I hope colder winter and hotter summer is not caused by less earth protection air, whatever it is.

For you people on the cold part of the globe, i wish we could trade a bit of our heat for your cold. We are in the midst of a heat wave and heading into record temperatures it seems.
Adelaide heading for record hot week - Yahoo!7 News
Although the article refers to Adelaide which is roughly 700 to 750 km (about 450 miles) from my City, we have been having very siimilar weather. 43 degrees celsius (109F) today, and same temperature forecasted for the next two days. Forecasted to ease back after about the weekend, but still hot. It was 41 C (106F) yesterday. I do not recall ever experiencing repeatedly hot weather like this, without the weather cooling down after a day or two.

There is something going on with these extremes at both ends of the globe.

While we are busy arguing and pointing fingers, what about the the sum value of heat which the human population creates on this planet. Is that something to totally ignore?
Man generates heat from;
-800 million cars;
-electrical motors. They are everywhere; computers(fans, hard drives), refrigerators, building air cooling & heating systems, pumps, industry processes,
-electricity generation,
-Other industry processes
-any electrical or electronic product generates heat.
-every thing else that generates heat

One could assume all the heat generated by humans escapes into the atmosphere. One could completely ignore it too.

I just remembered that i had seen some information some time ago on a government web site regarding statistics. It is called The Australian Bureau of Meteorology.

Although the data is only for Australia, i think the continent is sizeable enough to make it a realistic possibility of being a global trend as well.

One can select various data, but what is of interest here, is the Temperatures in the Timeseries. The data stretches back to about the year 1910. There are options in the drop down menu for; Min ; Max, and Mean values; rainfall; sea temperatures. Unless the graphs are a fabrication by what i would call " the Cabal", the information clearly points to global warming. It is most evident in the Sea Surface Temperature dating back to 1900.

Timeseries Graphs

some say cooling, its as hot as a rattle snakes BUTT here, and his tennis shoes too

Deadly heatwave causes havoc across south-eastern Australia
Deadly heatwave causes havoc across south-eastern Australia - Telegraph

Hi People,

After the little ice age; I would expect a 100 year warming even more...
The sunspot connection has me worried; About it suddenly happening
again.

Dave

The magnetic block wall has something to do with heat in bulk,
Magnetism and heating/cooling on a planetary scale is related.

After the last solar pole flip the poles seemed to pull into the star
and as it settled for a while the pole were both of the same polarity
and the equator was the other pole. Since then sunspots are minimum.

Leading to possibly another maunder minimum and ice age, mini or not.

the either way dude
Dave

I am not a climate person or a weather geologist or any of those things. But I try to have common sense. What bothers me is the politicians that try to control companies, budgets, government, etc, yes like Al Gore. This guy knows not a lot more than I do, as he is a journalist and a politician. And what I am saying is this globe and the solar system, not to mention the galazy and universe, are too vast for us to be able to get a handle on just what the climate will be in 10 years or 20 years or 100 years or 100,000 years, or yes a million years.

Back to my scale. I have been living here 25 years about a block from a bay that opens into the Gulf of Mexico. I have been walking down to the same dock ever few days since I have lived here. And I look at the depth of the water on the dock, where it comes to on high tide, low tide, and storms, and it has not gone up a half inch over those marks since I have lived here 25 years. Now all I want is for those marks I am looking at to go up maybe a full inch before all the politicians, the saps, the United Nations, the tree huggers, and the Chicken Little's go running off in all directions saying the poles are melting. Is that too much to ask, that is before I cut back on driving, any more than I already have, to look for a place to live inland, to start turning co2 consumption control over to that crazy politician at the governor's office, to have the government and the United Nations take over the oil companies and control the distribution of oil, before we allow some others in other countries to control how much air conditioning I can use, to allow my life to be run by the government, please cannot I wait until I see the water rising an inch here on the ocean near where I live?

Look no one is saying that change does not take place over time, and yes the weather may very well be warming, just as it probably did 100,000 years ago before it went on a 20,000 year cooling cycle. And no one is saying that some CO2 might have some effect on this, just as those volcanos, and lightning, and forest fires, and meteors falling into the atmosphere and burning did 100,000 years ago. And no one is saying that sun spots do not effect all this, etc. I am just saying all those computer models will tell you what you want to hear based on what you base your program on. I will even say that sunspots may actually cause the earth to heat so much that we will all be inundated and roasted to extinction. That may happen or it may happen with cars burning CO2, and maybe rationing ourselves from driving or running our air conditioners may save the day, but I do not think those things are going to happen before we get some solid evidence. It turns my stomach for the poor sap tree huggers to say Oh My God we don't have time to wait to start cutting back and fighting this global warming. The only thing that turns it worse is Gore or somebody standing up on national TV and saying everything has been settled, all the evidence is now in, that we now know we are destroying life on earth, and there is no more room for argument or discussion. Now folks for someone to say this he has to be one more dumb bunny, and how dumb was I to have voted for this guy.

I think it was a sad day when politicians started to using "global warming" to toot their own horns, or the bureacrats at the United Nations to say it is definately in the can that global warming will destroy the environment if controls are not instituted. It was a sadder day when guys that call themselves scientists started pandering to which ever side funded their so called research.

