How To Buy A Cricket Bat From Internet

Global Warming Illusory - 2 º Part

by Zbigniew Jaworowsky, MD, Ph, D., D.Sc.

Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, Poland.
also served as Chief of UNSCEAR,
Scientific Committee of the United Nations on the Effects of Atomic Radiation.

(English translation of Eduardo Ferreyra,
the article published in the journal Science & Technology Centruy 21st)

Influence Sun

Recent studies by several groups of oceanographers, meteorologists and astrophysicists show excellent correlation between surface temperatures of oceans and solar activity during the last 50 years the tropical and subtropical parts of three oceans have been cooling and heating 0.1 ° C, perfect fit with the solar cycle of eleven years. This is amazing, because differences in solar brightness reached only 0.1%, which is not sufficient to cause the observed temperature changes. It appears that the sun triggers a signal of climate effect by some factor amplifier. During the Little Ice Age about 300 years ago, solar radiation was 0.25% lower than the current [48]. Since 1750, the air temperature over Europe has been constantly changing the pace of solar cycles, but not at the rate of change of greenhouse gases. When the Sun was more active, the Earth's troposphere was warmer (Figure 7). [47, 49, 51]

The mechanism that amplifies the solar signal is probably a phenomenon like El Niño / Southern Oscillation (ENSO), an anomaly of the equatorial waters of the eastern Pacific, El Nino warming, La Nina cooling . The ENSO anomalies occur as irregular cycles of 2-7 years, associated with large-scale changes in atmospheric pressure in the tropics between East and West Pacific. ENSO influences the climate of the planet. [52]. Satellite measurements during the observation period of 20 years, El Niño in 1998 caused the strongest thermal anomalies in the Earth's atmosphere. In April and May 1998, the deviation of the average global temperature from 1982 to 1991 amounted to +0.7 ° C.

During the past 20 years, El Niño occurred several times, but in 1997-98, was developed without simultaneous volcanic eruptions. On two previous occasions, the child was associated with large volcanic eruptions injected huge amounts of stratospheric dust: El Chichon in 1982 and Mount Pinatubo in 1991 These eruptions caused a global cooling of the atmosphere, which masked the effects of thermal Child. (See Figure 6 above).

Figure 7
TEMPERATURE OF THE SOLAR CYCLE troposphere and

Since 1750, the air temperature over Europe has been constantly changing the pace of solar cycles, but not at the rate of change of greenhouse gases. When the Sun was more active, the Earth's troposphere was warmer

Source: Notes 47, 49 and 51.

appears that El Niño is probably the strongest of the natural variability of the global climate system [53]. Since 1958 there have been positive and negative anomalies in global temperature associated with the Child [54] (and some dating back to 1610) [52]. Numerous observations suggest that the ENSO phenomenon depends on solar activity: Large solar flares cause dramatic increases in the solar wind, and decrease the intensity of cosmic rays reaching the Earth's atmosphere. As Cosmic rays provide condensation centers for clouds, large solar flares allow the formation of the Child, through a decrease of 2 to 3% of cloud cover in the short term. [52, 55, 56]

Computer models are only opinions

Computer models of climate are nothing but formalized opinion of its creators, on the global climate system operation [57]. If these models were able to project right-mind climate change, should pass the test to accurately reconstruct past climates, or at least reconstruct the current climate.

Normally, the projections of the human impact on climate using one of the many versions of GCMs (General Circulation Model) test various versions has shown that models are unable to correctly reconstruct the current climate even . All models had a 100% error for predictions of precipitation, and an error of 2 ° C for estimates of global temperature. For the Arctic, the error reached 10 ° C and Antarctica, the error was 20 ° C. [58] In one test, when fed 14 different models with the same climatic parameters, you got 14 different responses ranging from heating to cooling the overall temperature of the atmosphere [59].

A similar test was done on another 17 MCG produced similar results [60]. This explains why the predictions of temperature change of the IPCC, based on GLS models are in total disagreement with the actual temperatures measured by satellites (Figure 8).

Figure 8
GAPS BETWEEN TEMPERATURE TRENDS in the lower troposphere and the predictions of IPCC

The trend of annual changes of temperature in the lower troposphere, as has been measured satellite between latitudes 83 ° N and 83 ° S, diverge from the trend line for prone-ticada by IPCC computer models. Down line corresponds to the temperatures actually observed, while the sharp upward trend is the "prophecy" of the IPCC

Source: AR Robinson, SA Baliunas, W. Soon, and ZW Robinson, 1988 (Note 47).

Computer models project the greatest warming in the Northern Hemisphere to the Arctic, in 8 ° C to 10 ° C [15]. These projections have not been confirmed by measurements in situ. In Spitsbergen, where Norway has station measurements since 1912, the temperature does not show a positive trend [61]. It was also noted an absence of warming in five other Arctic regions [62], in Scandinavia, in Denmark and Greenland [63, 64].

A long series of measurements from 10 meteorological stations that form an arc around the Arctic, show that there was no heating, but cooling of the region [65]. The analysis of data from these regions covering an area of \u200b\u200bArctic Canada, Greenland, Iceland and Eurasia, shows that occurred around 1920 large warming in the Arctic. Between 1912 and 1920, increased the temperature in West Spitzbergen and Greenland between 3.5 ° C and 5 ° C. After 1950, the Resolute and Alert Canadian stations observed a decreasing trend. During this period, the temperature in West Greenland decreased by 1.5 ° C. We also observed a declining trend in the Russian Arctic, Franz Josef Land recorded in the maximum decrease in temperature, short-term, 4 ° C to 5 ° C. Nine

Danish weather stations in Greenland observed similar changes in the long term, with cooling in these regions between 1940 and 1985 [65, 66]. During the decade of 1955-1964, in a sector Arctic between Greenland, Norway, Spitzbergen and Novaya Zemlya, the temperature of sea surface water decreased by 0.1 ° C to 0.6 ° C in winter and 0.1 ° C to 0.25 ° C in summer. Between 1945 and 1975, also saw a decrease in surface water temperature of 1 ° C around the Faroe Islands, and the average temperature of the Atlantic north of 35 ° N decreased by 0.5 ° C between 1940 and 1987 [64 ]. A review of the temperatures of the Greenland ice sheet shows a decrease in air temperature over the past 30 years, and 15% decrease in rainfall. Both effects are completely opposite what the computer models projected. [67]

