National Anxiety Center - Warning Signs!

Suffice it to say that if any of the nitwits babbling about CO2 and global warming ever went to any of the several dozen excellent websites that provide accurate scientific data and analysis, they would cease from their abusive manipulation of the public and perhaps find honest work.

To begin at the beginning; at the heart of the global warming hoax is the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. While it purports to represent the views of thousands of scientists, it does not. As Ashworth notes, “Most scientists do not agree with the CO2 global warming premise. In the United States 31,072 scientists, including the author, have signed a petition rejecting the Kyoto global warming agreement.” An additional 1,000 scientists are being verified to be added to the list. Thousands more exist who find the assertion the CO2 will destroy the Earth totally absurd.

Here’s what you need to know; if an increase in carbon dioxide (CO2) is directly related, i.e. causes changes in the Earth’s temperature, there would be a direct correlation between the two. As CO2 rose, we would see a comparable rise in the Earth’s temperature. This correlation does not exist.

Global warming liars, however, insist that CO2 builds up on the atmosphere over a 50 to 250 year period, but this is untrue. “Every year around April, increased CO2 absorption by plants in the Northern Hemisphere starts reducing the CO2 in the atmosphere,” notes Ashworth, “and the reduction continues until around mid-to-late August when plants start to go dormant.”

“It is clear that nature reacts very fast in its consumption of carbon dioxide.” Farmers call this the growing season, followed by the harvest season, followed by snow and cold during which nothing grows. Modern civilization, beginning about 5,000 years ago, is predicated on the ability to provide food to both humans and livestock, all based on these obvious seasonal cycles.

The ancient Egyptians and Mayans understood the seasons, but they are apparently too difficult a concept for today’s many ex-politicians, some PhD’s, United Nation’s flunkies, and high school teachers.

Warming and cooling cycles are well known throughout human history, reaching back to the days of ancient Rome. There were Viking settlements in Greenland because they arrived in warmer times. By 1410 the place froze up. Shakespeare lived during a Little Ice Age when the Thames would freeze too. The man-made emissions of CO2 had nothing, zero, to do with these climate events.

The IPCC, however, with its agenda to tax and control energy use that produces CO2, is not based on either the obvious or more complex science involved. Its “data” is the invention of computer models that are deliberately manipulated to produce false results which, in turn, can be announced and repeated worldwide.

In March 2008, The Heartland Institute brought together more than 500 climatologists, meteorologists, economists, and others for two days of seminars and addresses that totally destroyed the IPCC’s lies. It will do so again for a second time, March 8-10 of this year in New York City. Suffice it to say that the mainstream media did its best to ridicule or ignore the event and will no doubt do so again.

Here, then, is a fundamental fact about CO2 you need to commit to memory. “Nature absorbs 98.5% of the CO2 that is emitted by nature and man.” Nature is a totally self-regulating mechanism that dwarfs any mindless effort to “control” the amount of CO2 produced by coal-fired utilities, steel manufacturers, autos and trucks, and gasoline fueled lawn mowers, not to forget fireplaces where logs glow or just about any human activity you can name, including exhaling two pounds of the stuff every day!

“Further,” says Ashworth, “no regulation by man is necessary because CO2 is not a pollutant; it is part of the animal-plant life cycle. Without it, life would not exist on Earth. Increased CO2 in the atmosphere increases plant growth, which is a very good thing during a period of world population growth and an increasing demand for food.”

“Taxing carbon,” Ashworth adds, “would do absolutely nothing to improve the climate but would be devastating hardship to the people of the world.” For example, U.S. Representative John Dingell’s plan to tax carbon would add 13% to the cost of electricity and 32% to the cost of gasoline; just what we need during a Recession that threatens to become a Depression.

Dr. Tim Ball, a former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg, recently asked, “How many failed predictions, discredited assumptions and evidence of incorrect data are required before an idea loses credibility? CO2 is not causing warming or climate change. It is not a toxic substance or a pollutant.”

It is time to rebuke everyone attempting to foist the global warming hoax and carbon taxes on the United States and the rest of the world. It is time let Congress and the White House know that Americans will not be ruled by laws that have no scientific merit.

