"The World of Man-Made
Global Warming Supporters
is in A Serious State"

 
CONTENTS


 
-

Is man-made global warming proved?


 
The answer is a resounding 'no'. There is no convincing scientific evidence for man-made global warming outside of computer models, which do not agree with actual climate data. There is, however, overwhelming evidence to show that temperature increases precede carbon dioxide rises, so carbon dioxide levels cannot be a cause of global warming and any steps taken to reduce emissions are futile.
 
Computer models as used for generating future scenarios have been unable to reproduce actual climate patterns, and are unreliable in the extreme. As the following chart shows, these GCMs, an abbreviation which has been translated as general circulation models or global climate models, predict uniform warming of the lower levels of the atmosphere as a result of man's emission of greenhouse gases, chiefly carbon dioxide, actually a minor greenhouse gas. This man-made warming is predicted to be particularly marked in the last 25 to 30 years, yet actual measurements from satellites and radiosonde balloons show no warming, but slight cooling instead.
 

This graph shows troposphere temperature from satellite data
against IPCC computer model predictions

-
TopIn the Beginning
 
An infamous UN-backed statement, that the balance of evidence suggests man has definitely had an impact on climate, has had numerous repercussions. Newspaper headlines, the school curriculum, political careers, and taxes on car drivers have all felt the aftershocks of this proclamation. Yet the chapter and report from which it derives were described by former President of the American Academy of Sciences, Frederick Seitz, as the worst abuse of the peer review process he had seen. Dr Sherwood Idso, then of the Water Conservation Laboratory in Arizona, commented on unauthorised changes made to global climate reports post-review, up to 16 per document. Today the same process continues, in order to present the facade that there is credible scientific evidence to support man-made global warming theory when there is not, and that the human influence brigade reflect the consensus of scientific opinion, which they do not.
 
Climatology professor John Christy is a Lead Author with the IPCC, the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change. Unlike many other Lead Authors he was not appointed by his government, and he considers that this situation arose most likely because the remainder were willing to adopt a particular viewpoint on causes of climate change not dissimilar to the views of their political appointees. Describing a gathering in New Zealand prior to publication of the latest IPCC Report, he mentions how discussion at a meeting was cut short when serious objections were raised to a pet theory of the scientist leading the discussion. Such is the quality of open debate in IPCC circles.
 
Christy also points out that, in the IPCC's third annual report, a future scenario involving a 6 degree C rise in temperature in the next 100 years was added to the report at a late stage in the review process at the request of a few governments. As is evident, political interference, not scientific reasoning, was responsible for the scary headlines the politicians required in order to justify their plans for taxes on energy and mobility. This extreme 'storyline', labelled A1F1 was one of 245, but it grabbed all the media attention. It required the most extreme outputs of greenhouse gases barely imaginable, the least possible countermeasures, and an atmosphere of the highest sensitivity to these factors. It was described by Christy as "the one that's not going to happen". No wonder that Hartwig Volz, a geophysicist with the RWE Research Lab in Germany, commented that the IPCC's output of 'storylines' might be more aptly termed 'fairytales'.
 
Underhand activity has also been reported in print, where it seems that IPCC procedures on matters such as peer-review are not in accord with accepted scientific standards. For example, a conscientious journal editor would not normally choose an author's colleague as a referee. The IPCC has previously assigned the role of convening lead author to Ben Santer — who it is reported based much of his conclusions on two of his own papers that had not yet appeared in peer-reviewed journals, definitely non-standard practice. Graphs of temperature have shown incomplete data prior to circulation, in order to strengthen the case for a particular viewpoint, that of man-made global warming. Data sets from dangerously unreliable sources have been included in measurements used for modelling purposes. In some cases the integrity of surface temperature data has been shown to be compromised, with no resulting exclusion from data sets. The list of non-standard practice in the world of IPCC climate 'science' appears to be inordinately lengthy.
 