Further south, measurements indicate a systematic dendrological summer cooling of 3, ° C in the region north of Quebec, between 1800 and 1950. [68] In the southern part of the planet, the Antarctic Peninsula, the climate has gradually cooled to 2 ° C since 1850. [69] Compared with the 9 th century, the Ronne Shelf temperature decreased 0.7 ° C, and by 4 ° C in the 80's. [70] On a global scale, the temperature measurements show a systematic failure to gain optimal temperature after the 40's, instead, there is a trend enfriamiento durante las siguientes tres décadas. [57, 71] Desde los años 40, el mayor enfriamiento del clima se observó en las altas latitudes del norte [72], es decir, exactamente donde las hipótesis del calentamiento global proyecta el mayor aumento de temperatura.

Los Glaciares Crecientes

Las mediciones altimétricas por radar satelital sugieren que, entre 1978 y 1985, estaban creciendo a un ritmo que se correspondía con la disminución del nivel de los océanos, de 0,20 a 0,45 mm por año, de manera principal, por la acumulación de hielo en Groenlandia [73, 74] . Durante estos ocho años, the thickness of the Greenland helo coverage increased about 1.5 meters, which corresponds to 23 cm per year. The accuracy of these measurements was questioned on the basis of being "military secrets" [75]. However, the original results of Zwally et al., Were confirmed by later measurements made during the Geosat Exact Repeat Mission [76] and laser measurement result. [77]

measurements carried out in Greenland storey by the Expedition Glaciologique Internationale au Groenland (EGIG), and other groups in southern Greenland, show an average increase ice from 3 to 9 cm per year [74]. From 1968, face six of nine small glaciers studied in the West Greenland are beginning to move [66]. EGIG measurements showed that between 1959 and 1968, the surface layer of the central Greenland ice had increased 1 meter height. Around 1950, most of the ice edge south and west of Greenland was retiring and decreasing thickness. But around 1985, many parts of the retreating ice had begun to move again. In early 1990, the area of \u200b\u200bprogression had spread from the highlands to the lowlands [78]. Recent studies suggest that "There is no convincing evidence an increase in negative balance conditions can, a priori, be expected from a human-induced warming. "[79]

Of the 18 glaciers studied in the Arctic, 15 of them (77%) are now positive coefficient on mass balance / pending. Some of the glaciers show a trend towards less negative mass balance, and many others show a strong positive trend. Much of Scandinavian glaciers reached their historic peak in the 17 th century, during the Little Ice Age. After an intense melting in the early 20, 17 Scandinavian glaciers dramatically reduced its retreat and entered a process of increasing its mass. [80, 81]. Similar changes were later found in Scandinavia and Spitzbergen. [82]

In Antarctica, ice is growing so rapidly that by 2050 there will be a decline in the oceans of 30 cm. [83] The measurement indicates that ice buildup in Antarctica much of the increase in ice up to 5 to 25% of global precipitation, and lower sea levels of 1.0 to 1.2 mm per year. [84] Such behavior of the cryosphere will not support any claim that the climate is warming, or the catastrophic vision of rising sea levels caused by man can be fulfilled.

The Greenhouse

Only about half the solar energy reaching Earth is absorbed by the atmosphere. The rest is scattered back to space and to some extent absorbed by the atmosphere or reflected by the ground. The Earth itself radiates infrared wavelengths much longer than solar radiation. The infrared radiation from the Earth, unlike solar radiation is strongly absorbed by the atmosphere. The absorption is caused, the main way for the steam water and clouds, but also some low concentration gases in the atmosphere. Only a very small part of the emitted radiation reaches the surface to escape into outer space In this way, the atmosphere is warm and radiant energy back to the surface of the Earth, where it is absorbed again and again re-radiated. Thus, a substantial heat exchange occurs between the ground and lower atmosphere. This process, known as the greenhouse effect, is responsible for the relatively high average temperature of the planet.

Without the greenhouse effect, the average temperature near the surface would -18 ° C, rather than +15 ° C, as it is now. The difference of 33 ° C is the result of absorption of infrared radiation by atmospheric greenhouse gases. The most important greenhouse gas is water vapor, responsible for 96 to 99% of the greenhouse effect. Any reader of the IPCC 1990 report (the Bible of the adherents of the global warming induced by humans) may believe, incorrectly, that produces 25% CO2 greenhouse effect.

What is striking in this IPCC report is that the water has not been mentioned in any of the eight tables comparing the greenhouse effect of different components of the atmosphere! If the corresponding values \u200b\u200bof water had been included in these tables, it would have clearly seen the lack of importance in the thermal balance of the atmosphere, the CO2 produced by man. If CO2 were the only greenhouse gas from the atmosphere, contributing to 22% of current greenhouse. However, the effect of CO2 emissions is much lower, because of overlapping or overlapping with strong absorption lines from 12 to 18? M in the spectral region.
detailed analysis of the summer atmosphere in middle latitudes indicate that the overall effect of 342 watts/m2 gases, water vapor (lines continuous and discrete absorption) contributes with 330 watts/m2-that is, 96.5%, while CO2 contributes 12W/m2, or 3%. [85, 86] Other studies that take into account the vapor water, liquid water and heat transport by convection, estimated the contribution of CO2 as 1 to 5% of the total greenhouse effect. [87, 89] The other greenhouse gases are of marginal importance.

