Truth, Lies and In Between

Here’s a great site that addresses:

The Economics of Global Warming:

Here’s the first two:

Why is economics important to the study of global warming?

* Predictions of global warming catastrophe are based on models that rely on economics as much as on science. If the science of greenhouse theory is right, then we can only assess its consequences by estimating future production of greenhouse gases from estimates of economic activity.

Is there anything wrong with the economics underlying warming projections?

* The economic modeling by the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is seriously flawed (The Economist called it “dangerously incompetent”), relying on economic forecasts that show much faster growth rates for developing countries than is justified. The IPCC economic scenarios show significantly greater economic growth globally than do other recognized, comparable scenarios.

Go read the rest at:
Globalwarming.org

The Public Debate of Global Warming:

Again, the first two:

Is the world in danger of plunging into a new ice age, as in the 2004 movie The Day After Tomorrow?

* No. The scenario presented in The Day After Tomorrow is physically impossible. While research does suggest that the Gulf Stream has switched on and off in the past, causing temperature drops in Europe, oceanographers are convinced that global warming does not present any such danger.

Is the world in severe danger from sea level rise?

* No. Research from Nils-Axel Mörner, professor of paleogeophysics and geodynamics at Stockholm University, demonstrates that current sea levels are within the range of sea level oscillation over the past 300 years, while the satellite data show virtually no rise over the past decade. The IPCC foresees sea-level rise of between 0.1 and 0.9 meters by 2100. The Earth experienced a sea-level rise of 0.2 meters over the past century with no noticeable ill effects.

Another study relevant to this controversy is Zwally et al. (2005), which examined changes in ice mass “from elevation changes derived from 10.5 years (Greenland) and 9 years (Antarctica) of satellite radar altimetry data from the European Remote-sensing Satellites ERS-1 and -2.” The researchers report a net contribution of the three ice sheets to sea level of +0.05 ± 0.03 millimeters per year. CO2Science.Org puts this in perspective: “At the current sea-level-equivalent ice-loss rate of 0.05 millimeters per year, it would take a full millennium to raise global sea level by just 5 cm, and it would take fully 20,000 years to raise it a single meter.”

Go read the rest at:
Globalwarming.org

And the third section:

The Science of Global Warming:

Isn’t there a scientific consensus that global warming is real and bad for us?

* There is no “scientific consensus” that global warming will cause damaging climate change. Claims that there is such a consensus mischaracterize the scientific research of bodies like the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS).

What do scientists agree on?

* Scientists do agree that: 1) global average temperature is about 0.6°Celsius—or just over 1° Fahrenheit—higher than it was a century ago; 2) atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide (CO2 ) have risen by about 30 percent over the past 200 years; and 3) carbon dioxide, like water vapor, is a greenhouse gas whose increase is likely to warm the Earth’s atmosphere.

Go read the rest at:
Globalwarming.org

Excellent stuff throughout the site.
If you are a person with a brain, go to their site and get educated against the global warming hysteria.