Global Warming Myth

gentlemans gentleman made world-wide melting does non exist. Evidence suggests that degree centigrade levels argon not abnorm whollyy high and that the trumpery caps atomic number 18 not melting away. in that respect are m any reputable scientists who uncertainty this theory we call spherical thawing. Others would check out it is a way for the g everyplacenment to pick up more and more of our daily lives and to trigger off along an agenda that benefits certain groups and individuals. Man made international modify plant is a theory being preached to us as gospel and being taught as fact already proven.However there are a large flesh of people in the scientific community who would disagree. One of the to the highest degree prominent opponents of man made spherical warming was Dr. Frederick Seitz. Dr. Seitz is a physicist who served as the electric chair of the case Academy of Science during the 1960s and of Rockefeller University from 1968 to 1978. In 1973 he r eceived the National Medal of Science. (Oriana Zill de Granados, PBS. org, April 24, 2007, p1. ) Dr. Seitz known as the Grandaddy of orbicular warming skeptics (Buisness week, June 24. was an apponent of climate change locution that the science behind world(a) warming was likewise inconclusive and certainly didnt warrant imposing mandatory limits on the putting surfacehouse-gas emissions ( blade Hertsgaard, Vanity Fair. com, While Washington Slept, whitethorn 2006, p3. ). Dr. Seitz believed science was being misrepresented and wrote an op-ed pageboy to The Wall Street Journal lashing the integrity of a 1995 I. P. C. C. and that global warming and ozone depletion were exaggerated threats devised by environmentalists and unscrupulous scientists thrust a political agenda. Mark Hertsgaard, Vanity Fair. com, While Washington Slept, may 2006, p3) He excessively wrote that This IPCC report, like all both(prenominal) separatewises, is held in such high witness largely because it has been peer-reviewed. That is, it has been read, discussed, modified and O.K. by an international body of experts. These scientists dupe rigid their reputations on the line. But this report is not what it appears to beit is not the version that was approved by the contri stilling scientists listed on the claim page.In my more than 60 geezerhood as a member of the American scientific community, including serv screwball as president of twain the National Academy of Sciences and the American somatogenic Society, I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review accomplish than the events that led to this IPCC report. (Dr. Frederick Seitz, Wall Street Journal, June 12, 1996) Dr. Seitz was also a main component to and wrote the front for the Oregon Petition. The Oregon Petition states We scoff the United States goernment to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals.The prop osed limits on leafy vegetablehouse gases would disparage the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and injury the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of degree centigrade dioxide, methane, or other verdurehouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earths atmosphere and disruption of the Earths climate. Moreover, there is substantive scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many secure effects upon the natural plant and wolf environments of the Earth. (Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. org) This petition has garnered over 31,000 signatures of scientists who feel that man made climate change is not definitive. Almost 10,000 of those who write the petition have PhDs. This petition shows that there are a large number of scientists who question man made global warming exists, unlike the Washington stead writer who wrote near scientists who are skeptical about global warming but these few- about 2% of climate re searchers- could drop their annual meeting in a phone booth, if there are any left. (Larry Bell, Forbes, That globose Warming Consensus, July 17, 2012 p. 1) These scientists are not adept forming an opinion on the drug-addicted there is mounting evidence to acantha up their claims a improverst climate change. We hear about the grouch-skating rink caps melting and watch on television polar bears stranded on floating pieces of ice that have crushed off and drifting away. National humans Radio published a account on its website claiming Ten divisions past, a piece of ice the size of Rhode Island disintegrated and fluid in the waters off polara.Two other massive ice shelves along the Antarctic Peninsula had suffered similar fates a few eld before. (Richard Harris, NPR. org, Humans Role In Antarctic crank Melt is Unclear, August 22, 2012) This leads to a conclusion t hat Antarctica is melting away when just the opposite is happening. According to (James Taylor, Antarctic scratch Sets Another Record, Forbes, September 19, 2012) Antarctic sea ice has been exploitation since satellites first began amount the ice 33 years ago and the ice has been above the 33 year average throughout 2012.Snow and ice are steadily increasing and growing hot than it is melting. Meteorologist Anthony Watts shows us new information from ICESAT(Ice, Cloud, and grease SATellite) which is NASAs top satellite for observing and measuring the earths ice and masses. During 2003 to 2008, the mass gain of the Antarctic ice sheet from atomic number 6 accumulation exceeded the mass loss from ice discharge by 49 Gt/yr (2. 5% of input), as derived from ICESat laser measurements of elevated change.The net gain (86 Gt/yr) over the atomic number 74 Antarctic (WA) and East Antarctic ice sheets (WA and EA) is essentially unchanged from revised results for 1992 to 2001 from ERS microwave radar altimetry. (Wattsupwiththat. com, Anthony Watts, ICESAT Data Shows Mass Gains of the Antarctic Ice Sheet Exceed Losses, September 10, 2012) So ice and snow are growing in Antarctica and a new meditate by NASA suggests that the continent once was green and full of vegitation. The frozen continent of Antarctica which some believe is melting away referable to global warming once was green and suitable for vegitation. The peak of Antarcticas green perioid was amid 16. 4 and 15. 7 trillion years ago during the Micene Epoch. (NASA. gov, June 17, 2012, p. 2) During this time carbon levels, which is the main contributor to greenhouse gasses and global warming were 400 to 600 parts per gazillion(ppm) (NASA. gov, June 17, 2012,p. 2) cytosine levels today are at 393ppm, the highest they have been in the past several million years. (NASA. gov, June 17, 2012, p. ) This shows our carbon levels today are well-nigh the level they were millions of years ago when Antarctica w as green and yet today snow and ice are building in the region. If carbon levels are almost the same as they were millions of years ago than who was creating them? We are told over and over again we cause global warming from our cars to refriderators to hairspray. The question needs to be answered who was driving in Antarctica 16 million years ago? The answer is nobody. Global warming is being used as a tool generate fortunes for the government activity and take our liberty away.