TABLE 1

CARBON POOLS AND CO2 FLUX IN THE ATMOSPHERE

1000 Inorganic marine dissolved soil ground biomass

Current carbon reservoirs Gt
Sediment	60,000,000
marine dissolved organic
	38,000
fossil fuels (exploitable )	7,200
Atmosphere	727
1,300
	834
marine biomass	42

Earth 63

natural flows into the atmosphere annually	Gigatons
	Oceans 106
	Total 169

human flows into the atmosphere annually	Gigatons
Comb. Fossils and agricultural use	6

the total flow of CO2 into the atmosphere of 169 Gt (Gt) of carbon annually, industrial and agricultural activity of mankind adds 6 Gt for years. This is similar to amplitude of the annual fluctuation of the total mass of atmospheric CO2 (5.4 megatons of carbon per year). The table shows the existing carbon pools on the surface of the Earth and the annual flows of CO2 (expressed as carbon equivalent in gigatons) of 1015 tons into the atmosphere.

Source: Adapted from Z. Jaworowski, and V. Segelstad TV Hisdal, 1992. (See Note 27)

We thank the existence of the oceans, which emit water vapor, not CO2, the Earth's temperature is well above 0 ° C on the surface, which is stable in a range of only a few degrees, and has allowed the existence of life. Total flow of CO2 into the atmosphere of 169 Gt (Gt) of carbon annually, industrial and agricultural activity of mankind adds 6 Gt per year (see Table 1). This is similar to the amplitude of the annual fluctuation of the total mass of atmospheric CO2 (5.4 megatons of carbon per year).

isotopic estimates of the mass balance of carbon-12 and carbon-13 in the atmosphere show that in 1988 the mass of CO2 from burning fossil fuels which had accumulated in the atmosphere between 1860 and 1988 was about 30 Gt of carbon, ie about 5% of the total mass of atmospheric CO2. [31, 90, 91] Similar results were found with estimates of the mass balance of CO2 non-isotopic [92]. Consequently, the human aggregate to total greenhouse is between 0.05 and 0.25%.

But even this tiny addition is doubtful. According to recent studies, all the infrared radiation could escape Earth's atmosphere (outside the "spectroscopic window" in the range 7.5 to 14 mm) is almost completely absorbed. Any increase in the concentration of CO2 in the air above the current level can not contribute significantly to greater retention of heat in the lower troposphere. [89 , 93]

known consequences of global warming hysteria

The hypothesis of global warming that would be caused by man is far from being confirmed by observations, many of which suggest that it is false. Environmentalists dreamers trying to seem axiomatic that the imaginary dangers of this warming must be remedied without waiting for further testing. In fact, they claim that scientific uncertainty should become the basis for a global regulation, which will put intolerable burdens on the world's population, especially in underdeveloped countries.

FB Cross, professor of business regulations at the University of Texas, has warned that "the precautionary principle is deeply perverse in its implications for the environment and human welfare." (94) To fulfill their dreams, environmentalists are willing to pay any cost humanity, impoverish entire nations and thus endanger the environment, destroy the industry created the work and sweat of their ancestors, and strangle our civilization. It's amazing the gullibility of a large part of society that, once exposed to concentrated media manipulation, has accepted a huge facility the mythology of global warming. One can understand the psychological and social reasons for this acceptance. However, the actions of the Organization of the United Nations and many governments, leading to the Earth community with a disaster eco-nomic and civilization, on behalf of a wandering ghost, do not appear to be responsible. Is it too much to ask politicians to act reasonably, rather than by short-term selfish interests?

Zbigniew Jaworowski, MD, Ph.D., and D.Sc., a professor at the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw. Multidisciplinary scientific, medical, doctor in physics and Doctor of Science, has studied ice cores from glaciers around the world, analyzing traces of heavy metals and radionuclides. It is well known as an expert on radiation effects, and has served as chairman of the Scientific Committee United Nations Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR). Among his previous articles in the 21st Century Science & Technology is "Ice Info Show No Signs of Increased Carbon Dioxide", Spring, 1997, p. 42.

This article has the special permission of the magazine and the author for publication in Estrucplan.com

Notas:

47. J. Christy, R. Spencer, y W.D. Braswell, 1999. "Scientists Present 1998 Earth-Temperature Trends. Updated 20-year Temperature Record Unveiled at 1999 AMS Meeting", informado en NASA Space Science News, Jan. 12, 1999. http http://wwwssl.msfc.nasa.gov/ newhome/headlines/essd12jan99 1.htm

48. A.B. Robinson, S.L. Baliunas, W. Soon, y Z.W. Robinson, 1998. Medical Sentinel, Vol. 3, pp. 171-178.

49. R.A. Kerr, 1996. Science, Vol. 271, pp. 1360-1361.

50. E. Friis-Christensen y K. Lassen, 1991. Science Vol. 254, pp. 698-700.

51. K. Lassen y E. Friis-Christensen, 1996. In "The Global Warming Debate", J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 224-232.

52. ES Posmetier, WH Soon, and SL Baliunas, 1998. In "Global Warming: The Continuing Debate", R. Bate, ed. (London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 159-171.

53. T. Landscheidt, 1999. "Solar Activity Controls El Niño and La Niña,

http://www.john-daly/sun-enso/sun-enso.htm

54. SGH Philander, 1990. "El Niño, La Niña and the Southern Oscillation" (San Diego, Calif.: Academic Press). Quoted from T. Landscheidt, 1999 (See Reference 52.)

55. JP Peixoto and A.H. Oort, 1992. "Physics of Climate" (New York: American Institute of Physics).

56. M. Pudvokin y S. Veretenenko, 1995. J. Atm. Terr. Phys., Vol. 57, pp. 1 349-1 355.

57. H. Svensmark y E. Friis-Christensen, 1997. J. Atm. Sol. Terr. Phys., Vol. 59, p. 1225.

58. R. Bryson, 1993. "Environmental Conservation", Vol. 20, pp. 339-346.

59. L.S. Kalkstein, 1991. "Global Comparisons of Selected GCM Control Runs and Observed Climate Data." Report PM-221 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, Climate Change Division)

60. R.D. Cess et al., 1989. Science, Vol. 245, pp 513-516.

61 RD Cess et al., 1991. Science, Vol 253, pp 888-892.

62 I. Hanssen-Bauer, M. Kristensen, Solas, y EL Steffensen, 1990. "The Climate of Spitsbergen." NMI Rap port Nr. 39/90 (Oslo: The Norwegian Meteorological Institute).