Wider problems were revealed when in May, 1999, Evan DeLucia and colleagues published an article in the journal Science showing the fertilising effect of increased atmospheric carbon dioxide on trees. In a letter to the editor, Bert Bolin, who happened to be the first head of the IPCC, wrote: "In the current, post-Kyoto international political climate, scientific statements about the behaviour of the terrestrial carbon cycle must be made with care..." Translation by US scientist Patrick Michaels: "Scientists had better consider NOT publishing results that might undermine support for Kyoto. Signed, the Boss." We examine the Kyoto Protocol shortly. Objective science appears to be a casualty of Summary injustice. However the science to be found in the Technical Sections of IPCC reports is largely sound, and unlike the Summary for Policymakers there is less of an attempt to brush over shortcomings.
 
Boundaries between science and religion are blurred in some treatments of climate change. The IPCC's former chief scientist Sir John Houghton wrote in 1996 that climate change is a "moral issue." He said that he agreed with the World Council of Churches, "which calls upon the Government to adopt firm, clear policies and targets [i.e. Kyoto again], and for the public at large to accept the necessary consequences." The reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, Houghton says, will "contribute powerfully to the material salvation of the planet from mankind's greed and indifference." Michaels comments: "This is the chilled environment in which the secular scientist now works. Leaders of the world's premier scientific organisations on climate change now publicly call for the suppression of research findings and invoke religion, and not science, as the basis for policy".
 
The IPCC suffered a personal casualty when a recent Chairman, Robert Watson, was ousted by a vote of 75 nations to 49. This was widely reported to be self-inflicted, the result of outspoken advocacy of the environmentalist agenda at odds with the views of thousands of independent scientists worldwide.
 
Thus the IPCC is by no means an infallible source of wisdom on climate change, nor is it apolitical, and nor are its projections (now called storylines remember) worth paying much attention to. After all, the IPCC relies on computer models that Harvard climatologist Dr Sallie Baliunas describes as "not reliable as tools for explaining past climate or making projections for future trends".
 
-
Top

Global Warming, Colonialism and the ICE


 
Are environmentalists the new imperialists? This question was asked by Prof Deepak Lal in his inaugural Julian Simon Lecture at the Liberty Institute in Delhi, where he made a spirited attack on the new cultural imperialism of international Greens and their local networks. Professor Lal believes that the Green movement is a secular religion filling the void created in the West by the retreat of faith in traditional religions. Its aim, he says, is to create a new 'white man's burden' and impose its values on the world. The former religious crusades for saving souls has given way to new green crusades for (supposedly) saving the planet. The professor added that in his view this new imperialism needs to be resisted — its claim is to save the environment, but its practical effect in many instances will be ruinous for poor countries. The attitude of environmentalists these days is suggestive of the comment by H L Mencken that the desire to save mankind is almost always a false front for the desire to rule it.
 
Former US presidential candidate and green luminary Al Gore, who as a member of the U.S. Senate participated in the 1992 UN-sponsored Earth Summit, is a highly visible exponent of what appears to be an environmental cult built around the concept of reverence for planet Earth. Gore has written openly about the Earth having sacred qualities and he has praised primitive pagan religions and goddess worship. He also seeks the obliteration of the internal combustion engine (ICE), a curious quest and one which has no justification whatsoever.
 
Climate change clearly has its disciples for whom objective scientific evidence is a mere inconvenience to be ignored. In this new world order, those who prefer science and evidence are to be demonised and marginalised by any means possible. Mobility and industry, energy consumers both, are to be taxed off the face of the planet, or at least until the pips squeak. One tool for attempting to do this is the aforementioned Kyoto agreement.
 
-
Top

Kyoto


 
The Kyoto Accord seeks to reduce supposedly harmful carbon dioxide emissions, reducing output to below 1990 levels by 2010. As a result, if implemented, the necessary reduction of emissions would cost industrialised nations between 3.5% and 5% percent of their annual gross domestic product (GDP). To illustrate this in hard financial terms, this amounts to $350 billion per year out of a USA $7 trillion-plus economy. A report warning of these implications, by the economic and energy consultancy DRI-WEFA, outlines the damage that Kyoto will also impart to the economies of European Union (EU) nations. Compliance with the Kyoto protocol will cost Germany and Britain about 5 percent of their GDP and increase unemployment by 1.8 million and 1 million respectively. The Netherlands could lose 3.8 percent of its GDP and 240,000 jobs, Spain 5 percent and 1 million jobs. And these DRI-WEFA findings assume best-case outcomes, in which efficient and widespread carbon dioxide trading limits the burden imposed by emissions reduction policies.
 
