"Global Warming", or now rather embarrassingly renamed to "Climate Change" after the coldest year worldwide for many thousands...

I am so sick of hearing about the damage cars "cause" that I decided to post this. I found this typical "explanation" on the BBC website to "educate" us. Or rather to brainwash us with the same rubbish they all believe in off each other.  Well it wont work on me...  I used this particular list as an example - there are many others equally misguided organisations out there..

BBC website - Global temperatures have risen by over 0.7C in the last 300 years - climate change is therefore already taking place.

Me - I doubt that its even possible to measure average worldwide temperatures to that level of accuracy! Especially since we are talking about 300 years ago. And even if I tried to measure the temperature of my HOME town accurately today I find 10 degree variations depending on which bit I am in. Because areas of cloud cover and cooler winds off the sea etc mean its not possible. Unless you were to somehow measure all of the towns surface temperature at once which cannot be done. I could track the temperature here in my garden. But that bears no resemblance to the temperature half a mile away.

Certainly it would be several degrees different purely at the whims of the clouds and the sea air. So measuring this spot for a year could easily give a very incorrect perspective as it might just be unlucky and read much lower than the rest of the area.

Plus the climate warming brigade are only starting their measurements (for what value they do have) over the last 300 years. 300 years is less than a tick in the timescale of a planet! The temperature and the CO2 levels have been massively higher and temps have also been massively cooler over a longer timescale of millions of years. Plus since we just had the coldest year in thousands of years (rather inconveniently) they just had to rename it climate change...



BBC - 0.5C of this 0.7c warming occurred during the 20th century. Most of the warming was from 1910 to 1940

Me - but wasn't that when most of the world wasn't "industrialised" as it is now? And populations and car ownership almost unknown? I will answer that myself. Yes... So the biggest proportion of temperature rise happened before we really got "going" with fuels at all?  Actually proving that "we" are not causing anything, but that temperatures were rising regardless! Much as they have risen and fallen thousands of times before due to many other natural factors. Like the suns output varying, the amount of dust in the air from volcanoes, etc.



BBC - and from 1976 onwards  Four out of five of the warmest years ever recorded were in the 1990's

Me - and since then we have had around 9 years were things are getting colder... With 2006 to 2007 being the coldest on record for thousands of years... Totally ruining the global warming caused by us theory. In fact these last 9 or ten years we as a race have burned vastly more fuels than ever before as india and china become more industrialised at ever increasing rates! So we should be seeing years of temperature increase, not the exact opposite!



BBC - The 1990's was the warmest decade of the last millennium with 1998 being the warmest year globally since records began in 1861.  1999 was the warmest year on record in the UK

Me - And the following 8 or nine years were cooler and 2007 the coldest in thousands of years by a county mile! Hence the renaming of global warming to "climate change" which has always happened in much larger proportions since way before humans existed (only about 1 million years) and will continue to change long after we have gone.

BBC- January-June 2002 was the warmest start to a year in the northern hemisphere

Me - only if your starting point is just 300 years ago. Go back thousands or millions and that claim looks ridiculous! Plus that's just the northern hemisphere. And the year was cooler in general than the 90s. You can always choose some specific stats to support an argument if you want to, and with so much scientific grants and political pressure these types of stats will be produced or all the politicians will look a bit silly.



BBC - The total number of cold days (where the average temperature was under 0C) has fallen from between 15 and 20 per year prior to the twentieth century, to around 10 per year in recent years


Me- Again, all of this is "recent years", if you look on a planetary timescale its a completely irrelevant tiny aberration in the data. Rainfall, temperatures, and C02 in the atmosphere has been higher and lower many many times over. And C02 now is almost at an all time low of 360 parts per million. A tiny fraction of one percent. At times in the past it was 15 percent! And of course plant life flourishes as it gets more essential CO2 to breath, and again locks it away to form coal and oil in the future. A natural cycle.



BBC - 1995 saw the most hot days in 225 years of daily measurements - 26 days above 20C

me - again its natural and a tiny blip in the big longer term picture. 225 years isn't even a blink of the eye in planetary timescales. And its been much hotter and colder so many times in the past way before we started burning fuels. It only appears to be significant if you look only at the last 300 years. The last 300 million years would show it as a tiny variation or bump on a hugely varying graph that's hard to even see! Plus its been colder every year since culminating in the coldest year on record in 2007... Totally negating this often repeated statistic!  And you will notice they don't mention it very much!