63 PJ Michaels, 1990. Liberty, Vol 3, pp 27-33.

64 B. Aune, 1989. "The air temperature and precipitation in Norway." NMI Report Nr. 26/89 (The Norwegian Meteorological Institute).

65 K. Joy Dahl, 1989. "Global and Regional Temperaturudvikling since 1850." Scientific Report No. 89-6 (Danish Meteorological Institute).

66 JA Dowdeswell et al., 1997. Quaternary Research Vol. 48, pp. 1-14.

67. J.E. Gordon, 1980. Nature, Vol. 284, pp. 157-159.

68. K.C. Jezek, 1993. Nature, Vol. 366, pp. 17-18.

69. G.C. Jacoby, I.S. Ivanciu, y L.A. Ulan, 1988. "Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology", Vol. 64, pp. 69-78.

70. A.J. Aristarain, J. Jouzel, y C. Lorius, 1990. Geophysical Research Letters, Vol. 17, pp. 2369-2372.

71. W. Graf, O. Reinwarth, y H. Moser, 1990. Annals of Glaciology, Vol. 14, pp. 90-93.

72. C.K. Folland, D.E. Parker, y F.E. Kates, 1984. Nature, Vol. 310, pp. 670-673.

73. P.E. Damon y S.M. Kunen, 1976. Science, Vol. 193, pp. 447-453.

74. H.J. Zwally, A.C. Brenner, J.A. Major, R.A. Bindschadler, y J.G. Marsh, 1989. Science, Vol. 246, pp. 1587-1589.

75. H.J. Zwally, 1989. Science, Vol. 246, pp. 1589-1591.

76. B.C. Douglas et al., 1990. Science, Vol. 248, pp. 288-289.

77. H.J. Zwally, A.C. Brenner, J.A. Major, R.A. Bindschadler, y J.M. Marsh, 1990. Science"Vol. 248, pp. 288-289.

78. R. Thomas, W. Krabill, E. Frederick, y K. Jezek, 1995. Global and Planetary Change, Vol. 9, pp. 17-28.

79. A. Weidick, 1991. "Gronlands Geologiske Undersekolse" Vol. 152, 39-41 (1991).

80. K. Melvold y J.O. Hagen, 1998. Joumal of Glaciology, Vol. 44, pp. 394- 403.

81. J. Bogen, B. Wold, y G. Ostrem, 1989. In "Glacier Fluctuations and Climactic Change", J. Oerlemans, ed. (Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989), pp. 109-128.

82. O.H. Loken, 1972. En "Growth and Decay of Glaciers as Indicators of Long-term Environmental Changes", Symposium on Environmental Conditions in the Northwest Atlantic, pp. 1960-1969.

83. J.O. Hagen, 1996. "Memoirs of the National Institute of Polar Research" (Tokyo) Vol. 51, pp. 343-354.

84. M.F. Meier, 1990. Nature, Vol. 343, pp. 115-116.

85. V.l. Morgan, I.D. Goodwin, D.M. Etheridge, and C.W. Wookey, 1991. Nature, Vol. 354, pp. 58-60.

86. R.G. Ellingson, J. Ellis, and S. Fels, 1991. Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol. 96(D5), pp. 8929-8953.

87. R.G. Ellingson, en carta al autor, Feb. 10, 1999. 87. R.S. Lindzen, 1991. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society, Vol. 117, pp. 651-652. 88. J. Emsley, 1992. New Scientist, (Oct. 17), pp. 53-54.

88. J. Barrett, 1996. En "The Global Warming Debate", J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environ-ment Forum), pp. 60-70.

89. T.V. Segalstad, 1996. "Carbon Isotope Mass Balance of Atmospheric CO2," en "The Global Warming Debate", J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 41-50.

90. J. Barret, 1996, en The Global Warming Debate, J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 60-70.

91. T.V. Segalstad 1996. "Carbon Isotope Mass Balance of Atmospehric CO2," en "The Global Warming Debate", J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 41-50

92. T.V. Segalstad y Z. Jaworowski, 1991. Rechazado por Nature.

93. C. Starr, 1993. Energy, Vol. 18, pp. 1297-1310.

94. J. Barrett, 1995. Spectr. Acta, Vol. 51A, pp. 415-417.

95. F.B. Cross, 1996. Washington 8 Lee Law Review, Vol. 53, p. 851.

96. L.D. Keigwin, 1996. Science, Vol. 274, pp. 544-545.

97. R.A. Kerr, 1996. Science, Vol. 271, pp. 137-138.

98. T.A. Boden, P. Kanciruk, y M.P. Farrell, 1990. "Trends '90: A Compendium of Data on Global Change," ORNL/CDIA-36 (Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Environmental Science Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory).

99. R.J. Andres, G. Marland, T. Boden, y S. Bischof, 1993. "Carbon Dioxide Emissions from Fossil Fuel Consumption and Cement Manufacture, 1751-1991, and an Estimate of their Isotopic Composition and Latitudinal Distribution," Global Change Institute, Snowmass Conference on the Global Carbon Cycle, Snowmass, Colorado (USA), July 19-30.

100. AH Gordon, 1998. In "Global Warming: The Continuing Debate, R. Bate, ed. (London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 53-61.

Twitching In Sleep And Iron Deficiency

Global warming illusory, Part 1

by Zbigniew Jaworowsky, MD, Ph.D., D., D.Sc.

Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw, Poland.
also served as Chief of UNSCEAR,
Scientific Committee of the United Nations on the Effects of Atomic Radiation.

(English translation of Eduardo Ferreyra,
the article published in the journal Science & Technology Centruy 21st)

Despite billions of dollars in studies and millions of propaganda headlines , global warming predicted by computer climate modeling industry is not scientifically real.

The amount of money spent on climate studies worldwide has reached a staggering U.S. $ 5,000 million per year [1]. Only in the United States spend more $ 2,000 million, not including the cost of satellites, ships and construction of laboratories [2]. Climatologists have obtained this fabulous amount of money to invent a vision on a global scale catastrophe, caused by man.

