerships- shift decision making away from people to unaccountable bureaucracies. This becomes like the feudal system. Neo-fascist relationship between government and people,

creating monopolies.

Association of American Free Trade Agreements was a Stealth Trade Agreement.

Trade agreements has resulted increased profits for corporate sector by 45%. While American wages went up only 3%.

Al Gore uses 17 times more energy than the energy used by the average American. The average American uses 11,256 kw annually. Gore’s use 191,000 kw annually.