Posted by
Glenn Flowers on Sunday, August 10, 2008 7:14:00 AM
As early as 1954 the state of California realized that automobile emissions were the source of air quality deterioration. By the early 60s automotive engineers and the Department of Motor Vehicles had enough research results to implement emission controls on all vehicles, new and used. Their goal was to achieve substantial reductions in targeted pollutants with the ideal result being auto exhaust that consisted of only carbon dioxide and water vapor, both proven to be naturally occurring and non-toxic. Of course, this ideal result could not be attained, but it was the goal California would strive for. The targeted pollutants which were the culprits in formation of smog and suspects in the depletion of the ozone layer were carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), total photochemical oxidants (TPO), total suspended particles (TSP), hydrocarbons (HC), and lead (Pb). Eventually the hydrocarbons were dropped from the list, oxidants (TPO) was replaced by ground level ozone, and suspended particles (TSP) was replaced with a particulate matter (PM) standard.
What you don’t see in any of the standards for auto pollution control is a requirement to reduce carbon dioxide. In fact, at that time, carbon dioxide emission was listed as one of the favorable results being sought by the state as a method of cleaning the atmosphere of existing ozone and carbon monoxide. The climate experts throughout the state were of the opinion, and had demonstrated in repeated laboratory trials, that carbon dioxide was not only non-toxic and non-polluting, but was beneficial to the atmosphere, plant life, and climate. Since that time the CO2 levels in the atmosphere have risen from .0025 to .0033 percent, or 25 parts per million to 33 parts per million.
Today, the majority of climatologists agree that some small part of that rise is probably due to manmade causes, but the majority of that rise has been caused by the cyclic warming of the interglacial period we have been in for near 10,000 years. Yes, I said they agree that the rise in CO2 is caused by climate warming, not the other way around.
So why is the climate warming? Well, if you consider that around 10,000 years ago there were ice sheets three miles thick reaching all the way to the equator from both the arctic and antarctic poles, the only choice the climate had to go, temperature wise, was warmer. We are still in the interglacial warming period, but most scientists believe we are reaching the peak of global warming. In fact, for the past 12 years there has been a levelling off and even a slight decrease in average worldwide temperatures.
Over 33,000 scientists agree that a slight increase in temperature and CO2 is far and away a more desirable scenario than would be a plunge in temperature and the slide into the next glacial period. Even if an ice age were not imminent, it is a fact that all life on Earth benefits when the temperature is slightly warmer and CO2 levels slightly higher than the calculated averages of the past several million years. In 1816, the year following the eruption of Mt. Tambora, global temperatures fell dramatically causing crop killing freezes in May and June, lake and river ice as far south as Pennsylvania in July and August, and was known as the "Year Without a Summer". Agricultural failures led to starvation and a lowered state of immunity which resulted in death from disease.
Those folks who suffered through that year could have done with a bit more heat and CO2. Humans as a species have always prospered in warmer regions and periods as opposed to colder temperatures.
The climate change scare mongers claim a rise in CO2 is causing warming of the atmosphere in the range of about 0.4 to 1.5*C per century. What a puny heat wave that is. That won’t even cause you to break a sweat. They claim that rise is causing the ice sheets at the poles to melt. Satellite measurements show, though, that the ice sheets this year are already 12% larger than at this time last year. Polar bear populations have grown approximately 18% in the past decade, pollock has increased approximately 7% despite their status as the most commercially fished, and sea level continues to rise at a rate of 1-4 centimeters per year at specific locations. In other locations around the world sea level has actually dropped as much as 8-10 centimeters. NOAA scientists say that plate tectonics and wind have more effect on world wide sea level fluctuations than the melting of ice sheets would, if they were actually melting.
The bottom line to all this is we, as a nation and internationally as well, are being duped and forced into making drastic, VERY expensive, long term changes in almost every aspect of our lives in an attempt to prevent a slate of supposed disastrous, man made changes in Earth’s climate that are exagerated and fabricated and over which man has no control. Legislation of all kinds demand investment and research into unproven, high cost energy replacements, financial and even criminal penalties for causing CO2 emissions, industrial limitations on emissions of future production items, the forced banning of the production and usage of inexpensive, readily available, proven energy resources, and the enrichment of the fat cat proponents of such false climate change scare tactics to the detriment of every individual wage earner or business owner.
The Eath’s climate is a highly complex, ever changing machanism driven entirely by the heat from the sun. It has many, many subtle and evident subsystems which act to cool excessive heat and warm extreme cooling. No scientist who believes in the scientific method admits to understanding the vast workings of Earth’s climate, and they all agree that consensus of even 200 trillion scientists is not a method for validating or disproving anything. Only experimentation of a hypothesis with reproducable results, and validation of those results by observation of actual climate conditions can be used as valid reason for action. In other words, we don’t know enough about how the climate works to justify the extreme financial and social upheaval being demanded by a group of scientists, environmental extremists, and politicians who have a great deal to gain from such drastic changes. It is just not ethical to cause such harm and suffering over what amounts to fables and myths. We must vote in a totally new Congress and convince the new members to reverse the policies and legislation enacted in an attempt to control the climate.
VOTERS UNITE IN AN ELECTION REVOLT TO FIX AMERICA !!
DON’T EVER RE-ELECT ANY SENATOR OR REPRESENTITIVE !!
KICK ALL THE BUMS OUT OF THE DOMED BUILDING AND LET’S START OVER.
Subnote: It is my opinion that the impotent rally of GOP representitives after the speaker adjourned the session is a blatant attempt to garner support for the re-election of those involved. Their actions will not change democratic policy, they have acted seven years too late, and there was a very puny number of participants. I think it was all a show put on by members who realized the voters are pissed off and believed they could make up for their years of inaction with a few days of acting like they cared. After all, why didn’t they try this protest BEFORE Pelosi ended the session? Why didn’t they get this excited last year? Complacency?
Glenn Flowers