This Week's Headlines (Continued)

Newspapers Bristle at Environmentalism Being Mocked in New Animated TV Show

Is Global Warming Responsible for Slow Tornado Season?

LA's Big Burn Exposed

Obama's Solution for the Car Companies: Make More Expensive Cars Nobody Wants

Gaseous Emissions

China (World's Biggest Polluter) Says Rich Nations Must Cut Emissions 40 Percent

Gore Calls on World Business Leaders to Push for Climate Deal

The Climate Industrial Complex

PJTV Video: Exposing the Myths of Our Energy Supply and Environment (Video)

Why I Am a Climate Realist

CFC's Responsible for ozone depletion?

GreenWatch reader Wallace wrote in this week, questioning what has become the common assumption that CFC (chlorofluorocarbons) deplete the ozone layer.

"Thank you for bringing up the subject of CFC propelled medications in your article.

This is a serious health problem for a great many people. Not only are the new inhalers less effective, they cause irritation that is not good for the patient and they are much more expensive.

The “do-gooders” in congress are causing egregious harm to those who need the inhalers and they are doing it absolutely needlessly. They are too proud to admit what many of us now know. CFC’s do not harm the “ozone layer” because they can never reach it. Scientists now know that the thinning of the ozone at the poles is a direct result of material ejected from the sun in solar flares entering the atmosphere at the Earth’s magnetic poles combined with the fact that less ozone is produced in polar regions.

The so called “ozone layer” (actually just an area of higher ozone levels) is produced by radiation from the sun interacting with oxygen (O2) in the outer atmosphere. The ozone molecules then migrate down to lower levels because they are heavier than O2 molecules. Eventually they disintegrate before they reach lower levels because ozone is unstable. Two ozone (O3) molecules will react to make three O2 molecules or they will react with some other molecule, like chlorine (which is constantly being released from the oceans).

The stratosphere (so named because it lacks the strong currents of the troposphere and therefore “stratifies”) tends to separate air into its constituent gases in layers. Carbon dioxide, for example, is a little heavier than oxygen (O2) and nitrogen (N2) molecules (1.38 times as heavy as O2) and its presence (as a percentage) declines with altitude until it becomes undetectable. This is important because CFC molecules are much heavier than carbon dioxide. In fact, the most common CFC (R-12) is almost THREE TIMES as heavy as carbon dioxide and nearly FOUR TIMES heavier than oxygen (O2) MOLECULES.

If carbon dioxide can’t get up to the ozone layer, how can the heavier CFC’s get there? In fact, CFC’s have never been detected at those high altitudes.

CFC’s are still some of the very best refrigerants and their being phased out has cost the public billions of dollars.

Just one more way that our Congress is looking out for our best interest!"

(PG): I cannot vouch for the veracity of Wallace's claims, but I am intrigued. Any GreenWatch readers know more about this issue? Email me at greenwatchamericaATgmailDOTcom.

This Week's Headlines

Science Says Climate Change Isn't Fueling Hurricanes

Alaskan Land Rising Faster than Alaskan Sea

Researchers Scale Back Forecast of Sea Level Rise

EPA Focus on Greenhouse Gasses Over Conventional Pollutants Draws Concern

Indiana Says 'No Thanks' to Cap-And-Trade

Arctic Cooling Has Begun

Did Arctic Warming Ever Start? (Arctic non-warming since 1958)

From the "you have got to be kidding me" department: Global Warming May Exceed Infections as Health Threat

Save the Polar Bear: Hysteria and Myth

Doctor's Health Warning on Climate Change

What To Expect From Renewable Energy

Via Blowing Our Tax Dollars on Windfarms, Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann of Minnesota details why President Obama's plan to make the U.S. more like Spain when it comes to renewable energy subsidies and jobs will wind up an economic disaster:

This Week's Headlines

How About A Real Public Debate?

Antarctic Sea Ice Only Melting Where Manned Stations Located

Honolulu's Switch the Hybrid Buses stalled by Reality of Costs

Obama's Stance on Polar Bears Identical to Bush's, Palin's

Sea Salt Holds Clues to Climate Change

North Atlantic Ocean Warming Not Due to Climate Change

Is the Globe Warming or Cooling?

A License to Tell Warming Lies

More Bigger Spiders May Be In Store

Just What is Waxman-Markey For?

