When More Ice=Global Warming

What you're looking at is a comparison between satellite pictures of Antarctica and all of the ice that resides there (in grey). The top two pictures are from 1979, when we first started collecting satellite images of polar caps in this fashion.

Don't be surprised if the grey areas in the top two photos look exactly the same as the two in the bottom pics, which were taken in November of 2008. In fact, there is 4.4% greater ice now than there was 30 years ago. (source)

What?

But I thought that mankind and George Bush were melting the polar caps!!! I thought Al Gore told us that we were only a few years away from global catastrophe, involving sea levels rising to unsustainable levels, polar bears going extinct, and marine life being boiled alive thanks to the way US citizens use 25% of the world's resources!

The reasons we use one quarter of the world's resources are simple:
1) We pay for them
2) The nations which have them can't use them as well as the US, and need our money for them
3) Supporting the world's poor takes that much energy

Every paycheck we make in the US has a portion extracted in order to give to developing nations to the tune of 15 billion dollars a year. That isn't even including the money we pay to the UN (we are only 1/190th of the UN's total membership, yet we pay 1/4 of their monstrous budget), and all other multinational organizations who tell us that we are gluttons while holding out their hand for more dollars.

The reason we are using this much energy is because we work harder and longer than any other nation. We get up every day, on time, and show up for work; we don't take siestas, or repeated days off without explanation; when we loose one job, we take on two until we find the one that pays the same; we don't sit on our asses, complaining that the rice field is flooded, therefore we can't do anything else.

To hear the Al Gore's of the world tell it, we Americans are all joyriding every day in Jalopys which get about 4 miles to the gallon. In Al's eyes, conditioned to seeing life through the prism of his Watergate Hotel in his formative years, gasoline consumption means only one thing: cruising in limosines, yachts, or jets.

He's never driven an old work van every day for a living. He's never been a small businessman who can't afford to just run out and buy a brand new vehicle. For Al, getting behind the wheel is an an impulsive act of exuberance, excess, and greed. He thinks he's latched onto "an inconvenient truth" simply because that's the way he was raised.

As the data pours in, finding that the natural cycle of global warming is ebbing, we see that even the US Senate Committee On Environment And Public Works has grown a spine, and is publishing undeniable facts that refute the main thesis of Al Gore and his rabble. The latest report dealing with AGW (anthropogenic [human-caused] global-warming), is here.

What the rabid Gore crowd like to do, I've noticed, is to try to shut down the conversation by ad-hominem attacks, ranging from "you're just too stupid to understand science", to "you're just too greedy to admit the truth because you're accepting money from the polluters".

That's great. They remind me of my 4 yr-old niece when you tell her that she can't have something: "You just hate me."

"The amount of scientists we have who agree on AGW is incontrovertable", they have been telling us, lately. Unfortunately for Al Gore and his kool-aid drinkers, only 52 scientists signed their names to the highly-respected United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore.

52?

And we're all just supposed to follow this lemming called Gore over...52 scientists?

Twelve times that number of scientists came forward to sign the report from the Senate (linked a few lines above), all ready to sign their names as dissenters of Al Gore's team of scientists who claim AGW. Here are just a few comments from the report:

•“I am a skeptic.... Global warming has become a new religion.” — Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever. •“Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp.... Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” — Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee.

•“The quantity of CO2 we produce is insignificant in terms of the natural circulation between air, water and soil.... I am doing a detailed assessment of the UN IPCC reports and the Summaries for Policy Makers, identifying the way in which the Summaries have distorted the science.” — South African Nuclear Physicist and Chemical Engineer Dr. Philip Lloyd, a UN IPCC co-coordinating lead author who has authored over 150 refereed publications.

•“Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” — Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh.

•“All those urging action to curb global warming need to take off the blinkers and give some thought to what we should do if we are facing global cooling instead.” — Geophysicist Dr. Phil Chapman, an astronautical engineer and former NASA astronaut, served as staff physicist at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).

•“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense.... The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” — Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

•“Earth has cooled since 1998 in defiance of the predictions by the UN-IPCC.... The global temperature for 2007 was the coldest in a decade and the coldest of the millennium ... which is why ‘global warming’ is now called ‘climate change.’” — Climatologist Dr. Richard Keen of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the University of Colorado.

•“I have yet to see credible proof of carbon dioxide driving climate change, yet alone man-made CO2 driving it. The atmospheric hot-spot is missing and the ice core data refute this. When will we collectively awake from this deceptive delusion?” — Dr. G LeBlanc Smith, a retired Principal Research Scientist with Australia’s CSIRO.•“Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly.... As a scientist I remain skeptical.... The main basis of the claim that man’s release of greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system.” — 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.”

•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.

•“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds.... I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists.” — Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

Besides these international scientists, more than 31,000 American scientists have signed onto the Global Warming Petition Project, a petition that urges “the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.”