I wrote up a fact sheet and sent to everyone on my contact list, urging them to contact their senators. We all need to do as much as possible to expose these lies. I wish the Tea Parties had kept their powder dry till the Senate begins action on cap and trade…but its getting a bit chilly for demos in D.C.

Reading in British newspapers, it seems many people there, too, are fed up with their government hawking this scam.

They don’t care about the science–never have. They care about money and subjugating the masses, and Thermageddon legislation is the best way to do so on a massive scale ever conceived.

It seems the President is the one who is ignoring the scientific evidence. After spending $80 Billion on research, there is still no evidence of a direct link between CO2 and temperature. Perhaps he has written a peer-reviewed article on the subject that purports to have evidence of such a link? If so, why hasn’t the media covered that article? Evidence please, Mr. President.

Thanks PM for your thoughtful response. I agree. The argument he rejects is a false one. “If it ain’t broke, fix it until it is” is not a cost effective policy.

That one thing is CO2.

It is claimed that humans are responsible for Climate Change because of our CO2 emissions and that we need to have limits imposed because we need to reduce our emissions of CO2.

So first simply ask yourself this:

Can CO2 trap in heat?

Answer: NO, nothing traps in heat, substances can only absorb and re-emit heat but they cannot trap heat.

Next question, does CO2 absorb heat more strongly than the other gasses in the atmosphere?

Answer: NO, CO2 is only 0.03811% of the atmosphere and remains as solid ice up to a temperature of 194.65 K

Nitrogen and Oxygen which make up 99% of the atmosphere on the other hand, begin to melt at temperatures as low as 50-60 K and so are much stronger absorbers of heat and at the same time, make up most of the atmospheric gasses.

This puts the effect of CO2 into context. CO2 cannot trap heat as no gasses in the atmosphere can. CO2 is a tiny proportion of the gasses in the atmosphere, so tiny in fact that compared to Oxygen and Nitrogen it is barely noticeable. The effect of such tiny amounts of CO2 being a much weaker absorber of heat than Nitrogen and Oxygen, also show that the warming effect of CO2 is insignificant.

So the final question is, are we responsible for Climate Change through our CO2 emissions?

Answer: NO WE MOST DEFINITELY ARE NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR CLIMATE CHANGE.

Take that to Copenhagen!

If you would like to know more about the AGW fraud and carbon tax, download this free .pdf book

http://www.spinonthat.com/CO2_files/CO2tdino.pdf

Dr. Richard Lindzen of MIT, served on IPCC: “One of the things the scientific community is pretty agreed on is those things will have virtually no impact on climate no matter what the models say. So the question is do you spend trillions of dollars to have no impact? And that seems like a no brainer.

Here, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at MIT, gives a clear, concise summary of the real problem: http://www.heartland.org/events/newyork09/pdfs/lindzen.pdf

http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/compress:12/detrend:0.707/normalise/plot/esrl-co2/normalise

Is it not amazing that the CO2 increase matches with the increase in temperature from 1976 to 1998? Does a match of CO2 and mean global temperature between 1976 and 1998 means they will always match?

Was CO2 decreasing from 1878 to 1911 like the mean global temperature?

Was CO2 decreasing from 1944 to 1976 like the mean global temperature?

At the moment, as shown in the above data, temperature and CO2 are moving in opposite direction. No relationship at all!

AGW advocates, be quick with your tax before this becomes so obvious that even primary school students see no relationship.

“It’s the pessimistic notion that our politics are too broken and our people too unwilling to make hard choices for us to actually deal with this energy issue…” – what? People don’t even think we have much of an “energy issue”. And, politics? Politicians should pretty much just step aside and let us get on with our business of building our country. How not in touch with the issues and the people can a President get?

We have massive new finds in oil, the largest supply of coal in the world and burgeoning CH3 discoveries and supplies for over 100 years so we will not be hindered one bit for the necessary 10 years in building adequate 100+ new nuclear power plants that will support our energy needs for the next hundreds of years. Where’s the problem?

We don’t need to invest a dime on solar and wind power, leaving that up to individuals and niche applications.

A “smart” power grid investment? With as needed modular nuclear plants any kind of a large scale grid will not be necessary.

CO2? GHG? Scientists and science have not proven any harmful temperature effects by them, and to the contrary, modelers have failed in their predictions. As CO2 increases temps has stabilized, or decreased for over ten years. Historically, there is no correlation between CO2 and global temperatures. Forget about it.

So, what’s there to be pessimistic about, except politicians trying to feed their egos by trying to impose another fraud upon us where: “Only they (politicians) can save us.” I don’t think so.

So, Mr. President, how about you direct your attention to the real problems for a U.S. president and clean up the mess in the mid-east you campaigned to manage and harden our borders so we can actually have a real country with real defendable borders. And, how about working out appropriate, up-to-date legal immigration policies where we set up quotas and stick to them – or just leave it up to the states, whatever.

Take it easy Mr. President. Shoot some more hoops, collect some more prizes and let citizens work on developing a prosperous future for us all – PM