Quote of the Week

AA Gill in his review of the English Restaurant Fino:

"The truth is, environmentalists are just not attractive. They’re not winning, engaging, amusing or empathetic. They are ranty, repetitive, patronising, demanding, deaf, weirdly bonkers and smelly. Environmentalists are the nutters with degrees in composting who sit next to you on the bus. But that’s not their real impediment. The real killer thing is the schadenfreude: the naked, transparent, hand-rubbing glee with which they pass on every shame, sadness and terror. No disaster is too appalling or imminent that the green movement can’t caper and keen with a messianic glee."

Please, please read the whole thing.

GreenWatch Newsletter 26

Featured Story:

A story hit the wire this week that shattered the conventional wisdom scientists had been peddling for years, about a dramatic climatic event that allegedly led to the extinction of the dominant species on the planet. This version of events had become common knowledge, from the most dedicated scientists to Hollywood to children. And now, it seems, it could all be wrong:

The demise of the dinosaurs probably occurred 300,000 years after a giant meteor struck what is now Mexico, scientists said, casting doubt on a popular theory that the impact triggered a mass extinction.

What?! As a child, I was (to state it lightly) obsessed with dinosaurs, to the point where the first word I ever read was "Brontosaurus." And for as long as I can remember, the devastating impact of that Mexican meteor was the generally accepted reason for the dinosaur's extinction. But now, thanks to advances in science, we're learning more about the natural processes that led to the extinction.

And you know what? The authors of this study aren't being ostracized, bullied and called "deniers." Pro-meteor groups aren't demanding the scientists lose their funding and be regarded as the lunatic fringe. They are simply using the best tools at their disposal to discover the scientific truth of the situation.

There was another recently released report which this time cast some doubt on the impacts of global warming - specifically whether or not the historically low water levels in the Great Lakes were caused by human activities. Green Groups frequently cited the lower levels as a result of human activity and a portent of things to come. Henry Payne at Planet Gore offers an assortment of news stories that claim just this:

April, 2003, Detroit News: "A group of scientists predicted that global warming will wreak havoc on the Great Lakes region . . . the largest single concentration of fresh water in the world."

October, 2003, Detroit Free Press: "The idea that warming has benefits may be a particularly tough sell to Michiganders already disturbed by what happens when the Great Lakes drop near historic lows."

April, 2007, Detroit News: "Data from a new United Nations report on climate change . . . strengthens scientific opinion that Michigan will see other dramatic effects in the coming decades: lower Great Lakes water levels, a dramatically receding Lake St. Clair. . . . "

May, 2008, Detroit News: "A report released by an environmental group warns that unless Congress acts to curb global warming, Great Lakes water levels will drop up to 3 feet; beaches will close more often, and fish and animal populations will decline."

It turns out these warnings and reports were almost entirely wrong:

A steady drop in water levels in Lake Michigan/Huron over the first half of this decade resulted from natural causes, not man-made ones, according to U.S. and Canadian researchers, noting that the past 18 months of rising waters could be an indication the lakes are headed back to normal levels.

Researchers working for the International Joint Commission this week released the findings of a two-year study on the St. Clair River and the amount of water running through it out of Lake Michigan/Huron. The study was launched to answer questions by lake shore residents who had watched the steady drop of water levels in recent years.

The study found that Mother Nature has been behind the changes under way in the last eight years. "It's not ongoing; it has definitely stabilized," said Ted Yuzyk, the Canadian co-chair of the study board, who added the changes have reversed in the last 18 to 24 months. "And it's not human driven. This is more natural."

This was a two-year, comprehensive study (you can read the PDF here) with no political bias except to find the truth. Sadly, and predictably, green groups were up in arms over it.

The commission is not calling for any corrective action in the Lake Huron-St. Clair River now. And that's not sitting well with members of the Canadian environmental group GBA Foundation, which funded its own study in 2004 which put the blame on human activity.

"The fact that (the report) completely dismisses such an enormous increase in outflow and recommends that nothing be done about it is very disturbing," said Roy Schatz, GBA's founding president, in a press release.

The report does not completely dismiss the enormous increase in outflow - it attributes it to a natural cause, using scientific evidence. It is no different than the new report on the dinosaur extinction, except that more people were more certain for a longer time that the dinosaurs were, in fact, killed by that meteor and the effects of its impact than have ever been certain about man made global warming.

For science to work properly, it needs to be allowed to be wrong, so that scientists can learn from their mistakes. The problem with the Radical Green Movement is that it can't ever allow for the possibility that it could be wrong. The whole movement is based on the necessity of immediate action. That leaves them little choice but to attack and belittle deniers; which is as unscientific a response as there is.

We Need Your Help!