My daily blog is gaining “followers” who list themselves as regular visitors every day. That is wonderful motivation. If you haven’t visited the blog, what are you waiting for?

Witnessing a Perversion of Science

Here’s part of what Barack Obama had to say when he announced the appointment of Dr. John P. Holdren to be his science adviser:

“Because the truth is that promoting science isn’t just about providing resources—It’s about protecting free and open inquiry. It’s about ensuring that facts and evidence are never twisted or obscured by politics or ideology.”

The problem with this is not that it is true but that Obama has appointed the most ideologically committed team of people to oversee the “science” his administration will champion. Here’s what Dr. John D. Holdren had to say in a commentary published in the Boston Globe:

“The few climate-change ‘skeptics’ with any sort of scientific credentials continue to receive attention in the media all out of proportion to their numbers, their qualifications, or the merit of their arguments...The extent of unfounded skepticism about the disruption of global climate by human-produced greenhouse gases is not just regrettable, it is dangerous. It has delayed and continues to delay the development of the political consensus that will be needed.”

What Dr. Holdren does seem to understand or even care about is that science does not operate by consensus. That’s why a “political consensus” on global warming or as the Greens now call it—climate change—is the real danger.

The only people disinterested in the truth about the Earth’s climate are people like Dr. Holdren, Al Gore and the rest of the crowd that has devoted itself to trumpeting completely discredited “scientific” proof that global warming is happening. The problem for them is that (a) what warming that occurred since the end of the last Little Ice Age in 1850 was completely natural, (b) there is zero proof that any element of that warming was the result of human—anthropogenic—activity, and (c)Dr. Holdren has a long track record of being wrong.

As New York Times writer, John Tierney, noted in a December 19 blog post, “”Does being spectacularly wrong about a major issue in your field of expertise hurt your chances of becoming the presidential science advisor? Apparently not, judging by reports…that Barack Obama will name John P. Holdren as his science advisor.” Along with fellow alarmist, Paul Ehrlich, Dr. Holdren accepted a wager with Julian Simon during the “energy crisis” of the 1980s to name several natural resources which would they said cost more in ten years due to scarcity. At the time, Dr. Holdren was co-director of the graduate program in energy and resources at the University of California. Suffice it to say that he and Ehrlich lost the wage concerning every resource they named.

When Bjorn Lomborg published “The Skeptical Environmentalist” in 2001, Dr. Holdren, according to Tierney, “joined in an extraordinary attack on the book in Scientific American—an attack that I thought did far more harm to the magazine’s reputation than to Dr. Lomborg’s.”

The many—they now number in the thousands—of scientists that have come forward to oppose the lies behind “global warming” or “climate change” have been continually attacked, not because the science they advance is wrong, but because it is politically wrong in the view of alarmists like Dr. Holdren.

One such brave soul is Dr. S. Fred Singer who, along with 23 other contributors, some of whom are among the most respected atmospheric scientists, authored a rebuke to the years of falsified data put forth in reports by the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Its summery is titled “Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate.”

Recently, two full-time abusers of the truth, Michael Mann and Gavin Schmidt, attacked Dr. Singer and the study that found the United Nations’ IPCC reports, the basis for the Kyoto Protocols and “global warming” alarms, were filled with errors and distortions.

As Joseph Bast and James M. Taylor of the Heartland Institute point out, Mann is the author of a “hockey stick” temperature graph that was used by the IPCC to fuel global warming hysteria, “but which a Congressionally appointed panel of experts found was not supported by scientific data.” Schmidt, a climate modeler for the Goddard Institute for Space Studies “has in recent weeks been frantically trying to explain why his organization falsely reported that October 2006 was the warmest October in recorded history.”

That’s how these global warming folks operate. If they can’t get the science to support their grand hoax, they work to get themselves close to people of power and where they can use the power of government to continue their lies and attack the truth-tellers.

President-elect Obama is totally committed to the global warming hoax. He has now surrounded himself with a who’s who of environmental loonies and a perversion of science will be the predictable outcome.

Hey, buddy, can you spare a dime? That was a famous song during the Depression and it is no less true today for those of us who want to keep The National Anxiety Center on the job. If you can make a donation of $15.00 or more, please do so. We have urgent and important work to do in 2009!

Send This Article to Other