Look folks tomorrow I am going down to look at those marks on the docks and if the water is not up an inch or so from where it goes to regularly, then I am going to come home, set down on my patio, not turn on those politicians on TV, and hope that little bird that comes to visit me from time to time comes by and sings me a song or two. If he does come then we, he and I, are not, for a little while, going to worry about the world coming to an end.

Bob

Bob, i can appreciate your comments. I also live on the water, in the FL Keys. In the over 20 years i have been coming here for vacation, and the 3 that i actually lived here, i've seen the water rise about 3 cm's against our dock.

Now, it is very difficult to accurately measure this: It must be done at the same lunar cycle day, at dead slack tide. And there cannot have been several days of overly hot or colder temperatures above the average before hand (since sea water will expand and contract, even locally). Also, there cannot have been much wind for several days (as it will "push" the water and change levels). But when these conditions are met, the small change can be seen as you said.

During that time, as an avid diver, i have also seen the water get noticeably cloudier... From all the toilets flushing into the water. And from the fact that the local politicians are more interested in getting payola from the condo developers than building adequate sewage treatment plants. I have also watched most of the coral reefs around here die.

The idea from the "Pro-" side of this equation is that the time to try and stop or slow it all is before the major melt-offs occur. Simple physics and math will tell us that the water would then rise... With disastrous consequences for everybody on the planet. Are we so sure it won't rise?

I have never met Al Gore, don't trust him, and really don't care what he has to say. I've come to the conclusion that because of the constant attacks on him from the political right, he has actually become a hindrance to the cause. I think it is "very odd"... And highly suspect... that he has been chosen to be the major spokesman for this issue that is really "trans-partisan" and should be way above politics... Considering he is the one person who is automatically disliked by about 49% of the population from the get-go. Many people will crap on what he supports, simply because he is the one saying it.

The "Ron Paul Revolution" was an extremely powerful new force in American politics. Think about this: What do you think "they" (those who hold power) fear most...? Could it be an alliance between the Left and the Ron Paul people (...suddenly being the most populous faction in American politics)? Q: What is the single largest issue that they disagree on? A: Global Warming. Divide and conquer.

The people in power have no need to use GW as a means to control us further: They already have enough ways to do so. "Homeland Security" (a term i despise, since it was coined by hitler in 1933) has worked very nicely. Now they are using the fear of economic collapse... Fear of losing our pensions, 401k's, jobs, healthcare. Unfortunately, i know many peeps who would walk into tyranny with arms wide and mouths shut... Giving up their personal freedoms to keep their corporate jobs, to keep from losing their $300k homes, to get relief from their $20k of credit card debt.

Jibbguy:

Without a doubt there are many areas where water pollution is a serious problem for fish, coral reefs, scuba divers, etc. No one disputes this. The same for polluted air in some areas. But these rivers, sewage dumps, etc, when corrected have shown to correct itself in relatively short time and in a very measurable way. Like the water clears up and fish come back. And smog clears up or improves as regards the air.

The thing is that is totally different than the Global Warming bureacrats and etc, that say adding CO2 to the air will cause global catastrophy unless soon corrected. I am just trying to say that per what my Grandfather said about weather in his time does not sound a lot different than what I am seeing now. And he was alert and working and raising a family on a farm in the early part of the 1900's.

As for observing water rising by eyeballing it on marks on docks over a good many years and observing at relatively the same times and conditions and seasons is not that tough an observation for a sane person. There can be some changes in some places as the Earth is not a perfect ball and it morphs some due to changes in tides, wind currents, seasons, sun spots, and yes climate cycles. No doubt the gravitational pulls of the moon and planets effects it some too. But with all that I have seen nothing remarkable. You say you have seen an inch rise, but you also say why this small amount could be due to any number of reasons. That is my argument. All these things you mention are not going to bring down civilization. I still say to ration ourselves is foolish, and it certainly is if we can't get every other country to do it, and I can assure you we cannot. Try getting the Chinese to stop burning coal for example.

I am just saying the big burner increaser in our culture over the last hundred years has been the automobile, and that, as much as it seems to us small thinkers, it has not been enough to cause catastrophy to the planet, in my humble opinion. There is even some evidence and argument that it might be beneficial for plant life, which life on Earth is dependent upon, and some global warming itself would be beneficial to plants as well.

Again local pollutions are one thing, and catastrophic global warming is entirely another. The attacks on pollution which has cleaned up rivers and streams, and helped with smog in places like Los Angeles, did not require rationing of driving or gasoline nor did it cut back on air conditioning, etc. Much more sensible measures were used.

An example of bureaucrats getting in over their heads to me is the area here where I live. We have beautiful beaches and with the world's most beautiful sand dunes. Well someone decided that people were not to walk on these dunes as the foot steps and paths would provide erosion trails and the dunes would be eroded away by wind and rain cutting along these paths. So I am forbidden from walking along these dunes and enjoying the scenry of the beaches and the ocean. Well it happens that this area is also in an area frequented by hurricanes, and guess what, yep ever so often the dunes get washed away by a particularly bad hurricane. And so efforts are made right away for them to start naturally coming back, and this includes no people walking on them. To me life is for the living. I am a tree hugger as much as the next person, but it is just dumb to keep people from walking on the dunes when a storm will in all probability wash them and change them around anyway.

