Global warming scam
Oh sorry, I know I’ve covered this topic before but now more and more evidence is surfacing that the alleged global warming is a scam. I’m not just referring to the intercepted emails of CRU where scientist admit to (at least) manipulate their measurements. I’ve written about the greatest scam in history around two years ago. Early 2008 I’ve linked to a skeptic russian article that predicts a cold-spell. In 2009 there was a report that the antarctic ice is growing instead of melting. For those who are unaware: the northpole is just ice floating in water. When the northpole melts the water-level will not rise. Antarctica, however, is land with ice on top of it. When the ice on Antarctica melts it will influence the water-level.
It was hard to find good alternative research by scientist who don’t support the global warming theory. But now “Popular Technology” has compiled a list of 450 peer-reviewed scientific papers that criticize the global warming lobby (click on the PDF links). I’ve only read a few so far but some of these are really good. The first one (“A 2000-year global temperature reconstruction based on non-treering proxies“) shows that the way in which the global temperature is often reconstructed (using treerings) appears to be invalid for longer periods in history. This is done by using alternative ways to determine the global temperature. There are two periods in history called the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) and the Little Ice Age (LIA) that show up from many ways to determine the temperature in history except for the treering method… a very good read for those long hot winternights…
December 1st, 2009 at 14:04
OMG! Quick, call Al Gore! Ig he’s making a fool of himself, I’m sure he will want to hear about it!
December 1st, 2009 at 22:51
Het valt me tegen dat je niet over Ram6 (moderne spelling) blogt.
En waarom zijn alle links zo raar wazig? Met CSS aan het klooien?
December 1st, 2009 at 23:46
At your service…
en inderdaad.. ik was met CSS aan het klooien… Nu alleen nog in de headers… links waren inderdaad wazig. Ik heb een multifocale bril aangeschaft om te compenseren maar ik had beter de CSS weer kunnen herstellen… done.