EVEN MORE PROOF AGW IS BS: EARTH'S ELLIPTICAL ORBIT, VOLCANISM AND WARMING OCEANS

SCIENCE DAILY:

The Earth's orbital behaviors are responsible for more than just presenting us with a leap year every four years. According to Michael E. Wysession, Ph.D., associate professor of earth and planetary sciences in Arts & Sciences at Washington University in St. Louis, parameters such as planetary gravitational attractions, the Earth's elliptical orbit around the sun and the degree of tilt of our planet's axis with respect to its path around the sun, have implications for climate change and the advent of ice ages.

People often think of orbits as circular, but they're not that smooth and simple. They are often a less-than-perfect eccentric circle.

"All planets travel in an ellipse around the sun, but the shape of that ellipse oscillates," he explains. "When the Earth's orbit is more elliptical, the planet spends more time farther away from the sun, and the Earth gets less sunlight over the course of the year.

These periods of more-elliptical orbits are separated by about 100,000 years.

Ice ages occur about every 100,000 years, and they line up exactly with this change in the Earth's elliptical shape."

Er um... how does curbing our carbon-"footprint" change our orbit? IT DOESN'T!

REUTERS:

Rises in the sea level around Antarctica in the past decade are almost entirely due a warming ocean, not ice melting, an Australian scientist leading a major international research program said.

The 15-year study of temperature and salinity changes in the Southern Ocean found average temperatures warmed by about three-tenths of a degree Celsius.

Satellites also measured a rise of about 2 centimeters (about an inch) in seas in the southern polar region over an area half the size of Australia, Rintoul told Reuters.

"The biggest contribution so far has been from warming of the oceans through expansion," said Steve Rintoul, Australian leader of an Australian-French-U.S. scientific program.

Melting sea ice or Antarctic ice shelves jutting into the ocean do not directly add to sea level rises.

Er um... why is the water down there getting warmer!? VOLCANISM:

A volcano beneath Antarctica’s icy surface has been detected for the first time.

Under the frozen continent's western-most ice sheet, the volcano erupted about 2,300 years ago yet remains active, according to a study published Sunday in an online issue of the journal Nature Geosciences.

"We believe this was the biggest eruption in Antarctica during the last 10,000 years," said study co-author Hugh Corr, a glaciologist for the British Antarctic Survey (BAS). "It blew a substantial hole in the ice sheet, and generated a plume of ash and gas that rose around 12 kilometers (7.5 miles) into [the] air."

Brooding giant

Although ice buried the unnamed volcano, molten rock is still churning below. David Vaughan, a glaciologist with the BAS and a co-author of the new study, said the discovery might explain the speeding up of historically slow-moving glaciers in the region.

SOMEONE TELL AL GORE TO STFU. PLEASE.

BOTTOM-LINE: climate change is natural.

MORE SNOW RECORDS DESPITE AL GORE AND AGW

OREGON MAIL TRIBUNE:

... storms have brought abundant snow all over the Southern Oregon Cascades and Siskiyous.

The snow depth at the Siskiyou Summit (elevation 4,600 feet) on Jan. 31 was 65 inches, more than three times the average depth of 19 inches for the end of January, and the most ever measured at that site since record-keeping began in 1935.

The water content of the snow (18.4 inches) also set a record: It was 347 percent of the end-of-January average.

Two other sites within a mile of the Mount Ashland summit had about 160 percent of average snow depth for the end of January and 140 percent of average water content, said Steve Johnson of the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest.

Johnson worked in blizzard conditions Thursday to measure the snow.

"It was quite a day, with snow falling at two inches per hour," Johnson said. "The road was like coming west in 1840."

As of Friday, Crater Lake National Park had received a total of 348 inches of snow since October, 65 inches more than the average, and 127 inches of snow were on the ground at park headquarters.

On Sunday, the Rogue and Umpqua basins had a combined average snow water content of 152 percent of normal, and every basin in Oregon had at least 100 percent of average snow water content.

