[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
GSBN:Re: GSBN Research to combat solar warming
- To: GSBN GSBN@...
- Subject: GSBN:Re: GSBN Research to combat solar warming
- From: "John Glassford" jacksflat@...
- Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 13:57:37 +1100
- Reply-to: "GSBN" GSBN@...
- Sender: "GSBN" GSBN@...
G ' day David
Interesting information that you provided on global warming and at the
moment our media are in a feeding frenzy re global warming and the
politicians are jumping aboard the band wagon, elections upcoming next
year! However our mob are looking at nuclear power stations, some 25
or so to combat emissions and hence reduce green house warming. Even
though we have an abundance of coal we also have a mass of uranium
I have copied an article here from Profesor Ian Plimer a noted
geologist down under. Ian came and spoke at our Rotary club very
recently and he debunks in some manner that global warming is caused
directly by mankind. He claims that there are 27 other reasons for
the globe warming up. Mainly Mother Earth and the Sun.
I will continue to look at straw bale building from a cost and comfort
point of view with the bonus being the environment. However some
straw bale homes here are costing a whole lot more than conventional
buildings. Their on going benefits are still the same if designed
well and save a motza on heating and cooling which is a good thing.
The bad thing is they are costing far too much to build. Not enough
qualified straw bale builders around for now.
I am also told that China is building a new coal fired power station
every week until 2012! Interesting but confusing times for us green
Huff 'n' Puff Constructions
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.glassford.com.au/">http://www.glassford.com.au/</a>
Mount Kilimanjaro Climb 28/8/07
<a target="_blank" href="http://www.coolamonrotary.com/kili/">http://www.coolamonrotary.com/kili/</a>
61 2 6927 6027
Here is an article by Ian Plimer and I would appreciate your comments:
Global warming a damp squib - Hot or cold
by Ian Plimer
January 05, 2006
HEAT, bushfires. Just another Australian summer, some hotter, some
wetter, some cooler, some drier. As per usual, the northern hemisphere
freezes and the blame game is in overdrive. At the 2005 UN Climate
Change Conference in Montreal, Greenpeace's Steven Guilbeault stated:
"Global warming can mean colder, it can mean drier, it can mean
wetter, that's what we're dealing with."
It is that simple! If it's hot, it's global warming; if it's cold,
it's global warming. Demonstrators in frigid temperatures in Montreal
chanted: "It's hot in here! There's too much carbon in the
atmosphere!" The same apocalyptic Guilbeault says: "Time is running
out to deal with climate change. Ten years ago, we thought we had a
lot of time, five years ago we thought we had a lot of time, but now
science is telling us that we don't have a lot of time." Really.
In 1992, Greenpeace's Henry Kendall gave us the Chicken Little quote,
"Time is running out"; in 1994, The Irish Times tried to frighten the
leprechauns with "Time running out for action on global warming,
Greenpeace claims"; and in 1997 Chris Rose of Greenpeace maintained
the religious mantra with "Time is running out for the climate". We've
heard such failed catastrophist predictions before. The Club of Rome
on resources, Paul Erlich on population, Y2K, and now Greenpeace on
During the past 30 years, the US economy grew by 50 per cent, car
numbers grew by 143 per cent, energy consumption grew by 45 per cent
and air pollutants declined by 29 per cent, toxic emissions by 48.5
per cent, sulphur dioxide levels by 65.3 per cent and airborne lead by
97.3 per cent. Most European signatories to the Kyoto Protocol had
greenhouse gas emissions increase since 2001, whereas in the US
emissions fell by nearly 1per cent. Furthermore, carbon credits
rewarded Russia, (east) Germany and Britain, which had technically and
economically backward energy production in 1990.
By the end of this century, the demographically doomed French,
Italians and Spaniards may have too few environmentalists to fund
Greenpeace's business. So what really does Greenpeace want? A
habitable environment with no humans left to inhabit it? Destruction
of the major economies for .07C change?
Does it matter if sea level rises a few metres or global temperatures
rise a few degrees? No. Sea level changes by up to 400m, atmospheric
temperatures by about 20C, carbon dioxide can vary from 20 per cent to
0.03 per cent, and our dynamic planet just keeps evolving. Greenpeace,
contrary to scientific data, implies a static planet. Even if the sea
level rises by metres, it is probably cheaper to address this change
than reconstruct the world's economies.
For about 80 per cent of the time since its formation, Earth has been
a warm, wet, greenhouse planet with no icecaps. When Earth had
icecaps, the climate was far more variable, disease depopulated human
settlements and extinction rates of other complex organisms were
higher. Thriving of life and economic strength occurs during warm
times. Could Greenpeace please explain why there was a pre-Industrial
Revolution global warming from AD900 to 1300? Why was the sea level
higher 6000 years ago than it is at present? Which part of the 120m
sea-level rise over the past 15,000 years is human-induced? To
attribute a multicomponent, variable natural process such as climate
change to human-induced carbon emissions is pseudo-science.
There is no debate about climate change, only dogma and
misinformation. For example, is there a link between hurricanes
Katrina and Rita and global warming? Two hurricanes hit the US Gulf
Coast six weeks apart in 1915, mimicking Katrina and Rita. If global
warming caused recent storms, there should have been more hurricanes
in the Pacific and Indian oceans since 1995. Instead, there has been a
slight decrease at a time when China and India have increased
greenhouse gas emissions. The impact of hurricanes might seem more
severe because of the blanket instantaneous news coverage and because
more people now live in hurricane-prone areas, hence there is more
property damage and loss of life.
Only a strong economy can produce the well fed who have the luxury of
espousing with religious fervour their uncosted, impractical,
impoverishing policies. By such policies, Greenpeace continues to
exacerbate grinding poverty in the Third World. The planet's best
friend is human resourcefulness with a supportive, strong economy and
reduced release of toxins. The greenhouse gases - nitrous oxide,
carbon dioxide and methane - have been recycled for billions of years
without the intervention of human politics.
Ian Plimer is a professor of geology at the University of Adelaide and
former head of the school of earth sciences at the University of