“Manmade climate change.” We’ve all heard the
catchphrase before (well, at least until politicians realized that
“global warming” could easily be falsified by uncooperative temperature
data).
But wouldn’t “climate change” whether man was here or not? Do government bureaucrats who can’t even run Amtrak or the Post Office actually think they can control the weather like a thermostat?
Why should the U.S. further reduce its “carbon emissions” when the rest of the planet, oblivious regimes run by central planners in Russia and China, are happily emitting away?
Most importantly, why should American taxpayers spend billions, if not trillions, of dollars fighting a quixotic crusade to keep the planet’s climate from changing?
Man’s activities play but a small part in the global scope of things, and 25 graphs show that to be
the case.
Temperatures rise and fall in the long historical picture regardless of CO2 levels. In fact, CO2 levels are fairly low right now compared to life-flourishing eras.
Forget the “hockey stick” graph the IPCC whipped out to stoke fears of a global apocalypse; such warming is not unprecedented.
Before the Industrial Revolution took hold, there was a period of warming
that allowed the Vikings to more easily explore the North Atlantic and
settle Greenland. Other historical studies, some based on tree-ring
data, suggest a similar period of warming in Roman times.
The 1990 figure 7c that was subsequently “disappeared” from succeeding IPCC reports followed by the infamous “hockey stick.”
Mankind has about zero control over the volume of atmospheric water vapor, which is about 90% to 95% (varies by location) of what is commonly referred to as the “greenhouse effect.”
Since man has only produced somewhat over 3% of atmospheric carbon dioxide, that means man is responsible for a little over 0.28% of the “greenhouse effect,” when one accounts for water vapor. That’s based on Department of Energy figures.
Adding more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere does not lead to a linear effect on “thermal forcing,” but a logarithmic one. That means the more CO2 is added, the less of a “warming” effect it has.
Of course, early warning systems improve survivability, but do not mitigate monetary damage from hurricanes (which is obviously up, due to factors like economic development on coastal shorelines).
Again, no trend in fatalities from hurricanes.
No trend in hurricane landfalls; 1887 was one of the most frequent on record.
2013 isn’t shown on this chart, but it continues the trend: A decrease of 40% since the 1930s, as Steven Goddard pointed out.
Global Tropical Accumulated Cyclone Energy (ACE) is fluctuating as usual – in defiance of predictions from the “the consensus.”
Forest fires show almost no recent trend; although they recently tend to do more damage per acre. Changes to forestry practices may be a contributing factor to why forest fires spread more uncontrollably.
It’s important not to monitor Arctic and Antarctic ice levels by taking a snapshot at one moment and forgetting all historical precendent; witness Arctic ice growth year-on-year in August 2013.
22. Arctic Ice Continues to Grow (as of February 2014)
In February 2014, Cryo-satellite images showed Arctic ice volume continued to grow into October 2013.
A study by the Reason Foundation in 2011 found that deaths due to natural disasters have plummeted by 98% since the 1920s. Whether it’s from early warning systems or better adaptation to climate (central heating and cooling, e.g.), this stat shows no trend that Nature is threatening humanity’s very survival.
If anything, these charts show that we will have to continue adapting to Nature, just like life on this planet has always had to do.
If that means less pollution – like economically free societies have – then let’s talk about that. If it means better economic development, like impoverished nations in Asia and Africa need, so be it.
But what the demands of adapting to Nature don’t demand is authoritarian control over energy and industry by central governments. Because if anything, the examples of history and the modern day (see Russia, China, et al.) show that this way of looking at things is “on the wrong side of history.”
As President Obama begins his unconstitutional push to deprive Americans of more money and economic freedom in the vain crusade of “saving the planet,” and Prince Charles flips his hole cards by explicitly tying “global warming” to anti-capitalist economy, people should ask themselves: just how do these governments plan to stop the climate from changing?
Source
But wouldn’t “climate change” whether man was here or not? Do government bureaucrats who can’t even run Amtrak or the Post Office actually think they can control the weather like a thermostat?
Why should the U.S. further reduce its “carbon emissions” when the rest of the planet, oblivious regimes run by central planners in Russia and China, are happily emitting away?
Most importantly, why should American taxpayers spend billions, if not trillions, of dollars fighting a quixotic crusade to keep the planet’s climate from changing?
Man’s activities play but a small part in the global scope of things, and 25 graphs show that to be
the case.
1. Carbon Dioxide Levels Were Previously Much Higher & Yet Life Survived
Temperatures rise and fall in the long historical picture regardless of CO2 levels. In fact, CO2 levels are fairly low right now compared to life-flourishing eras.
