Program: The Great Global Warming Swindle

[chops_a_must]

Not enough evidence for what?
To convince you that the Earth is now warmer than it was?
Or that the Earth is not getting warmer?

What are the "relevant" issues?
The causes of global warming, or the effects of global warming?

The causes, either way.

There can be no doubt that the earth is warming.

 

[billhill]

I have read plenty of articles, it's a part of my study.

Personally, I don't think there is enough evidence. I have yet to read a publication, that in my mind, addresses all of the relevant issues. And that is a problem. Though, it certainly shouldn't stop us from taking action now.

The fact that greenies, who I am probably a part of, have been notoriously wrong in predictions (apart from one or two occasions) in many high profile cases, leaves me sceptical. Tin would run out in the 70s. We would all starve to death in the 80s due to overpopulation. Spaceship Earth. The list goes on and on...

As a fellow scientist I respect that you feel there is not enough evidence chop's. I disagree and thats my opinion. Just remember that although we may be wrong some of the time, we also get it right and thats what scares me. Too many people have their heads in the sand. I used to think like that. In denial that there was a problem. For me the evidence is enough for us to start preparing for the worst. I honestly hope we're wrong because if the scientist are right the future looks clouded to say the least.

 

[2020hindsight]

..because if the scientist are right the future looks clouded to say the least.

ahh , bill, - but then the earth cools and .... (jokin)

repeating ghoti's link, :-
http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/climate_change/article2355956.ece
"The programme failed to point out that scientists had now explained the period of "global cooling" between 1940 and 1970. It was caused by industrial emissions of sulphate pollutants, which tend to reflect sunlight. ",

If this is so, are we doing the wrong thing in stopping pollution

equally, (same result), should be be sending up millions of balloons to act as "fake clouds"??

The real global warming swindle
A Channel 4 documentary claimed that climate change was a conspiratorial lie. But an analysis of the evidence it used shows the film was riddled with distortions and errors
By Steve Connor
Published: 14 March 2007
A Channel 4 documentary that claimed global warming is a swindle was itself flawed with major errors which seriously undermine the programme's credibility, according to an investigation by The Independent.

The Great Global Warming Swindle, was based on graphs that were distorted, mislabelled or just plain wrong. The graphs were nevertheless used to attack the credibility and honesty of climate scientists. A graph central to the programme's thesis, purporting to show variations in global temperatures over the past century, claimed to show that global warming was not linked with industrial emissions of carbon dioxide. Yet the graph was not what it seemed.

Other graphs used out-of-date information or data that was shown some years ago to be wrong. Yet the programme makers claimed the graphs demonstrated that orthodox climate science was a conspiratorial "lie" foisted on the public. Channel 4 yesterday distanced itself from the programme, referring this newspaper's inquiries to a public relations consultant working on behalf of Wag TV, the production company behind the documentary.

Martin Durkin, who wrote and directed the film, admitted yesterday that one of the graphs contained serious errors but he said they were corrected in time for the second transmission of the programme following inquiries by The Independent. Mr Durkin has already been criticised by one scientist who took part in the programme over alleged misrepresentation of his views on the climate.

The main arguments made in Mr Durkin's film were that climate change had little if anything to do with man-made carbon dioxide and that global warming can instead be linked directly with solar activity - sun spots.

One of the principal supports for his thesis came in the form of a graph labelled "World Temp - 120 years", which claimed to show rises and falls in average global temperatures between 1880 and 2000. Mr Durkin's film argued that most global warming over the past century occurred between 1900 and 1940 and that there was a period of cooling between 1940 and 1975 when the post-war economic boom was under way. This showed, he said, that global warming had little to do with industrial emissions of carbon dioxide.

The programme-makers labelled the source of the world temperature data as "Nasa" but when we inquired about where we could find this information, we received an email through Wag TV's PR consultant saying that the graph was drawn from a 1998 diagram published in an obscure journal called Medical Sentinel. The authors of the paper are well-known climate sceptics who were funded by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine and the George C Marshall Institute, a right-wing Washington think-tank.