We need your help to spread our message far and wide. Now signing up for this newsletter is easier than ever. Forward this email or direct ten of your friends to this webpage, where they can sign up to receive the newsletter themselves. We're also on facebook and twitter.

More Headlines:

Seeking to Save the Planet, With a Thesaurus

Global Sea Ice Nears Record High

Is New Zealand Becoming the Next Denier Nation?

Another Part of Global Warming Theory Toppled

Cosmic Rays Too Wimpy to Influence Climate?

Read more headlines and the Quote of the Week on the GreenWatchBlog.

The Reader's Corner:

Write to the Reader's Corner at GreenWatchAmerica@gmail.com. Be sure to include your name and where you're from.

Margaret S. in CA: Just thought it worth mentioning that two weeks ago there were two cold temperature records broken at March Air Base in Riverside, CA. Last week, interestingly, there was one high temperature record broken. And this week there has been another cold record broken.

I've lived around the Inland Empire area in Southern California most of the time since 1942. Through the 40s and 50s the summer temperatures were almost always higher than they are in more recent years since the massive development has raised the normal summer daytime humidity from a typical 9 percent in the late 40s to about 20 percent now. The number of days with temperature readings above 100 are very few compared to the earlier decades.

I remember the folks coming back to work after lunch on June 14, 1959 in San Bernardino telling us that the temperature was 114. That never happens any more.

Something suspicious that's happening during the past year or two is that the official daytime summer temperature in Banning, where I live, has stopped being a few degrees under the readings of my outdoor thermometers and started being a few degrees higher. They used to report what my mother called "chamber of commerce" temperatures---that moderated undesirable extremes. Now they're apparently on the Gore bandwagon and inflating them.

Cy H, PA: I have read historical books regarding global climate. Earth has been in warming/cooling cycles since man has recorded. Why are we so alarmed now when history tells us it is just a cycle. Alarmists are trying to have us waste funds to accomplish something that does not need done.

Al Gore started this latest round of "Global Warming" talk and he needs to read history books.

Regarding last week's featured story, Alida L. writes: I want to know how it's possible/legal/moral to disallow someone a chance to speak. Mr. Gore must be so proud.

Have something to say? Write to the Reader's Corner at GreenWatchAmerica@gmail.com.

Most Egregious Claim of the Week:

The most egregious claim this week isn't a claim at all, but rather an egregious judicial action that will hurt farms and farm workers throughout California. A judge ruled that water pumps in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta be shut off due to a US Fish and Wildlife Service report which declared the delta smelt a threatened species of fish.

The problem here is that nobody knows if turning off the pumps will have any effect at all on the delta smelt population. What they do know is that shutting off the pumps will have a dramatic impact on the agricultural business. Less food will be produced and farm workers will lose their jobs.

And this, in a nutshell, is the core of our problem with the Radical Green Movement. Al Gore and the Goracles want us to make dramatic sacrifices to our economic well-being in order to maybe counteract a possibly man-made phenomenon that may or may not actually be happening. And they don't care who they hurt in the process.

Quote of the Week

“One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under threat that the full force of the White House press corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight.”

-Tom Lauria, lawyer representing the investment firm Perella Weinberg.

This Week's Headlines

Climate Model Predictions: It's Time For a Reality Check

Shock: Global Temperatures Driven By US Postage Charges?

Women, Children, Feeling Effects of Climate Change?

AARI Predicts Arctic Cooling/Ice Recovery to Continue

Lawns Will Become Sign of Moral Decadence Because of Climate Change?

Oh Dear God, Please Don't Tell Me Chocolate is Killing the Planet!

And finally:

New York Rode Out Big Wave in 300 B.C.

But how could that happen, 2200 years before the Industrial Revolution?

No truth to the report that it looked just like this, minus the buildings:

GreenWatch Newsletter 25 (April 27, 2009)

Featured Story:

The Democrats are proposing a bill aimed at limiting carbon dioxide and other pollutants linked to Global Warming. Al Gore testified before a hearing of the Energy and Commerce committee and was up to his usual shenanigans.

But this time he had some help from House Democrats. Republicans pushed for Lord Christopher Monckton, former science advisor to Margaret Thatcher and global warming denier, to testify along with Mr. Gore at the hearing last Friday. The democrats refused to allow Lord Monckton to testify. Again, Gore and the Democrats chose to muzzle dissent rather than allow a fair and open debate of the issues.