Furthermore, all European nations may see rising heating fuel, gasoline, diesel and electricity prices. By 2010, prices will have risen by between 10 and 20 percent. The UK currently has the highest levels of fuel duty and taxation in Europe, and the situation is likely to deteriorate. Spain has a large trucking fleet, which could be seriously harmed by a 25 percent increase in the price of diesel. Electricity prices are estimated to more than double for Germany, Britain and the Netherlands, with the expected economic consequences.
 
Yet the impact of Kyoto on climate change is, even within the disreputable climate models used to indicate warming where none exists, totally insignificant, amounting to a minuscule one-twentieth of a degree, for which industrialised nations are expected to accept a return to the middle ages. Kyoto's irrelevance has been recognised as an embarrassment, and these days it is touted by environmentalists as a 'first step'. Presumably, a first step on the pointless transition from a healthy global economy capable of tackling real environmental problems, back through the middle ages, to the stone age if at all possible.
 

 
While Kyoto would do nothing useful, the EU has set out a course of action with more serious potential consequences. The Car Free Cities (CFC) network, set up by the European Commission's DG XI directorate, proclaims the following as part of the Copenhagen Declaration: "All decision makers at the local, regional, national and European levels are urged to play their part in changing our culture of mobility". So we must know our place, and stay in it. Except that one gets the distinct impression that only mobility involving the car will be targeted, and already so-called 'car free days' are a sign of things planned for us.
 
Apart from noting that such days pass with few people aware of their existence, and little different happening on the roads, when any car driver next hears of these things remember this — our freedom to use a car is under serious threat. Car free communities have been set up already, but if they all have the same success as the one brought to the attention of the ABD, then we need have less fear. Set up in a former military base in Germany, it became very unpopular with its neighbours as the car free people kept parking their cars in nearby residential areas.
 
Our ability to point out the drawbacks and failures of schemes like these may itself be under serious threat. The EU has apparently considered adding the offence of 'seditious libel' to EU law, which could make it an offence for a citizen to say or do anything that might harm the interests of the EU. Presumably the EU self-appointed elite would decide what was and wasn't in the EU's interests. One can only speculate that the document bearing this proposal, should it ever emerge, would bear the symbol of a face with its mouth tightly gagged.
 
-
Top

Case Closed?


 
That would be that, except for three key issues. Firstly, there is such a thing as the greenhouse effect, but it's a natural phenomenon — a greenhouse effect can be found on Mars, and even on the remote icy satellites of the gas giant planets. Secondly, climate change is real, and has been happening throughout the 4.7 billion year history of planet Earth, but it's natural and caused by factors outside our control. Thirdly, those with ulterior motives are using these facts, together with a healthy dose of scaremongering, to 'spin' and misinform people about the future. This plays on people's natural concern for nature, our stewardship of planet Earth, and the lack of widely available scientific data, in a very cynical manner. So it's necessary to address these points, to demonstrate the lack of any objective evidence to sustain the green myths about alleged symptoms of man-made global warming, and to establish the genuine immutable causes of natural climate change.
 
-
Top

Green Myths


 


-
Top

Turncoats

Not surprisingly, in the face of all this, there have been casualties. We have already mentioned the ousting of an IPCC Chairman who seemed very keen to toe the environmentalist hard line. In addition, the NASA scientist who lit the blue touch paper of the global warming firework with his congressional testimony along the lines of Tim Wirth's "the science is settled", has turned the flame off 14 years later. There is now no reason for the American administration to go along with the Kyoto protocol, says Dr James Hansen, as he admits that we don't understand the environment well enough yet. Other scientists, holding on to man-made global warming theory for reasons we can only speculate as due to reputation-on-the-line, or tenure, or research grants, or political leanings, or limelight hunger, or playing a tune to suit the piper payer, maybe even the unscientific save-the-planet-from-everything fanaticism seen from film and pop stars, do their profession no good. "Global warmers predict that global warming is coming, and our emissions are to blame." says Nobel Prize winner Kary Mullis . "They do that to keep us worried about our role in the whole thing. If we aren't worried and guilty, we might not pay their salaries. It's that simple."
 