If we can assure that catastrophy is in the offering due to buring fossel fuels than that is one thing, but if it is a theory only, and I think it is, then lets conserve oil in a meaningful way that is respectful to people living on this globe today. And that does not mean restricting our standard of living to severe degrees, when what will probably happen is someone else will severly restrict others, but favored people such as himself will be exempt of course.

Bob

Hehehe Bob, yes yer right my rant about the water pollution and political corruption here in the Keys has nothing to do with GW Its just one of those things that once i get wound-up on, its gonna blow!

I'm old enough to remember the bad-old-days before the great successes of the Ecology movement in the 70's. I grew up on the shores of Lake Erie, which was arguably the very worst example of how Man can ruin his enviroment... The entire lake stank, even out in the center of it you could not see more than 3" down. Oil, dead fish, and styrofoam balls could be seen floating in it all over. And once the laws changed, and chemical and large manufacturing corps were forced to clean up their act, the Great Lakes bounced back amazingly quickly... Now, it is actually possible to drink the water 20 miles out in Lake Erie (.. as a stunt, i don't recommend it for regular use lol). The point of this is that it didn't take hardly any changes in our life style to accomplish this.... Only in the life-styles of corporate executives

So it is with Climate Change. They want to sell you on the horrors of the worst-possible scenarios of Carbon taxes (a totally dead-dog in Congress anyway), energy rationing, draconian measures outlawing jet skis, snowmobiles, 4-wheelers, SUV's, and power boats... You name it. Orwellian nightmares of government control and loss of Freedoms.

However, the greatest possible gains in this would come the same way as it did in the 70's: From the corporations changing their polluting ways. Ending or curtailing the huge amounts of pollutants going out from coal and oil fired boilers, and the gassing-out from strip mines would be by far the most effective thing we could do... And not only for carbon, but a whole range of dangerous chemicals.

I would submit to you all, that forcing these changes would not have any more effect on us as the Ecology movement of the 70's did (for most peeps, that means having to sort your trash for recycling). These things CAN be done without losing our liberty.

However... They will never be done at all as long as the people who have to foot the bill for those changes can convince everyone that it is an "evil conspiracy" .

Jebb,

All that polution of the 70's that you are blaming on the bad old corportations was mostly caused by city, county, and state mishandling of sewage and mostly dumping it into local waters. Or the same city, county, and state officials not passing laws to stop the polluting offenders.

But whatever, you acknowledge it can be cleared up fairly quickly by stopping the water polluting (or air polluting). And you are going against your own argument as you are also claiming it is the automobile causing the current catastrophy of the planet. That my friend is me and you, us coarse folks that travel, and cool and heat our houses and light them. You say oh it would all be cleared up by the smallest of corrections in our standards of living. Cut back a little here and a little there, hardly noticeable. Well now does that not depend on how far you are told to cut back? Do you trust bureacrats that much, especially when they don't have to cut back? I sure do not. But again I would go along with what ever they said cut back to if they had a valid basis for so ordering me to do so, and I am saying they do not. It is all a theory. Twenty five years ago the theory was global cooling, another ice age coming. Somewhere along the line it was the greenhouse effect, and a hole in the ozone, and other things. The media sold this as it sounded good and exciting enough to sell papers and magazines and get people to watch the news. Then the politicians got into it as a way to control things. It stems from politicians finding they could control with passing laws requiring Environmental Impact Statements, and then when these EIS's said the snail darter was endangered they could forbid the bridge or the dam or whatever. Unless there was proper campaign contributions properly donated of course.

I am not saying that corporations should not have to abide by laws just like all the rest of us poor saps do. They should be required to be responsible. But within that statement I do not accept that corporations are not run by responsible people. They are people like me and you. They are not the media styreotypes of the cigar chomping, spatz wearing, stick pin wearing fat slobs of baby eaters and general bullmooses. They are just like every single person born in our epoque and era, just like you and me, they will not do any thing that does not benefit them in some way, and they will stop doing anything that does not continue to benefit them in some way. This however does not make us bad people. It just makes us human people that will do good far more than they will do bad. And yes I have heard of the evil Enron monsters, but they were hauled into court and heartily chastised.

And if you think bureacrats assuming control would suddenly bloom into grey beard noble leaders always having no self interest as opposed to those bad old executives you are accusing of taking us down the prim rose path, then you are truly self deluded. Actually under your grey beard selfless leadership you wouldn't have that at all. You would have the exact people that would otherwise run the corporations. And they would run the govenment owned and managed system exactly the same way they would the corporations. The only difference being there would be no restraining tandem institution as exists under our free enterprise system which is electoral government with its checks and balances. If the government is all there is then who is going to restrain them? Occasional revolutions perhaps?