However, there are no diagrams in the paper that accurately compare with the C4 graph. The nearest comparison is a diagram of "terrestrial northern hemisphere" temperatures - which refers only to data gathered by weather stations in the top one third of the globe. However, further inquiries revealed that the C4 graph was based on a diagram in another paper produced as part of a "petition project" by the same group of climate sceptics. This diagram was itself based on long out-of-date information on terrestrial temperatures compiled by Nasa scientists.

However, crucially, the axis along the bottom of the graph has been distorted in the C4 version of the graph, which made it look like the information was up-to-date when in fact the data ended in the early 1980s. Mr Durkin admitted that his graphics team had extended the time axis along the bottom of the graph to the year 2000. "There was a fluff there," he said.

If Mr Durkin had gone directly to the Nasa website he could have got the most up-to-date data. This would have demonstrated that the amount of global warming since 1975, as monitored by terrestrial weather stations around the world, has been greater than that between 1900 and 1940 - although that would have undermined his argument.

"The original Nasa data was very wiggly-lined and we wanted the simplest line we could find," Mr Durkin said. The programme failed to point out that scientists had now explained the period of "global cooling" between 1940 and 1970. It was caused by industrial emissions of sulphate pollutants, which tend to reflect sunlight. Subsequent clean-air laws have cleared up some of this pollution, revealing the true scale of global warming - a point that the film failed to mention.

Other graphs used in the film contained known errors, notably the graph of sunspot activity. Mr Durkin used data on solar cycle lengths which were first published in 1991 despite a corrected version being available - but again the corrected version would not have supported his argument. Mr Durkin also used a schematic graph of temperatures over the past 1,000 years that was at least 16 years old, which gave the impression that today's temperatures are cooler than during the medieval warm period. If he had used a more recent, and widely available, composite graph it would have shown average temperatures far exceed the past 1,000 years

 

[2020hindsight]

transferance of guilt - a natural psychological process I'm told.
"US-Aust initiative " is all about action in the developing nations??
who do we think we are ? to set ourselves up as the only ones entitled to development / timber clearing etc. (this was covered in that Channel 4 video you may recall)

Thought for the day ...
"Mr Turnbull says there is nothing new in the report and the Government is doing all it can to save the reef, but admits that may not be possible."

Yet wasn't it just a few months ago that it was all "she'll be right - nothing to panic about folks." ??
The prime minister saying "Al Gore is just trying to promote his movie"...
the treasurer saying that "it will be bad in 50 years, and we plan to do something before then ..."

Sounds like an admission of gross incompetence to me. - anyone disgaree.?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1892019.htm

US-Aust to work on climate change initiative.
The US has agreed to work with Australia on a global deforestation initiative to address climate change.
The agreement comes as politicians and environmentalists react to the latest report on global warming, which predicts increased droughts and floods in Australia. With almost a fifth of the world's emissions coming from forest clearing, the Government says the initiative aims to prevent forest logging in developing countries.

Federal Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull has discussed the plan with officials in Washington. He says they did not make a financial commitment, but they are supporting the initiative. "I would be amazed if you would get a particular dollar or an amount within a few hours of visiting but what we have got is a commitment of resources to work on joint projects," he said.

Labor's Environment spokesman, Peter Garrett, has welcomed the initiative. He says while it may have positive effects, it is not a substitute for many of the climate change policies the Government has avoided adopting. "Mr Turnbull and Mr Howard refuse to set targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, they belittle the idea that we should have targets and yet there's a clear consensus that a target is necessary," he said. "They won't set a date when Australia's greenhouse gas emissions are going to be reduced and yet under current scenarios we will see significant increases in greenhouse gas pollution."

Climate report. Labor has described the Government's reaction to the latest climate change report as "extraordinary". The major global report shows if current trends continue, Australia will face a bigger water crisis and the loss of the Great Barrier Reef within two decades.

Mr Turnbull says there is nothing new in the report and the Government is doing all it can to save the reef, but admits that may not be possible.

Mr Garrett says that is not good enough. "The situation the reef is facing is really serious, there's no question about it," he said. "I think the great tragedy of Minister's Turnbull comments this morning is that the Government of which he's a part of has not taken climate change at all seriously, nor the likely threats to the reef, and as a consequence we're faced with this scenario."