By Sunday morning, the Mount Ashland ski area had received more than 240 inches of snow for the winter, 80 percent of its annual average of about 300 inches, and there are 10 weeks of skiing still to come.

MORE SNOW THAN NORMAL - DESPITE HIGHER ATMOSPHERIC CO2 CONTENT.

• AGW = BS.
• AL GORE: STFU.

THIS IS ANOTHER REASON NOT TO NOMINATE MCCAIN: HE BELIEVES IN THE MAN-MADE GLBAL-WARMING NONSENSE - AND WILL RAISE TAXES TO STOP IT.

20,000 Scientists Denounce Global Warming Hysteria

BROOKES: Scientists denounce global warming hysteria

Time for an Australia New Zealand Royal Commission on Global Warming

A group of Australian and New Zealand organisations and scientists today called on the governments of Australia and New Zealand to set up an Australia New Zealand Royal Commission on the Science of Global Warming (to be known as "The ANZIG Royal Commission" — the Australia New Zealand Inquiry into Global Warming).

The chairman of Australia's Carbon Sense Coalition, Mr Viv Forbes, said that many groups and individuals in Australia and New Zealand had listened with alarm and disbelief to plans of both governments to saddle their people and industries with the burdens of carbon taxes and the risks of carbon trading which he described as "an open invitation to massive fraud" .

We also fear the enormous costs of taxing and decimating our backbone industries of farming, mining, power generation, cement making, forestry, mineral processing and tourism and subsidising many expensive and ineffective alternate energy proposals. The very high costs to society of the actions being proposed require that we settle the science before forcing the whole ANZ community into a futile and expensive exercise to solve a problem that may not exist. "Do it just in case" is not an option.

The Australian Government has set up the Garnaut Review to look into the likely costs of various proposals for reducing carbon dioxide emissions. However, we need a parallel independent inquiry into the science to determine whether any action at all is required.

The science is definitely not settled. Hundreds of qualified independent scientists around the world now question whether sufficient attention has been paid to the proven historical influence of natural solar cycles, and many other aspects of climate science. Since the scientific investigations for the IPCC fourth assessment report were completed 18 months ago, new research and new observations have cast serious doubt on many of the IPCC  s conclusions.

Everyone, from the highest government minister to the lowliest taxpaying consumer, must realise that unless it can be proved beyond reasonable doubt that carbon dioxide causes excessive global warming, there is no justification for imposing restrictions and costs on emitters of carbon dioxide.

These burdens will pass inevitably on to the whole community, and will fall most heavily on those who can least afford them. No valid, verifiable scientific proof has yet been established.

All we have are hypotheses and speculations based on computer models. Governments have a duty to create an opportunity for the full range of scientific evidence to be examined and evaluated. This can best be done by way of a Royal Commission of Inquiry.

Australia and New Zealand are both heavily dependent on primary production and world trade, neither have nuclear power, and both are leaders in science in the southern hemisphere. The whole hemisphere would be very damaged by the global warming extremism of Al Gore and old Europe.

Al Gore is more motivated by extreme Green politics than scientific truth while Old Europe believes that their nuclear capacity protects them from the carbon costs they plan to impose on others.

Mr Forbes said that this proposal is the joint initiative of The Carbon Sense Coalition based in Australia and the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, and is supported by individual scientists and industry representatives

... Mr Forbes said that it is clear there is growing concern among the world scientific community about the conclusions being promoted by the IPCC.

In contrast to the 2000 or so scientists who are claimed to have contributed to the IPCC (many of whom do not support the extremist political conclusions promoted by the IPCC) there are at least 20,000 scientists who have signed their names in public opposition to the IPCC. (See references below).

AGW = BS.

By supporting green taxes - and carbon trading and limiting the spread of coal power plants and nuclear power plants and oil exploration - the Left is DIRECTLY contributing to increased Third World poverty and degradation.

What th Third World needs is more electricity and more factory jobs - and a refrigerator and an electrical stove in every home.