But back to pollution, it is my view that the advocates of catastrophic Global Warming claim that burning fossel fuels is the monster of the midway, not mismanaged sewage, garbage, trash, fertilizers, insecticides, etc. So I think they are saying that no matter how much we clean up streams, rivers, and oceans as long as we drive SUVs as much as we want then we are headed for unbridled weather and water inundation. I am just saying Hey guys until we are sure lets not force most of us into lawn mower sized vehicles that we can only drive a limited amount. Or put most of us on bicycles, or cut off electricity much of the time to shut down cooling and heating. Hey I live in Florida and I am not sure I can make it without my AC in the summer.

Hi Guys,

Just found this report on the extent of Arctic Sea Ice at the end of 2008. The result...... same as 1979!

DailyTech - Sea Ice Ends Year at Same Level as 1979

What can I say?

Peter

Polar Sea Ice Cap and Snow - Cryosphere Today

February 15, 2009
In an opinion piece by George Will published on February 15, 2009 in the Washington Post, George Will states "According to the University of Illinois' Arctic Climate Research Center, global sea ice levels now equal those of 1979."

We do not know where George Will is getting his information, but our data shows that on February 15, 1979, global sea ice area was 16.79 million sq. km and on February 15, 2009, global sea ice area was 15.45 million sq. km. Therefore, global sea ice levels are 1.34 million sq. km less in February 2009 than in February 1979. This decrease in sea ice area is roughly equal to the area of Texas, California, and Oklahoma combined.

It is disturbing that the Washington Post would publish such information without first checking the facts.

end quote




I believe ice thickness explains the winter/summer area divergence from 1979 to now on the graph at the link below. Also we are now at solar minimum, just wait 5 years.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosph...a.ice.area.pdf

Thank you for your clearing up this.

The Northern Hemisphere Sea Ice Anomaly graph looks very urgy:

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosph...rrent.anom.jpg

We are now at the solar minimum. Apparently, any rebound in solar radiation will further complicate the problem.

Dear Poii,

Thanks for posting this link. It does a better job of explaining the recent data than the article that I found. Thank you.

But this brings up another point I would like to make, and that is, the generally recognized "pseudoscience" of "predicting the future". No one has ever been any good at it, and this includes the "Global Warming Cabal".

The most important historic reference here is in relation to the WEATHER. It was determined, early in the 20th century, that "knowing" what tomorrow's weather will be like would be quite valuable. The people involved in collecting information about what the weather is like "right now" (meteorologists) did NOT want to get into the business of "predicting" the weather. To overcome this problem, they INVENTED A NEW WORD to describe what they were going to be doing, and the WEATHER FORECAST was created. They were relatively assured that the public would not think of them as mere "psychics" if they replaced the word "predict" with the word "forecast", and so, the "spin doctor" was born and the public doubt about predictions was quieted.

Even with the biggest computer models available today, with all of the previous weather data in them, the weather forecast spewed out by these machines is very often WRONG. This is certainly true of long-term forecasting, but is also quite often true of the forecast for tomorrow's weather. The fact is, the Natural World is a living system, and knowing what a living system might do, or how it might respond to a specific stimulation, is nothing more than a GUESS.

"Global Warming" represents a climate forecast, a "long-term" climate forecast. It is based on incomplete data, run through relatively crude computer models of the climate system.

In engineering, there are very sophisticated 3-D physics simulation software packages available now. These computer models were developed over many generations of programming, and tested repeatedly against real world results, to fine tune the program code. Now, these software packages are remarkably accurate and automobiles and jet aircraft are designed, built and tested in the simulators before being built in physical form. When built, they perform nearly flawlessly, because of the accuracy of the software to MODEL the REAL CONDITIONS of the physics involved.

This is, in fact, what is missing with the Global Warming computer models. There has been no long-term, fine-tuning against real world conditions. If this "Global Warming" software was for sale, and the climate was a product in commerce, no one would buy it, because the method isn't mature enough to warrant placing a value on it. It's like Earthquake Prediction.... nobody believes in that! And no one would believe in Climate Prediction either if it had not been sold to us by a well funded media.

The rest is just fear-mongering and a multi-billion dollar PR campaign to sell the MYTH that it is the HUMANS that have caused the planet to warm up. This myth only looks reasonable if you look at short time frames, ignore solar output variations, and assume that the climate is inherently stable. The other way it looks reasonable is to not look too deeply at it and just believe what you're told.

Long-term climate data shows huge, natural swings of climatic conditions on this planet, many of which are related to solar activity, and many others related to other factors like deep ocean currents and atmospheric composition. CO2 is not a pollutant. It is one of the necessary components in the atmosphere that is used by plants to produce photosynthesis and release Oxygen. The ratio of these gases in the atmosphere has NEVER been stable. NEVER. There is no "base line". There are mean averages during different eras, but these are all different.

CO2 is routinely pumped into commercial greenhouse operations to INCREASE plant growth. And that would be the natural response of the living system on the planet if CO2 were actually "getting out of control".

Peter

Just saw on the news how a satelite recently launched failed to make it into orbit due to what they call a minor error, "the rocket was too heavy". I mean gee it could happen to anyone. It would seem to me to be a nice way of conveniently loosing the one instrument which could put a different spin on global warming. The satelite was designed to map green house gases. It would seem to me they were worried about the information it would produce.