 

[insider]

NASA Scientists are reporting that Mars is facing their own global Warming issues... That says that Global Warming has less to do with Carbon emissions than The sun burning at a Hotter Temperature

 

[2020hindsight]

NASA Scientists are reporting that Mars is facing their own global Warming issues... That says that Global Warming has less to do with Carbon emissions than The sun burning at a Hotter Temperature

yep saw that m8. intresting isnt it Mars has all these geological features that appear to be canyons carved by water yet only the poles of Mars are currently "water / ice" according to the photos - you wonder if that will happen again (?)

still, we shouldn't ignore our own contribution to the problem on earth , yes?

And you'd have to agree surely, that for us to propose doing things overseas (in developing countries , reduced forest clearing etc) - without AT LEAST matching them at home - "dollar for dollar", or let's call it "tree for tree" - it is hardly valid compensation for our own (first world) excesses. ?

 

[chops_a_must]

And you'd have to agree surely, that for us to propose doing things overseas (in developing countries , reduced forest clearing etc) - without AT LEAST matching them at home - "dollar for dollar", or let's call it "tree for tree" - it is hardly valid compensation for our own (first world) excesses. ?

Not to mention that we refused to ban the importation of illegally logged timber from the areas that we are funding to protect. Or to stop the logging of old growth forests in Australia.

There are some rather hypocritical messages here.

Plus the cutting of funding to all sustainable logging programmes in PNG (which provided thousands of villagers with an ongoing income). This itself has led to rampant forest clearing in these areas that were being managed well.

Shame Australia, shame.

 

[2020hindsight]

Not to mention that we refused to ban the importation of illegally logged timber from the areas that we are funding to protect. Or to stop the logging of old growth forests in Australia.

There are some rather hypocritical messages here.

Plus the cutting of funding to all sustainable logging programmes in PNG (which provided thousands of villagers with an ongoing income). This itself has led to rampant forest clearing in these areas that were being managed well. Shame Australia, shame.

I wonder could it be , chops - lol - that PNG timber getters dont vote in Aus How dare we ! Are we such cretons as even to suggest it to them? Maybe I'm missing something , but it smells like an insult, looks like an insult - heck, maybe it really IS an insult ? (yet Rudd and Howard are both behind it ? - gotta be something to do with Tasmania lol)

PS The reasoning seems to be "give them money in exchange" - they will be happy ! (?)
I have worked in three expatriate situations.
a) PNG, where the Aussies ran the place - using alcohol as the common denominator lol - since we left in 1972, the elections are decided on who provides the most free booze (plus of course the "which one is my one-talk" system)
b) American Samoa, where the yanks ran the place on the dollar - keep em financially "fat" and they'll be happy - trouble is that the people become lazy and sadly lose any zest for life - I can tell you their brothers and sisters in the much poorer Western Samoa ( under NZ administration) are thinner, poorer, and infinitely more happy.
c) finally in HK where the combination of British internationalism , and chinese industry and "business skills", have proved to be an incredibly successful combination - a giant dragon in Asia. (although possibly becoming overshadowed by Shanghai in recent times - local politics etc - but I'm talking about pre 1997 of course)

No question which one is the best system. - and it ain't the one where the people get handouts ( sheesh - reminds me of the Indian reservations ;( "how many blankets for your land, redskin- and your dignity - and your buffalo etc etc ??" )

 

[Kimosabi]

I suspect Global Warming is another neo-conservative fear campaign.

Something stinks at the highest levels of Power on this Planet, the question is, What are they trying to achieve?

 

[chops_a_must]

I wonder could it be , chops - lol - that PNG timber getters dont vote in Aus How dare we ! Are we such cretons as even to suggest it to them? Maybe I'm missing something , but it smells like an insult, looks like an insult - heck, maybe it really IS an insult ? (yet Rudd and Howard are both behind it ? - gotta be something to do with Tasmania lol)

PS The reasoning seems to be "give them money in exchange" - they will be happy ! (?)
I have worked in three expatriate situations.
a) PNG, where the Aussies ran the place - using alcohol as the common denominator lol - since we left in 1972, the elections are decided on who provides the most free booze (plus of course the "which one is my one-talk" system)
b) American Samoa, where the yanks ran the place on the dollar - keep em financially "fat" and they'll be happy - trouble is that the people become lazy and sadly lose any zest for life - I can tell you their brothers and sisters in the much poorer Western Samoa ( under NZ administration) are thinner, poorer, and infinitely more happy.
c) finally in HK where the combination of British internationalism , and chinese industry and "business skills", have proved to be an incredibly successful combination - a giant dragon in Asia. (although possibly becoming overshadowed by Shanghai in recent times - local politics etc - but I'm talking about pre 1997 of course)

