World's been fooled
Global warming hypothesis doesn't meet basic test of science

By TIM BALL, Special to Sun Media

Last Updated: 21st May 2009, 3:17pm

The idea human production of CO2 is causing global warming or climate
change is the biggest deception in history.

That statement was once met with incredulity. How could the entire
world or a majority of scientists be fooled?

Now, after almost complete collapse of the global financial system,
people realize the world can be fooled. Yes, a few warned of the
dangers, but were easily marginalized as skeptics and naysayers by
those making large sums of money in a falsely booming economy.

The anthropogenic global warming (AGW) hypothesis proposed in the
1980s claimed global temperature would rise because of human addition
of CO2 to the atmosphere.

Like all scientific hypotheses it is based on assumptions.

These a CO2 is a greenhouse gas that slows the rate at which heat
escapes to space; as atmospheric CO2 increases it causes temperature
to rise; and CO2 levels will increase because of human burning of
fossil fuels. Unlike most scientific hypotheses, it was accepted as
fact almost immediately.

Normal scientific procedures of disproving hypotheses by showing the
assumptions were wrong were marginalized.

Scientists who challenged were called skeptics, which is silly because
all scientists are naturally skeptics. They were called climate change
deniers with all the holocaust connotations. Most, like myself, knew
how much climate changes naturally and worked to inform people --
anything but climate change deniers.

Instead of trying to disprove the hypothesis, most funding came from
government and was directed to proving it. Worse, government agencies
at all levels from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) of the UN, down to individual departments, accepted the
hypothesis as proven.

Environment Canada was in the forefront, accepting and actively
pushing it clearly without understanding. The process was aided by
mainstream media who, without understanding the science, allowed their
political bias to dominate.

The consensus was reached before the research had even begun. While
this seriously hampered the scientific method, it didn't block it.

The most important assumption fundamental to the entire hypothesis is
the exact opposite in reality -- temperature changes before CO2 in
every record of any duration for any time period.

That alone is sufficient to reject the hypothesis, however, there is
another serious problem. Every prediction of future temperatures made
by the computer models based on the hypothesis are wrong.

Most recently they predicted temperature would continue to rise in the
21st century, but it has declined in the first nine years even though
CO2 levels have risen.

Science is simply defined as the ability to predict, so the hypothesis
does not meet this basic test.

The science isn't settled except that we know CO2 is not causing
warming or climate change and is not a pollutant.

A few scientists, driven by their political bias, continue to argue
CO2 is the cause. Tolstoy encapsulated another reason over 100 years
ago when he wrote: "I know that most men, including those at ease with
problems of the greatest complexity, can seldom accept even the
simplest and most obvious truth if it be such as would oblige them to
admit the falsity of conclusions which they delighted in explaining to
colleagues, which they have proudly taught to others, and which they
have woven, thread by thread, into the fabric of their lives."

But the scientific evidence has had little impact on the politics of
the issue. Governments everywhere plan to reduce CO2. This exposes the
degree to which climate science and CO2 are a political issue.

We have politicians who don't understand the science but want to
appear to be doing the right environmental thing. Many of them see the
tax potential and push carbon taxes under their cloak of green.

Ironically, events are bringing the madness into perspective for the
public. The downturn in the economy has put warming or climate change
at the bottom of lists of concerns.

Even those who don't understand the science see the illogic in claims
the colder weather was due to warming.

Prediction failures are no surprise because of familiarity with
inaccuracy of weather forecasts even two days ahead.

Then there is the cooling, which solid scientific evidence expects
will continue as solar activity declines. Despite this, because of the
great deception, governments plan for warming.

DR. BALL HOLDS A PHD IN CLIMATOLOGY FROM QUEEN MARY COLLEGE,
UNIVERSITY OF LONDON, ENGLAND. HE WILL SPEAK AT A FRIENDS OF SCIENCE
LUNCHEON IN CALGARY TOMORROW. WWW.FRIENDSOFSCIENCE.ORG

On Thu, 21 May 2009 23:30:31 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

World's been fooled
Global warming hypothesis doesn't meet basic test of science

Snip... quoting more junk from fossil fuel nut case Tim Ball..

I see our ID morphing troll (EF.. or whomever) who lives north of
the boarder (Canada) has found a new trick. What a silly moron..

Take a good look fokes, this is your fossil fuel dollars at work.,
Using every trick in the book in an attempt to deceive you, to lull
you into a false sense of safety and security while the world warms.

Will those whom are uneducated wake up before it's too late? I
guarantee you will not like to live in the world these people have
planned for you. .

"Global warming may be twice as bad as previously expected"
May 21, 2009
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...-warming_N.htm

wrote:
World's been fooled
Global warming hypothesis doesn't meet basic test of science

By TIM BALL, Special to Sun Media

Last Updated: 21st May 2009, 3:17pm

The idea human production of CO2 is causing global warming or climate
change is the biggest deception in history.

That statement was once met with incredulity. How could the entire
world or a majority of scientists be fooled?

Now, after almost complete collapse of the global financial system,
people realize the world can be fooled. Yes, a few warned of the
dangers, but were easily marginalized as skeptics and naysayers by
those making large sums of money in a falsely booming economy.


It's really a good point, just because it's not popular doesn't mean
it's not worth listening to.

Yousuf Khan