More Negatives on Global Warming

  Excerpts from The Global Warming Policy Foundation ( http://www.thegwpf.org/category/science-news/ ):

  Vladimir Kotlyakov, from the Russian Academy of Sciences, said: ‘There are no grounds to claim that global warming will continue till the end of this century." A period of low solar activity is predicted between 2030 and 2040, and the earth’s average temperature is expected to fall by several degrees.
The area of Antarctica sea ice is now the second largest in 34 years.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 4th Assessment report said in 2007 that for the next two decades, a warming of about 0.2°C per decade is projected. However, since 1998 there has been no statistically significant increase in global surface temperature.
There is compelling evidence that, across the disciplines, peer review often fails to root out science fraud.
The UK’s “irrational” use of biofuels will cost motorists around £460 million over the next 12 months, and the growing reliance on sustainable liquid fuels will also increase food prices

Laboratory Work on CO2/Global Warming Needed

Open email to explorers and producers of crude oil and associated products:

Pres. Obama told scientists at Argonne National Laboratories on March 15 that he wants to shift our cars and trucks entirely off oil. In effect, he wants to put you out of the oil business.
To do this, he will collect from you royalties paid for your drilling in federal waters. He expects to collect from you $2 billion over 10 years and use this money to develop advanced electric vehicles. Notice that he will be asking you to pay for your own demise

It seems to me that you have two choices. Either go into the electric car business or fight Obama's proposal with technological information.

For some years, we imported considerable quantities of crude oil and still do. Because of that, there have been continued minor attempts to release our economy from dependence on imported oil. That has recently changed. Large quantities of shale gas are now available through improved fracking technology. Similarly, advanced drilling technology has also made available increased quantities of crude oil. In several years, we can be basically energy independent. This obviates one of the reasons for Pres. Obama's push for electric vehicles.

The other reason for Pres. Obama's program to eliminate use of oil in motor vehicles is the fact that one of the products of use is emission of carbon dioxide. He has related carbon dioxide emissions to increased concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and the simultaneous include increase in global warming. Since global warming supposedly will have dire effects on the world economy, he takes the attitude that we obviously have to control global warming and eliminating carbon dioxide emissions will do that.

However, he has no basis for that conclusion other than the two facts. Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration has been increasing simultaneously with increasing global temperature. He has taken no consideration that these two facts may be coincidental and unrelated. For some reason, he wants to place the blame for global temperature increase on carbon dioxide. You are responsible, because you produce oil and sell it to people who use it unwisely, such as transportation.

As a scientist, I see the weakness in this correlation, especially having checked some fundamental data available on the Internet. The term "greenhouse gas" has been invented and subsequently relegated as a bad term, even though greenhouse gases are responsible for our ability to live on this planet. The Obama theory is that the sun's radiation comes through the atmosphere unimpeded, strikes the earth surface to generate heat, which cannot pass out to the stratosphere, because of the presence of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere at 350 ppm. However, when one checks the insulation capabilities of various atmospheric gases, as reported in the Air Encyclopedia, carbon dioxide heat insulation is not significantly different from the other natural gases, such as oxygen and nitrogen.

I strongly recommend that you engage in a significant research effort, starting in the laboratory and following through to real-life speculation concerning whether carbon dioxide is a culprit as designated by Obama or a figment of his imagination. Once you have become convinced one way or another, you can then either contradict Obama's claim or support it to your own demise.

Weakening Global Warming Data

The government of Australia has been a strong promoter of the nonexistent relationship, up to now, between global warming and atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration.
The Australian is a broadsheet newspaper published in Australia from Monday to Saturday each week since 14 July 1964. It is the biggest-selling national newspaper in the country, although local newspapers in Sydney and Melbourne have substantially higher circulation.
The Australian recently ran an extensive article on global warming.  http://m.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/twenty-year-hiatus-in-rising-temperatures-has-climate-scientists-puzzled/story-e6frg6z6-1226609140980.
The Australian article quotes from various sources as follows:
"DEBATE about the reality of a two-decade pause in global warming and what it means has made its way from the skeptical fringe to the mainstream.
In a lengthy article this week, The Economist magazine said if climate scientists were credit-rating agencies, then climate sensitivity - the way climate reacts to changes in carbon-dioxide levels - would be on negative watch but not yet downgraded.
Another paper published by leading climate scientist James Hansen, the head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, says the lower than expected temperature rise between 2000 and the present could be explained by increased emissions from burning coal.
The Economist says the world has added roughly 100 billion tonnes of carbon to the atmosphere between 2000 and 2010, about one-quarter of all the carbon dioxide put there by humans since 1750. This mismatch between rising greenhouse gas emissions and not-rising temperatures is among the biggest puzzles in climate science just now, The Economist article says."