No question which one is the best system. - and it ain't the one where the people get handouts ( sheesh - reminds me of the Indian reservations ;( "how many blankets for your land, redskin- and your dignity - and your buffalo etc etc ??" )

They weren't handouts 20/20. Most of the funding was for equipment and marketing, so that they had somewhere to sell their product. And the reason why they didn't have to clear massive amounts of land, was because all of the money raised went to the community, not a company.

But in my reading of the topic over the last few years is that the interests involved in PNG have significant lobbying/ donating/ bribing power over the nationals.

“One company – Rimbunan Hijau, controlled by billionaire Malaysian Hiew King Tiong has interests in the finance sector, the media, information technology, property, retailing, commercial printing, travel and shipping,” the report’s executive summary states.

The Tiong family also has business interests in China, Malaysia, Cambodia, Hong Kong, Canada, the USA, New Zealand and Australia. “In Australia, Tiong investments include the Harbourside shopping complex at Darling Harbour in Sydney, and companies that account for 10 per cent of Australia’s mango crop.”

(RH are the biggest logging company in PNG)
http://www.foe.org.au/media-releases/2006-media-releases/mr_07_08_06.htm

Rimbunan Hijau also has interests in Australia. Company searches reveal extensive business investments through Thomas Tiong Kiu King, a younger brother of Hiew King Tiong. Various family members of the Tiong family are key shareholders of two major holding companies, Deland Corporation and Burlington Corporation.

These holding companies in turn own companies such as
Landmark Investments, Landmark Projects, Landworth and
Roxbrook. Their property investments include the Harbourside
shopping complex at Darling Harbour in Sydney and a number
of agricultural businesses. The Tiong family controls a number
of other companies in Australia, including Westby and Sunray
Nominees.

The Tiongs have significant interests in mango farming in
Queensland through NAP Townsville Pty Ltd (based in Giru
in northern Queensland) and its ultimate holding company
Burlington Corporation. Burlington is also part owned by
Thomas Tiong. The largest Mango plantation in the Northern
Territory, Manbulloo Mangoes Australia Pty Ltd, is owned by
MCH N ° 202 Pty Ltd, which in turn is part-owned by Thomas
Tiong. These companies’ plantations in Queensland (Burdekin
region) and the Northern Territory (near Katherine) are estimated
to supply around 10 per cent of Australia’s total mango crop.

The Tiongs also have interests in cattle in the Northern Territory
and Victoria. The Northern Territory operations are centred at the
Jindare property, about 30 kilometres south west of Pine Creek.
Jindare is a massive grazing property located in the Daly River
and is owned by Chiong Ong Tiong,122 Hiew King Tiong and Ik
King Tiong through Taimatsu (Australia) Pty Ltd.

A timber importer in New Zealand linked with Rimbunan
Hijau, LumberBank, was expelled from the New Zealand
Timber Importers Association for illegally logging Papua New
Guinea forests. LumberBank lost its appeal to the New Zealand
High Court in December 2004 against its expulsion from the
association, which controls 80 per cent of timber imports to New
Zealand.123

The ANZ Banking Group has publicly acknowledged its longstanding
role in providing financial services to the Rimbunan
Hijau group of companies in PNG. Although aware of the
allegations and evidence of illegal and unsustainable logging and
serious human rights and labour abuses, ANZ has cited company
and governmental assurances that Rimbunan Hijau’s activities
are legal and has maintained its financial relationship with
Rimbunan Hijau.124 ANZ’s requirements contrast starkly with
those of CitiGroup, another major banker for the company, which
has stated it will require Rimbunan Hijau to obtain credible,
independent, third party certification for its Papua New Guinea
operations.125

http://www.celcor.org.pg/image/HR.pdf

In PNG, the capacity and political will to uphold legal and
human rights is being undermined, not least by the logging
industry itself. International fi nancial institutions struggle to
see beyond the frame of large-scale forestry to glimpse the
vision of sustainable forest communities. In countries, such as
Australia, that both sponsor and trade with PNG, consumers
and politicians underestimate the severity and reach of abuses
in PNG’s large-scale logging. They should show more interest.
Australia imports PNG timber and invites investment from the
same companies that stand behind the PNG abuses.

http://www.acfonline.org.au/uploads/res_ACF-CELCOR_exec_tasol.pdf

Nuff said.