Perhaps the biggest U-turn of all is that performed by environmentalists of three decades ago. In the early 1970s Dr Stephen Schneider rejected man-made global warming theory, writing, "temperatures do not increase in proportion to an atmospheric increase in carbon dioxide." He went as far as to predict that another little ice age would occur soon, but it hasn't. Schneider now endorses man-made global warming theory by u-turning on carbon dioxide. For now hot houses, not ice houses, are in fashion.
 
-
Top

The causes of climate change

The causes of climate change on a global scale involve processes of an astrophysical or geophysical nature beyond mankind's control. Already seen in the decadal hemisphere temperature charts shown earlier is the cooling influence of a volcanic eruption in the northern hemisphere (Mt Pinatubo, 1992). Tectonic effects, orbital changes and cosmic ray fluxes all play a part. The major astronomical and geological factors at work (including the Milankovitch cycles) are:
 

The sunspot cycle has been examined already in terms of the correlation with heavy daily winter rainfall and the equally strong correlation with uncorrupted temperature records. Evidence that solar factors are important now and in the recent past is as overwhelming as the lack of any evidence for a tangible effect due to mankind. The longer Gleissberg cycle, visible in the chart below, suggests that solar influences will remain high on the agenda for a while yet, up to about 2045. To know for sure will not involve consulting a computer model, but rather records of solar activity as they emerge and, most usefully, real data from satellites, balloons and accurate groundstation readings. In the diagram below, note the decline in solar activity up to the peak of the little ice age (1645-1715) when the Maunder Minimum involved an almost total lack of sunspot activity. Note also the rise in intensity of solar cycle maxima this century, coincident with very modest natural surface warming.
 
16
14
  16
45
    17
18
              18
08
              18
98
              19
90
Solar Activity 1614-1990

The tilt of the Earth's axis is the cause of our seasons and, as it varies, so the seasons either become more distinct or more alike. Our planet's orbit round the Sun is not perfectly circular and the shape of the 'ellipse' changes over time, becoming more eccentric (elongated) and then more circular. When the orbit is eccentric our planet moves further away from the Sun, then much closer. It's interesting to note that ice ages occur at approximately the same time interval as this orbital periodicity. Cosmic rays alter cloud cover, in ways that appear to vary with altitude. All of these factors are involved in natural climate change but are self-evidently beyond mankind's control. It is absurd, arrogant and harmful to ascribe such potent influence to mankind when it is clear that we are spectators not full participants.
 
Confirmation that astronomical factors play a key role in climate change comes from our cosmic neighbour, Mars, which also undergoes climate change. Surface features on Mars show that there were once flowing rivers, but all that's left now is a mixture of water and carbon dioxide ice at the poles, and permafrost. To this extent Mars may be said to have entered an ice age of its own. However, high-resolution images from NASA's Mars Global Surveyor spacecraft show that the south polar ice cap shrank significantly across two successive Martian summers. Should it need to be pointed out, there are no cars on Mars, no power stations, no businesses, and as it is a smaller world than Earth which therefore cooled much quicker, no volcanic or tectonic activity as there is here. No doubt if there were politicians on a Mars colony, egged on by little green (no pun intended) environmentalists, owners of Martian buggies would be in for a tough time right now.
 
-
Top

Hidden Motives Now On View

At first, those pushing hardest for the most extreme eco-based policies may have believed their own hype, and probably some still do. After a while the socio-political implications became more widely understood and a new generation of 'environmentalists' emerged, as pointed out by campaigner Dr Patrick Moore (not the astronomer; see below). However, with the march of global warming hysteria, and the success of other information pollution campaigns, came greater confidence to shed the green flag of convenience and hoist one of a very different colour.
 
The ABD is an apolitical organisation, with members from all walks of life and representing all shades of political opinion. We are as scathing about the right inspired fuel duty escalator as we are about the left inspired carbon dioxide road tax scheme. We have been accused of being Marxists one day and on the extreme right the next. Such vilification comes with the territory for anyone daring to challenge 'sacred' global warming orthodoxy. But when politically motivated extremists hijack the transport agenda for their own purposes, and politicians proceed to use environmental flags of convenience to justify the persecution of car owners and drivers, we are keen to make this clear to as wide an audience as possible. Accordingly, the ABD exposes the real driving forces behind the abuse of society's concerns over natural climate change, using quotes from both sides of the fence:
 
"There were always extreme, irrational and mystical elements within our movement, but they tended to be kept in their place during the early years. Then in the mid-Eighties the ultraleftists and extremists took over. After Greenham Common closed and the Berlin Wall came down these extremists were searching for a new cause and found it in environmentalism. The old agendas of class struggle and anti-corporatism are still there but now they are dressed up in environmental terminology."
(Dr Patrick Moore, co-founder member of Greenpeace, May 2000)

"We have an environmental movement that is run by people who want to fight, not to win."
(Dr Patrick Moore, co-founder member of Greenpeace, May 2000)

"The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed — and hence clamorous to be led to safety — by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary"
(H.L. Mencken)

"No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits.... climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world."
(Christine Stewart, Canadian Environment Minister, Calgary Herald 14 Dec 1998)

"The answer to global warming is in the abolition of private property and production for human need. A socialist world would place an enormous priority on alternative energy sources. This is what ecologically-minded socialists have been exploring for quite some time now."
(Louis Proyect, Columbia University, 27 November 1997)

"The climate modelers have been cheating for so long it's almost become respectable"
(Richard Kerr, discussing adjustments in climate models, Science 1997)

"the summary [for policy-makers, of IPCC Reports] is very much a children's exercise of what might possibly happen, prepared by a peculiar group with no technical competence."
(Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology;
Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences;
Massachusetts Institute of Technology;
and IPCC lead author)

"Efforts to link global change to coral reef degradation have continued without making any significant headway"
(Clive Wilkinson, Coordinator of the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network, and ignored by John 'Snorkel' Prescott)

"Isotopic records show that solar activity today is similar to that of the medieval warm period of about 1000 years ago. Much of the decrease in irradiance appears to have been in the UVb range, and hence could have caused a cooling force through a total atmospheric ozone concentration decrease of about 4%. Values at the upper end of estimates for reduced irradiance could be enough to fully explain temperature trends over the last century."
(Climate Change Newsletter, July 1997)

"Scientists who want to attract attention to themselves, who want to attract great funding to themselves, have to (find a) way to scare the public . . . and this you can achieve only by making things bigger and more dangerous than they really are."
(Petr Chylek, Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, commenting on reports that Greenland's glaciers are melting. Halifax Chronicle-Herald, August 22, 2001)

"We have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts we may have. Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."
(Stephen Schneider, quoted by Dixy Lee Ray in 'Trashing the Planet', 1990)

"Climate treaty supporters tend to become apoplectic at anyone who dares suggest that the threat of global warming is theory, not established fact"
(Wall Street Journal, 03 October 1997)

"Activists have learned to dismiss those whose argument they cannot counter by attacking their integrity, thereby warning off not only other researchers, but warning off other journalists not to cover those stories."
(David Murray, in 'Media Coverage and Global Warming: Is There a Problem?' 1997)

"The data don't matter. We're not basing our recommendations [for reductions in carbon dioxide emissions] upon the data. We're basing them upon the climate models"
(Chris Folland, UK Meteorological Office)

"The problem we are faced with is that the meteorological establishment and the global warming lobby research bodies which receive large funding are now apparently so corrupted by the largesse they receive that the scientists in them have sold their integrity."
(Piers Corbyn, Weather Action bulletin, December 2000)

"A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the [enhanced] greenhouse effect"
(Richard Benedict, US Conservation Foundation)

"We've got to ride the global warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing"
(Tim Wirth, former US Senator)

"All this concern with the effects of global warming is another manifestation of being politically correct"
(Lord Young of Graffham, The Times, 28th Nov 2000)

"The trouble with this idea is that planting trees will not lead to the societal changes we want to achieve"
(Kyoto Delegate, 05 December 1997)