Hi Guys,

Here is an announcement for an up-coming Conference on Climate Change. This one is NOT sponsored by the UN, multi-national corporations or the media. Its main title is: GLOBAL WARMING: WAS IT EVER REALLY A CRISIS?

The Heartland Institute - Welcome to the 2009 International Conference on Climate Change

It will be interesting to see what is reported at this gathering.

Peter

Lol it's been a challenge not to comment here without repeating myself

Please anyone, don't take offense at the below section; it's just some constructive sarcasm to help look at this problem from another angle...
___________________

Here's a convenient list of just some of the member's of the "cabal" of "corrupt" and/or "inept" scientists (lol, there's more PhD's listed here than there are lame excuses from the energy cartels for arbitrarily raising the gasoline, Diesel, and natural gas prices whenever the moon changes Phase )

http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documen...Action_fnl.pdf

I wonder why these con-artists listed there calling themselves "Scientists" just don't hide their heads in shame for perpetrating such a criminal world-wide swindle and conspiracy on us all; for taking the NWO's money to lie?!

But there they are, proudly displaying their names for all to see! Such audacity, such brazen disregard for decency! We should all get out the pitchforks and torches and give them a little visit tonight, and teach them some manners!

It's a good thing we here are so much smarter than they all are

___________

Seriously tho..

Actually, i recognize some of those names as past Customers of mine when i was in the instrumentation business, i've visited some of their labs. They were for the most part as i recall studious, courteous, bespectacled "geeks"; and i have a very hard time imagining them as stupid, corrupt, or even being politically motivated enough to lie about their chosen fields of study.

... So maybe they actually believed what was said there?

Again, we can certainly disagree with them. But when some do, why are these scientists then automatically considered to be shills, liars, fools, or even criminals? Could it be that they looked at the same data as others, and just came to different conclusions? ... Or is that concept too damaging to our egos: To accept that there are other "truths" (more accurately, other facets of the Truth) than our own..? Other valuable opinions? Other shades than Black and White?

This of course goes deeper than this particular subject; and everywhere in the Free Energy genre and the 'web in general we see these same attitudes every day (especially on that other forum, lol): This guy's a "shill for the NWO" because he attacked my idea... That person is a "troll" and "disrupter" because she continually brings-up negative aspects of my favorite technology. This group is a CIA front; because they promote differing ideas than "ours".

Although there may in fact be shills, trolls, even CIA fronts around the 'web... Lol, i can assure you their number is far smaller than what is suggested in these kinds of posts

It's time that we all agree to disagree without seeing it as an attack on us personally, or as some sort of scam or deception. Because when we do, all it ultimately does is expose us as being less secure, less sure in our beliefs than we would wish others to realize. Because those who actually are secure in their beliefs have no fear of facing dissent; no worries of being proved "wrong".

This will be an important point when it's time for us to be taken seriously by the rest of the world: At some time in the future when the Open Source movement may be the deciding factor and main means of introducing a new and successful Free Energy technology to the world....

We will be judged: Are we wearing our tin foil hats loosely; or do we have the Ground Wire firmly attached ?

Global Warming or Global Governance? (2007)


If you were to ask ten people on the street if mankind was causing global warming, at least eight out of ten would say yes. After all, Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth allegedly provides incontrovertible evidence that this is the case. Both presidential candidates are committed to passing economically devastating legislation that will do little to nothing to stop global warming. Contrary to what is heard in the media, however, there is overwhelming evidence that the warming we are experiencing is natural, with maybe a small amount contributed by man’s activities. Nor is there any scientific consensus. 31,000 scientists have signed a petition stating there is "no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide is causing...catastrophic" warming. The debate is still raging within the scientific community. In this DVD, Sovereignty International has put together interviews of respected climate scientists and biologists from numerous sources who explain, step by step, why Al Gore and the global warming alarmists are incorrect. In some cases, blatantly so.

The DVD also provides evidence that the global warming agenda is being funded with tens of billions of dollars as a mechanism to create global governance. Hear from congressmen, experts and even well-known news broadcasters how global governance puts global institutions, especially the United Nations (UN), that are not accountable to the American people in control of every aspect of our economy. The skyrocketing gas and food prices today are a direct result of this agenda.
Source
http://www.globalwarmingglobalgovernance.com

Download

RapidShare: Easy Filehosting
RapidShare: Easy Filehosting
RapidShare: Easy Filehosting
RapidShare: Easy Filehosting
RapidShare: Easy Filehosting
RapidShare: Easy Filehosting
RapidShare: Easy Filehosting
RapidShare: Easy Filehosting
RapidShare: Easy Filehosting


No Password

The worst thing is how they are ignoring well documented info on the magnetic poles reversing.
Their is a quete a bit of evidence that somthing happening with the poles. The largest peice of evidence is a spot east of South America in the ocean (How many square miles i can't remember) that has a 2-3 times more solar radiation peering down on it. It is so high they do not recomend prolonged exposure to the sun in this area. Do to radiation sickness not just sun exposure.
I was watching the Discovery science channel and they had a 1 hour show on global warming followed up by a 1 hour show on this radiation and its causes. But it was never mentioned as a factor in global warming. When clearly it should have some contributing factors at minimum. I would think solar radiation hitting the water would have some effect. Heat if anything.

