There was much discussion at the time of what measures needed to come into play to avoid this. Now towards the end of the 70's and into the 80' and 90's increased solar activity produced an overall warming of the planet as well as a equal and measurable increase on other planets in the solar system. To quote Fred Singer, an atmospheric and space physicist "There is now little doubt that solar-wind variability [streams of ionized gases that radiate out from the sun] is the primary cause of climate change on a decadal time scale.” However this small detail was quietly ignored by the vested interest groups as they started to issue warnings about this warming as if it was the result of a runaway greenhouse event. These powerful vested interest groups were able to employ a strategy of problem, reaction, solution blended with corruption to ensure the program is followed.
The global temperature rise brought on by the increased solar activity are used to justify the Global Warming claim. This new term was employed because it does not cite an actual cause for the warming just that there is one. If one does some investigating you will discover that the carbon dioxide level, which is supposed to be the actual cause of the warming has not moved greatly if at all in the past 160 years. To quote Science Daily; "Most of the carbon dioxide emitted by human activity does not remain in the atmosphere, but is instead absorbed by the oceans and terrestrial ecosystems. In fact only about 45% of emitted carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere." The facts are that this planet has a regular cycle of warming and cooling periods that are much more extreme than anything being experienced today.
One effect of the recent warming period will be the heat absorbed by the oceans which will linger, melting ice, releasing CO2 and influencing weather patterns for some time to come.
It is also notable that these variations occurred at low levels of atmospheric CO2. We have a situation where the Little Ice Age was found to have been the coldest period of the current interglacial which suggests that 20th-century global warming could not have taken the earth into "uncharted" thermal territory, but only back to something similar to what prevailed prior to the Little Ice Age, like the Medieval Warm Period, which was merely a run-of-the-mill relatively warmer period that was still much colder than the several-millennia-long Holocene Thermal Maximum, which was several degrees warmer than today's temperatures. Keep in mind, too, that nowhere over the course of this planets known history have temperatures remained stable for any length of time, and never has it gone in a straight line from year to year. The real greenhouse gas, water vapour which warmer oceans generate, also releases CO2 but that is a symptom of the warming not the cause.
Atmospheric CO2 from 1860-2000 - Human CO2 emissions (blue line) are only responsible for 1% of the quite small quantity of CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 is still on the rise due to ocean warming (does not cause warming)
Of course more cloud equates to more warming. Interesting to note that the data indicates that ice in the oceans is melting but ice on land is increasing in Antarctica. In the summer of 2007 Top Gear a popular UK automotive television series drove a car to the north pole! In 2008 the US National Snow and Ice Data Center predicted that the north pole would be ice free that year because of "global warming". This is a huge amount of ice to melt in one season and of course this never happened. It was later claimed to be the result of "errors in the data" which resulted in their missing 193,000 square miles (310,603 square kilometers) of sea ice, an area larger than some countries. (You are supposed to trust these people!) At the same time much was made of city size blocks of ice breaking of the ice shelf in Antarctica which is not uncommon for that ice shelf.
Have a look at the current supposed charts for temperatures and you will notice the medieval warming period has suddenly and magically ceased to be, apparently it didn't happen under the new model. I bet that would have come as a surprise to the Vikings who named Greenland as at the time it was ice free and covered in vegetation, and settled there and established vineyards. Based on this fact alone it is apparent that the globe could warm up to the degree that Greenland is free of ice and still be within normal fluctuations.
NASA-GISS' James Hansen's global raw 1999 temperatures
In simple terms vested interest groups are using a known phenomena to promote their own agenda. I suspect this agenda goes well beyond simply raking in of billions in cash. I think that is just an agreeable side benefit.
What evidence is there that we the human inhabitants of this planet are actually affecting its mean temperatures? None that can be clearly stated as having figures that have not been manipulated to show the desired outcome (warming) however a major scientific report by leading Japanese academics states that since 2001, the increase in global temperatures has halted, despite a continuing increase in CO2 emissions. There is no denying warming has indeed occurred over the last century. It's just that it has nothing to do with CO2 emissions. What about the movie Inconvenient Truth from Al Gore? Well aside from the fact it has been presented by a politician (that should indicate something in itself) has been shown to have at last count 35 serious scientific errors or exaggerations including some manipulations to reverse the data trend.
