Manmade Global Warming: The Story & the Reality
Image: Twitter
One of the early purposes of climate alarmism was to stimulate the reduction of the worldwide population over an extended period, under the ultimate control of a single worldwide government. It is predicated on the fictitious notion of man-produced climate change.
The plan was and perhaps still is to use climate change as a socially accepted reason to force the abandonment of the cheap, abundant energy produced by fossil fuel and nuclear generation.
To maintain a population of over 7.5 billion human beings requires massive amounts of food and energy. Energy is the key. It takes energy to raise, harvest, produce and transport food. And it takes still more energy to provide for man’s comfort and mobility.
Reducing the amount of available energy by a significant factor assures that sustainable conditions are only available for a similarly reduced population. Such conditions are ripe for tyrannical socialistic control through a unified worldwide government.
History:
The patently false notion of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and climate change was first adopted by the Club of Rome in its efforts to promote the need for population reduction. Its inauguratory meeting was held in 1968 at David Rockefeller’s estate in Bellagio, Italy. The notion of AGW and climate change was based on inaccurate understandings of the 19th Century works of John Tyndall, “Heat A Mode of Motion” and Svante Arrhenius, “Worlds in the Making.”
The plan was to stress the need for restricted availability of energy under the guidance of a united worldwide government. Lower available energy would lead to much lower population levels over several hundred years.
On October 10, 1972, J.S. Sawyer, the head of research at the UK Meteorological Office, wrote a four-page paper published in Nature summarizing what was known at the time about potential temperature changes, and predicting warming of about 0.6℃ by the end of the 20th century.
The movement took root in October 1975 when Dr. Margaret Mead, president of AAAS, aided by associates Paul Ehrlich (the author of “The Population Bomb”), Stephen Schneider, John Holdren and George Woodwell, held the “Atmosphere: Endangered and Endangering” conference in North Carolina, where Mead used global warming caused by CO2 as the predicate for population reduction and eugenics.
In response to a request from the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy, the President of the National Academy of Sciences convened a study group under the auspices of the Climate Research Board of the National Research Council to assess the scientific basis for projection of possible future climatic changes resulting from man-made releases of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The Study Group met at the NAS Summer Studies Center at Woods Hole, Massachusetts, on July 23-27, 1979. By the end of the year the group released what became known as the Charney Report.
Also in 1979 the World Meteorological Organization hosted its first World Climate Conference which framed climate change as a global political issue, giving way to similar conferences in 1985, 1987 and 1988. In 1985, the Advisory Group on Greenhouse Gases (AGGG) was formed to offer international policy recommendations regarding climate change and global warming. At the Toronto Conference in 1988, climate change was suggested to be almost as serious as nuclear war, and early targets for CO2 emission reductions were discussed.
As a result, later in 1988 the United Nations Environment Programme (UN Environment) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) created the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC.) The IPCC has 195 member countries. In the same year, the UN General Assembly endorsed the formation action.
In 1990, the IPCC released its working group First Assessment based on the Scientific Plan for the World Climate Research Program of 1984. A Second Assessment was released in 1995. A Third Assessment was released in 2001. A Fourth Assessment was released in 2007. The most recent Fifth Assessment was released in 2013. A sixth assessment report is scheduled to be released in 2022 and has been previewed.
In general terms, each successive assessment report projects a higher degree of confidence in anthropogenic warming based mostly on the increased release of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere principally as a product of fossil fuel use.
Trackback from your site.
Dave Burton
| #
This article is about 50% true, and 50% false.
FALSE ⟹ “There is no demonstrably measurable man-made warming or climate change on Earth.” It is modest and benign, but it is not immeasurable. https://sealevel.info/GISS_vs_UAH_and_HadCRUT_1958-2018_woodfortrees_vs_ONI_2238x1119.png
FALSE ⟹ “Carbon dioxide does not cause any measurable warming on Earth but rather adds a slight delay to nightly cooling.”
WILDLY FALSE ⟹ “The lack of correlation of the linear increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide indicated by the Mauna Loa Keeling Curve and the increased use of fossil fuels worldwide over the last 40 years, proves that the increase in CO2 is not man made.” See: https://sealevel.info/resources.html#outgassing for discussion.
TRUE ⟹ “The Earth’s climate has constantly changed over the course of its 4.6 billion year history”
TRUE ⟹ “Variations in the solar system such as planetary motions, the Earth’s tilt or axis, solar and planetary gravitational fields, and the Sun’s radiative output have a profound effect on the Earth’s climate, and are periodic in nature”
TRUE ⟹ “Climate change is used as an excuse worldwide by governments to tax carbon as a means of revenue generation”
FALSE ⟹ “The cornerstone of the climate change fraud and deception is the incorrect notion that hydrocarbon fuels contribute to man made warming; and that nuclear power generation is inherently unsafe, and its use is irresponsible.” The actual cornerstone of the climate change fraud is the claim that manmade climate change is calamitous, rather than modest and benign: https://sealevel.info/learnmore.html
TRUE ⟹ “It is conclusively demonstrated that only hydroelectric, hydrocarbon (fossil fuels) and nuclear generation can supply the vast amounts of energy a worldwide population of 7.8 billion people require”
Reply
Andy
| #
If you think you know better than Tom Tamarkin I suggest you read ‘About the author’ at the bottom of the article. CO2 does NOT drive temperature. Quoting falsified GISS links just shows you to be an indoctrinated alarmist.
Reply
Tomer Tamarkin
| #
Dave Burton, You are incorrect on both of your points. There is no measurable increase of temperature on the Earth as a result of heat in the IR wavelengths received by the Earth from the Sun and reflected to various greenhouse gases, the principal one being water vapor, and then being redirected to the Earth. None. Please provide a verifiable set of empirically measured data to the contrary. Secondly the amount of anthropogenic carbon dioxide relative to the total amount of carbon dioxide in the troposphere is below the signal to noise ration of the mauna Loa Keeling data records. The keeling data sets has detected no decrease in CO2 emissions over the last year which has seen a 30% reduction of the amount of fossil fuel used. The principal source of CO2 in the oceans ad atmosphere is purley naturally occurring. This is governed by both the liberation of CO2 from lifi9ng organsms as well as volcanic activity and Henry’s law per the partition and temperature coefficients. Learn more at: https://greatclimatedebate.com/yearly-temperature-variation-and-atmospheric-co2-levels-1979-2018/
Reply
Brian James
| #
Apr 1, 2021 NASA Ministry Of Truth
A detailed look at NASA alterations to the global temperature record over the past 40 years. They have completely rewritten earth history.
https://youtu.be/D73i74Z2yk4
Reply
James McGinn
| #
FALSE ⟹ “Carbon dioxide does not cause any measurable warming on Earth but rather adds a slight delay to nightly cooling.”
WILDLY FALSE ⟹ “The lack of correlation of the linear increase in the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide indicated by the Mauna Loa Keeling Curve and the increased use of fossil fuels worldwide over the last 40 years, proves that the increase in CO2 is not man made.”
Dave, this shows how deeply delusional you are. The article makes a (correct) claim about the lack of efficacy of CO2 to warming in the atmosphere and you respond by (falsely) claiming that we have evidence that humans have increased the level of CO2. You are so delusional you don’t realize that these are two separate issues with no obvious causal connection between them. You have perfectly exemplified the dull-wittedness of the global warming faithful.
James McGinn / President of Solving Tornadoes
The ‘Missing Link’ of Meteorology’s Theory of Storms
http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16329
Reply
Andy
| #
Well said James.
Reply
James McGinn
| #
Although water vapor is defined as a “greenhouse gas” in the first IPCC assessment, the quantity of water vapor and its ratio to other greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide is never stated. Water vapor accounts for over 95% of the greenhouse gases in the lower troposphere portion of the atmosphere at any time. Water vapor is the real, major greenhouse gas. At any given time there is over 37.5 quadrillion (million X billion) gallons of water in the atmosphere in the form of invisible water vapor referred to by weathermen as humidity.
Proof that Meteorology is Pretending to Understand Storms
James McGinn / Genius
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi James,
Cannot believe what you wrote! Have you been ‘born again’?
James: “At any given time there is over 37.5 quadrillion (million X billion) gallons of water in the atmosphere in the form of invisible water vapor …”
INVISIBLE WATER VAPOR!!!
James: “the quantity of water vapor and its ratio to other greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide is never stated.”
Here you state water vapor is a ‘greenhouse gas’ just like the other molecular greenhouse gases.
The next step is to admit that that the water molecules condense on atmospheric ‘condensation nuclei’ to form larger (than the condensation nuclei) cloud droplets which are capable of scattering visible solar radiation so we can see the presence of the atmospheric cloud even though we still cannot see the small individual water droplets.
I certainly agree with your entire comment.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
James McGinn
| #
Hi Jerry,
You are right. This misrepresents my position. I was quoting the article, but that is not clear from how I posted it. Whatever the case, I continue to maintain that the widespread belief that clear moist air contains gaseous H2O (a belief which, you cannot deny, is based solely on superstition and not empirical evidence) is lunacy. Whatever the case, H2O in earth’s atmosphere is not a “greenhouse gas.” In fact it is not a gas at all, it’s liquid. Vapor. (BTW, only liquid H2O has a high heat capacity. Gaseous H2O [which does not occur in earth’s atmosphere] does not.)
In the meantime, Jerry, I refer you to the H2O phase diagram as proof that I am correct on this issue and yourself and many others are delusional.
Proof that Meteorology is Pretending to Understand Storms
James McGinn / Genius
Reply
TL Winslow
| #
The only way that atmospheric H20 can be a greenhouse gas that can radiate IR back to Earth’s surface and raise its temperature is if it’s in gaseous form, because H20 is a polar molecule. Vapor contains water droplets, which are Planck radiators, but only at the temperature of the frigid ambient air, hence useless for surface heating. Even if there were gaseous H20 in the sky any radiation from it would likely soon be absorbed by water vapor, rendering it useless for surface heating. To even be in the sky, surface H20 has had to soak up a bunch of surface heat, cooling it from the get-go. The lapse rate insures that the atmosphere quickly grows frigid with altitude. When precipitation falls, it cools the Earth’s surface more than the Sun ever heated it.
Thus it’s a misnomer to call atmospheric H20 a greenhouse gas.It’s actually a refrigerator in the sky.
http://historyscoper.com/climatescience101.html
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi James,
The reason they don’t want to acknowledge the water droplets in the atmosphere is because they cool the Earth, carrying energy up so it can be radiated into space making it an anti greenhouse agent
Herb
Reply
Ron Pritchett
| #
To counter the idea that there are too many people on earth, let us remember and study work of the late Julian Simon. Through his research, Simon concluded: people are the ultimate resource; opportunities increase with the population. He proved the benefits of more people by showing that world GDP per-person grew faster than population (1960-2016). Said Simon, “The world’s problem is not too many people, but lack of political and economic freedom.”
Reply