No Cap and Trade

Home

Danger of

Cap & Trade

YouTube

Videos

Background

Science

Emerging

Science

Sun's &

Ocean's Role

A Century

of Cycles

Heat

Island

FAQ

Climate

News

Links

Contact Us

 

Emerging Science

 

Temperature and CO2

Climate Models and Killer Storms

CO2 vs. Sun and Oceans

Fraud and Misrepresentation

   

                                    Fraud and Misrepresentation

Click on graph to enlarge

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the media, and Al Gore repeatedly say that the science of global warming is settled and that only a radical fringe group of corporate-sponsored scientists disagree with the scientific consensus that man is causing global warming. Over $50 billion has been spent to support that believe. However, even as far back as 2003 a survey was conducted among all climate scientists (those actually having climate PhDs and working specifically on climate issues) showed that there was barely a majority, let alone a consensus that man was causing global warming. When the question was asked, "was the scientific debate about climate change over," less than half of the respondents agreed with the question. An equal number disagreed. This is far from a consensus among scientists who can actually speak to the issue.

In 2001 a voluntary petition was sent to all scientists in the United States stating that, among other things, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate." At that time, 17,000 scientists signed it. When the same petition was sent out in 2008, 31,000 scientists signed it, almost double the number in 2001. Nine thousand of these had PhD's in the physical sciences. This compares to only about 60 (not 2500) that support the IPCC's man-caused theory. More are signing every day. The IPCC's, media's, and Gore's instance that there is a consensus among scientists that the science is settled is completely false, designed to hide the fact that the entire effort is politically, not scientifically, motivated. Every effort is made to silence the dissenters, yet more and more scientists are speaking out because the actual science supporting man-caused warming is non-existent.

In 1998 a team of scientists applied a statistical analysis to a selected data set of earth's past temperatures and reported that instead of having a Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Optimum over the past 1000 years, the earth's temperature was relatively flat, until the latter half of the twentieth century when it skyrocketed, allegedly providing proof positive that mankind was causing the warming due to CO2 emissions. The curve was called the Hockey Stick Curve because of the similarity of the graph to a hockey stick. Without verifying these results, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) made this graph the centerpiece of its 2001 Summary for Policy Makers. When other scientists tried to verify the results, Dr. Michael Mann (the lead author of the study) refused to provide the data set to the scientists wanting to verify his results.

Click on graph to enlarge

 
Finally, two Canadian scientists found out the data set used by Mann, and analyzed Mann's statistical approach. They determined that Mann and his team used incorrect statistics to come up with the curve. In fact, it was so bad that the same curve was created even if they inputted a completely random data set. The curve was a function of the statistics used, and had nothing to do with reality. When the Canadian scientists applied the correct statistics, out popped the Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Optimum (see above). Worse, a scandal at Great Britain's Climate Research Unit in the late fall of 2009 revealed that the data used in the graph after 1960 was from a totally different and completely corrupted data set. Even if the second data set was not corrupted, combining two radically different data sets (apples and oranges) into one graph negates its scientific validity.  Although the Hockey Stick Curve was thoroughly discredited, it continued to be used in publications and media reports for years, and was a main component of Al Gore's video The Inconvenient Truth. Perhaps the most alarming aspect of this episode is that even after having his error exposed, Dr. Michael Mann is still a principal scientist in the IPCC and receives millions of dollars from the US government. Tragically, this kind of slipshod research has also been discovered coming out of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. Since the finding that NASA's temperature data was in error in 2007, other errors are being reported.

Click on graph to enlarge

 
Although Al Gore's video, The Inconvenient Truth has been show in almost every middle and high school in America, it is very biased and error ridden. The former Science Advisor to Prime Minister Thatcher was so alarmed at the errors, biases and exaggerations that he sued the British government to keep it from being shown in England. After the British High Court reviewed all the evidence, they ruled against Gore outlining 9 serious errors (there are over 30 errors totally). The Inconvenient Truth cannot be shown in public schools today without a disclaimer that is a political film with numerous scientific errors. To read the court's decision in these articles click here, here and here.

