The Great Global Warming Swindle

[jraabe]

This is a very powerful BBC documentary on the relationship between climate change, the sun and cosmic rays (strong correlation), CO2 production (weak correlation) and the the politics of anti -growth.

Very interesting, I thought I'd only watch a couple of minutes and expected it to be nothing more than oil company or neocon propaganda. I ended up watching the whole hour and I'll be thinking about it for days.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9005566792811497638

What do you think?

[MountainDon]

I had trouble with the link not connecting... anyone else??  :-?

[MountainDon]

I googled and found this.... looks like it may be it.... 1 hour 15 min. I'm D/L'ing it and going to bed.  

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9005566792811497638

I forgot to mpaste that in there last night.    

[glenn-k]

It didn't open for me.  

I think it's just a normal trend although I didn't see the video.  I'll bet it was warmer when dinosaurs and troglodytes roamed the earth.

[jraabe]

Thanks Mountain Don - that TinyURL link didn't work when I went back today. I copied in the same one you found.

This is a BBC production every bit as powerful as Al Gores "An Inconvenient Truth" - which I thought was a good, if depressing, movie.

This makes a solid case for global warming happening but not from CO2 emissions, and particularly not from the relatively small human contribution to CO2. The warming is caused by long term solar flux changes and variations in cloud cover caused by incoming cosmic rays. These warming and cooling cycles do not align with the smokestack output of factories and cars as much as they do with sunspot cycles.

Anyway, take a look and see what you think. It surprises me what a good case they make for the politicization of science.

Note to Glenn: I know the dinosaurs are gone but I think there are still a few troglodytes roaming the earth.  

[jonseyhay]

Very interesting, I thought I'd only watch a couple of minutes and expected it to be nothing more than oil company or neocon propaganda. I ended up watching the whole hour and I'll be thinking about it for days.
What do you think?

I think that your original thoughts would be pretty much on the money
Here is a bit of stuff gleaned from our great public library.
Incidentally the program was aired on Channel Four; this is not the BBC. Channel Four was established to provide a fourth television service to the UK. Mainly to break the duopoly of the BBC's two established television services and the single commercial broadcasting network, ITV. Although publicly owned it is entirely commercially self-funded.

http://climatedenial.org/2007/03/09/the-great-channel-four-swindle/

This does not mean that these people should be demised out of hand but you would certainly want to take what the have to say with a pinch of salt. History is littered with civilizations that thought they could mess with nature and get away with it. You have only got to look to the southern part of your own continent or the Easter islands.

[MountainDon]

I've been a skeptic regarding the true causes of warming since day one. I don't think we know for certain what the real cause/effect relationship is.  :-/ In the meantime making better use of the natural resources available to us does make a lot of sense. That includes cleaning up our world as best as we can.

We, as people, have not been totally negligent; our air and water is cleaner today. Transportation is safer than it used to be. We do grow a surplus of food. Social Security is in trouble because we live longer due to better medical care. No, we are not anywheres near perfect, but we're dong pretty good.

I would not want to live at any other past time; I'd no doubt already be referred to in past tense.  

I also don't "buy" into a lot of the (bad) news the media feels they must report to us. Maybe that's just me.

[jraabe]

Thanks Jonsey:

Good link to some spirited rebuttals. I do not know enough about climate science to know if the graphs are right or if the very important idea of what is driving climate change is CO2 or forces such as the sun and cosmic rays that are outside our control (if we presume to be able to control CO2).

I note that the rebuttal starts by claiming these people to be "climate change deniers" (putting them in the same camp with Holocaust deniers!  ). I think that is unfair. They are not claiming climate is not getting warmer and that this is not a concern and a problem. They are claiming we may not have the right answer as to why it is changing and what we can do about it.

I think one of the posters summed it up well:

"I regret to admit that human science has been as arrogant and vain as human nature itself. If our ancestor scientists knew that the remarkable combustion engines or electrical appliances they invented would cause so much harm, surely they wouldn't have done so. But they DIDN'T KNOW. If we knew that CFCs would plug a hole in the ozone layer, we wouldn't have used them in the first place. But NOBODY KNEW. Climatologists of the 70s proclaimed the anthropogenic ice age, but finally they DIDN'T KNOW. I'm afraid that a similar fallacy is happening with climate science, WE THINK WE KNOW BUT WE DON'T KNOW."