But can you really blame them? Mr. Gore knows that public sentiment has turned against his pet cause/cash cow. Recent polling data found that just 34%, barely one in three Americans believe global warming is caused by human activity.

The reason that sentiment has turned so swiftly against Gore and his Goracles is simple: He's wrong. Look at the graph at the top of this article. Temperatures have been declining for the last 10 years, while CO2 emissions have continued to climb. Gore has conveniently ignored the fact that reality has spent the last ten years defying his "settled science." The more people hear the holes in the global warming theory, the more apt they are to reject the "solutions" proposed by Gore and Co. That's why they refused to allow Monckton to testify.

GreenWatch reader Jean Jones alerted me to this fascinating video explaining the Svensmark Cosmic Ray Global Cooling theory from scientist Martin Enghoff of the Danish Space Institute.

And it's not just Republicans who have concerns about this bill. Visit the blog to watch a leading Democrat voice his concerns about some of the industry destroying results this bill could have.

From now on, the "Quote of the Week" can be read on the GreenWatch blog. Click here to read a great zinger from Newt Gingrich.

More Headlines:

Selling the Green Economy

Bjorn Lomborg: Don't Waste Time Cutting Emissions

Gingrich: Climate Bill Will Punish Americans

Prince Charles to Leave 53 Ton Carbon Footprint on "Green Initiative" Tour

NBC's Today Warns of Doom and Gloom Icecap Melt

Read more headlines on the GreenWatch Blog.

The Reader's Corner:

The Reader's Corner is your chance to sound off on issues related to global warming. Found an interesting article you'd like us to cover? Don't like something we wrote in the featured story? Want to tell Al Gore where he can shove his latest powerpoint presentation? Email us at GreenWatchAmerica@gmail.com. Please include your name and where you're from.

James F. Lea: "Offshore Oil: Without energy our economy will tank regardless of horrendous effects of overspending by Government. The administration decries offshore oil as destroying environment.

"When I took my Dad on a party fishing boat off the Texas Gulf coast, they ONLY stopped at offshore platforms some miles offshore. We would stop almost at arms length to the platforms before dropping lines. It was the only place there were fish and plenty of them. The seaweed , crustaceans, smaller fish, etc around the platforms make them fish generators. Far for destroying the environment. Try it.. you will see."

George McClellan: "I just discovered your blogspot, put the link in my 'favorites' and moved it to the top of the list. Can't tell you how pleased I am to see a concerted effort to counter the lies and distortions of the left. This isn't about climate change; it's about acquiring power, just as gun control isn't about guns, but about control. Over the past decades we have been subjected to more and more attempts to tell us what we can and cannot do. This goes even to smoking bans in various places, which may seem innocuous in itself, but which may spread to a ban on smoking in our homes. I'm a non-smoker, incidently. However, the handwriting is on the wall and the 'liberals' are on the march. They want a completely controlled population, and it seems that we've been bending to their will. It's time to stop them. Keep up the good work."

And Cyndi Pavia offers up some valuable advice for all of us who have to deal with Al Gore devotees: "I've tried a little experiment and had results with some potential. I've challenged some "greenies" who believes in made made climate change. I ask them if they've given up their home and car air conditioners, their clothes dryer, their dishwasher, their hair dryer, and whatever else I can think of that involves the convenient use of electricity. None so far have. I point out its something that they can do NOW to save the planet and that if all the multitudes of people who believe in man made climate change did it NOW, they would make a HUGE IMPACT without having to wiat for Obama to impose laws! Boy oh boy, does it take the wind out of their sails. If they defend not giving up all those things, and leading by example, then they are hypocrites (which we know is only slightly less bad than being a racist!). At a minimum, in precious few cases, it might actually make them THINK for a moment. Maybe we should spread the word that we should challenge any and every 'greenie' we have the displeasure of being preached to by. I think this idea has potential. Please give it some thought."

Most Egregious Claim of the Week:

Henry Waxman, Democrat Representative from California. Following Mr. Gingrich's testimony, Mr. Waxman accused Gingrich of using more of the "old scare tactics." He continued, "When American people hear the statements you have made today, they get scared, which I think is exactly what is intended."

What a joke. Mr. Waxman, if what Gingrich said is just more "scare tactics" then pray tell sir, what would you call a movement that warned of billions of deaths, a billion homeless, devastated continents, killer jellyfish, alligators in the Thames, the bubonic plague, cannibalism, the earth exploding (opens PDF file), the spread of HIV, the death of the Loch Ness monster, and extremely severe acne?

Edited by Patrick Gallagher

Published by Richard Vigilante