Thursday, March 22, 2007

The Great Global Warming Swindle

Please see Lubos Motl's post on this for a more detailed analysis of this documentary.


This is a must-see for everyone: all skeptics of global warming as well as true believers, as long as they can set aside their preconceived notions and objectively view the real facts. This is an eye-opening film for those whose only information on the imaginary "planetary emergency" comes from the AntiChrist himself and his lie-filled and erroneously titled piece of garbage, "An Inconvenient Truth." And the US TV networks really need to pick this up and broadcast it.

Update: The film now has its own domain.

If you are interested in real science and real truth please watch this 1.25 hour film:

12 comments:

juan manuel said...

It's easy to get confused by all the theories. There is an animated discussion going on about this.

IanP said...

The whole environmental green thing is a SCAM

Its a SCAM to build a market so the money men can make more money out of traded carbon credits.

http://tinyurl.com/yv25p4

Be sceptical, very sceptical.

rafa said...

Dear Rae Ann

what you said at Lubos' is the real problem (If it's not true then why am I hearing about it so much). It is amazing the brainwashing at school level. My youngest son is 11 yrs old. Now he is skeptical but just because I told him. He does prefer to play soccer rather than listening his father (well done!) but keeps me updated on the school bah blah blah regarding this crazy alarmism. And even the science teachers support this nonsense. I asked him to see the final 5 minutes of the 'swindle'. Where you can see what the poorests in Africa can expect for the future if following recommendations from Mr. Gore, IPCC and some other mad people. He was shocked seeing rich people (the alarmists) condemning poor people to remain poor forever. Since you're a lady I cannot repeat here what he said.

:-)

best
r.

Anonymous said...

Clearly, I have a masochistic streak, since for some reason I promised myself to watch this until I heard heard two examples of unequivocal bullshit. Fortunately, that only took about a minute, so I listened to another ten minutes or so as punishment for my stupidity. The next nine minutes were mostly devoted to moaning about a conspiracy, so I gave up. I did go back to refresh my memeory of those early moments of unequivocal bullshit though.

There were about six in a row, but let me just mention two: "there is no direct evidence linking twentieth century global warming to anthropogenic greenhouse gases."

Here are a few such pieces of evidence are (1)the well demostrated anthropogenic increase in atmospheric greenhouse gases. (2)Direct calculations that show that such gases tend to warm the Earth (3)The well demonstrated greenhouse effect on Earth, Venus, and Mars, (4)the success of climate models in prediction of the quantitative effect of GG's.

Another absurd claim is that increased CO2 was not associated with increased temperatures in the past. Exactly the opposite is true of that part of the past for which we have ice-core evidence. We mostly don't know a whole lot about CO2 concentration for the more distant past, except that there is good reason to believe that there was a lot more CO2 in the distant past, when the Sun was considerably dimmer than it is now, but the Earth was roughly as warm as it is today.

Eli Rabett and RealClimate have more detailed smackdowns for anyone who cares.

CIP

Rae Ann said...

Thanks Juan and Ian. Not much time now for debates, etc. due to family circumstances.

Rafa, thanks, and it's amazing how things like this infiltrate society from so many directions. When I was a kid in the seventies during the 'energy crisis' we were taught energy conservation measures in school, like turning off lights and water and so on, just kind of common sense things. But now this global warming thing is much different. My oldest is 11 and we've already talked about what happens when the teachers start preaching global warming. I might have to send them a letter explaining that it's "against my religion". Well, that is enough to get evolution kicked out of schools. ;-) And evolution seems to have much more real scientific evidence. Have a nice weekend. Oh, how was that concert?

Rae Ann said...

CIP, you really should have watched past the soundbites. Most of the warming of the twentieth century happened *before* the postwar boom. Then the temps dropped. How do you explain that?

"The well demonstrated greenhouse effect on Earth, Venus, and Mars"

Speaking of Mars, are humans causing its polar caps to recede too? And Venus's atmosphere is 96% CO2. It's not at all comparable to Earth's .003 or whatever tiny amount it is. Also Mars has more carbon dioxide in its atmosphere than Earth and a lot less of everything else. Let me ask something. Do you use the same calculations to determine the influence of a 96% ingredient and a .003% ingredient? If I were cooking I don't think I could find a recipe that would adapt to those huge differences. Do you see what I'm saying here? Venus and Mars aren't Earth. What cooks there won't cook here.

"Another absurd claim is that increased CO2 was not associated with increased temperatures in the past."

Where exactly did you hear that? I don't recall that being said at all. The big issue is the cause and effect that Gore preaches is *backwards*. The increase in CO2 *follows* the increase in temperature. The CO2 wasn't driving the temperature increase. It makes perfect sense that higher temperatures would result in more growth of life and therefore more CO2 being produced.

So the Sun is getting hotter? Well, duh! That's your answer right there. :-)

CapitalistImperialistPig said...

I will address two of your points, mainly because I don't have a good answer for the temporary decrease in temps after the war - nobody claims every aspect of climate is understood.

Venus and Mars are not Earth, but they are each heated by greenhouse gases - the magnitude of the effect depends more or less logarhithmically on the amount of greenhouse gas, and yes, the same laws of physics apply to both Venus and Earth. Venus has a few hundred thousand times as much CO2 as Earth, so the effect is much larger - 900 C, vs 32 C for Water + CO2 plus miscelleaneous for Earth (the natural log of 300,000 is about 12).

The claim is clearly made in the opening sound bites that CO2 increase in the record is not associated with increased temperatures. In the case of the ice cores, it is claimed that the CO2 increase lags the temperature increase - that is not improbable, but it is also not proven - the best estimates are that the CO2 - T lag is +800 yrs to -600 years, that is the uncertainty is comparable to lag.

In any case, that point is fundamentally irrelevant. Most theories of ice ages treat CO2 as a feedback, so the point is that it is a positive feedback, as suggested by basic physics and confirmed by the ice core records.

CapitalistImperialistPig said...

er, that should be 500 C = 900 F for Venus.

Rae Ann said...

cip, I'm sorry I still don't really understand how exactly the greenhouse effect on Venus or even Mars can be applied to Earth. You should explain it the way that you would explain it to a child.

I just don't see how you can plug 96% and .003% into the *same* calculations and get any kind of meaningful result. Sure, someone can probably create a formula that *forces* some kind of answer, but it isn't gonna be a true reflection of reality. See, I don't really remember squat about math and statistics and whatnot anymore, but I do remember that numbers are very easy to manipulate to say whatever you want them to say. But just because an equation says so, don't make it so in reality.

Anonymous said...

Rae Ann,

I have written a long attempt to answer your question here. If you read it I would be interested in your comments and questions, if any.

CIP

Alexander said...

Unbelievable :-)

Rea, it is You, who is brainwashed.
TGGWS is an excellent piece of propaganda.

Have You ever read something else than Lumo's blogs?

Lumo has NO impacted publication in climate science, why are You not listening to scientist in that field???

yes, of course, they are all cracpots, doing science for money and fame. No?

And IPCC is the clearest manifestation of conspiration against Americans.

Just ask Michael Crichton :-)
Who knows more about climate than he knows :-) :-) :-)

Anonymous said...

“The Great Global Warming Swindle” is itself a Fraud and a Swindle

“The Great Global Warming Swindle” is a pseudo-documentary in which British television producer Martin Durkin has fraudulently misrepresented both the data involved and scientists who have researched global climate. Movie director Durkin has willfully misrepresented the facts about global warming just to advocate his own agenda.

Much more including the "credentials" of the "experts" at: http://www.durangobill.com/Swindle_Swindle.html

Bill Butler (author of the above page)