I think though the reason these (Anti CO2) people have taken such a stance with no tolerance is due to the fact that they have been trying to bring attention to this problem for some time.
Everytime a scientist or physist comes out againts them the right wing nazi, neo-cons, big energy zombies immediatly use that as proof that global warming doesn't exist. And disregard all causes.
So they (The anti CO2) take a no telerance for anything else approach, and because of that they now have started a trend.

It to bad they ignore everything else. Reminds me of that fellow H.A.Lorentz. Who mearly wrote that the Heavyside component was not Mathmaticly calculateable and should disregarded. Look what that has turned into...

Matt

Ash is right. Its about government control. This another contrived crisis. More fear mongering to keep folks from learning the truth.
Paid spokeman and scientist producing any results they are told to produce in certain applications.
The goal it to turn the public into sheep that will be lead...

Certainly we need to be good stewards of the non-renuable energy sources. Yes we are developing alternative systems right here and now. Yes we will driving electric vehicles 20 years from now. However not due to Al Gore and some slant science scaring children.

Its really time for Big Gov and Big Oil to start acting like adults. Gee ExxonMobil only made $45 Billion in profits in '08. If there were real leaders in this world. They would be scaring the board of that and other energy company executives. Rather than giving kids bad dreams!

Thesis -> Antithesis -> Synthesis

Problem -> Reaction -> Solution

Global Climate Change -> Were All Gonna Die! -> Tax Cow Farts

People have been handed the issues to debate over instead of coming up with them themselves. Global Warming vs Global Cooling vs No impact on the environment, etc...

Just like in the USA... people are essentially closed (as in closing a sale) on their choices... Will that be cash or charge?.... will that be Republican or Democrat?...2 sides of the same coin...just illusion of choice to have people debating nothing more than two paths to the SAME agenda.

The Bilderberg's agenda is to tax us to death on carbon emissions, while convincing us that we're responsible for the climate change. It has always been their plan to convince the people that there is a man-made catastrophe that will give the powers that be the ability to pass more laws and gain more control over the people because of it. Just a global psyops propaganda scheme that they have NOT been secret about.

As far as our energy use, the only thing we really have control over regardless of if it causes climate change or not is pollution.

People will remain divided forever like democrats and republicans if they argue global warming or cooling or no impact.

The only thing that I can see that could be agreed on by most people is that we need to reduce pollution while keeping the climate change argument out of the conversation. Reducing pollution, keeping toxins out of our water, land and air, food, etc...

I think this is the productive focus....as I've believed for a long time, if it is going to get hot I want to breathe clean air and if it is going to freeze, I still want to breathe clean air. I can't change what the sun is doing to the Earth but I can control how dirty or clean I leave the planet.

I reckon constantly changing weather is proper functioning of the biosphere. Water, air, and food that kills you aint.

Peace
PJ

Hi all,

Out ability to accurately interpret archeological, ice and other records is recent ... what ... 200 years of scientific record keeping ... 50 year of interpretation. It's enough though to conclude that we are in a natural cooling cycle, and this is also according to NASA.

But please just remember that as we are in this 'cooling cycle', CO2 and other greenhouse gasses continue to accumulate. So in essence, there is a latent 'warming trend' operating in the background. When the next 'natural warming cycle' swings into play it will likely result in a devastating warming of the planet.

Or not,

Greg

In "Free-Energy Research of Eric Dollard, A Collection of Contributions to The Journal of Borderland Research" (1987) there is an interview with Eric Dollard, in which he says the following:

"T: There's some popular literature on the market today claiming that the strange weather patterns the earth has been experiencing over the last ten years or so are being caused by Soviet use of Tesla apparatus. Have you done any research which would confirm or deny such claims?

E: The claims are basically groundless. I did a four year research project at Sonoma State University (California) involving the relationship between the planets in general, the sun and the weather on this planet, and the effects of solar flares on the weather, the effects of planetary alignments on solar flares, the effects of these things on radio propagation, earthquake activity, and tried to tie the geometries of all these energy patterns together. I found the weather patterns were very tightly coupled to the solar flare cycles, the Russians really don't have anything to do with this. Any effect the Russian Woodpecker signal would seem to have on it would be purely incidental because during these periods of intense solar flares signals like the woodpecker would be sounding louder and propagating better. Maybe its an advantageous point for the Russians to utilize the signal. This seems to be the case. But to think that the woodpecker is making solar flares on the sun and controlling the times at which the planets align is absolutely absurd! As far as all these geometric patterns being seen in the sky, the Indians and other ancients knew about these patterns and they look like the patterns generated by mundane forces such as water and dielectricity.

T: What do you feel the woodpecker is and what is its use?

E: Its a non-Hertzian, shortwave signal which could be used for one of two things. Either its used for sounding and exploring the electrical system of the planet or more likely its a cryptographic signal utilizing the spread spectrum technology of frequency hopping and direct sequencing modulation. It is not an ELF signal!

T: Then the cloud patterns are the indicators of cosmic flux?