In the decades of 70 and 80, the computer models prophesied a doubling of CO2 content in the atmosphere for the next 60 years. The greenhouse effect of this increase in CO2, along with other gases released by humans into the atmosphere, CH4, N2, CFC-11 (Freon), and CFC-12-supposed to increase the global surface temperature by 5 ° C. In the polar regions, increased projected to reach 10 ° C [3-5]. Later, climatologists truncated estimates of computer models of the temperature rise caused by man for the year 2100 to 3.5 ° C [6], first, and then to 2.3 ° C. [7]

Global warming caused by greenhouse gases caused by humans is normally presented as a grim disaster that will induce mass extinction of animal and plant epidemics of infectious and parasitic diseases, droughts and floods and even invasions mutant insects resistant to insecticides. It is predicted that the melting of glaciers will cause an elevation of 3.67 meters from sea level, flooding islands, densely populated coastal areas and big cities [6, 8].

befall mass migrations and a host of other social and environmental consequences, always harmful, never beneficial. According to one American climatologist, the tactic of "asústelos to death" seems to be the best means of raising funds for climate studies. Dr. Stephen Schneider, a leading prophet of global warming has stated very clearly:

"To capture the public imagination ... we do ... simple and dramatic statements, and very little mention of any doubts we may have ... Each of us must decide what the right balance between being effective and being honest. "[9]

Great international organizations such as World Meteorological Organization (WMO), the United Nations Environment (UNEP ), the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and others, addressed the huge influx of money for climate studies. The sources of these funds are the governments of many countries, the European Union and the World Bank. The IPCC Founded in 1988, became the chief scientific adviser to the countries that are part of the Convention Working Group on Climate Change United Nations, adopted in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, and known as the "Treaty on Climate Change."

IPCC reports, which have become the bible of bureaucrats and environmentalist fanatics, civilization accused of being responsible for global warming, and repeatedly declared that they reflect a true "consensus" in the scientific community. This consensus statement is absolutely false: The assessments, conclusions, and even the working method of the IPCC are criticized today by many scientists. A more accurate description current situation would be controversial. Science does not progress through a process of consensus or voting. There was no consensus on the idea of \u200b\u200bCopernicus, in his time, that the Earth orbited around the sun is not necessary consensus in science is useful for policymakers.

Many notable and competent have expressed their opinions criticizing the IPCC reports. For example, Dr. Frederick Seitz, former president of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA and the American Physical Society, president emeritus of Rockefeller University, former chairman of the Defense Science Board, and former Scientific Advisor to NATO said: "I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of a process of peer review (peer review), the events that led to this IPCC report [10] . Dr. Keith Shine, one of the main authors of IPCC reports, described the editing process of the IPCC 1996 report as follows:

"We produce a draft, and then policy makers reviewed the line by line and change the way it was presented ... the data do not change but the way they are presented. It's very peculiar that they have the final say on what's in a scientific report " [11].

Cerca de la mitad de los científicos que tomaron parte en la preparación del informe del IPCC de 1996 no están de acuerdo con sus conclusiones [12] , y eso difícilmente es un "consenso". Hasta los más importantes publicaciones del establishment científico, Science y Nature, han expresado la falta de consenso del IPCC y su errónea metodología. Nature dedicó dos editoriales al tema, [13,14] y un editorial en Science dijo que:

"Si se examinan algunos artículo científicos sobre el tema (modelado del calentamiento climático) se encuentra un acuerdo virtualmente unánime de que los modelos computed are deficient. "[15] The incompatibility between procedures of the IPCC with accepted standards of scientific research carried Science to say that" the IPCC's reputation for correction procedures and consensus building about the accuracy science will be permanently compromised. "[16]

The European Forum for Science and Environment (ESEF), an independent organization, recently published two papers in which several dozen scientists (including Sir Fred Hoyle) present studies that contradict conclusions of the IPCC [17.18]. More hundred scientists signed the Leipzig Declaration, protesting the alleged consensus of the IPCC and the implementation of the Rio Treaty.

Leipzig Declaration called the terms of this treaty as "drastic policies lacking credible support from the underlying science" ... ill-advised, full economic and hazard likely prove counterproductive. " In 1998, 17,000 scientists signed the Oregon Petition, protesting the Kyoto agreement in 1997. [19] These agreements demanded, among other things, the 35% reduction in energy production in the United States in a decade.

How sensitive are the leaders of the IPCC and organizations related to the threat of losing credibility (and therefore funding), it can be seen in a recent article by the former president of the overtly political IPCC, Bert Bolin, and four senior officials Global Change and Terrestrial Ecosystems (GCTE) and the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP). Bert Bolin, writing in Science, September 14, 1999, commenting on the study by DeLucia et al., (Science, May 14, 1999, p. 1177), which projected that by 2050 the forests absorb 50% of CO2 produced man-that is, there is no imminent global warming. Bolin et al. stated: "In the current political climate post-Kyoto, scientific claims about the behavior of terrestrial carbon cycle must be done with caution..."

This is an open attempt to include political criteria in scientific statements, and a limitation on the freedom of science. This statement evokes the pagan spirit of the politically minded Soviet academic, Trofim Lysenko.

Both ideas, the global warming induced by humans and limiting the consumption of fossil fuels have long been politicized. (20) global warming became in a convenient justification for the now popular neo-Malthusian proposal of limiting population growth in Third World countries, and excessive taxation on fuel combustion. The so-called "BTU tax" would be $ 500 per ton of coal, [21] causing an eightfold increase in the price of bituminous coal and a drastic reduction in economic activity. The nuclear industry welcomed this, naively believing that, somehow, the fear of global warming will cause the public is more favorable to nuclear energy.

Maurice Strong, Secretary General Conference on Environment and Development United Nations, held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992, marking the stage for political struggle: "We can get to the point that the only way to save the world will be the collapse of industrial civilization" [12]. Strong was seconded by Timothy Wirth, Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs: "We have to ride the global warming issue. Even if the warming theory is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic and environmental policy."