2. Modern History Shows Similar Temps in Medieval Warm Period
Forget the “hockey stick” graph the IPCC whipped out to stoke fears of a global apocalypse; such warming is not unprecedented.
3. More About the Medieval Warm Period
Before the Industrial Revolution took hold, there was a period of warming
that allowed the Vikings to more easily explore the North Atlantic and
settle Greenland. Other historical studies, some based on tree-ring
data, suggest a similar period of warming in Roman times.4. Graph from 1990 IPCC contrasted with 2001 IPCC Report
The 1990 figure 7c that was subsequently “disappeared” from succeeding IPCC reports followed by the infamous “hockey stick.”
5. Carbon Dioxide’s Contribution to “Thermal Forcing” (Also Dubbed the “Greenhouse Effect”)
Mankind has about zero control over the volume of atmospheric water vapor, which is about 90% to 95% (varies by location) of what is commonly referred to as the “greenhouse effect.”
6. Mankind’s Production of Carbon Dioxide by Burning Fossil Fuels is a Little Over 3% by Volume
Since man has only produced somewhat over 3% of atmospheric carbon dioxide, that means man is responsible for a little over 0.28% of the “greenhouse effect,” when one accounts for water vapor. That’s based on Department of Energy figures.
7. The Decreasing Effect of Adding More Carbon Dioxide to the Atmosphere
Adding more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere does not lead to a linear effect on “thermal forcing,” but a logarithmic one. That means the more CO2 is added, the less of a “warming” effect it has.
8. Forecasts (Including from the U.N.) Do Not Match the Recent Temperature Record
9. Five Major Temp. Datasets Show No Statistically Significant Warming for 17 Years
10. Greenland Ice Core Samples Show Major Fluctuations in Temperatures
11. Hurricanes Per Decade On the Decline
12. Last Year’s Hurricane Reporting from the U.S. was One of the Lowest on Record
13. Deadliest Atlantic Hurricanes in Historical Perspective
Of course, early warning systems improve survivability, but do not mitigate monetary damage from hurricanes (which is obviously up, due to factors like economic development on coastal shorelines).
14. Deadliest Pacific Hurricanes in Historical Perspective
Again, no trend in fatalities from hurricanes.
15. Hurricane Landfalls in the Longer View
No trend in hurricane landfalls; 1887 was one of the most frequent on record.
16. One of the Lowest Tornado Counts on Record: 2013
17. One of the Lowest Readings for 100 Degree Temperature Days: 2013
2013 isn’t shown on this chart, but it continues the trend: A decrease of 40% since the 1930s, as Steven Goddard pointed out.
18. Snowfall is Showing a Slight Increase Since 1967
19. Tropical Storms Down to Mid-1970s Levels
20. Recent Forest Fire Counts
Forest fires show almost no recent trend; although they recently tend to do more damage per acre. Changes to forestry practices may be a contributing factor to why forest fires spread more uncontrollably.
21. NASA Satellite Shows Arctic Ice Growth
It’s important not to monitor Arctic and Antarctic ice levels by taking a snapshot at one moment and forgetting all historical precendent; witness Arctic ice growth year-on-year in August 2013.
22. Arctic Ice Continues to Grow (as of February 2014)
In February 2014, Cryo-satellite images showed Arctic ice volume continued to grow into October 2013.
23. Fatalities Due to Natural Disasters Has Plummed 98% Since the 1920s
A study by the Reason Foundation in 2011 found that deaths due to natural disasters have plummeted by 98% since the 1920s. Whether it’s from early warning systems or better adaptation to climate (central heating and cooling, e.g.), this stat shows no trend that Nature is threatening humanity’s very survival.
24. Despite Having the World’s Biggest Economy, the U.S. is Not the World’s Leading CO2-Emitter
25. U.S. is One of the Few Global Economic Powerhouses to Actually Cut CO2 Emissions
If anything, these charts show that we will have to continue adapting to Nature, just like life on this planet has always had to do.
If that means less pollution – like economically free societies have – then let’s talk about that. If it means better economic development, like impoverished nations in Asia and Africa need, so be it.
But what the demands of adapting to Nature don’t demand is authoritarian control over energy and industry by central governments. Because if anything, the examples of history and the modern day (see Russia, China, et al.) show that this way of looking at things is “on the wrong side of history.”
As President Obama begins his unconstitutional push to deprive Americans of more money and economic freedom in the vain crusade of “saving the planet,” and Prince Charles flips his hole cards by explicitly tying “global warming” to anti-capitalist economy, people should ask themselves: just how do these governments plan to stop the climate from changing?
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment