Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
Friends of Science
There is no date on this site so I can’t reference when this was written. This is great little article in Question / Answer format (or in this case Myth / Fact). I have heard many of these statements before but it is good to read them on one site for evaluation. The Friends of Science site is fairly critical of the concept of global warming and in some cases I think their answers and articles could be slightly more balanced. Definitely an article worth spending some time on.
I have included all of the Myth statements below but have intentionally edited for brevity the Fact statement. Click through to get the whole article.READ MORE
Canada Free Press – March 3, 2007
This is an interesting article that is a little difficult to read in its original form. I hesitate to do this, but I feel compelled to insert the entire article here in this forum. I want to stress that I do not own the copyright to the following information – the copyright belongs to the original site and author as they have advertised on their site. I will only do this in rare situations where readability is more of an issue.
Senator Inhofe has made available his CPAC speech notes and PowerPoint presentation to the public. The science section notes below are only a sampling of the new developments since January 2007 refuting the media engineered ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming.]SENATOR JAMES INHOFE (R-Okla.)
Ranking Member Environment & Public Works Committee
MARCH 3, 2007 POWERPOINT SPEECH
TO CPAC IN WASHINGTON, DC
JunkScience.com – April 21, 2006
This is a very long article that has quite a few good points in it. The article is a series of questions and answers on the subject. The author’s goals were to try and put some simple facts behind many of the myths and rumors regarding weather and the things that influence the weather.
This article should be standard reading for anyone that is interested in the details behind global warming.
Only the structure constraining internal-external convection will function as an effective greenhouse. Greenhouse gases categorically do not inhibit convective activity and so are not like a physical greenhouse.
Human Events.com – February 20, 2007
This site is not known for balanced reporting but that does not mean that its statements are not true. This article is a compiled listing of the thoughts espoused in the book “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism ” is a pretty strong listing of opinions. Many of the opinions have some scientific backing – others do not.
The U.S. rejects the Kyoto Protocol’s energy-rationing scheme, along with 155 other countries, representing most of the world’s population, economic activity and projected future growth. Kyoto is a European treaty with one dozen others, none of whom is in fact presently reducing its emissions.
AccuWeather.com: Global Warming News – January 9, 2007
This is a very good blog entry that discusses the exaggerations that can happen on both sides of this issue. I especially find outrageous that someone actually wrote that billions will die if we don’t make massive changes to our human output. This blog (nor the article) makes reference to how many people will die by diverting billions or trillions of dollars to new methods of energy use and distribution.
The headline grabbed my attention – stating that “Over 4.5 Billion people could die from Global Warming-related causes by 2012.”
Heck, if that’s the case, I might as well go right down to the GM dealership and buy a Hummer. What difference will that make?
Investor’s Business Daily – February 12. 2007
This is a very powerful article (opinion) that says that there is no reason for nations to spend huge amounts of money on global warming. It quotes Canada’s leader (who is struggling to make environmental commitments) as saying it is actually a socialistic scheme of wealth redistribution.
Canada’s new leader is taking heat over an old letter saying Kyoto was a “socialist scheme” to redistribute wealth on a global scale.
Harper described the Kyoto Protocol as “a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations.” He voiced his support for the “campaign to block the job-killing, economy-destroying Kyoto accord,” an agreement he said was “based on tentative and contradictory scientific evidence about climate trends.”