 

[2020hindsight]

They weren't handouts 20/20. Most of the funding was for equipment and marketing, so that they had somewhere to sell their product. And the reason why they didn't have to clear massive amounts of land, was because all of the money raised went to the community, not a company....(RH are the biggest logging company in PNG)
...Nuff said.

ahh yes.
two things , my comment about handouts relates to Aus giving handouts to PNG etc to stop land clearing, (which I understand is the flipside of this latest proposal to gain , in effect , carbon credits - those things that we refuse to acknowledge ) ...and so clear our consciences for us..

but then .. whilst I referred to the Chinese industry in HK, you introduce the topic of recent Malaysian timber industry ethics, which is subtley "different" I can tell you a few stories there too - for instance, put all your money in the Malaysian stock exchange lol - see if you end up with 10% of your investment

PS shortest job in the world? - lol , Forestry Minister in PNG (and let's not talk about Sarawak, various islands of Indonesia etc)

 

[chops_a_must]

ahh yes.
two things , my comment about handouts relates to Aus giving handouts to PNG etc to stop land clearing, (which I understand is the flipside of this latest proposal to gain , in effect , carbon credits - those things that we refuse to acknowledge ) ...and so clear our consciences for us..

but then .. whilst I referred to the Chinese industry in HK, you introduce the topic of recent Malaysian timber industry ethics, which is subtley "different" I can tell you a few stories there too - for instance, put all your money in the

It is different but I was pointing out the fact that the Australian government has a huge role in this (bigger than what anyone could imagine) as they are approving the clearing of forest and cutting deals with these same people. THAT is the reason the libs wont do anything about the issue. It's got nothing to do with Malaysian ethics, but our role in the problem in Australia.

 

[2020hindsight]

It is different but I was pointing out the fact that the Australian government has a huge role in this (bigger than what anyone could imagine) as they are approving the clearing of forest and cutting deals with these same people. THAT is the reason the libs wont do anything about the issue. It's got nothing to do with Malaysian ethics, but our role in the problem in Australia.

i remain as always open minded, lol , I will do some more research and/or ask you to amplify lol

PS Pauline Hanson may have been a fringe dweller, but lol , she will go down in history with that comment / reply "please explain" !!:silly:

PPS we have perfectly good trees in Tasmania if they want to get serious about saving trees

 

[Julia]

NASA Scientists are reporting that Mars is facing their own global Warming issues... That says that Global Warming has less to do with Carbon emissions than The sun burning at a Hotter Temperature

As far as we know Mars is unpopulated. If Mars is also experiencing global warming, then presumably it cannot be attributed to the actions of man. Doesn't it then follow that global warming on our own planet may also not in fact be due to anything we have done or are doing?

 

[Smurf1976]

It is the net change in forest cover that is the real issue. If you clearfell and burn a forest then that's releasing carbon. If you replant it then that slowly soaks it back up again.

It's not really that different to harvesting wheat. If you eat it then ultimately that releases carbon dioxide. Then you plant more wheat which soaks that carbon back up again.

Done properly, a lot of wood can be cut on a sustainable basis without permanently adding carbon to the atmosphere. It's when there is permanent clearing of land that it's a problem.

 

[2020hindsight]

As far as we know Mars is unpopulated.

ahhh c'mon Julia.
where did you get that idea?

I saw this doumentary from USA presented by Arnie Schwarz - and he had this big lump in his nose that he pulls out with these bludy big tweezers - and it proved there are lots of people on Mars.!

PS yep I found that real interesting as well - and we come back to the question, what percentage of GW is natural, eg due to the sun and what percentage is man made.

