Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 1 (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   21 comments

Sci Tech

From the IPCC to Dinosaurs Climate

By Dr Andrew Glikson  Posted by Mac McKinney (about the submitter)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 2 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It Headlined to H3 2/20/11

- Advertisement -

The end of the IPCC?

Just before 2 a.m. on February 19, the war on climate science showed its grip on the U.S. House of Representatives as it voted to eliminate U.S. funding for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. The Republican majority, on a mostly party-line vote of 244-179, went on record as essentially saying that it no longer wishes to have the IPCC prepare its comprehensive international climate science assessments. ( )

Some examples of the "rationale" in the background of this vote:

Representative Luetkemeyer (Missouri): "Scientists manipulated climate data, suppressed legitimate arguments in peer-reviewed journals, and researchers were asked to destroy emails, so that a small number of climate alarmists could continue to advance their environmental agenda."

US Congress Representative John Shimkus (Illinois): "Today we have about 388 parts per million [of carbon dioxide] in the atmosphere,". "I think in the age of the dinosaurs, when we had most flora and fauna, we were probably at 4000 parts per million. There is a theological debate that this is a carbon-starved planet, not too much carbon." " " The earth will end only when God declares its time to be over. Man will not destroy this earth. This earth will not be destroyed by a flood.; click here

The Representative is correct in pointing to the wealth of fauna and flora in the age of the dinosaurs (Figure 1). The only error he makes is in overlooking the fact that humans, as a part of nature, are the product of environment changes associated with cooling of the Earth since the mid-Pliocene about 3 million years ago, followed by the glacial-interglacial eras during which H. sapiens and civilization arose. The other error is that rapid shifts between climate states result in mass extinctions.

But then its not clear how many of the new House majority accept Darwinian evolution?

- Advertisement -

Representative Joe Barton (Texas), who is competing for the position of chairman of the Congress Energy and commerce Committee states: "Wind is God's way of balancing heat. Wind is the way you shift heat from areas where it's hotter to areas where it's cooler. That's what wind is. Wouldn't it be ironic if in the interest of global warming we mandated massive switches to energy, which is a finite resource, which slows the winds down, which causes the temperature to go up? Now, I'm not saying that's going to happen, Mr. Chairman, but that is definitely something on the massive scale. I mean, it does make some sense. You stop something, you can't transfer that heat, and the heat goes up. It's just something to think about."

Never mind that in nature winds move air from cold high pressure to warm low pressure zones, such as in onshore sea breeze or the polar vortices.

E. Calvin Beisner of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, argued that because the "biblical worldview sees the world and ecosystems as the work of a wise God, humankind couldn't possibly be affecting the climate". click here

Some are happy with ongoing carbon emissions, among other as "plant food", in what some of them regard as a "carbon starved world".

- Advertisement -

A new kind of "science" is being invented, free of data and unrelated to the basic laws of physics and chemistry.

Just in case those who reject the science may not be correct, at least Congress continues to support space research programs.   In search of habitable planets when Earth is no longer suitable for human life?

Defenders of the IPCC are in retreat. Representative Waxman (California) states: "The US contributes only $2.3 million to the IPCC. Our $2.3 million contribution leverages a global science assessment with global outreach and global technical input -- a process we could not carry out alone and one that could come to a halt without US support ". click here

Next Page  1  |  2


The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact Editor
- Advertisement -
Google Content Matches:

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Jesse Ventura Exposes the JFK Assassination Conspiracy Nationally

The Voice of the Wetlands Festival, Part 5: Brad Pitt and the Color Pink


Is Osama bin Laden Dead? Part 4: Deeper into the Confession Tape

Is Osama bin Laden Dead? Part 2: the First Tapes

A History of the FARC and Reviewing The FARC Revolutionist by Renate Vanegas


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
6 people are discussing this page, with 21 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

You know it's a bad news source when it's news edi... by Meme Mine on Sunday, Feb 20, 2011 at 11:02:27 AM
Guess we should kill all the scientists and ask th... by Mac McKinney on Sunday, Feb 20, 2011 at 11:35:29 AM it getting warmer or not?:DFace by zonie on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 at 3:20:24 PM
When the planet is sweltering again this summer, t... by Mac McKinney on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 at 4:13:42 PM
Requires cap and trade FRAUD.The earth has seen cl... by zonie on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 at 5:48:53 PM
Perhaps I misunderstand you. Global warming at an ... by Mac McKinney on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 at 6:04:33 PM
Be open to independent alternative studies.Early q... by zonie on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 at 7:02:12 PM
Actually, a volcanic eruption that blanketed the s... by Mac McKinney on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:34:23 PM
Perhaps I misunderstand you. Global warming at an ... by Mac McKinney on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 at 8:05:24 PM
It is not just "deniers" who say check the science... by Frank Legge on Sunday, Feb 20, 2011 at 8:48:13 PM
What we do know is that so-called Climate Gate "re... by Mac McKinney on Sunday, Feb 20, 2011 at 9:54:28 PM
A PBS info-tainment program to qualify human-induc... by Bill Cain on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 at 12:32:55 PM
You can lead a horse to water but you can't make t... by Mac McKinney on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 at 3:50:24 PM
Receding glaciers = human-induced climate change? ... by Bill Cain on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 at 9:31:38 AM
Maybe your subconscious will have absorbed more of... by Mac McKinney on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 at 5:42:59 PM
Google glaciers and recent data revealing many of ... by zonie on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 at 7:22:59 PM
Two passengers on the 1st class deck, near the ste... by Jim Arnold on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 at 7:51:58 PM
Alaska? I think you need to watch the above docume... by Mac McKinney on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 at 8:18:06 PM
Is there still "scientific debate" whether smoking... by Jim Arnold on Monday, Feb 21, 2011 at 5:53:02 PM
If there had been only one case of a lung cancer p... by Bill Cain on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 at 9:10:49 AM
The analogy is stooge science for tobacco, stooge ... by Jim Arnold on Tuesday, Feb 22, 2011 at 10:45:26 AM