CLIMATE CHANGE: It's official: the world is cooling, not
warming
Subject: CLIMATE CHANGE: It's official: the
world is cooling, not warming
To cut CO2 emissions to
combat a non-existent threat will end up hurting the world's poor, writes
Peter Westmore.
Midsummer polar ice increase
2007-2008,
http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/ From: Governor
Recent scientific
evidence shows that the world's climate is cooling, not warming, as a result of
reduced radiation from the sun, the engine which drives the earth's
climate.
The slight warming of the earth's atmosphere from about
1970 to 2000 came at a time of increased solar radiation and higher levels of
sunspot activity.
As solar observatories have been collecting sunspot
data for several centuries, a correlation has been observed between sunspot
activity and the temperature of the earth's surface.
Solar activity very
closely matches not only recent global temperature changes but also historical
changes for the past 1100 years. For instance, the Maunder Minimum (1645-1715)
was an extremely cold period in which there was very little sunspot
activity.
Earlier, the Medieval Warm Period (950-1300) was a time when
the Vikings colonised Greenland, now much of it covered in a thick
ice-sheet.
The Space and Science Research Center (SSRC) recently said,
"There are historic and important changes taking place on the sun's surface.
This will have only one outcome - a new climate change is coming that will bring
an extended period of deep cold to the planet."
Influence of the sun
In a recent paper
for the Danish National Space Centre, physicists Henrik Svensmark and Eigil
Friis-Christensen wrote, "The sun... appears to be the main forcing agent in
global climate change.... Even though atmospheric carbon dioxide continues to
accumulate - it's up about 4 per cent since 1998 - the global mean temperature
has remained flat. That raises some obvious questions about the theory that CO2
is the cause of climate change."
While sunspot activity between 1970 and
2000 was higher than in earlier decades of the 20th century, there are signs
that it is now in decline.
Scientists have also found an inverse
correlation between the length of solar cycles, which average about 11 years,
and sunspot activity and solar radiation.
Solar cycles can last between
about 7 years and 14 years. Short cycles are usually characterised by intense
sunspot activity and higher solar radiation, while long cycles have far less
sunspot activity.
Solar cycles also come in groups. A further correlation
has been observed between the length of a solar cycle and the average
temperature over the following solar cycle.
The current sunspot cycle,
Cycle 23, is already longer than average, having commenced in May 1996. It also
had considerably fewer sunspots than previous cycles.
Currently, there is
little sunspot activity, and some observers consider the current solar cycle
could continue for another year, a very long solar cycle.
Not
surprisingly, average global surface temperatures remained approximately
constant from 1999 to 2006, but have fallen significantly over the past 18
months.
Even land-based monitoring centres, such as the UK Met Office
whose reports have been used extensively by the Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) and the Stern Report, admit that this is
so.
However, people such as Al Gore (the ex-politician turned
climate-change campaigner), Ross Garnaut (the Federal Government's climate
change adviser), Climate Minister Penny Wong and Prime Minister Kevin Rudd do
not seem to have caught up with these developments.
They are still on the
"global warming" bandwagon, insisting that the science is settled, and there is
to be no more debate on the issue.
Unfortunately for them, 31,000
American scientists have signed an internet petition rejecting the Kyoto
Protocol and the theory of human-induced global warming (www.petitionproject.org
<http://www.petitionproject.org/> ). The scientists, of whom over 9,000 have PhDs, state:
"We urge
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.
"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release
of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the
foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and
disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific
evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial
effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."
The
signatories include over 2,600 who are physicists, geophysicists,
climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental
scientists.
In light of the urgent need to improve the standard of living
of the poor, through provision of inexpensive fuel and power to millions of
low-income families throughout the world, the current emphasis on cutting CO2
production will have the effect of keeping many of the world's poor in
continuing poverty.
Is this really the world we want to
create?
- Peter Westmore
------
End of Forwarded Message