E: Exactly. A well trained observer can look at the sky and it serves as a metering of the intensity of the cosmic energy which exists at a particular point in space and time. I've utilized this during periods of heavy solar flares to get an idea of the flare's more subtle characteristics by watching the geometries they produce in space, particularly at the intervals when the solar flares have stopped and all the earth is receiving the discharge from the flares. These discharges produce very profound cloud patterns and of course heavy rain. So the heavy rain cycles were produced by the enormous flares of solar cycle 21, which were cranked out between 1978 and 1982. The flares were most intense around 1978 and as the flares died down we got an upward cycle of precipitation. Now we're at the point where the energy has mostly fizzled out and the weather is fairly indeterminate from the solar-terrestrial physics standpoint.

T: In January we've received reports that the coldest temperatures on record have hit England and on the same day we got a report of an abnormally high 46° temperature in Antartica. Dog sleds have to be run at night because of the heat. My research shows that some of the major contributing factors to the erratic weather patterns have been the mass deforestation of rainforests to produce toilet paper and newsprint, and also nuclear testing which is also directly related to earthquake and volcanic activity.

E: You have to keep in mind that mass deforestation and large amounts of thermodynamic and nuclear energy are going to have a much stronger effect than the subtle energies coming from the planets and the sun. Deforestation and nuclear energy are definitely going to be dominant influences. Being that the size of the earth and the scope of the phenomena are so large, and the frequency of events is slow, its going to take a while to see exactly what effect all these destructive actions are going have. It seems as though everyone intuitively knows that life is going to thoroughly disrupt and things are going to get pretty bad. You just can't keep whacking on the earth and expect things not to start changing.

T: There has been a lot of varying literature on the polar shift appearing over the last 30-40 years. One aspect which I've pursued is the magnetic reversal of the poles. In some of the Native American prophecies they say that the earth will get very hot and then very cold, and then things will balance out again. Does this relate to any electrical phenomena as you understand it?

E: At the point at which the earth's magnetic field equals zero, which happens between maximum positive and maximum negative the planet will cease to be a magnetic energy type of situation and become a dielectric energy type of situation. In most spatial geometry systems which contain electric energy the point of zero magnetic energy is the point of maximum dielectric energy. Interestingly enough, for navigational purposes you wouldn't be able to use iron, or magnetic, permeability type materials anymore. You'd have to start using dielectric permeability materials like ceramic for compasses.

T: Would this be a short lived situation?

E: It would be in balanced proportion to the magnetic and it is probably going on right now, but it is not generally acknowledged due to the lack of measuring instruments. Physicists have focused their attention strictly on magnetism. In a newspaper article I was looking through the other day I saw that the physicists now have an even bigger magnet so they can smash atoms ever harder and find more little tiny fragments to catalog and confuse themselves. What could be quirkier than a quark? (laughter)

T: If this is happening right now and there is a dielectric propagation during the changeover of the magnetic poles could this in some way account for the shifting of orgone streams and be a part of the phenomena of the strange weather we've been having?

E: Yes, it could definitely tie in. You're talking about a whole different spatial geometry emerging as far as how electrical energy is distributed so you're going to have all kinds of effects. The weather is filling in patterns that already exist in space determined by all these fields of force, most of which we don't even know about yet. Tesla was able to open up a door into all these things, but he really didn't explain how to do it. There are other flux fields that can be measured with his apparatus that get more into this dielectric type of situation. Tesla was successful in measuring the amount of charge on the planet, but no one really knows how he did that. That would be an experiment to try. The velocity of light continually changes which changes the capacity of all capacitors and changes the effect of orgone. A fundamental property of an orgone accumulator is that the dielectric material, which Reich called the organic material, serves the purpose of slowing down the velocity of light trying to draw in the orgone energy. Then the metallic layers reflect the electromagnetic part but the dielectric part penetrates through it without even seeing what's going on. The accumulator serves as a magneto-dielectric separator. I don't know if Reich would go along with this. He had his own way of looking at it."

Some more:

"T: It seems as though the true promise for beneficial technology lies in the etheric, organic side, the side of life. It seems as though when one presents this information on living energy to scientists, rather than looking at it objectively, they react in a rage. Reich called this the emotional, plague and his work has suffered from it. What do you think is with these scientists who refuse to face scientific verification of energies such as argone.

E: The problem is that they are not scientists, they're not following the precepts of science. They're mystics worshipping a nuclear type of destructive energy. My contention about nuclear power plants is that they're not there to generate energy, they serve as temples to worship this energy of decay and destruction and disease. The high laws are the lows of thermodynamics where everything must diffuse, decay and dissipate. Its quite obvious that they're pretty much worthless for generating electricity because, for one reason, they cost too much. They have to pump billions and billions of dollars into them and they hardly produce enough electricity to justify their existence, let alone break even. So they serve no practical purpose even though they were purported in the late 1950s to be so-called free energy devices. You look at the way things were in the 50s and you find its basically a death worship. That’s one thing that surprises me now is that people want to get back to the 50s and relive those images.

T: So you're saying that the American Dream has turned out to be a nightmare?

E: The American Dream is to destroy the earth. We've succeeded in training everbody else how to do it too, so in case we fail they can take over where we left off.

