Friday, May 16, 2008

If Only ...

We had some news interviewers in the UK who would have the balls to take our politicians and so-called experts to task like this. I would have loved for someone to interview Blair like this and call him on his blatant BS before he invaded Iraq. The news media has been supremely craven and supine in their support for our corrupt political leaders for far too long.

Friday, May 09, 2008

Global Warming and Cooling - The Reality

Stephen Wilde has been a Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society since 1968. The first two article's from Mr Wilde were received with a great deal of interest throughout the Co2 Sceptic community.

In Stephen Wilde's third and exclusive article for CO2Sceptics.Com, he explores the mechanics and mechanism involved that are attributed to the Earth's Warming and Cooling, needless to say the presence of CO2 is not part of the process.

Global Warming and Cooling - The Reality.

It’s all very well doing what alarmists do which is to say that Co2 is rising and temperatures are rising so in the absence of any other known cause it must be man made CO2 that is warming the planet. That approach ignores both the differing scale of the possible influencing factors and the clear historical relationship between cooler climates and periods of a less active sun. The presence of the sun must be a much bigger influence on global temperatures than the greenhouse characteristics of CO2 on it’s own.

At most the greenhouse effect can only be marginal though some have tried to talk it up by asserting that the planet would be very much colder without a greenhouse effect, which is correct, but avoids the issue of the rather small proportion of the overall greenhouse effect provided by CO2 and the even smaller proportion provided by man. It also begs the question as to whether the oceans are slowly releasing CO2 as a result of natural warming. If the oceans warm for any reason they will release CO2 into the atmosphere because water holds less CO2 at higher temperatures.

The greenhouse effect, as a whole, may smooth out rises and falls in temperature from other causes but is not itself the determining factor for global temperature. If the heat from the sun declines the global temperature will fall with or without any greenhouse effect and if the heat from the sun increases the global temperature will, of course, rise. The greenhouse effect does not create new heat. All it does is increase the residence time of heat in the atmosphere.

Continues ......

I cannot fault this article. I have wondered for several years now how a tiny proportion of the tiny proportion of a natural atmospheric gas could have a greater effect on our climate than the interaction between the energy output of the sun and the energy store of the oceans. That has never made sense to me that the former was greater than the latter, or that it could even have any effect on the latter or more of an effect than, say, a fly hitting the windscreen would have on the momentum of a motor vehicle. I have always considered that our climate is merely the meeting layer and interactive layer between a huge energy output source (the sun) and a huge energy store (the oceans) The landmass has a smaller effect and the people on it practically none. You only have to use google earth to see how insignificant mankind is. Spin the earth and with eyes closed stop the spin and zoom into the surface, 7 times out of 10 that will be uninhabited water. Of the three times that land surface is encountered it is usually barren desert or mountains. People only have the feeling that we over populate the planet because we all live together and spend our waking experiences mostly in towns and cities. The vast majority of the earth is unspoilt nature.

The variations in the suns output, our irregular orbit around the sun and the electro-magnetic energy fluctuations, would have a far greater effect on the climate than any tiny proportion of a tiny proportion of natural atmospheric gas. To my way of thinking this is blindingly obvious.

Increasing the amount of "greenhouse" gas may have a tiny effect on climate, but to compare our climate to a greenhouse is massively and grossly over-simplifying our complex climate to the extent that it completely omits many of the critical and most fundamental regulatory mechanisms that actually occur in our real climate (many of which are omitted entirely from so-called sophisticated computer models). I was aghast when I read that many of these models cannot accurately model clouds and rain, and some omit them altogether. They do not model the solar cycles, they do not model winds correctly and they did not model ocean cycles at all until recently. The most hysterical models have the "greenhouse effect" creating a "tropospheric heat island" high in the atmosphere that reflects more heat back to earth in a positive feedback loop leading to the "tipping point" that starts catastrophic global warming. Inconveniently, the NASA Aqua satellite system has shown that the tropospheric heat island (central to the catastrophic human induced global warming scare) does not, in fact, exist in reality. The cooling of the earth since 1998 matches in with solar observations and the ocean's cooling as observed by the Argos sub-ocean probes. More and more evidence is coming in all the time that demonstrates that the earth IS cooling. Climate alarmists deny this and in desperation call it merely a "stalling of global warming". This suggests that warming is on-going and irreversible so that they can continue to get their fat grant cheques. In that case the last 200 years has been a long stalling in onset of the next ice age then!