Richard Benedick, another State Department representative said: "We must implement a treaty on global warming even when there is scientific evidence supporting the greenhouse effect." Maurice Strong advanced on his idea of \u200b\u200b"sustainable development" which he said can be implemented "by a deliberate pursuit of poverty ... ... reduced resource consumption and provincial levels of mortality control." This death sentence echoes the recommendations of Thomas Malthus in the 18th century, who counseled

"All children born, beyond what is required to maintain the population at this level, must necessarily perish unless they made place through the death of adult ... Therefore, we should facilitate, rather than silly and vain attempt to stop the operations of nature to produce this mortality. "[22]

Benefits and Costs of Catastrophism

The exhortations of climatologists on issues catastrophic are loved by the ministries of environment protection, because they justify their existence. They are also loved by the ministries of economy, eager to increase the budgets of governments through new taxes. Thus, the interests of climate scientists to get funding for their jobs are competing with the interests of governments. In fact, governments can earn 500 times more that climate, taxing all industrial emissions of CO2 to the atmosphere (5 gigatons of carbon per year) can reach 2.5 trillion dollars per year. However, losses in the global economy will be several orders of magnitude larger, ruining the entire industry in the world and cause a massive decline, as proposed by Maurice Strong in Rio de Janeiro. According to Sir Fred Hoyle, this may have the effect of making us go back to the Dark Ages Middle Ages. [23]

Just 25 years in the 70's, climate warming was called "improvement", ie a milder climate and the warm periods of the past were known as "optimal climate." Dr. Stephen Schneider, the most notorious of the prophets of the catastrophe of global warming, warned us in the '70s that industrial emissions would induce a drastic cooling, that shortly after the year 2000 would bring a new ice age [24]. At that time, the cooling was a better source of funding for the attack on the heating industry.

Scientific Bases for Weather Theories

global warming supposedly caused by human emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases, is a hypothesis based on computer models and theoretical arguments. The most important bases for this hypothesis is the analysis of greenhouse gases in ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica. From the results, glaciologists have inferred that the content of preindustrial atmospheric CO2 was 26% lower than today. In many studies published in the last decade, studies showed that the ice samples are stained by the manipulation of data, unlawful refusal results did not suit, and unilateral interpretations-what disqualifies these studies as a reliable source of information on changes in the atmosphere during past eras.

Figure 1 Variation of Temperature on the Surface of the Earth

The three curves show temperature variations in the Earth's surface during the last million years (a), the last 10,000 years (b) and the last thousand years (c). The horizontal dotted line represents the temperature at the beginning of 20 century.
Source: IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change), 1990 (Note 6)

The low concentration of CO2 and other gases found covered in ice, are artifacts resulting from a variety of over 20 chemical and physical processes that occur either in the ice layers resulting polar ice drilling. They are the true pre-industrial atmospheric concentrations. Most of these processes tend to decrease the concentration of CO2 in the gas inclusions. These facts were totally ignored by glaciologists in its unilateral interpretation of analytical results [25-33]. Moreover, a careful analysis of the abundant Measurements of CO2 in the atmosphere made in the 19 th century, show that the average concentration before 1900 was 335 parts per million by volume (ppmv) [34]-ie, similar to the concentration of CO2 in 1978.

recently discovered that there is an inverse relationship between atmospheric CO2 concentrations and stomatal frequency in tree leaves, and that this method provides an accurate method to detect and quantify the CO2 fluctuations over the past centuries. Maple leaves recovered from deposits of the Holocene was a lake in Denmark by a team of Dutch scientists, for example, show that 9,600 years BC atmospheric CO2 concentrations were 348 ppm concentrations as 1987. From 9,600 years before present (AAH) to 9,400 AAH levels remained between 333 and 347 ppmv. So, much against the famous ice estimates, the sign of stomatal frequency shows that concentrations of CO2 in the early Holocene were similar to those of the late 20.

The Dutch study authors said "Our findings contradict the concept of relatively stable Holocene CO2 from 270 to 280 ppmv until the industrial revolution" [35]. The study of the leaves of trees corroborate criticism of studies of ice cores and destroy the very foundations of the global warming hypothesis.

Temperature Changes: Long Cycles

atmospheric CO2 content and temperature have never been stable, have been fluctuating since the dawn of history. Geological evidence shows that the atmospheric concentration of CO2, which is now about 350 ppmv, was of 5,600 ppmv at the end of the Ordovician, are about 450 million years [36], in the Carboniferous period, 340 million years before now , was 4,000 ppmv, and in the Cretaceous period - 90 million years ago - was the level of 2,600 ppmv. These extremely high concentrations were not so obvious, associated with any "runaway greenhouse effect", the mantra of global warming propagandists.

Over the past 100 million years, the average surface temperature and the concentration of atmospheric CO2 have been systematically diminishing [37]. 50 million years ago, the CO2 concentration (2,000 ppmv) was almost 6 times larger than now, but the temperatures were only 1.5 ° C higher! In the Ordovician period, when the content of CO2 in the air was 16 times higher than today, the temperature of the tropics has not increased, and at high latitudes was recorded glaciation of Gondwanaland. [36]

The surface temperatures of the Sargasso Sea, east of the West Indies have been determined for a period of 3000 years analyzing the oxygen isotope ratio of fossil organisms in bottom sediments. The information runs until 1975. During l-heating period to 580 DC-Mediterranean countries, the Indian subcontinent and China enjoyed an unprecedented boom. Around 500 AD, a period Cooling was associated with a decline in the economy and European civilization, which was recovered in a new warming by the year 1000 AD Since the end of the Little Ice Age, the temperature has not again been as high as during the MWP.

