Tuesday, April 22, 2008

World temperatures keep falling while CO2 keeps rising

A group of scientists has formally petitioned the UN's International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to cease and desist on their message that CO2 emissions relate to warming temperatures.

And they issue this challenge: "If you believe there is evidence of the CO2 driver theory in the available data please present a graph of it."

The letter is signed by Hans Schreuder (Analytical Chemist), Piers Corbyn (Astrophysicist), and Dr Don Parkes Svend Hendriksen (1988 Nobel Laureate), and a copy is available at a website operated by the International Climate Science Association.

Evidence presented in the letter goes well beyond putting the “hockey stick” graph, made famous in Al Gore's movie, in doubt. The hockey stick presented exponentially increasing global temperature in the near future due to uncontrolled increases in CO2 – and got its name from the shape of the graph – an apparently long stable period with an upward increase in CO2 and temperature during the industrial age. The UN panel claimed that human activity was driving what Mr. Gore explained as a certain end to civilization as we know it, if extreme political and economic measures are not taken.

The scientists assembled a graph based on actual measurements and did not find evidence that CO2 was the main driving force behind temperature. In fact, temperature increases and decreases, showing little interest in CO2 level.

The scientists go on to renounce the unintended consequences of the UN's position: that the policy of burning food (to produce biofuel) has driven food prices sharply higher and is causing hunger and deforestation in countries around the world (especially the poorer countries).

Given the economic devastation that is already happening and which is now widely recognised will continue to flow from this policy, what possible justification can there be for its retention?

Easy answer: money. The carbon offset market, which environmentalists, researchers and scientists decry as utterly "fraudulent", represents more money than the UN and its related entities can walk away from. And, yes, that's a preposition I ended that last sentence with.

Update: AJ Strata has more. Hat tip: Larwyn.


Anonymous said...

Can anyone explain what this "Carbon offset" market is? Who exactly stands to profit from it? shareholers of a few Corporations or elected officials, who?

Anonymous said...

I'm not expert, but I believe carbon offset is the general term for what American politicians are calling cap and trade. This is where companies who release large amounts of CO2 must buy carbon "credits" from other companies who don't use as much. Effectively it's a way of taxing releasers of C02 and rewarding those who don't. The trick is it's controlled by the government who takes their cut for managing the deal, plus they control what types of companies get the money. Do you smell corruption??? The UN is mentioned because basically it is feared they will want to one day manage a global system such as this (controlling Trillions in transfers!!). This has been done in the US in the past for real pollutants and now is being threatened for C02 by the democrats. Hopefully this C02 fear will be exposed for what it is before implementation.

Anonymous said...

I should have said other companies who don't RELEASE as much.....and of course I'm not AN expert.