Global Warming Refuted By Facts
o,nob
October 23 2009
Why are the Democrats so determined to get their
so-called cap and trade law passed now?
Climatologists have reported carbon dioxide has
increased in the atmosphere, yet there has been a
cooling trend over the past decade. They are now
forecasting a continued cooling trend for at least
the next two decades.
The cooling trend with higher carbon dioxide
contradicts the current global warming theory
advocated by Al Gore and those pushing this cap
and trade bill. So far no one has offered a
reasonable explanation for this cooling trend in
spite of higher carbon dioxide using their global
warming theory.
There is scientific data that correlates with our
current global cooling trend. That data is based
on sun spots. During the past decade, sunspot
activity has been decreasing to the current state
of none currently being detected. This also
correlates with historical data associated with
warming and cooling trends.
It seems to me Democrats are not truly interested
in considering scientific facts which refute their
argument for carbon dioxide. Could it be they are
more interested in any theory and bill that will
increase their control and involvement in our
daily lives?
WILLIAM HADLEY, Yuma
http://www.yumasun.com/opinion/cooling-53720-trend-global.html
Warmest Regards
Bon_0
"I care about the environment (I grew up in a
solar house) and think there are a dozen good
reasons why we should burn less fossil fuels,
but.global warming is not one of them."
Nir Shaviv, Israeli physicist 2009
Surfer
>An interesting letter .
>October 23 2009
>
>Why are the Democrats so determined to get their
>so-called cap and trade law passed now?
>
>
>Climatologists have reported carbon dioxide has
>increased in the atmosphere, yet there has been a
>cooling trend over the past decade.
>
Now why don't I trust this unsubstantiated claim?
Perhaps its because I don't trust unsubstantiated claims in general.
But in addition, Arctic sea ice extent has continued to decrease
during the past decade.
See graph at right:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/index.html
Larger image here:
http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/n_plot_hires.png
Krudd the Dud
>>An interesting letter .
>>October 23 2009
>>
>>Why are the Democrats so determined to get their
>>so-called cap and trade law passed now?
>>
>>
>>Climatologists have reported carbon dioxide has
>>increased in the atmosphere, yet there has been a
>>cooling trend over the past decade.
>>
>Now why don't I trust this unsubstantiated claim?
>Perhaps its because I don't trust unsubstantiated claims in general.
Could you substantiate that please?
FRANKIE LEE
***How to admit Warming global is a fake theory since so many things
are at stake?
o.no.b
"Surfer" <n...@spam.net> wrote in message
news:r0l8e51vuj9s1anvb...@4ax.com...
Yes indeed!
Arctic Melting More Rapidly Than Expected
Urgent Action On Climate Change Required.
2 May 2008
The Arctic ocean is warming up, icebergs are
growing scarcer and in some places the seals are
finding the water too hot, according to a report
to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consul
Ifft, at Bergen, Norway. Reports from fishermen,
seal hunters and explorers, he declared, all point
to a radical change in climate conditions and
hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic
zone.
Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any
ice has been met with as far north as 81 degrees
29 minutes. Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters
showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great
masses of ice have been replaced by moraines of
earth and stones, the report continued, while at
many points well known glaciers have entirely
disappeared.
Very few seals and no white fish are found in the
eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and
smelts, which have never before ventured so far
north, are being encountered in the old seal
fishing grounds.
A RealClimate blogger?
No, that was the US Weather Bureau in 1922.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/05/02/a_tale_of_two_thermometers/print.html
Last Post
> On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 10:38:56 +1100, "o,nob" <t...@dd.com> wrote:
> >An interesting letter .
> >October 23 2009
>
> >Why are the Democrats so determined to get their
> >so-called cap and trade law passed now?
>
> >Climatologists have reported carbon dioxide has
> >increased in the atmosphere, yet there has been a
> >cooling trend over the past decade.
>
> Now why don't I trust this unsubstantiated claim?
> Perhaps its because I don't trust unsubstantiated
claims in general.
•• That is because your claims are false so you
expect others to be the same
> But in addition, Arctic sea ice extent has continued to decrease
> during the past decade.
•• Dead wrong, but you are accustomed to that.
–– ––
In real science the burden of proof is always on
the proposer, never on the sceptics. So far
neither IPCC nor anyone else has provided one
iota of valid data for global warming nor have
they provided data that climate change is being
effected by commerce and industry, and not by
natural phenomena.
kangarooistan
salt tax , except it will be run by those who OWN the " rights " to
emmit carbon , check out the financial pages in newspapers to see how
enthusiatic some financial experts are , they openly claim it WILL be
more profitable and BIGGER than the oil industry
The consumer will pay , exactly like the salt tax , everybody will be
caught in their scam
Taxation of salt in India was greatly increased when the British East
India Company began to establish its rule over provinces in India. In
1835, special taxes were imposed on Indian salt to facilitate its
import. This paid huge dividends for the traders of the British East
India Company. When the Crown took over the administration of India
from the Company in 1858, the taxes were not repealed.