(make that EGW Earth's Global Warming - since we now have to differentiate it seems)

Note that it is driven (probably indirectly granted - but this is what they say in the article results from the sun, then the winds then the dust etc) by a similar phenomenon to CO2 greenhouse effect on earth, but almost certainly the prime driver is the sun. - and 100% certain it aint mad made - unless the martians are putting up a red smoke screen to stop earthlings observing them from all these Viking and Global Surveyor missions peeping toms

PS let's do our best to minimise CO2, but give the third world a break and let them have less efficient power sources. (i.e. the other option would be to give them nuclear power plants I guess, but I would not be going there , personally - too many Homer Simpsons around over here, let alone there )

PPS Interesting too that 0.65 deg C is not too different from the effect on Earth since the 1970's

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200704/s1890339.htm

Mars heating up: NASA. Earth's dusty neighbour Mars is grappling with its own form of climate change as fluctuating solar radiation is kicking up dust and winds that may be melting the planet's southern polar ice cap, scientists have announced.

Researchers have been watching the changing face of Mars for years, studying slight differences in the brightness and darkness of its surface. These changes in brightness have been generally attributed to the presence of dust, but until now their effect on wind circulation and climate has not been clear.

NASA scientist Lori Fenton and colleagues, reporting this week in the journal Nature, now believe variations in radiation from the surface of Mars are fuelling strong winds that stir up giant dust storms, trapping heat and raising the planet's temperature.

By studying changes in light reflected from the surface of Mars, a measure known as an object's albedo, they predict the red planet has warmed by around 0.65 degree Celsius from the 1970s to the 1990s, which may in part have caused the recent retreat of the southern polar ice cap.

On earth, carbon dioxide traps infrared radiation which can affect global climate, this a phenomenon is known as the greenhouse effect, fossil fuel emissions add to the problem. On Mars, it is the red-tinged dust.

Ms Fenton's team compared thermal maps gathered from NASA's Viking mission in the 1970s with maps gathered more than two decades later by the Global Surveyor. They saw that large swaths of the surface have darkened or brightened over the past three decades. These albedo changes strengthened winds, picking up and circulating dust, creating a vicious cycle that is warming the planet.

"Our results suggests that documented albedo changes affect recent climate change and large-scale weather patterns on Mars," Ms Fenton's team wrote.

They believe changes in albedo should be an important part of future studies on atmosphere and climate change.

 

[2020hindsight]

I find that sequence interesting in itself .... radiation > strong winds (hurricanes , cyclones etc) > dust > presumably rapid increase in the warming

a) winds are increasing on earth yes? stable mates in tandem?
b) I wonder if this problem on Mars becomes unstable, i.e. becomes a viscious circle - obviously not because it must've been through the cycle many times ... or rather I wonder how long it takes to settle again? - does it need the sun's radiation to decrease before it stabilizes?
c) if you want to get a clear photo of Mars, better do it now before it gets too windy

NASA scientist Lori Fenton and colleagues, reporting this week in the journal Nature, now believe variations in radiation from the surface of Mars are fuelling strong winds that stir up giant dust storms, trapping heat and raising the planet's temperature.

 

[2020hindsight]

I also find it interesting that the concept of dust "trapping heat" in that article is contrary to what happens on earth - in that pollution tends to prevent heat getting here in the first place. - i.e. According to those comments triggered by the Channel 4 program, pollution has a cooling effect.

I am getting a little suspicious of the accuracy of this one. But if someone out there is an expert on Mars then great, maybe they could set me straight here.

 

[maffu]

This one acknowledges GW but refutes CO2 as the cause and pins it on solar activity. Does a good job of it.

Pollution is still the biggy for me rather than co2.

A scientist up the road from me, is in his 70's and has been talking about Global Warming being a serious problem, but due to the declining amounts of oxygen in our atmosphere, thus the world has less insulation. Its an interesting point, and the only research done on this was back in the 60's and 70's and in that decade the amount of oxygen dropped dramtically, then once that was found out the funding was dropped and no more research has been done.

He is a really smart guy, and his back shed is amazing with all the jacobs ladders, and lightning machines pumping out millions of volts. It was very interesting going to his place to listen to him talk about it.

 

[billhill]

Here 2020,
This article explains how the dust affects temperatures on mars.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070404203258.5klhwqs4&show_article=1

Because earths surface is covered by vegetation and water (absorb heat) dust in the atmosphere has the opposite affect to dust on mars.