Leftist policies prevent this.

IOW: AGW = BS which kills poor people.

UN PUTS A PRICE-TAG ON DEALING WITH GLOBAL WARMING HYSTERIA: $20 TRILLION

YUP: TRILLION (AP):

Global warming could cost the world up to $20 trillion over two decades for cleaner energy sources and do the most harm to people who can least afford to adapt, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon warns in a new report.

Ban's report provides an overview of U.N. climate efforts to help the 192-nation General Assembly prepare for a key two-day climate debate in mid-February. That debate is intended to shape overall U.N. policy on climate change, including how nations can adapt to a warmer world and ways of supporting the U.N.-led negotiations toward a new climate treaty by 2009, U.N. officials said Wednesday.

The treaty, replacing the Kyoto Protocol when it expires in 2012, could shape the course of climate change for decades to come. The Kyoto pact requires 37 industrial nations to reduce greenhouse gases by a relatively modest 5 percent on average.

Much of the focus has been on the United States, the only major industrial nation to reject the treaty, and on fast-developing nations such as China and India. Many are looking to next year, when a new U.S. president takes the White House. The leading contenders in both political parties favor doing more than the voluntary approaches and call for new technologies that President Bush espouses.

In his 52-page report, Ban says that global investments of $15 trillion to $20 trillion over the next 20 to 25 years may be required "to place the world on a markedly different and sustainable energy trajectory." Today, the global energy industry spends about $300 billion a year in new plants, transmission networks and other new investment, according to U.N. figures.

Now you can readily see why there are so many socialists, utopianists and crooked carbon-traders campaigning for all kinds of carbon schemes and carbon taxes - (including Johnny McCain!): they're ITCHING to get their carbon-free fingers on just a little bit dough!

And since AGW is BS every single solitary cent spent on curbing man-made CO2 is WASTED.

2007-8 is shaping up as not only the coldest of the short century, but one of the coldest winters in several decades.

Yet so convinced are the PC libs, the lefties, the assorted pseudo-do-gooders in the CW crowd, and the intimidated centrists that they don't even trust their own eyes. As in, "who ya gonna believe - Al Gore or your lying eyes!" It's the Emperor's Clothes all over again - and they will cost YOU AND ME $20 TRILLION.

If we MERELY nominate McCain, then it guarantees that we're going down that road.

And it will reduce ALL of our living standards and our incomes.

FOR NOTHING.

Sigh.

THE DEMS RUNNING CONGRESS ARE GETTING READY TO FURTHER DISTORT THE ENERGY MARKETS

NYTIMES: The Carbon Calculus

A CHANGE is in the works that could go a long way toward making alternative energy less alternative, and more attractive to consumers and businesses.

It’s not a technological fix from some solar-cell laboratory in Silicon Valley or wind-turbine researcher in Colorado or the development of some superbug to turn wood waste into ethanol.

Rather, the change would come from Washington, if Congress does what it has talked about and puts a price tag on greenhouse-gas emissions. Suddenly the carbon content of fuel, or how much carbon dioxide is produced per unit of energy, would be as important as what the fuel costs. In fact, it might largely define what the fuel costs.

That could shake up the economics of energy, handicapping some fuels and favoring others. Those that produce hefty emissions, like coal and oil, would likely look much worse. And some — sunlight, wind, uranium, even corn stalks and trash as well as natural gas — would probably look much better. “Carbon-negative” fuels that take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere as they are made, might even become feasible.

• PUTTING EXTRA TAXES ON CARBON IS IDIOTIC, AND IT DISTORTS THE ENERGY MARKET.
• CO2 HS NO EFFECT ON GLOBAL CLIMATE.
• GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE IS NORMAL AND ALWAYS HAS BEEN.
• NY'S LONG ISLAND - WHERE I GREW UP - WAS ONCE UNDER A GLACIER.
• ANTARCTICA WAS ONCE A TROPICAL FOREST.
• THE ARCTIC WAS FORMED DURING AN OTHERWISE GLOBALLY WARM ERA 91 MILLION YEARS AGO.
  