There is general agreement that we've been messing with Mother Nature and that we need to clean up our act. As Don mentions above there is a lot of this cleanup work that we've already done (at least in the wealthy countries). That is certainly well and good and further pollution control, recycling, doing more with less all make good sense and we can expect these to continue. But if we start a worldwide project to capture and sequester carbon as some would like to see us do, it would be good to know that it has a chance of making some positive difference.

[jonseyhay]

John,
Here are a few more links you may interested in having a look at. http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/s1857355.htm

[glenn-k]

If we knew that CFCs would plug a hole in the ozone layer, we wouldn't have used them in the first place. But NOBODY KNEW.

I you ever follow the money you will know that the above statement is not true.  Corporate and political insider greed and dirty politicians cause all kinds of things to be done that are not good for the environment or people in general.

When DuPont invented R12 Freon they lobbied to get propane removed as a refrigerant with stories of how unsafe it is.  Now that the patent protection period is up for R12, all the sudden it is unsafe for the ozone layer - a rather unproven theory anyway...  but it opens the door for another high tech refrigerant to come to the market and bring in its big share of business, rather than propane which is more efficient than freon, fair for the environment and costs next to nothing.  In fact - propane is being sold as a refrigerant under a high tech name now of Duracool.  No recorded accidents from it's use and a label is all that is necessary as a warning for mechanics.   It is much safer to have a pound or so of this stuff in your A/C than it is to be sitting on top of a 25 gallon gas tank in a wreck.  You must have an expensive change over to use it though.  You can't just hook the two hoses together like I do and fill your A/C for fifty cents.

[jraabe]

I'm following a similar thread on another (subscription) website I been a member of for years (www.bmyers.com). It was where I first saw the BBC-4 movie link.

Here is a link to an interesting article about how heated the argument has now become... death treats no less.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/11/ngreen211.xml

PS - The latest copy of Atlantic Monthly has a big article on where money will be made as global warming kicks in. In fact, to make money we don't have to KNOW what is going on we just have to have agreement on what can be SOLD and this is determined by PERCEPTIONS not truth or facts. It was, after all, manipulation of perceptions that got us into Iraq, Vietnam, etc.

[glenn-k]

So much for others views on thread hijacking, eh? :-/

Death threats = money to be lost if the official line isn't believed.

[Amanda_931]

I do think that, whatever the cause, it is warming.

Sooner or later oil will run out.  

Population pressures are greater for humans, extinction possibilities for everything else.

Using less, transporting fewer things shorter distances, are probably pretty good ideas.

There is a great deal of resistance to changing our way of life--this does include me.

And if working with those ideas also reduces the amount of carbon in the atmosphere, fine.  Even if that isn't the number one cause.

By the way the LaRouche people are getting on the Global Warming hoax idea.  Sometimes they sound sensible, sometimes they don't.  But they have the reputation for the latter.

[jraabe]

I agree totally Amanda.

What we need to do personally is pretty much the same no matter what the determinate mechanism is.

And it is true that there will be groups who will use these ideas for their own agendas. For them it is always politics first and science only if it aligns with the political.

That doesn't' necessarily mean the science is wrong. "Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get me!"  

[benevolance]

Glenn

Did I read that correctly are you using Propane as a refrigerant in your vehicle? does it work okay... Any problems with oil and the compressor or the seals?

-Peter

[benevolance]

And Yes large corporations decide what is safe and unsafe based on how much money they can make...

This is why Toxic waste gets dumped in drinking water...It is why people diefrom taking vioxx... People have decisions to make...And instead of morality..Greed rules the day and drives the decisions.

Drug companies, chemical companies...They are all the same.... I wish there was more protection from these massive companies...Whether we like it or not they are continuosly trying to control everything we buy or use as a society...

[Amanda_931]

A friend of mine is very impressed by this web site--just to see what happened a while back she applied for two credit cards, asserting that she was unemployed, no assets of her own, etc.  She now has a credit limit of something like $13,000.00 dollars.   :

http://www.carolynbaker.org/

in general--this in particular:

IN DEBT WE TRUST AS THE ECONOMY GOES BUST: A Return To Serfdom?, By Carolyn Baker  

This week the Senate Banking Committee has begun an investigation of credit card companies and that industry's lending practices of which Chairman, Carl Levin of Michigan said, "Millions of families...are kept in debt and are in over their heads not just because of their own purchases...but because of the abusive practices and excesses of the credit card companies."

