Is Global Warming being set up to be discredited?

Question

So when Global Cooling starts - nobody will believe it?

We (the Earth) go through periods of warming and cooling naturally (google the temperature graphs). We are now in an "Interglacial" - and coming to the end of it so it seems.

We may have a few decades of cooling and warming before the slump - but scientists don't really know what triggers it.

I type this as it is snowing outside at the moment - usually it is mild spring rain by now.

What will happen when temperatures plummet? - War over fuel reserves,? Colonisation of warmer countries? Maybe even mass euthanasia - so those elite can survive with less struggle for resources. - Quite a dire scenario.

Looking at the analogy of a beehive, the less useful of the community are thrown out of the hive to die to conserve resources. Will we humans callously do the same?

Answer 1

Probly. we are stupid.

Well must of "them" are anyways.

Answer 2

You are simply incorrect.  Please read my wiki article at the link below for a scientific explanation of the Earth's natural cycles and other causes of climate change.

Answer 3

Speaking before an audience of medical doctors in Las Vegas, the Dr. Sallie Baliunas, Ph.D, Senior Staff Physicist at Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, cited numerous examples of evidence proving either gross incompetence or blatant fraud in the UN report on Global Warming. Along with her associate, Dr. Willie Soon Ph.D, also from Harvard-Smithsonian, 2 hours of startling evidence was presented to the audience.

Titling her presentation "A Climate History of the Earth: the last 1,000 years," Dr. Baliunas first explained how certain criteria must be met to obtain credible evidence to support any theory. She then went on to cite in one example after another where standard operating procedures were bypassed to obtain a fraudulent set of numbers to appear to make Global Warming seem true, but where the correct study unquestionably proved the opposite.

One study formulated to present an accurate look at climate in the Northern Hemisphere, frequently had data from Tasmania and New Zealand (Southern Hemisphere) inserted just to make the numbers add up. Tree ring studies were used attempting to support temperature variations, when more accurate studies of the specie of tree used shows that tree ring size reacted to moisture, not temperature. Small sections of historical temperature readings were selected to prove a warming trend when the longer term numbers were showing a cooling trend. A one year fluke of El Nino is the only year in another formula that created a warming trend. However, shifting the study one year either side shows a cooling trend.

Dr. Baliunas and Dr. Soon cited more credible evidence that the earth has gone through normal temperature cycles. In the last thousand years, there was a notable warming trend during medieval time, and a mini ice age around the 1700's. Noting the Sun to be essentially our planets sole source of thermal energy, it is the cause of any thermal cycles experienced by our planet. CO2 levels, water vapor, aerosols and all the criteria used by the UN to try to halt industrial progress have no credible evidence to support the claims. The UN conveniently ignores any research done to true scientific standards and quite obviously has a political agenda of discrimination when choosing numbers to support their fantasies.

During a Q & A time at the end of their presentation. The term "Children Playing Scientist" was used to describe all the studies offered by the United Nations. Unfortunately, this is an insult to children. The question of honesty must come into play. When numbers are knowingly changed or misapplied, that is fraud. A child might not know which number to apply to what study, but UN financed studies are revealing themselves to be the actions of corrupt marketing people with a political agenda that surpasses any level of conscience or morality.

Answer 4

i dont kno wats gonna happen but its going to be bad. as human population increases we may hav 2 fite 4 our resources cuz resources r limited. as  the polar ice caps melt the sea is going to rise n there isnt enuf high places 2 go 2. ppl may fight over high ground which will b horrible.

  bees are also beginnin 2 die in th US , we actlly use exported bees. i dont kno wats happenin and y but soon well hav to pollinate plants by hand and resources will plummit evn more.

   we need 2 do sumthin b4 all this happens.

  it always surprises me that i barely hear any thin being done about it. i mean, wen was the last time  that our idiot president (or any president) talked about it, and its  MUCH more important than how our stupid economy is goin. Water ruins money so they better get thier lips movin about how to save the envirnment.

Answer 5

We're in no way "coming to the end of an Interglacial".  For the last half million years, Ice Ages happen at roughly 100,000 year intervals.  The last one ended about 12,000 years ago.

The data clearly shows that the present warming is NOT natural, but one created mostly by us.

I like the guy who quotes Baliunas and Soon.  Their work was so bad, that half the editorial board of a journal that published it resigned in protest.

Not because the bad work was published.  Even the publisher agreed it was bad.  They resigned because the publisher refused to make a public apology for publishing it.

And the idea that the Sun is causing this is trotted out, when it's been PROVEN false.

"Recent oppositely directed trends in solar

climate forcings and the global mean surface

air temperature", Lockwood and Frolich (2007), Proc. R. Soc. A

doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.1880

http://www.pubs.royalsoc.ac.uk/media/pro...