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
(Winston Churchill)

"Plans to tax and penalise car use are leading Britain into a former Soviet-style regime"
(Professor Garel Rhys, Head of Automotive Economics at Cardiff Business School, and Parliamentary Adviser on Trade and Industry)

"I now find that many environmental groups have drifted into self-serving cliques with narrow vision and rigid ideology. At the same time that business and government are embracing public participation and inclusiveness, many environmentalists are showing signs of elitism, left-wingism, and downright eco-fascism. The once politically centrist, science-based vision of environmentalism has been largely replaced with extremist rhetoric. Science and logic have been abandoned and the movement is often used to promote other causes such as class struggle and anti-corporatism. The public is left trying to figure out what is reasonable and what is not."
(Dr Patrick Moore, on his Greenspirit website)

"The collective needs of non-human species must take precedence over the needs and desires of humans."
Dr. Reed F. Noss, The Wildlands Project

"Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?"
Maurice Strong, Head of the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro


-
Top

Why is the Association of British Drivers entering the Global Warming Debate?

The ABD isn't entering the debate, we have been involved from the very beginning of our existence in 1992. The reason is clear enough. Man-made global warming, albeit non-existent, has been seized on by politicians to justify anti-car policies from high fuel duty to road tax schemes and all points in-between. The UK government collects £40 billion in motoring taxes each year, and this does not include national insurance, income tax or corporation tax paid by drivers, it's purely motoring taxes and duties. Also the nonsensical 'climate change levy' affects many businesses and employers which ABD members and car drivers at large are associated with.
 
In return, the driver gets precious little back. Under-investment in roads has occurred for decades. Motorists pay a fortune in taxes yet an engineering survey has shown that the road maintenance backlog is bad and getting worse. Local authorities estimate it will cost £7.4 billion just to clear the backlog, the equivalent of £120 per UK resident. Instead there are increasingly vicious, and increasingly silly, anti-car policies at national level 'justified' by futile attempts to avert non-existent man-made global warming. Governments have declared war on the car driver, and so we are fighting back as there is no justification whatsoever for such extortionate and restrictive policies. There is no evidence for man-made global warming, just natural climate change.
 
-
Top

What Next?

There is a large amount of independent, factual and sourced material on other false alarms concerning motoring topics such as congestion, health, and road safety as well as climate change elsewhere on this website. Take a moment or two to look over the relevant pages using our index or search facility, and scan through our press release list for any topic of particular interest to you. In terms of man-made global warming, if when you started working your way through these pages, you were neutral but interested in becoming more informed about the issues surrounding climate change, we trust that the material provided has helped you to see though the fog of information pollution surrounding this important matter.
 
On the other hand it's possible you were, and still are, one of the 'true believers', holding on to man-made global warming theory in spite of the vast array of objective evidence amassed against it. Climatologist and IPCC Lead Author Dr John Christy points out that he meets as many 'true believers' in climate science as in religion. If you are a member of this group you are probably feeling at least annoyed with ABD, but we make no apology and cannot help you if your mind is already closed.
 
The people we hope to reach are millions of ordinary people, roughly 45 million of them, who either drive a car or who regularly travel in one as a passenger, and who at the present time find themselves demonised, taxed and restricted, all in the name of a demonstrably false theory (and to some, a new form of religion). We sincerely hope that you are hopping mad by now, and if so, don't just sit there, DO SOMETHING. Use the information we have provided to write to your local newspaper and the national press, your MP too. Use your vote, tell your friends about this information and our website, join the ABD, but don't just sit back on the expectation that somebody else will act for you.
 
 
"All it takes for evil to prosper is for good men [and women] to do nothing"

 
 
Text EMA/ABD 2002
 
Acknowledgements: CDIAC, GES, CSCD, OISM, GISS, NASA, ESA, WAG, IPCC, UKMO, EMA, J Daly and all the distinguished independent scientists — those named in our discussion and others — whose research in peer-reviewed scientific journals has provided objective evidence effectively countering soundbite science hype on man-made global warming.

 

Top  ABD Home Page     Environment     Contact the ABD