JCT: Bad news: Species extinction is still real. In August,
I published "Is problem really global cooling?" an article
asking if melting ice caps could be due to insufficient
evaporation of oceans due to global cooling, not warming. No
serious replies were received. Here's another tough article.

I'm a believer that establishing a world-wide UNILETS
timebank would eliminate all the unnecessary competition for
foreign markets and the associated transport costs and do
more to reduce the need for energy than all other energy
corrections combined.


>Subject: [apfn-1] Digest Number 4382
>Date: Sat Sep 30, 2006 6:26 pm (PDT)
>http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/tgr092606.htm
>LMedia Hyped Global Warming, environmental alarmism
Cold media spin cycle: A challenge to journalists who cover
global warming

Senator James Inhofe
SENATE FLOOR SPEECH DELIVERED MONDAY SEPTEMBER 25, 2006

I am going to speak today about the most media-hyped
environmental issue of all time, global warming. I have
spoken more about global warming than any other politician
in Washington today. My speech will be a bit different from
the previous seven floor speeches, as I focus not only on
the science, but on the media's coverage of climate change.

Global Warming -- just that term evokes many members in this
chamber, the media, Hollywood elites and our pop culture to
nod their heads and fret about an impending climate
disaster. As the senator who has spent more time educating
about the actual facts about global warming, I want to
address some of the recent media coverage of global warming
and Hollywood's involvement in the issue. And of course I
will also discuss former Vice President Al Gore's movie "An
Inconvenient Truth."

Since 1895, the media has alternated between global cooling
and warming scares during four separate and sometimes
overlapping time periods. From 1895 until the 1930's the
media pedaled a coming ice age. From the late 1920's until
the 1960's they warned of global warming. From the 1950's
until the 1970's they warned us again of a coming ice age.
This makes modern global warming the fourth estate's fourth
attempt to promote opposing climate change fears during the
last 100 years.

Recently, advocates of alarmism have grown increasingly
desperate to try to convince the public that global warming
is the greatest moral issue of our generation. Just last
week, the vice president of London's Royal Society sent a
chilling letter to the media encouraging them to stifle the
voices of scientists skeptical of climate alarmism.
During the past year, the American people have been served
up an unprecedented parade of environmental alarmism by the
media and entertainment industry, which link every possible
weather event to global warming. The year 2006 saw many
major organs of the media dismiss any pretense of balance
and objectivity on climate change coverage and instead
crossed squarely into global warming advocacy.

SUMMARY OF LATEST DEVELOPMENTS OF MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING
HOCKEY STICK

First, I would like to summarize some of the recent
developments in the controversy over whether or not humans
have created a climate catastrophe. One of the key aspects
that the United Nations, environmental groups and the media
have promoted as the "smoking gun" of proof of catastrophic
global warming is the so-called 'hockey stick' temperature
graph by climate scientist Michael Mann and his colleagues.

This graph purported to show that temperatures in the
Northern Hemisphere remained relatively stable over 900
years, then spiked upward in the 20th century presumably due
to human activity. Mann, who also co-publishes a global
warming propaganda blog reportedly set up with the help of
an environmental group, had his "Hockey Stick" come under
severe scrutiny.

The "hockey stick" was completely and thoroughly broken once
and for all in 2006. Several years ago, two Canadian
researchers tore apart the statistical foundation for the
hockey stick. In 2006, both the National Academy of Sciences
and an independent researcher further refuted the foundation
of the "hockey stick." ("Hockey Stick" is broken)

The National Academy of Sciences report reaffirmed the
existence of the Medieval Warm Period from about 900 AD to
1300 AD and the Little Ice Age from about 1500 to 1850. Both
of these periods occurred long before the invention of the
SUV or human industrial activity could have possibly
impacted the Earth's climate. In fact, scientists believe
the Earth was warmer than today during the Medieval Warm
Period, when the Vikings grew crops in Greenland.

Climate alarmists have been attempting to erase the
inconvenient Medieval Warm Period from the Earth's climate
history for at least a decade. David Deming, an assistant
professor at the University of Oklahoma's College of
Geosciences, can testify first hand about this effort.

Dr. Deming was welcomed into the close-knit group of global
warming believers after he published a paper in 1995 that
noted some warming in the 20th century. Deming says he was
subsequently contacted by a prominent global warming
alarmist and told point blank "We have to get rid of the
Medieval Warm Period." When the "Hockey Stick" first
appeared in 1998, it did just that.

END OF LITTLE ICE AGE MEANS WARMING

The media have missed the big pieces of the puzzle when it
comes to the Earth's temperatures and mankind's carbon
dioxide (C02) emissions. It is very simplistic to feign
horror and say the one degree Fahrenheit temperature
increase during the 20th century means we are all doomed.
First of all, the one degree Fahrenheit rise coincided with
the greatest advancement of living standards, life
expectancy, food production and human health in the history
of our planet. So it is hard to argue that the global
warming we experienced in the 20th century was somehow
negative or part of a catastrophic trend.

Second, what the climate alarmists and their advocates in
the media have continued to ignore is the fact that the
Little Ice Age, which resulted in harsh winters which froze
New York Harbor and caused untold deaths, ended about 1850.
So trying to prove man-made global warming by comparing the
well-known fact that today's temperatures are warmer than
during the Little Ice Age is akin to comparing summer to
winter to show a catastrophic temperature trend.

In addition, something that the media almost never addresses
are the holes in the theory that C02 has been the driving
force in global warming.

Alarmists fail to adequately explain why temperatures began
warming at the end of the Little Ice Age in about 1850, long
before man-made CO2 emissions could have impacted the
climate. Then about 1940, just as man-made CO2 emissions
rose sharply, the temperatures began a decline that lasted
until the 1970's, prompting the media and many scientists to
fear a coming ice age.

Let me repeat, temperatures got colder after C02 emissions
exploded. If C02 is the driving force of global climate
change, why do so many in the media ignore the many
skeptical scientists who cite these rather obvious
inconvenient truths?

SIXTY SCIENTISTS

My skeptical views on man-made catastrophic global warming
have only strengthened as new science comes in. There have
been recent findings in peer-reviewed literature over the
last few years showing that the Antarctic is getting colder
and the ice is growing and a new study in Geophysical
Research Letters found that the sun was responsible for 50%
of 20th century warming.

Recently, many scientists, including a leading member of the
Russian Academy of Sciences, predicted long-term global
cooling may be on the horizon due to a projected decrease in
the sun's output.

A letter sent to the Canadian Prime Minister on April 6 of
this year by 60 prominent scientists who question the basis
for climate alarmism, clearly explains the current state of
scientific knowledge on global warming.

( The 60 scientists wrote:)
"If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about
climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we
would have concluded it was not necessary."

The letter also noted:
"'Climate change is real' is a meaningless phrase used
repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a
climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause.
Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes
occur all the time due to natural causes and the human
impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this
natural 'noise.'"

COMPUTER MODELS THREATEN EARTH

One of the ways alarmists have pounded this mantra of
"consensus" on global warming into our pop culture is
through the use of computer models which project future
calamity. But the science is simply not there to place so
much faith in scary computer model scenarios which
extrapolate the current and projected buildup of greenhouse
gases in the atmosphere and conclude that the planet faces
certain doom.

Dr. Vincent Gray, a research scientist and a 2001 reviewer
with the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) has noted,
"The effects of aerosols, and their uncertainties, are such
as to nullify completely the reliability of any of the
climate models."

Earlier this year, the director of the International Arctic
Research Center in Fairbanks Alaska, testified to Congress
that highly publicized climate models showing a disappearing
Arctic were nothing more than "science fiction."

In fact, after years of hearing about the computer generated
scary scenarios about the future of our planet, I now
believe that the greatest climate threat we face may be
coming from alarmist computer models. This threat is
originating from the software installed on the hard drives
of the publicity seeking climate modelers.

It is long past the time for us to separate climate change
fact from hysteria.

KYOTO: ECONOMIC PAIN FOR NO CLIMATE GAIN

One final point on the science of climate change: I am
approached by many in the media and others who ask, "What if
you are wrong to doubt the dire global warming predictions?
Will you be able to live with yourself for opposing the
Kyoto Protocol?"

My answer is blunt. The history of the modern environmental
movement is chock full of predictions of doom that never
came true. We have all heard the dire predictions about the
threat of overpopulation, resource scarcity, mass
starvation, and the projected death of our oceans. None of
these predictions came true, yet it never stopped the
doomsayers from continuing to predict a dire environmental
future.

JCT: Extinction of species, if not oceans? We can still play
safe.

The more the eco-doomsayers' predictions fail, the more the
eco-doomsayers predict. These failed predictions are just
one reason I respect the serious scientists out there today
debunking the latest scaremongering on climate change.

Scientists like MIT's Richard Lindzen, former Colorado State
climatologist Roger Pielke, Sr., the University of Alabama's
Roy Spencer and John Christy, Virginia State Climatologist
Patrick Michaels, Colorado State University's William Gray,
atmospheric physicist S. Fred Singer, Willie Soon of the
Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, Oregon State
climatologist George Taylor and astrophysicist Sallie
Baliunas, to name a few.

But more importantly, it is the global warming alarmists who
should be asked the question -- "What if they are correct
about man-made catastrophic global warming?" -- because they
have come up with no meaningful solution to their supposed
climate crisis in the two decades that they have been hyping
this issue.

If the alarmists truly believe that man-made greenhouse gas
emissions are dooming the planet, then they must face up to
the fact that symbolism does not solve a supposed climate
crisis.

The alarmists freely concede that the Kyoto Protocol, even
if fully ratified and complied with, would not have any
meaningful impact on global temperatures. And keep in mind
that Kyoto is not even close to being complied with by many
of the nations that ratified it, including 13 of the EU-15
nations that are not going to meet their emission reduction
promises.

Many of the nations that ratified Kyoto are now realizing
what I have been saying all along:

The Kyoto Protocol is a lot of economic pain for no climate
gain.

JCT: Financial pain... accounting malfunction, not real pain

Legislation that has been proposed in this chamber would
have even less of a temperature effect than Kyoto's
undetectable impact. And more recently, global warming
alarmists and the media have been praising California for
taking action to limit C02. But here again: This costly
feel-good California measure, which is actually far less
severe than Kyoto, will have no impact on the climate --
only the economy.

Symbolism does not solve a climate crisis.

In addition, we now have many environmentalists and
Hollywood celebrities, like Laurie David, who have been
advocating measures like changing standard light bulbs in
your home to fluorescents to help avert global warming.
Changing to more energy-efficient light bulbs is a fine
thing to do, but to somehow imply we can avert a climate
disaster by these actions is absurd.

Once again, symbolism does not solve a climate crisis.

But this symbolism may be hiding a dark side. While
greenhouse gas limiting proposals may cost the
industrialized West trillions of dollars, it is the effect
on the developing world's poor that is being lost in this
debate.

The Kyoto Protocol's post 2012 agenda which mandates that
the developing world be subjected to restrictions on
greenhouse gases could have the potential to severely
restrict development in regions of the world like Africa,
Asia and South America -- where some of the Earth's most
energy-deprived people currently reside.

Expanding basic necessities like running water and
electricity in the developing world are seen by many in the
green movement as a threat to the planet's health that must
be avoided.

Energy poverty equals a life of back-breaking poverty and
premature death.

If we allow scientifically unfounded fears of global warming
to influence policy makers to restrict future energy
production and the creation of basic infrastructure in the
developing world -- billions of people will continue to
suffer.

Last week my committee heard testimony from Danish
statistician Bjorn Lomborg, who was once a committed left-
wing environmentalist until he realized that so much of what
that movement preached was based on bad science. Lomborg
wrote a book called "The Skeptical Environmentalist" and has
organized some of the world's top Nobel Laureates to form
the 2004 "Copenhagen Consensus" which ranked the world's
most pressing problems. (Copenhagen Consensus)

And guess what?

They placed global warming at the bottom of the list in
terms of our planet's priorities. The "Copenhagen Consensus"
found that the most important priorities of our planet
included: combating disease, stopping malaria, securing
clean water, and building infrastructure to help lift the
developing nations out of poverty.

I have made many trips to Africa, and once you see the
devastating poverty that has a grip on that continent, you
quickly realize that fears about global warming are severely
misguided.

I firmly believe that when the history of our era is
written, future generations will look back with puzzlement
and wonder why we spent so much time and effort on global
warming fears and pointless solutions like the Kyoto
Protocol.

French President Jacques Chirac provided the key clue as to
why so many in the international community still revere the
Kyoto Protocol, who in 2000 said Kyoto represents "the first
component of an authentic global governance."

Furthermore, if your goal is to limit C02 emissions, the
only effective way to go about it is the use of cleaner,
more efficient technologies that will meet the energy
demands of this century and beyond.

JCT: And only social currencies make it affordable.

The Bush administration and my Environment and Public Works
Committee have been engaged in these efforts as we work to
expand nuclear power and promote the Asia-Pacific
Partnership. This partnership stresses the sharing of new
technology among member nations including three of the
world's top 10 emitters -- China, India and North Korea --
all of whom are exempt from Kyoto.

CONTINUED


--
Abolitionist Slave Leader John C."The Banking Systems Engineer" Turmel
for UNILETS interest-free time-based currency in U.N. resolution C6
to Governments in the http://www.un.org/millennium/declaration.htm
http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel 519-753-0645 USENET: can.politics