The same temperatures as previous chart processed/manipulated 2008 . As you see, a global cooling since the 1930s (right) up to the year 2000 has elegantly been changed into a global warming since the 1930s to suit the program.
Of course we need to act with responsibility and care for our world, we do need to put in place systems and ways that eliminate pollution. While I think of it don't you find it sadly funny how it's the public's fault if there's pollution but never the politicians who fail to support alternative non-polluting technologies or the industries that actively suppress any alternative energy sources because that would end the monopoly they have on energy supply and we all know that money is the number 1, 2, 3 and 4 priority. The control system is nothing if not consistent but I digress.
In light of the above who benefits from the introduction of carbon emission controls? In theory we all should in the long term, if it results in true change and the introduction of non polluting replacements for existing fuels. Something that could have been done years ago.
In fact what we find is two of the most powerful global groups falling over each other to rush this program into place. These two groups are governments and industry. We even see a politician making a movie about it, this movie it has been pointed out by independent researchers and scientists uses the facts in a very loose and biased manner. The figures presented in it are misleading, selective and/or distortions of existing data. Industry is already leeching funds from tax payers under the guise of carbon credits and deals with governments. You will soon be experiencing increases for power and fuels supplied to you of up to 40% or more because of these same credits. Welcome to the greatest scam on earth, presented and manipulated into your reality by those with a vested interest in having you believe you have created the problem so you must pay for it.
The point is none of the so called carbon credit actions will make any difference at all. Not only that but I would expect to see the UN being used to foster a single global enforcement of these policies as a precursor to establishing a global government. To this end they are offering to leech the wealthy nations via carbon credits to bribe the poorer ones into cooperating.
Another aspect of this was the hole in the ozone layer, a serious issue which was put down to fluorocarbons from fridges, air conditioners and multipurpose fire extinguishers. It would have had nothing to do with the nuclear explosions that where conducted in the upper atmosphere now would it? I have yet to have it fully explained just how that gas caused the hole. I did see some explanations but they made little sense. One can however find a direct relationship between the timing of the "atmospheric nuclear tests" and the appearance of the hole. Mind you it was great for business, industry made a large fortune out of that one as every air conditioner and refridgerator needed a new gas, plus the old multipurpose fire extinguisher had to be replaced with alternatives, in some cases several alternatives and all this was done globally. $$$
Now the idea of carbon credits is a profitable scheme indeed as it involves no actual item, only the estimation of a item. Industry is by way of paper shuffling and political double speak able to profit immensely from the idea. The result will be the reallocation of billions of dollars away from worthwhile projects and into the pockets of the greedy. Sorry tax payers, seems you're the bottom line yet again. The trouble is it is all a fiction. They will be forced to move very quickly as they will not be able to hide the fact that things are getting cooler not warmer, mind you I won't be at all surprised if they try and claim that the cooling is a result of the warming and go on to show that black is white and that psychopaths are really good caring types who are just misunderstood.
The bottom line is the greedy, self serving manipulators have finally found a way to make you pay for air and they will use this as a stepping stone to the new world order that they desire so much. Global Warming, (the proposed problem) is a term that is now being switched to Climate change, serves the agenda to help deliberately whip up mass hysteria (the reaction) on behalf of governments and other vested interest groups who are all too eager to introduce draconian taxation and control measures (the desired solution) that won't do anything at all to combat warming, whether you believe it to be natural or man-made. What is for certain is that this "Global warming" scam has an agenda promoted through a minority group within the United Nations. Many scientists outside of this small group have vastly different opinions:
“It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.
"Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history… When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.
“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly…. As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.
Well it's up to everybody to make themselves and others aware, once enough people see what is going on it can change, we can save ourselves and our planet from these leeches, but if ignored.....
You better start practicing.
Baaaaa Baaaaa.
-------------------------------------
A small sample of related links:
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/press_releases/monckton-response-to-gore-errors.pdf/
http://www.co2science.org/articles/V12/N50/C1.php/
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/climategate-somethings-rotten-in-denmark-and-east-anglia-asheville-and-new-york-city-pjm-exclusive/
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/accurateclimatechange/accclimatechange.pdf/
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/11/ipcc-scientist-global-cooling-headed-our-way-for-the-next-30-years/
http://www.denisdutton.com/cooling_world.htm/
http://www.populartechnology.net/2010/01/global-cooling-in-2009.html/
[Next item on this subject]