Click on graph to enlarge

 
One of the most exaggerated claims made in The Inconvenient Truth is that if half of Antarctica's and half of Greenland's icecaps were to melt, sea levels would rise twenty feet or more, flooding coastal cities and islands. The images used in the video are very graphic and alarming. While Gore's claim is technically more or less correct,  the message he gives that it could happen in the next few decades is completely false. First, as noted above, earth has experience much warmer temperatures in the past and neither icecap melted. It would take thousands of years at these temperatures for that to happen. Second, even the highly political and biased reports from the IPCC say that at the very most, ocean levels might rise 23 inches in the next 100 years, and only then if warming continued to increase at the rates experienced in the last quarter of the twentieth century. Third, we are likely entering a cooling period, so the issue is no longer relevant. In fact, Greenland's icecap is not losing ice mass, and the rise in ocean levels has slowed significantly.

Click on graph to enlarge

 
A serious error was found in the NASA temperature data for the United States in 2007. When corrected, it was determined that the warmest year in the past 100 years was not in 1998 and 2006 as previously believed, but was 1934, followed 1998. 1921 became the third hottest year, followed by 2006 and 1933. Out of the five hottest years, three occurred in the 1920s and 30s and only two were in the past 10 years. Notice that the US data do not have the same steep increase in temperature shown in the corrupted data of Britain's Climate Research Unit's data in the graph above. This dramatically changes scientists understanding of the importance of the warming that has occurred since 1975. The period between 1995 and 2009 is no warmer than the period between 1920 and 1935. This error in the NASA data has lead to discoveries of other errors in the data which are raising concern about data integrity of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies.

Click on graph to enlarge

 
Although global warming models show that both polar regions should warming with CO2-caused global warming, the various stations maintained in Antarctica show Antarctica to be cooling over the past two decades. One research paper in 2008 allegedly showing Antarctica to be warming is being accepted with skepticism by the scientific community, even by those who still maintain that global warming is caused by human activity. The main criticism centers on the use of highly questionable equations to fill in temperature data between the widely scattered weather stations in Antarctica. It appears to many to be a repeat of the infamous hockey stick curve fiasco of the early 2000s.

The only place Antarctica has shown true warming is along Western Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula. This is where pictures of massive ice chucks breaking off of Antarctica come from that are shown on the news every couple of years. Research published in 2007-2008 found that this warming is NOT do to global warming, but to volcanic activity under the ocean and ice flows.

Click on graph to enlarge

 
While the correlation between atmospheric increases in CO2 and earth's temperatures is poor (r2=0.44), it is much better for solar irradiance and solar activity (r2=>70 -- The higher the rs value the greater the correlation). It has long been known that solar irradiance by itself does not provide enough energy to cause the warming on earth experienced in the twentieth century. However, when combined with the type of solar irradiance that is emitted during high periods of solar activity every 11 and 22 years (the solar cycle), there is a poorly understood, but good correlation. Solar flares, coronal mass ejections and other solar activity reach a maximum during the peak of each solar cycle and somehow influence ocean temperatures and therefore climate. One of the leading theories on this interaction is the interaction between solar activity and incoming cosmic radiation on cloud formation, explained below.

Click on graph to enlarge

 
Research done primarily at the Danish National Space Center has show there is a very high correlation between incoming solar radiation and cloud formation. Cosmic radiation originates from exploding super novae. When the cosmic radiation enter the earth's atmosphere, they excite water vapor molecules, causing them to clump together (condense) into tiny water droplets which form low elevation clouds. These clouds then reflect the solar radiation back into space instead of warming the earth. This causes the earth to cool.  When the sun becomes more active more solar flares, coronal mass ejections and other solar activity dramatically increase the solar winds which push back cosmic radiation thereby preventing the cosmic radiation from reaching the earth's atmosphere and creating more clouds. Since there is less cloud formation, more solar radiation reaches the earth's surface and the earth warms. It is estimated that this phenomenon can account for 85 percent of the warming that occurred in the twentieth century.

Click on graph to enlarge