BBC - Sea levels are rising globally, arctic sea ice is thinning and rainfall is becoming heavier in some parts of the World. Average global sea levels have increased by between 0.1 and 0.2 metres over the last 100 years

Me. Even if true, which is rather difficult to measure or prove, temperature change has been happening a long time before we ever appeared!  Ice has melted and froze and expanded and retreated many times. And I would challenge the ability to measure sea level height to an accuracy of a couple of centimetres especially 100 years ago! Plus the TIME SPAN again is too short to be meaningful. Over the longer planetary timescale nothing ever was stable. Temp, ice, sea levels etc all have changed continually and over a vastly greater level than the minute frankly dubiously measured levels we see today.  So how exactly does any of this prove that we caused it? And even then who says its bad if we did!


BBC - Snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has declined since the late 1960's by around 10%
Mountain glaciers in non polar regions have retreated significantly during the 20th century
There is evidence of more precipitation in large parts of the World - an increase of 0.5-1% per decade in many mid and high level areas of the northern hemisphere

Me - Measuring rainfall can only ever happen in one spot. It can be raining one side of the road but not the other where you measuring device is. Unless you measure every point on the earths surface the scope for experimental error in short term measurement has to be much greater than the "evidence" of 1 percent suggests. Besides there is plenty of evidence (largely ignored!) to the contrary. Non of which matters anyway because climate change always will happen with or without us as it has done for billions of years.


BBC - In the same area of the World there has been a 2-4% increase in the frequency of heavy rainfall events
In Asia and Africa there has been an increased frequency and intensity of droughts in the last few decades

Me - Few "decades" try looking back a few million years and you will see HUGE changes! From way before men were around (only a million years and burning fuel only for a few hundred, and burning lots of it only for 50...) Plus selecting your definition of heavy, and frequency, and the parts of the world chosen can totally reverse these results. Obviously the scientists producing these figures only show the ones they favour since it pays their wages.

The whole argument is based on ignorance and looking only at short time span of 300 years or less. And much brainwashing and political vote grabbing from the rise of the greens popularity. By going green . Now its become so big and involves so much money and politics they cant see that its ridiculous. Or don't want to. Its like a big rock rolling along gathering moss. And there are many scientists out their with the same views but nobody wants to hear it because it all seems "sewn up" and agreed. Well the truth is that its not by a long way!

OZONE HOLE...

Plus did you ever wonder why that big fuss about the Ozone hole above the south pole has disappeared and seldom gets a mention anymore?

Well I will tell you... Because its largely fixed. Its small now and should continue to be. And many scientists know why. But they arte keeping very quiet about it after costing many businesses a fortune or sending them bust to change from CFCs to other propellants and refrigerants. As usual it was all over hyped and all the politicians jumped on the bad wagon and brainwashed the media and the rock started gathering moss again.

Science WAS partly right. It WAS CFCs that was causing it. First a little physics. Ozone is just Oxygen. An Oxygen atom does not like being on its own so it finds a friend or friends. O2 is the common form of oxygen that we breath. It is just 2 oxygen atoms. It likes this relationship. Its happy as a pair of atoms and its naturally stable. When sunlight hits the O2 at the outer edges of the atmosphere it creates OZONE. What actually happens is that the energy breaks the 2 atoms in the O2 apart leaving the atoms all lonely again! So they try to join back up to another atom. Sometimes 3 join. This is OZONE.  Now as you know 3 is a crowd. So in a short time all the 3 atom groups split up and they all form pairs again or normal oxygen or O2. This happens continually. After a short while Ozone naturally slits up and forms oxygen. Ozone forms a really thin layer caused by the sunlight.

Now CFCs make it split up faster.  so would shorten the life of the Ozone. But CFCs released here on the ground or even high in the atmosphere just fall down. As surely as pouring water out of a glass. The stuff is heavy. It cant get up high on its own. Scientists were always worried about this problem but actually found CFCs up high where the Ozone layer is or was. What they didn't know was that a big volcano in south America was puking out more CFCs than the human race ever could daily. And it was hot and fired them high into the atmosphere! Guess what caused the Ozone hole... Guess why it was mostly the south pole that was effected, guess what happened when it stopped erupting... Another embarrassing truth.