• CO2 IS A LAGGING INDICATOR OF WARMING AND NOT A CAUSE; IT ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

The Democrat/Green policy is pure leftism: Elitist do-gooders think they can pick winners and losers better than the marketplace.

They're policies won't make "alternative" energy sources more attractive EXCEPT BY DEFAULT, by making good old regular energy sources more expensive.

This has never worked anywhere at anytime in any market. If it did work, then we'd all be driving cars made in the USSR, and West Germans would be clamoring to get into East Germany. And Floridians would be risking their lives to get into Cuba. And Zimbabwe would be richer now than when it was called Rhodesia. AND SO ON.

If we want cheaper energy all we need to do is build more clean coal plants and nuclear power plants and drill for oil in ANWR and off the coasts of CA and FLA.

The day we announce we're building more nuke and coal power plants... the moment we annouce we are going to drill for oil in ANWR and off the coasts of FLA and CA, OIL PRICES WILL DROP 10%.

If entrepreneurs want to invest in wind and solar and coal conversion and anything else: LET THEM.

But don't do it with my money; don't tax me and use the money to benefit one type of energy over another.

Carbon taxes and carbon credits are leftist schemes which will hurt the economy and a declining economy will lower living standards - especially for the poor, and the children.

These schemes hurt the economy because they're of no real benefit; they decrease efficiencies and increase costs. They DISTORT costs and prices artificially.

AND WHY?! In order to reduce the amount of man-made CO2 put into the atmosphere - as if this would change global climate.

SIGH.

This is about as likely as changing the speed of the rotation of the Earth by stream-lining buildings.

DESPITE GLOBAL WARMING, SOUTHERN USA GETTING DANGEROUS COLD SPELL

AP: Southern Farmers Fret As Cold Sets In

A wintry system that added inches to record snow accumulations in some Northern states sent temperatures plummeting Wednesday in the South, where farmers scrambled to protect their crops.

Temperatures were expected to drop into the 20s and teens in parts of Florida by Thursday morning, following the 30-degree temperatures some northern parts of the state saw Wednesday.

The cold spell could prove devastating to the state's citrus industry, which is the nation's largest and already has suffered from years of disease and hurricanes.

"We will have a lot of growers across the state pulling all-nighters and keeping a close watch on their groves and the temperature," said Andrew Meadows, a spokesman for the grower advocacy group Florida Citrus Mutual. "We are cautiously optimistic the industry can weather this cold snap without significant damage."

To help growers, Gov. Charlie Crist has signed an emergency order to relax restrictions on transporting produce.

Crops can withstand some cold, but not for long. Thirty-two degrees for four hours will damage an orange, for example, but 28 degrees for that long can actually ruin the tree. Most of the citrus industry is situated south, for this very reason, and in those areas it was not expected to get as cold.

But citrus crops were not the only ones at risk. A broad variety of plants and produce - from broccoli and cabbage in the north to strawberries, tomatoes and corn in the south - are also threatened.

• TOO BAD THEY DON'T HAVE GLOBAL WARMING DOWN THERE.

THEY SHOULD QUICKLY BUY SOME CARBON CREDITS - AND BURN THEM TO WARM UP!

HURRY, IT MIGHT SNOW!

FRAUDSTERS WHO TRAFFIC IN CARBON INDULGENCES EAGER TO SEE WHAT THE UN COMES UP WITH IN BALI

JAKARTA POST: Global carbon market pins hopes on upcoming Bali gathering

Urip Hudiono, The Jakarta Post, Singapore

The global carbon trading market is pinning its hopes on the upcoming conference on climate change in Bali to lay out the kind of post-Kyoto emissions reduction framework that is needed for the further expansion of the market, which is estimated to have doubled in size this year to US$60 billion.

