We Are Entering An Ice Age

Are you kidding me? How can this be when the "consensus" is that we are going to be destroyed by global warming? The answer is that obviously the consensus might be lacking a few people. Of course, this means that there is no consensus but that is another dispute.

Plainly, we are being lied to. Those in power are using fear to promote their agenda to eliminate our present way of life while implementing costly solutions where there is no problem. Following this idea is costing us billions, if not trillions.

Researchers are concluding that we are seeing signs that the world is entering a cooling period. Over the last few weeks, I wrote about some of this research. Now, we are seeing claims that we are closing in on another Ice Age. Here is an article that appears in Pravda showing how the climate is involved in a trend that lasts thousands of years.

The problem with the alarmists claims is that they like to take 10 or 20 year spans. When dealing with the Earth, we need to look at things in intervals of 10,000 years or more. This idea that man is causing the warming of the planet is becoming more ridiculous by the day. Each day we see another record low set somewhere in the world. As I write this, parts of Alaska is dealing with -75 degrees. Does this sound like a product of global warming? (I am going to ignore the absurd and illogical claim that record low temperatures are a result of global warming)

We saw the extinction of the dinosaurs during the last Ice Age. Since that time, the planet got warmer. There were fluctuations up and down over different intervals. Nevertheless, the planet is warmer than it was 200,000 years ago. In addition, we are told there is another ice age coming. This means that there will be a time when the planet gets remarkably colder. Hopefully, for those of us here, it won't be for thousands of years.

The bottom line is that another "mini-ice age" similar to what was experienced a couple hundred years ago is very likely. We are now seeing temperatures that date back to the late 1800s. Give this another couple of years, and it is highly possible that we will feel effects similar to the 1700s in terms of the temperature. Remember this the next time one of the political leaders warns of the dangers of global warming. Now, you will know for a fact they are lying through their teeth.

Read more...

Global Warming: Political Cause

The only consensus with the Global Warming debate is that the science seems to have left the house. This issue is now a matter of politics as opposed to a forum for scientific debate. Recently, I came across an article that verified my suspicions about this subject.

James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, is a long time proponent of man-made global warming. He was one of the first scientists to appear before Congress, doing so in 1988. At that time, he alerted them of the dire nature of the impending warming. He was basing his conclusions on the 10 year swing from the late 70s towards a warming. Remember, we experienced a cooling trend from the mid 1940's through up until that time. His analysis was certainly heard by a sitting Senator, Al Gore.

Hansen's credentials would make you believe he is someone to listen to. He has a high powered position (warning sign #1) with the government that allows his access to all the latest data collection devices known to man. However, we find that his conclusions are marred by his associations. In the past I wrote that it is not in the American Cancer Institute's best interest to cure cancer. Well, it is not in Hansen's interest to correctly analyze the data. This article sums up what many have long believed.

I find the easiest way to get to the truth is to follow the money. This usually reveals which "side someone's bread is buttered on". For Hansen, it is a liberal agenda that is pushing his results. How is that so? Because they are the ones lining his pockets with millions of dollars. To me, this proves a lack of neutrality in this matter.

Notice who his supporters are: George Soros who provided him with $720,000 for legal and marketing advice; Teresa Heinz Kerry, with of noted liberal John Kerry, who's foundation awarded Hansen $250,00 and let him split a $1 million prize. Right there is a cool (not warm) $1.5 million to this one individual. Do you think he is going to give up this gravy train by asserting that the data now says something different? Obviously not.

One of the major arguments that man-made global warming advocates levy against those who claim proof dispelling this idea is that their conclusions are biased based upon funding. We often hear how the oil companies are paying for these "scientific" studies the same way the tobacco industry paid for studies concluding that smoking was not hazardous to one's health.

This seems like a valid argument. However, further research reveals that ExxonMobil paid $18 million in climate change studies over a period covering 1997-2996. That averages out to under $2 million spent per year to all those doing research. Yet, Hansen received almost that same amount from 3 sources. Obviously, if the research is flawed by those who are funded by the oil companies, then Hansen's conclusions are fabrications also since he is paid by liberal organizations seeking to promote their agenda. This is just one more instance where the American people are being misled by individuals in the government.

Therefore, the next time you hear someone spewing their nonsense about the consensus on man-made global warming, remember the flaw in their argument. And, bet the ranch that they will point to some data put out by GISS. We can now say this facet of the government is an arm for the George Soros political machine.

Read more...