Might also check out this link:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2007/03/11/BUGC2OHQJ01.DTL&type=business

Let's say someone is spending about 11 percent of his or her paycheck to cover interest on outstanding debt. Erica Sandberg, a spokeswoman for Consumer Credit Counseling Service of San Francisco, says she'd immediately advise that person to seek help.

"This is a huge amount of a person's paycheck just to make ends meet," Sandberg said. "That's never smart. If you're borrowing that much, you might feel good for the short term. But over the long haul, you're going to be in real trouble."

Unfortunately, the person she's talking about is you -- and everybody you know.

As the national debt approaches a staggering $9 trillion, roughly $240 billion will be spent this year paying interest on the half that's held by public creditors (of which Japan and China are the largest). That translates to about 11 percent of projected tax revenue.

In other words, we're spending more on interest for our national credit card bill than was spent last year in discretionary funds for the Education, Veterans Affairs and Justice departments combined.

Apparently not a new idea to make us, though debt, into the new serfs--Baker quotes--and copies the illustration--from a last year's article.

[MountainDon]

Okay, I'm going to share a few of my thoughts on this. this thread is meandering off topic, but I can't help myself.

2. 1.

She now has a credit limit of something like $13,000.00 dollars.

Good for her. You never know when some genuine emergency could come along and having that available could be a quick ready way of covering it. Then you have some time to see if you can obtain the money at a lower interest rate, pay off the card in full, and get on with things. The DANGER, to many people, once they have all this money (credit), is that they cannot tell the difference between a "want" and a life event "necessity"

you might feel good for the short term. But over the long haul, you're going to be in real trouble.

Pure common sense! It's the instant gratification syndrome at work. I guess I learned that from my parent's. Dad operated a milk delivery route for as long as I can remember. I think the only thing they bought on credit or with a loan was their home.

SA3.

Unfortunately, the person she's talking about is you -- and everybody you know.

No it's not me; but I'm certain a bunch of my friend's and neighbors are included. I know I'm an exception; always have been, and in more ways than just money and the management thereof.

About 1970 I recognized the value in having the then fairly new Chargex credit card. It morphed into Visa. It wasn't accepted in many places of business back then, but I got one and started using other people's money until the monthly bill became due. Then I paid it off in full. I have done that ever since. The only time I have ever paid interest (and a late fee) were those ocassions when I simply screwed up and forgot to send the payment in on time. I can count those times on one hand over the 30+ years I've had credit cards. And on several of those occasions a nice friendly low key phone call from me had the charges and fees dismissed.

We put virtually everything on a credit card. Only time we don't is when there's a extra fee (county property taxes for example) or it's not possible (my lawyer doesn't do Visa, for example). The bill from the credit card autopays every month from a bank account. This only works if you keep track of your financial situation.

I borrowed money the first time for my first home. The second time I borrowed money was for a 1976 Scout I just couldn't live without... one of my weak moments. But I made sure I could pay both of them off early without penalty, and I did just that.

As soon as the house was paid off I borrowed money against it to buy the business I worked in. That was paid off in a few years; partly due to hard work, partly due to great luck in that the retail photo business was exploding at the time.

Vacations, hobby expenses (full size race cars, radio control airplanes & race cars, 4 wheel drive Jeeps, etc) and nice things to have (DVD recorder, power tools, computers, electronic sewing machines, (my wife's), the RV, etc.... you get the idea.... these things have all been paid for with money saved and on hand at time of purchase. Well, except for timing some purchases to extract the full benefit of the credit card grace period.

I have used a variety of bank accounts, CD's (the money kind, not The Who or whoever), and other investments to make money on the money I have/had unspent... You can be in control , rather than be at the mercy of the banks and credit card companies. But only if you can get over instant gratification. And yes, I have had so-called impulse purchases, but only because I knew I had the reserves to pay for them.

I admit it is a fact of financial life that it's easier to get a good rate, borrow money, etc if you have good collateral. I've heard it put "it's easier to borrow money if you don't need to borrow it". True, but that is a reflection on the risk the lender is taking on. If I did have a real financial emergency, because I've handled things well, I could take advantage of the lower interest rate (lower than credit card) available to me on an already setup home equity line of credit.

So I guess what I'm saying is that, Yes, there is a tremendous amount of consumer debt out there. But in most cases very foolishly so. Nobody needs that 52" big screen TV, the new SUV; they just want it bad enough they become blind to the real cost when financed on their credit card. Nobody (average size family, Mom and/or Dad, 2+ kids and a dog)  needs a 2500 sq ft home (I think that's the USA average). They make a conscious decision to buy it. And go into debt. And work the stressful job to pay for it. Etc. Etc.