Among the specific issues that carbon market players will be watching out for during next month's conference are signs of greater commitment to extending the Kyoto treaty -- which will expire in 2012 -- and a greater variety of projects eligible for carbon trading.

• CLAUDIA ROSSETT ALREADY TOLD US ABOUT THE UN JUNKET - THE 20 NIGHT STAY IN A LUXURY RESORT IN BALI, JETTING THERE BUSINESS CLASS, ETC.

• AND MANY HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT HOW CARBON-TRADING IS PHONY, NOTHING MORE THAN BUYING INDULGENCES WHICH DO NOTHING TO REDUCE ATMOSPHERIC CO2, AND OFTEN MERELY LINE THE POCKETS OF THE TRADERS.

• NOW WE LEARN THAT THESE UNSCRUPULOUS CARBON TRADERS/POSING AS WORLD-SAVERS ARE SALIVATING OVER THIS UN CONFERENCE.

OF COURSE THEY ARE: THE PHONY INSTRUMENTS THE CARBON INDULGENCES DEALERS SELL DEPEND UPON THE ACTIONS AND SANCTIONS OF THESE INTERNATIONAL BUREAUCRATS.

• AGW IS BS.

• CO2 DOESN'T CAUSE CLIMATE CHANGE; IT'S A LAGGING INDICATOR - ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

AGW IS THE BIGGEST HOAX SINCE MARXISM.

THE LEFT'S HIDDEN AGENDA EXPOSED: DEMONIZING CO2 IS ALL ABOUT RAISING TAXES

NYTIMES:

A CHANGE is in the works that could go a long way toward making alternative energy less alternative, and more attractive to consumers and businesses.

It’s not a technological fix from some solar-cell laboratory in Silicon Valley or wind-turbine researcher in Colorado or the development of some superbug to turn wood waste into ethanol.

Rather, the change would come from Washington, if Congress does what it has talked about and puts a price tag on greenhouse-gas emissions. Suddenly the carbon content of fuel, or how much carbon dioxide is produced per unit of energy, would be as important as what the fuel costs. In fact, it might largely define what the fuel costs.

That could shake up the economics of energy, handicapping some fuels and favoring others. Those that produce hefty emissions, like coal and oil, would likely look much worse. And some — sunlight, wind, uranium, even corn stalks and trash as well as natural gas — would probably look much better. “Carbon-negative” fuels that take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere as they are made, might even become feasible.

Carbon dioxide is what economists call an “externality,” something that imposes a cost on somebody other than the manufacturer. At some point, the thinking goes, Congress will force industries to pay those costs, either with a tax or a cap-and-trade system in which allowances will cost money. The consensus in the energy business is that lawmakers will come up with a charge that could start at $10 per metric ton or more.

On Thursday, a Senate subcommittee approved a bill to establish a cap-and-trade system for carbon dioxide, and the Democratic leadership is eager to have the Senate pass it by year’s end. But prospects in the House are less certain.

• THE LEFT IS ANTI-CO2 AND ANTI-CARBON FOR ONE REASON AND ONE REASON ALONE: THEY WANT TOP RAISE TAXES, ESPECIALLY ON INDUSTRY.

• IT'S ALL BASED ON A THE FALSE PREMISE THAT CO2 IS BAD.

• MAY I REMIND YOU OF THE FACTS: CO2 IS NON-TOXIC AND DOESN'T CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING; (IT'S A LAGGING INDICATOR).

• CARBON-TRADING SCHEMES ARE ALL FRAUDULENT.

THEY'D MIGHT AS WELL TAX TREES AND EXHALING.

IF WE ELECT A DEM TO THE WHITE HOUSE THEY JUST MIGHT!

Carbon Positive

The Brits are not just carbon neutral, they are carbon positive.

Using previous international research into climate change, the report estimated that covering the social cost of carbon emissions would have cost £11.7 billion in 2005.

But receipts from green taxes such as fuel duty, road tax and the Climate Change Levy totalled £21.9 billion. On average every household in the UK paid £400 more in levies than it cost to cover their own footprint, the TPA claimed.

