Why I think AGW is a Load of Crap.

Because we are having a warm spring here in Britain, a silly fucking weather girl was on GMTV this morning spouting the usual AGW rubbish. No mention there, or on the BBC, of the inconvenient drop in global temperature this year. I doesn't fit accepted doctrine you see. Annoyed by this I started thinking about why my opinions are as they are. Here's some of it:

The IPCC is a political organization that ‘adjusts’ reports to fit policy, names authors who have opted out or objected to the way their data are used, ignores research that does not fit the AGW hypothesis, based its 2001 claims for major warming on the discredited ‘hockey-stick’, has a stated purpose of “understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change” therefore no inclination to point out that there might not be a risk, especially when that would mean no more large bungs of cash from governments and no more conferences in exotic locations.

The left has hijacked the issue, blamed it on 'evil capitalism' and now tries to use it to foist their failed ideology upon us all.

Governments have hijacked the issue and are using it as an excuse to destroy our freedoms and impose further taxes upon us.

Cooling occurred between 1940 and 1965, at precisely the time that human emissions were increasing at their greatest rate.

For the years 1998 to 2005 global average temperature did not increase (there was actually a slight decrease, though not at a rate that differs significantly from zero).

This year’s total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to drop the graph to the lowest level for the past 100 years.

The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service estimates that the polar bear population is currently at 20,000 to 25,000 bears, up from as low as 5,000-10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s. The bears also survived the Medieval Warm Period and the Holocene Maximum.

Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is at 380ppm. In the Ordovician Period it was at 4400ppm, yet this was during an ICE AGE. The IPCC says it could reach as high as 450 to 550 ppm by 2050 … that would be one tenth of what it was during the mentioned ICE AGE.

Computer models not only failed to predict the future, they can't even predict the past: if you run their software with the data from the 1970s or 1980s, and project what should happen in the 1990s or 2000s, their results have absolutely nothing to do with the known climate data for those decades.

Despite Gore’s vague claim of a ‘correlation’ as proof of AGW, the ice core data inconveniently proves that CO2 appears approx 800 years AFTER warming commences,

Even the IPCC has backed off on its claims of catastrophic sea-level rise and we are now nearly back down to the 1.8mm a year of the last few centuries i.e. the rise ongoing since the end of the last Ice Age 18,000 years ago.

At the same time as supposed AGW we’ve had warming on Pluto, Jupiter, Saturn, Triton and Mars.

There is no proof that global warming would be harmful, but plenty to the contrary: plants do a lot better as do the animals that feed on them…

Oh hell, I could just go on and on, but if you want to find out some more, read the NIPCC Report. Unlike the IPCC report the English is quite clear in this one since they're not trying to distort reality to fit ideology.