Leaving out the factor of an extremely costly medical emergency, family or other "outside" financial disaster, most people are where they are financially today because of decisions they made. Some just handle it better than others.

Okay, I'm done.  I promise to stay off my soap box for at least a day or two.

FYI, if you wonder about, or are confused about the "soap box" reference it comes to us courtesy of Merry Olde England where anyone could speak out on whatever was on their mind on Sunday's in Hyde Park, London, England. It was common to stand on a wooden soap box to elevate oneself above the crowd. The tradition carries on today.

Sorry for being so long winded, but as an ex-banker I've met my fill of fiscally irresponsible people. I just hope you are not among them.

Two more words:   Personal Responsibility

[glenn-k]

Glenn

Did I read that correctly are you using Propane as a refrigerant in your vehicle? does it work okay... Any problems with oil and the compressor or the seals?

-Peter

Yes - you read it right - it is approved as Duracool legally after the R134A conversion is noted to be somewhat of a disappointment (You have to make sure the proper people get paid off.)  If you forget this step and accidentally go right to propane - oh - well ---

It is a better refrigerant than R12 - safe - Duracool is a commercial brand of propane (costs more)  check out the MSDS for ingredients.  Yes - it is compatible with current existing compressor oils.  This information as posted by a group of retired GM car dealers in an RV forum.  I have been running it for over a year in my truck and the Stealth when it runs.  Haven't had seal problems.

Duracool comes with labels to warn mechanics that the gas is flammable.  Supposedly better for the Ozone if that is real.  I think I  may be an Ozone Hole Denier. :-/  I think a piece of Duck Tape with the words Duracool or Propane refrigerant should take care of the safety problem - but hey -- that's just me.

[benevolance]

Glenn

I may need to call you on the propane thing...You have my brain working overtime  here....

I will have to get back to this when I get some time from the house work...

[glenn-k]

Not a problem -

It is listed in the old tables of refrigerants.

I use it the same as freon watching head pressures and for bubbles to disappear in the glass.  The auto group claimed it wasn't even necessary to evacuate the system totally.  

[Sassy]

I've only had a chance to look at a bit of this site - I'm glad to see that there are more people bringing out the other side & using science to back it up - although no one has a definitive answer.  

I don't hear too many people mentioning HAARP or chemtrails... remember all the hoopla about the holes in the ozone?  I'd reckon they've been helped along by HAARP along with several other countries who have the same set-up...  

[benevolance]

Sassy

I was reading somewhere that the ozone layer is healing itself quite nicely...Yes they predict another 100 years or something...But NASA has released photos and scans and all that business showing modest improvements in Ozone....

They said that there would be so many CFC's in the atmosphere for years to come that growth would remain slow for a long time...But the thing that made me glad was that the damage is not long term we did not totally screw the world it will heal itself if we leave it alone

Same thing in my opinion with greenhouse gas...If we stop polluting the world will heal itself and correct itself...All that needs to happen is....We need to stop polluting....Something that can not happen in our lifetimes....So the warming and the carbon being released is going to get much worse before it slows down or attempts to get any better...

Coal is still number one on the worldwide electrical generation grid...And I am not talking about the type of powerplant where they pressurize coal or inject steam underground so the carbon is not released in the atmosphere... I am talking smoke stack acid rain coal burning...

When that ceases to exist...The world will start to cool.....

It would be nice in the meantime if we could as a whole planet plant more trees to offset all the carbon being released...I mean if we increased forest cover by 5% the trees could suck up all the carbon we are releasing into the atmosphere...

Although I did see on yahoo news that Europe Parts of Asia and North America have reversed the deforestation trend and forest growth while slow is happening in these places...So it is possible to replant and revive our forest cover...

[MountainDon]

Although I did see on yahoo news that Europe Parts of Asia and North America have reversed the deforestation trend and forest growth while slow is happening in these places...So it is possible to replant and revive our forest cover...

I can't put my mouse cursor on it right now but out of something like 50 countries inventoried about 20 - 25 have gone from net deforestation to net reforestation, and the USA is one of them. I'll search some more tomorrow and see what I can find/post.

[glenn-k]

When I used to fly to Oregon I could see that the mandated tree replanting programs were working great and the forests were growing back just fine.  Not old growth but a good start.