The British pound is currently worth about $2 American.

Evidently the Brits opinion on this (read the article) is that "Green" taxes are not about the environment they are about taxes. Al Gore is having a hard time fooling any one.

H/T Instapundit

Cross Posted at Power and Control and at Classical Values

NEWSFLASH: ELIZABETH EDWARDS TAKES BRAVE AND PRINCIPLED POLITICAL STAND

She's giving up tangerines because, somehow, someway, (I can't be bothered, to be honest) they contribute to global warming.

UPDATE: OK, my curiosity got the best of me. She is "sacrificing", as we all must. Here's the deal, tangerines are not grown locally. We must support locally-grown fruits and vegetables, because they have a smaller carbon-footprint.

In order to encourage such support of local fruits, we must tax the hell out of those damned foreigner fruits.

Therefore, Elizabeth Edwards, price-conscious consumer that she is, "will probably never eat another tangerine again."

It brings a tear to my eye, to be honest.

Reliapundit: Great post! WOW! Whatta freakin' nut. As if she couldn't afford a truckload of overtaxed tangerines. SHITE! She could fly them in on the private jet her hubby flies around the country in!

It'd JUST be funny except it actually TYPIFIES the core Leftist thinking.

Here's the money quote from the article you linked to (IMHO):

"I live in North Carolina. I'll probably never eat a tangerine again," she said, speaking of a time when the fruit is reaches the price that it "needs" to be.

The idea that taxes and regulations can best or more efficiently determine where prices "need to be" is the heart & soul of SOCIALISM and it has been proven wrong - PROVEN WRONG not just by Hayek, but by REALITY, by LIFE, by RECENT ECONOMIC HISTORY.

It's simple: if central planning was better than a free-market then the USSR and Red China would be kicking ass instead of kicking up daisies!

As hard as this is for Leftists to accept - as "counter-intuitive" as it may seem - free-markets ARE MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at setting prices and supplying goods and services which people want or need.

The price of TANGERINES already INCLUDES the price of transportation, and doesn't need a "carbon footprint" tax to make the price "were it needs to be."

This comment by Mrs Edwards - (who seems to be the one with the BALLS!) - PROVES that the Left is really REALLY pushing the whole AGW/global warming/man-made CO2 BS in order to price things where they need to be priced - through taxes and regulations. IT'S SOCIALISM, AND IT HAS FAILED EVERY TIME.

Don't be fooled.

BELIEVE IT OR NT: COMPANY TO MAKE MILLIONS FROM ECO-NUTSIES DUMPING IRON INTO THE MIDDLE OF THE OCEAN!

WASH POST:

A small California company is planning to mix up to 80 tons of iron particles into the Pacific Ocean 350 miles west of the Galapagos islands to see whether it can make a splash in the markets where people seek to offset their greenhouse gas emissions.

Planktos -- with 24 employees, a Web site and virtually no revenue -- has raised money to send a 115-foot boat called the Weatherbird II on a voyage to stimulate the growth of plankton that could boost the ocean's ability to absorb carbon dioxide from the air. The company plans to estimate the amount of carbon dioxide captured and sell it on the nascent carbon-trading markets.

... In a bid for attention for another of its projects, Planktos said earlier this month it would offset the Vatican's carbon emissions by donating credits from trees being planted in a Hungarian national forest.

The company said it would make the Holy See "the world's first carbon-neutral sovereign state." It released a video that panned across St. Peter's Square to music from Johann Sebastian Bach's "St. Matthew Passion" and then cut to Cardinal Paul Poupard, who thanked Planktos chief executive Russ George.

SOME ECO-NUTSIES OBJECT:

... if the company started selling large amounts of ocean-based carbon credits, it could flood the market, reducing incentives for more reliable and measurable projects aimed at reducing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

BOTTOM-LINE:

"The global market for voluntary carbon offsets is currently unregulated," said Derik Broekhoff, senior associate at the World Resources Institute, "which has led to growing concerns about whether buyers are really getting what they are paying for."