Source: Adapted from LD Keiwin, 1996, Science, Vol 274, pp. 544-546

The reason for the lack of correlation between changes in temperature and CO2 concentrations in the past is that the main greenhouse gas is not CO2 but water vapor. It is also the case that increased CO2 concentrations above a level rather low may not cause an increase in temperature (see below). It was not CO2 that determined the permanent oscillations of Earth's climate, but changes in the solar constant which are in perfect correlation with climatic oscillations of a periodicity of about 2,500 years. This is suggested by the glacial deposits at the bottom of the North Atlantic, salt deposits in the glaciers, ocean sediments and carbon-13 content in tree rings.

The longer time scale, the duration of alternating long and asymmetric glacial cycles and much shorter warm interglacial periods, was 20,000 to 400,000 years [39]. For about 2 million years, a cycle typically lasted 100,000 years, with glacial cycles of 90,000 years duration, and warm periods of 10,000 years [6, 40, 41]. During the past 850,000 years there were 7 or 8 of such cycles. (See Figure 1). The temperature difference between warm and cold phases is 3 ° C. [42]

The current warm period began 10,500 years ago (6), so you can expect very soon the beginning of a new ice age, perhaps in the next hundred or thousand years. After an excellent climate around 1100 AD, came the Little Ice Age between 1550 and 1700, when the average global temperature was 1 ° C lower than now (Figures 1 and 2). After 1750, the climate warmed again, but we have not yet reached the level of the Century 12 (Figure 2). Around 1938 there was an acceleration of warming, and in the 40 years until 1976, the planet has been cooling. Between 1978 and 1984 there was a rapid increase in global surface temperature. The 40-year period of cooling between 1938 and 1976 occurred when 75% of total manmade CO2 was released the atmosphere (Figure 3). It is obvious that these changes were not dependent on the anthropogenic emissions of CO2.

The 40-year period of global cooling of the atmosphere between 1938 and 1976 occurred when about 75% of the total mass of CO2 produced by man was released into the atmosphere. Annual emissions of anthropogenic CO2 (dotted line) are plotted against changes in temperature near the earth's surface (solid line).

Source: Notes 96, 97 and 98.

In the European regional level, the measurements of nine representative meteorological stations show no warming between 1780 and 1989. Except for the years around 1940, Europe's climate has been cooling over the past 200 years (Fig. 4). For example, between 1780 and 1980, summer temperatures in Warsaw decreased 0.39 ° C, in Vienna, 0.91 ° \u200b\u200bC, in Prague and Budapest, 0.53 ° C. In Warsaw, the two warmest periods were the years 1899-1919 and 1934-1954, in Vienna, 1788-1817, 1943-1963 and 1970-1990; in Prague, 1797-1817 and 1943-1963, in Budapest, 1788 - 1808, 1934-1954 and 1971-1991. The maximum deviation of the average temperature of the region was +0.82 ° C, and was observed in the years 1797-1817 [43].

Except for the years around 1940, Europe's climate has been cooling over the past 200 years. Here are the trends in summer temperatures in Europe, 1780-1989, nine weather stations representative cities: Budapest, central England, De Bilt, Edinburgh, Hohenpeissenberg, St. Petersburg, Trondheim, Uppsala and Warsaw.

Source: GR Weber (see note 43).

In the United States, average annual temperatures do not show major changes between 1895 and 1997. The trend was only one hundred years +0.022 ° C per decade, and for the period 1940-1997 , 0.008 ° C per decade [44]. All these regional fluctuations can not be related to the emission of greenhouse gases caused by humans.

Satellite measurements of lower troposphere temperatures gives evidence against the theory of global warming caused by man. Between 1979 and 1997, these measurements (270,000 daily readings over 95% of the planet's surface) show a slight cooling trend of -0.04 ° C per decade (Fig. 5). At the same time, separate measurements over land and sea floor showed a warming of +0.15 ° C per decade, while computer models talk of 0.18 ° C per decade [46]. Satellite measurements are given in Figure 6. The difference between the satellite and balloon measurements, on the one hand, and firm ground, on the other, usually explained as the result of the influence of local warming of cities on land measurements, and changes in the methods of ocean measurements.

Figure 5 GLOBAL TEMPERATURE CHANGES OF THE MEDIA in the lower troposphere

Satellite measurements of lower troposphere temperatures between 1978 and 1997 (30,000 daily readings over 95% of the Earth's surface ) show a slight cooling trend of -0.4 ° C per decade. The changes in average temperature of Earth's atmosphere are shown here of satellite measurements of lower troposphere (solid line) and the near-surface dotted line.

Source: Adapted from Gordon AH (see note 99).

data from 107 stations in California for the period 1940-1996 show that the temperature increases with increasing population density in areas where stations are located. In a country station that is not near any "urban heat island" is a negative trend during the same period 1940-1996. [47]

Figure 6
satellite measurements of temperature in the lower troposphere

satellite measurements of lower troposphere temperatures between 1978 and 1999 (deviations from average)

Notes:

1. F. Bottcher, 1996. In "The Glacial Warming Debate." J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environmental Forum), pp. 267-285
2. SF Singer, 1996. In "The Global Warming Debate", J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environ-mental Forum), pp. 146-157.
3. S.H. Schneider, 1975, J. Atmosph. Sci. Vol. 32
4. V. Ramanathan, M.S. Lian, y R.D. Cess, 1979, J. Geophys. Res. Vol. 84, pp. 4949-4958.
5. S. Manabe y R.T. Wetherald, 1980, J. Atmosph. Sci. Vol. 37, pp. 99-118.
6. Panel Intergubernamental de Cambio Climático (IPCC) 1990, "Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific Assessment", J.T. Houghton et al., eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
7. Panel Intergubernamental de Cambio Climático (IPCC) 1990, "Climate Change 1995: The Second IPCC Assessment", J.T. Houghton et al., eds. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)
8. J.S. Hoffmann, J.B. Wells, y J.G. Titus, "Future Global Warming and Sea level Rise," en G. Sigbjamason, ed. Iceland Coastal and River Symposium, Reykjavik, Islandia, (National Energy Authority, 1986)
9. R. Bate y J. Morris, 1994. "Global Warming Apocalypse or Hot Air?" (IEA Environmental Unit)
10. F. Seitz, 1996. The Wall Street J., June 12
11. N. Winton, 1995. Reuters World Serv. Dic. 20
12. R. Kremer, 1998. Brainstorm, Abril, pp. 28-32
13. J. Maddox, 1991. Nature, Vol. 369, p. 189
14. J. Maddox, 1994. Nature, Vol. 369, p. 97.
15. P.H. Abelson, 1990. Science, Vol. 247, p. 1529.
16. A. Meyer, Nature, Vol. 378, p. 433.
17. ESEF, 1996. "The Global Warming Debate", J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environmental Forum).
18. ESEF, 1998. "Global Warming: The Continuing Debate", R. Bate, ed. (London: The European Science and Environmental Forum).
19. F.S. Singer, 1999. "New Heat in Global Warming," Financial Post (Toronto).
20. S. Boehmer-Christiansen, 1996. In "The Global Warming Debate", J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environmental Forum, London), pp. 234-248.
21. A.S. Manne and R.G. Richels, 1990. In "Scientific Perspectives on the Greenhouse Problem", R. Jastrow, W. Nierenberg, and F. Seitz, eds. (Ot tawa, III.: The Marshall Press; Jameson Books, Inc.), pp. 211-243.
22. T.R. Malthus. "An Essay on the Principle of Population; or A View of its Past and Present Effects on Human Happiness; With an Inquiry into our Prospects Respecting the Future Removal or Migration of the Evils Which It Occasions", (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
23. F. Hoyle, 1996. In "The Global Warming Debate", J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 179-189.
24. S.l. Rasool y S.H. Schneider, 1971. Science, Vol. 173, pp. 138-141.
25. Z. Jaworowski, T.V. Segalstad, y V. Hisdal, 1990. "Atmospheric CO2 and Global Warming: A Critical Review",
26. "Report of the Norsk Polarinstitutt, Oslo, No. 59, pp 1-75.
27. Z. Jaworowski, TV Ssgalstad, and N. Ono, 1992. The Sci Tot. Environ., Vol 114, pp. 227 - 284.
28. Z. Jaworowski, TV Ssgalstad, and V. Hisdal, 1992. "Atmospheric CO2 and Global Warming: A Critical Review", second revised edition (Oslo: Norsk Polarinstitutt) Meddelelse No. 119, pp. 1 -76.
29. Z. Jaworowski, 1994. Environ. Sci & Pollut. Res, Vol 1, pp. 161-171.
30. Z. Jaworowski, 1996. In "The Global Warming Debate J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 95-105.
31. Z. Jaworowski, 1996. "Greenhouse Gases in Polar Ice: Atmospheric Artifacts or Reality" Environment Conference 1996, Environment and Chemistry, the German Chemical Society, Ulm, Germany, 7-10 October, 1996.
32. Z. Jaworowski, 1997. 21st Century Science and Technology, Vol 10, No. 1 (Spring), pp. 42-52.
33. Heyke HE, 1992. Fusion Vol 13, pp. 32-39.
34. Heyke HE, 1992. Earth. Coal-and gas-petrochemicals, Brenn.-Chemie "Vol 45, pp. 360-362.
35. G. Slocum, 1955. Month. Weeth Rev. Oct., pp. 225-231.
36. F. Wagner et al., 1999. Science, Vol. 284, pp. 1971-1973.
37. C.J. Yapp y H. Poths, 1992. Nature, Vol. 355, pp. 342-344.
38. M.l. Budyko, 1982. "The Earth's Climate: Past and Future" (New York: Academic Press).
39. R.A. Kerr, 1996. Science, Vol. 271, pp. 146-147.
40. J. Imbrie y J.Z. Imbrie, 1980. Science, Vol. 207, pp. 943-953.
41. E.J. Barron, S.L. Thompson, and S.H. Schneider, 1981. Science, Vol. 212, pp. 501-508.
42. J. Imbrie y J.Z. Imbrie, 1979. "Ice Ages, Solving the Mystery" (Short Hills, N.Y.: Enslow Publ.).
43. T.J. Crowley, 1983. Rev. Geophys.; Vol. 21, pp. 828-877
44. G.R. Wesber, 1996. En "The Global Warming Debate", J. Emsley, ed. (London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 113-138.
45. W.O. Brown and R.R. Heim, 1996. Climate Variation Bulletin 8, Historical Climatology Series 4-7, (Dec.), National Climate Data Center, USA; http://www.ncd. noaa.gov.ol/documentlibrary/cvb.html
46. A.H. Gordon, 1998. "Bias in Measured Data ", in R. Bate, Ed," Global Warming: The Continuing Debate "(London: The European Science and Environment Forum), pp. 52-62

How To Put Coke On Your Gums

"Calentamiento.Climático? Where?

Hello! A tod @ s:
That is the question. We want to believe that everyone is talking about global warming and as soon as you start looking not too hard, because after all, this does not give to eat, and you find you face to face with a most scholarly website:
http://www.oism.org/pproject/
where they publish a list of nearly 18,000 scientists who are completely opposed to the insane pseudo warming theory holds that there is no crutches. Then , you go on and poking the net and this if you have crumbs:
http://www.climateaudit.org/
because it is the web of scientists that crushed the holy grail of global warming, that is, they have charged the theory of "Palo hockey. " "Someone" should be as happy as welcome news to a few hours the server suffered a devastating attack cracker (not hacker why they say), we knocked down the server and deleted them too much information. But, you have parts and are the gap.
How funny! I remember that in early summer and forecast of Santa IPCC (well, great minds that are supposed to know how to interpret these matters) this summer in Spain would be, ... Oh! Heavens! So hot ... ... that ... ... unimaginable.
Then after comparing each other, obvious that anything that sounds like catastrophic global warming is not only not science, but it is propaganda and bad. Propaganda to scare the kids but unfortunately also frightens older but they are largely responsible for swallowing without question for anything all the misinformation that the media spew daily. It is unnerving when you hear an adult say "Is that what the TV says." Finally! Everything reminds me of this techno-thriller, "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton that has attracted so little sympathy from the usual. The book is very good, not wasted.
Hala! Salu2