T: I know what you mean. New Zealand's native forests are being stripped to make disposable chopsticks for the Japanese. Eric, in closing do you have any final message?

E: Tell everyone to quit their jobs and smash their televisions."

Thx Aaron for all the info's so far, found some thing Peter might like

Global Warming: The Rest of the Story
Gerd R. Weber "Global Warming: The Rest of the Story"
Paul & Co Pub Consortium | 1991-06 | ISBN: 3925725180 | 188 pages | PDF | 2.3 MB

First it was acid rain, then the ozone hole. Now, CO2 in the air is supposed to bring on a climate catastrophe. Is global warming really a threat, are the polar ice caps in danger of elting and are coastal areas of habitation under threat of a deluge?
Do we therefore need an energy-CO2 tax?
The author explains in straight-forward language what climatological research indicates about the following questions:
• What is and how does the greenhouse effect work? What does that mean for life on earth?
• Why is a rise in temperature feared?
• How and for what reasons has climate changed over the centuries and what role was played by the greenhouse effect?
• What do we really know about the effect of a growing concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and what do current computer programs make of that ?
• How do plants and algae cope with increased CO2 and temperature through photosynthesis?

MEGAUPLOAD - The leading online storage and file delivery service
Mirror
Download Weber Global Warming rar for free at Uploading.com

Ash

@all
The Candle burns at both ends to keep everyone TOTALLY baffled with conflicting information ..
if you can't BS them (they aren't for it), baffled them (they can't appose it, because they don't know)

Ash and All, it's not being called the "CO2-Tax", "GreenHouse Gases Tax", "emissions tax" or "pollution tax".
No, NO!!!, That would force them to FOCUS upon what they say the problem is.
They are not calling it any those names at all, it's the CARBON-TAX...
you know that Carbon stuff all LIFE and non-living is made of.
Why Carbon-Tax, the wider the brush is, the more things you can paint with a tax.
To prevent weeds from growing you remove the SOIL, that's the carbon-tax method of a solution.
Besides, only the consumer will pay a carbon-tax, business will never pay a dime.
Oh, "carbon-credit" .. you have "Credit-Cards" .. Same Thing..
Credit-cards have been such a good idea, we'll use it for carbon-tax now.
It's the NEW Credit-Card, "carbon-credit", banks will eat it up!!!! wake up.


Old Ice Age:
Monday, Jun. 24, 1974, Time Magazine, Another Ice Age?
NOAA: Ice Age warnings lead to funding via a letter from Kukla to Nixon
Many other Ice Age articles of OLD found under the "More Info" of this video Global Cooling: The Coming Ice Age.

So it's BAFFLE the people Time ..
NEW ICE AGE:
Scientist: Forget Global Warming, Prepare for New Ice Age April 23, 2008
13th November 2008, Global warning: We are actually heading towards a new Ice Age, claim scientists
January 11, 2009 Global Warming Update: 'Earth on the Brink of an Ice Age' Such was reported by Russia's Pravda Sunday

Warming data has been debunked as distortions of the facts,
for example:
NASA pronouncement about global temperatures going up DURING the last decade
was A LIE, it's most of the century.
Warmest U.S. decade in 1930s, not the 1990s.
Go to the above link at NASA as see for yourself.


John Coleman founder of The Weather Channel ...
John Coleman slams global warming (1 of 4)
John Coleman slams global warming (2 of 4)
John Coleman slams global warming (3 of 4)
John Coleman slams global warming (4 of 4)
John in part 4, tells us South American and China had the
worst winter in 50 years. Alaska worst winter in 2 decades, -72 F degrees

As John Coleman tells you and this link confirms
IPCC stands for: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
"As a contributor to the IPCC’s 2007 report, I share the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore,
IPCC Nobel winner calls IPCC report: "Dishonest Political Tampering with the Science..." Posted on Sunday, December 16, 2007 06:00:59 AM
"Recently a High Court judge in the UK listed nine of the 35 major scientific errors in Gore’s movie,
saying they must be corrected before innocent schoolchildren can be exposed to the movie."
Someone is trying to stop the lies.
? how many scientific items in the movie where NOT errors then?
I've never seen the movie..

The WARMING OR COOLING is not the ISSUE, it's ONLY the distraction ...
Like a magic act, leaving you asking yourself, how did that happen?
Ask yourself what is being done about it??
The only effect any action will have will equal less money in your pocket.
Business will buy carbon credits and add that expense to your purchase,
plus you will be hit at the register for additional "carbon-taxes" too.
Nothing else will happen. Think about it.
The money is going to leave one pocket and go into another pocket.
What pocket is it leaving from and what pocket is it going into?

Follow the money .. works every time ..

Love and Light
Randy

Research Link: ICECAP

Surfacestations project reaches 70% of the network surveyed. 854 of 1221 stations have been examined in the USHCN network.
See surfacestations org
(see web site for stick-pins in a Google Earth map of these CRN sites)
for eye-ball surveys of "Climate Reference Network" (CRN).
CRN ratings are shown in the graph below, these CRNs are where
the temperatures come form in the US.