News article at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6290228.st...

Answer 6

Actually, the whole "Global Warming Theory" proposed by Al "The Weatherman" Gore was predicated on excessive man-made carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Nearly 70% of world climatologists found no basis in his ranting and rightly dismissed it as a cyclical phenomenon. This was merely a ploy to bring him media attention and catapult him into the race for president. His aim was off and he wound up neck-deep in political f***s. Now we are hearing that volcanic activity and increased strength of future tremors may trigger some form of devastation. Doesn't sound like anything we really have any control over. I also agree the fact that we reproduce at such an obscene rate that our resources will soon be stretched very thin. I like your comparison to the beehive scenario, but I have a better one. Lab rats are known to become cannibalistic when their living space is over-populated. I'm not saying mankind would do so. Then again, Gore would be proud of us for doing this in the name of recycling.

Answer 7

Looks like it ,look at the leadership

public attitudes are not natural they are made

before the cooling we still may have the warming extended from what it is now.

mass exodus to higher grounds will bring the biggest social unrest on a global scale ,but this is an unsolvable problem

there is not space ,food or water for thousands or millions on the move

and those already in place will resist invaders

Because there are no solutions to this ,it is conveniently under the carpet for now.

Loss of agriculture and limited potable water

will bring famine  ,and conflict over water

One degree rise in temperature means ten percent crop loss ,and this is only the beginning.

Look on the bright side

a overall nuclear war will make us forget all these Environmental problems.http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;...

The ARK of seeds and genetic material is already in place in Norway,just in case i guess.

That the elite have plans to cull world population back by 60 or 70 % was already revealed in 1998 in Copenhagen at a closed Bilderberg Group meeting ,by an AMERICAN  states man

Browse for that name --Bilderberg Group

exit stage left before a bolt of lightning strikes me.

Answer 8

This denier nonsense is starting to verge on poorly researched science fiction.

Matt: sighting Sallie Baliunas as a source is pointless, a discredited scientist and 'Willie Soon'  both are well known poster children of the denier movement and have little credibility in the science community these days.

Answer 9

How can I answer, when you already have? You are right on 100%!

A major chunk of Antarctica just sloughed off...this is nothing new whatsoever! The last time it happened, the news media wasn't worldwide. There was no news media!

We are headed into a 'Little Ice Age'...this seems to happen every 400-600 years. Devastation and famine in Europe, America...the Thames was completely frozen over for 5 consecutive years in the 1600's.

Thank you, Mr. P!

And, uh, before you're so quick on the draw with the TDs...do the research on the 'Little Ice Ages'...since obviously....

Answer 10

Oh yeah.

The locks on those bombs shelters weren't for the bombs trying to get in.

The sad part is people like the offspring Bush and Kennedy will inherit the earth.

The Earth ain't seen nothin yet.

Answer 11

Well ,there was a report in The Times yesterday that a significant amount of the ice that has melted near the North pole can be directly attributed to increased volcanic activity.Personally, I never bought into the global warming idea.The only reason we see so much about it today is that coming across as  'environmentally aware' is now regarded as trendy.

What will happen?

Well I guess the Western countries will do all in their power to protect themselves should any major catastrophy occur,obviously at the expense of poorer nations.There could be some major disputes over resources such as fresh water ,particularly if the world population continues to grow  at such an exceptional rate.But hey, we've been having wars on this planet for millennia

Answer 12

I dont remember reading about Churchill sharing his bunker with commoners as they were bombed by the Germans mere feet above his head.

I think that war over fuel reserves has already began. America's not in Iraq to enjoy the desert air. Many prominent politicians have admitted that oil is a major incentive of the Iraqi occupation. Were not leaving till an ally is in definite power. Saudi Arabia's oil reserves are in decline. With all that money made selling oil to us they could easily be a threat to neighbors.

I dont think the gov't will have to directly throw anyone out of the beehive. The extreme end (were nearly there) of capatalism is a huge canyon dividing the rich from the middle-class, and an even bigger canyon dividing the proletarian/poor class from the middle. In a crisis as the one you described, only the upper and upper middle would have any hope of being able to move, and perhaps even of realizing the reality of the situation. I met a guy the other day who "dont believe in that big bang theory - stuff just blowin' up - dont make sense...".

But if thats the case, meaning one group of humans doesn't kill the other group, rather they die as a result of financial or physical (no car, no place to go) inability, would that be considered natural selection?

But to answer your question directly - the ones that would survive your scenario are so callous. Me, you, and anyone else who can still feel right and wrong would probably be among the drifting bumblebees.