The stringent salt taxes imposed by the British were vehemently
condemned by the Indian public. In 1885, at the first session of the
Indian National Congress in Bombay, a prominent Congress Leader
S.A.Swaminatha Iyer raised the issue of the salt tax[1]. There were
further protests throughout the late 19th and early 20th centuries
culminating in Mahatma Gandhi's Salt Satyagraha in 1930.
In the eastern coast, salt could be obtained extensively along the
coast of Orissa[2]. The salt produced by the salt pans called khalaris
in Oriya is of the finest quality in all India[2]. There has always
been a demand for Orissa salt in Bengal[2].
When the British took over the administration of Bengal, they too
felt its need and traded for salt. Gradually they monopolized Orissa
salt all over Bengal[2]. To check smuggling and illegal
transportation, they sent armies into Orissa resulting in the conquest
of Orissa in 1803[2].
Since the introduction of the first taxes on salt by the British East
India Company, the laws have been subjected to fervent criticism. The
Chamber of Commerce in Bristol was one of the first to submit a
petition opposing the Salt tax:
The price to the consumer here [in England] is but about 30s per
ton instead of 20 pounds per ton as in India; and if it were necessary
to abolish the Salt tax at home some years since it appears to your
petitioners that the millions of her Majesty's subjects of India have
a much stronger claim for remission in their case, wretchedly poor as
they are, and essentially necessary as salt is to their daily
sustenance, and to the prevention of disease in such a climate[7]
The Salt Tax was criticized at a public meeting at Cuttack in February
1888. In the first session of the Indian National Congress held in
1885 in Bombay, a prominent Congress member, S.A. Swaminatha Iyer
pleaded against the salt tax[8][9][10].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_British_salt_tax_in_India
The Salt Tax was criticized at a public meeting at Cuttack in February
1888. In the first session of the Indian National Congress held in
1885 in Bombay, a prominent Congress member, S.A. Swaminatha Iyer
pleaded against the salt tax[8][9][10].
It would be unjust and unrighteous if the tax on salt should be
increased. It is a necessary article both for human as well as animal
well-being... it would be bad policy and a retrograde movement to
raise the tax, especially at a time when the poor millions of India
are anxiously looking forward for a further reduction of the tax....
As any increase, therefore, of this tax will fall heavily upon the
masses of the people of the land, I would strongly urge upon the
attention of this Congress the necessity of its entering its strong
protest against any attempt on the part of Government to raise the tax
on salt[1]
At the Allahabad session of the Indian National Congress in 1888,
Narayan Vishnu, a delegate from Poona vehemently opposed the Indian
Salt Act. A resolution was passed wherein the delegates present
declared 'That this Congress do put on record its disapproval of the
recent enhancement of the salt tax as involving a perceptible increase
to the burden of the poorer classes, as also the 'partial adoption, in
a time of peace and plenty, of the of the only financial reserve of
the Empire.' The 1892 session at Allahabad concluded thus: '... We do
not know when the tax will be reduced. So that there is every
necessity for our repeating this prayer in the interests of the
masses, and we earnestly hope that it will he granted before long'. A
similar sort of protest was also issued at the Congress session at
Ahmedabad.
The Salt Tax was also protested by eminent people like Dadabhai
Naoroji. On August 14, 1894, he thundered in the House of Commons:
Then the Salt Tax, the most cruel Revenue imposed in any civilised
country provided Rs. 8,600,000/- and that with the opium 'formed the
bulk of the revenue of India, which was drawn from the wretchedness of
the people.... It mattered not what the State received was called -
tax, rent, revenue, or by any other name they liked - the simple fact
of the matter was, that out of a certain annual national production
the State took a certain portion. Now it would not also matter much
about the portion taken by the State if that portion, as in this
country, returned to people themselves, from whom it was raised. But
the misfortune and the evil was that much of this portion did not
return to the people, and that the whole system of Revenue and the
economic condition of the people became unnatural and oppressive, with
dangers to the rulers. So long as the system went on, so long must the
people go on, living wretched lives. There was a constant draining
away of India's resources, and she could never therefore, be a
prosperous country. Not only that, but in time India must perish, and
with it perish the British Empire[1]
In 1895, George Hamilton stated at a session of the House of Commons
that:
Time has, however, now come when the Government finds itself in
possession of larger surpluses and it is, therefore, its duty as
guardian of public exchequer, to reduce taxation on salt
When the Salt tax was doubled in the year 1923,