THE WHOLE DAMN THING - AGW AND CARBON CAPS ANDS CARBON CREDITS - IS A SCAM OF A HOAX OF A SHAM AND A FRAUD.

CARBON-CREDIT TRADING IS MOSTLY A FRAUDULENT CON-GAME

FINANCIAL TIMES:

A Financial Times investigation has uncovered widespread failings in the new markets for greenhouse gases, suggesting some organisations are paying for emissions reductions that do not take place. Others are meanwhile making big profits from carbon trading for very small expenditure and in some cases for clean-ups that they would have made anyway. ... The FT investigation found:

■ Widespread instances of people and organisations buying worthless credits that do not yield any reductions in carbon emissions.

■ Industrial companies profiting from doing very little – or from gaining carbon credits on the basis of efficiency gains from which they have already benefited substantially.

■ Brokers providing services of questionable or no value.

■ A shortage of verification, making it difficult for buyers to assess the true value of carbon credits.

■ Companies and individuals being charged over the odds for the private purchase of European Union carbon permits that have plummeted in value because they do not result in emissions cuts.

THE WHOLE DAMN THING IS A FREAKIN' SCAM: FOR CROOKED "CARBON CREDIT" BROKERS, AND FOR LEFTIST YEARNING TO RAISE TAXES AND STIFLE INDUSTRIAL GROWTH.

DON'T FALL FOR IT!

THE REAL HISTORY OF CARBON DIOXIDE LEVELS

BUMPED UP TO THE TOP!

Prof. Beck's paper "180 YEARS OF ATMOSPHERIC CO2 GAS ANALYSIS BY CHEMICAL METHODS" has now been published in the journal Energy and Environment. A PDF copy of the full paper can be obtained from the author: egbeck@biokurs.de. Excerpt here. It shows that actual past measurements of atmospheric CO2 have undergone great variation in levels from time to time in the period surveyed. Levels were not "flat" before the 20th century, as is usually asserted. There is a discussion of the paper here. I mentioned this matter previously on March 9th. -- where there is also a link to an early version of the full paper.



(For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, DISSECTING LEFTISM,. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.) ORIGINALLY POSTED AT 8:59 AM - 3/24/07

AL GORE: ANTHROPOGENIC GLOBAL WARMING HUCKSTER

AL GORE:

Put simply, humans have destroyed the Earth. While some blame cow poots and others point to solar storms, I know for a fact that the Chevy Impala behind me -- and millions of vehicles like it -- are solely, completely responsible for warming the Earth.

... Scientists tell us that over the next five years, sea levels will rise by as much as three hundred feet. ... When that happens, millions of folks like you and me will have to leave their Malibu beach homes and migrate to the Midwest. Yes. They'll have to immigrate to... ... ... Red states. No tofu. No pet spas. And lots of pickup trucks. Oh, the humanity. ...

But there's a way you can make a difference.
We've found a way that you can pollute all you want.
Yep, you heard me right. Pollute all you want.
... With our amazing new product, Carbon Offsets™, you can pollute guilt-free!

RTWT. IT'S HILARIOUS. AND HAS PICTURES!

THE ENRON-ESQUE CARBON CREDIT SCAM

Thomas Lifson/THE AMERICAN THINKER:

The sale of indulgences [link added] for those who emit so-called greenhouse gases is built on widespread fraud. The illusion of "carbon neutrality" is very often nothing more than smoke and mirrors. Business Week, hardly a conservative source, has investigated a number of these schemes and found widespread questionable practices. [Umph added.]

... Nobody is reducing any CO2 emissions as a result of money changing hands. Common sense tells anyone that if you think it is a bad thing to generate carbon dioxide, you should curtail your activities that do so. Anything else is morally fraudulent.

Many people are getting rich selling this fraudulent crap. What they're really selling is merely a boost to the vanity of the purchaser - or their PC PR.