To my way of thinking, the earth is either warming or cooling. It is always doing one or the other. As to trends over time, it depends on when you want to measure from or to. I could show dates that currently show that we are in a warming trend and others that show that we are in a cooling trend. Alarmists only allow dates that support their alarmism and refute all other dates as meaningless.

We should stop worrying about CO2 and start tackling the problems that DO exist. Tackling the destruction of ancient forests, the massive damage done to the Amazon and the ancient forests of Borneo must be a high priority. The Orang-utang is facing extinction because of the desire to grow palm for palm oil. This kind of rape and butchery of nature must be stopped. We should clean up genuine pollution. CO2 is NOT a pollutant. We must grow crops for food, not oil! We are witnessing mass starvation in much of the world so that the political class can feel pleased with themselves that they are "tackling climate change" in their knee-jerk over-reaction to a false alarm. Tackle climate change? that has to be the worst and most brain dead slogan I have ever heard. What do they propose to do? Move the earth further from the sun? This is truly the science and politics of King Canute.

Excellent article and also plain common sense.

Thursday, May 08, 2008

My considered response to Labour's kicking in the local elections.

Labour were utterly humiliated and crushed and about time too. There performance was terrible and it was a delicious delight to watch the hapless Harriet Harman squirm as the true scale of their fully deserved defeat began to sink in.

Their excuses for their failure are, though, just as inept as their inability to govern.

Thursday's election was not a call to "pull your socks up Gordon" or a reaction purely to the 10p tax bad being DOUBLED (it was NOT abolished) People paying tax on that band are now and will continue to pay tax at 20p, that is NOT an abolition. I wish the media would finally after 14 months and hundreds of letters finally get a fucking clue and report the simple truth that this was a tax doubling not a tax abolition.

No the 10p tax was merely the straw that broke the camel's back. The re-introduction of 10p will not fix the splintered vertebrae.

What the 10p tax doubling showed in very simple and graphic terms was the character of a Government that will spend more than £100 billion pounds in loan guarantees bailing out billionaire bankers from billions of pounds of worthless loans, whilst doubling the income tax on 5 million of the poorest people in the country.

That stark realisation is what has not only lost labour a big chunk of their natural support, but utterly disgusted and sickened many of those whose father's and grandfather's had always voted labour so they must too... It took such a stark contrast to throw into graphic relief the difference between the support that Labour cravenly give to the billionaire bankers and the sickening contempt in which they hold their working class base.

That kind of awakening, forced by the sudden sickening jarring of realisation of contemptuous betrayal cannot be bought off lightly. Nor will it ever be forgotten by those whose taxes have now doubled.

Thursday's election was NOT a warning shot. Neither was it the labour party failing to get their message across. Labour's message, by their numerous and on-going vile, arrogant and corrupt actions, has got across very very clearly indeed and the result on Friday morning was the country had told that complacent and arrogant Labour party to FUCK RIGHT OFF!!!. Never return. No excuses, no fourth or fifth chances, no cheap policy initiatives to buy our support back. Labour have had numerous warnings before.

Every national election since 2001, except ONE general election, has been won by the Tories. So that is every local and European election that labour lost was a warning to labour. They did NOT listen to any of them. The sight of an unelected labour leader lecturing Mugabe on democracy after Brown has reneged on a promise to hold a referendum on the EU treaty sticks firmly in the throat.

Thursday was a national cry of enough is enough! Get out of power and never darken our political landscape with your oppressive centrist authoritarian politically correct ineptitude and corruption ever again.

The media that keep referring to this as the "abolition" of the 10p tax band will never ever get why this is such a pivotal moment and I cannot for the life of me understand why the media will keep insisting of referring to it as the abolition of the 10p band, as if just re-instating the 10p band will make everything OK again... It won't.

The fact that the labour party doubled the income tax whilst prices rise and at the same time have set aside hundreds of billions of pounds to bail out bankers has shown that the mask has slipped to reveal, in all it's ghastly nastiness, the real face of labour's leadership, this cannot be undone. Putting the mask back will not make people forget the horror's that laid beneath.

I would ask that anyone who still had the hatred in their hearts or the mendacity to vote labour to explain to me, how it is morally acceptable to spend billions bailing out the billionaire bankers whilst doubling the income tax on 5 million of the poorest workers in the land? This is a spiteful and cruel act upon a minority group of some of the most vulnerable people in the land. Spiteful and cruel acts on homosexuals are now illegal. spiteful and cruel acts against people because of the colour of their skin is now illegal.

In my humble opinion, voting labour now is on a par with racism or gender/sexual preference discrimination and should be legally classed as a hate crime.