Warmists need Christmas gifts too [update 2]
NZ’s Climate Science Coalition has the ideal Christmas gift for you, or a warmist friend:
UPDATE 1: It is all too readily apparent that many people who attempt to function in the modern world and who purport to comment intelligently on the events of the day are utterly unable to read, undertstand and intelligently interpret a simple graph. Staggering.
If you are looking for the ideal gift for the person who is really fretting about Climate Change and how they can change their life to save the planet the Centre has the perfect gifts for you.
First, if they cannot actually read, or have difficulty with anything more challenging than TV news then a single image they can hang on the wall may be the most appropriate.
The Centre has acquired a graph of the satellite temperatures in the mid-troposphere for the years 1978 – to Sept 2008.
The graph (below) also plots CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere over the same period. If it looks remarkably "flat" this is because you may well be looking at the first graph of CO2 concentration which is plotted against a base of zero. Most are plotted against a base of say 250 parts per million which makes it look as though CO2 levels are "going through the roof." Presumably, this is called "unbiased reporting."
The time period is thirty years which by convention is about climate rather than weather. Your exercise for today is look at this graph and compare it to the graphs presented by alarmists and explain the difference. Ponder this good news here, and below.
UPDATE 2: Christopher Monckton and Scientist Willie Soon tell an International Symposium on Climate and Weather “Carbon dioxide is not an air pollutant. It is plant food. All life on Earth depends on it. It is natural. It forms the bubbles in bread, champagne, and Coca-Cola. You breathe it out, and plants breathe it in.
“The Earth contains a lot of CO2, but the atmosphere contains so little that the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) rightly calls CO2 a “trace gas”. A scientific mystery is why the air does not hold more CO2 than it does. Half a billion years ago, there was almost 20 times today’s CO2 concentration.
“Most farmers would prefer to grow crops under much-higher concentrations of CO2 than today’s 385 parts per million—less than 1/25 of 1 percent of the atmosphere. To feed the world, low CO2 concentration is not such a great idea. High concentrations are better, and they cause no harm. Experiments have shown that even delicate plants such as orchids thrive at CO2 concentrations of 10,000 ppm.
“That is why U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Scalia has declared that if CO2 is to be labeled an “air pollutant”, then so must Frisbees and flatulence.
“What about the danger of overheating the Earth by CO2? Al Gore is spending $300 million telling us “global warming” will be a catastrophe. Yet a survey of 539 scientific papers containing the words “global climate change” and published between January 2004 and February 2007 found not a single one that provided any evidence that “global warming” would be catastrophic. It does not matter how many scientists or politicians say that more CO2 will cause a catastrophe. To true scientists, what matters is whether any real-world data support the idea.”