Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Globalists Switching Gears: Royal Society Lecturer Says CO2 Not Affecting Earth’s Temperature

Susanne Posel, Contributor
Activist Post

Fritz Vahrenholt, a German green energy investor, says he has reassessed his position on man-made climate change.

Vahrenholt has been a professor in the Department of Chemistry at the University of Hamburg since 2009. He served as a senator for the environment in Hamburg, Germany between 1991 and 1997, and was a member of the “sustainability advisory board” to chancellor Schröder and Merkel in 2001 to 2007.

Speaking at the 3rd Global Warming Policy Foundation Annual Lecture at the Royal Society in London, Vahrenholt was representing RWE Innogy, one of Europe’s largest renewable energy corporations.

Vahrenholt, who reviewed the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) most recent report on renewable energy, noticed that there was an obvious lack of scientific data to support their assertions. A prominent member of Greenpeace, a UN propaganda arm disguised as a proponent of environmental concern, edited the final version of the IPCC’s report. The IPCC’s report, according to Vahrenholt, is littered with falsities and a complete disregard for natural factors that would be considered in a fluctuating climate such as Earth.

Vahrenholt states that:
Real, hard data from ice cores, dripstones, tree rings and ocean or lake sediment cores reveal significant temperature changes of more than 1°C, with warm and cold phases alternating in a 1,000-year cycle. These include the Minoan Warm Period 3,000 years ago and the Roman Warm Period 2,000 years ago. During the Medieval Warm Phase around 1,000 years ago, Greenland was colonized and grapes for wine grew in England. The Little Ice Age lasted from the 15th to the 19th century. All these fluctuations occurred before man-made CO2.

The late Gerard Bond, marine geologist and professor from Columbia University, analyzed climate reconstructions of the North American deep-sea sediment cores, and found that “the millennial-scale climate cycles ran largely parallel to solar cycles, including the Eddy Cycle which is – guess what – 1,000 years long.”

Bond surmised through decades of research that variations in solar activity – the appearance of sunspots and changes in the emission of solar radiation – were directly causing measurable effects on the Earth’s global temperature. The heating and cooling of the Earth coincided with the activity of the sun.

The sun determines the Earth’s temperature, as proven from real-world observations over the past 10,000 years.

With the introduction of man-made carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere beginning in the 1850s, the CO2 level has only risen 11 percent; which is nearly negligible.

Empirical data has shown that pre-industrial carbon emissions were dependent on solar activity. This global warming was estimated by scientists as 1 degree Celsius. As far as the IPCC is concerned, this statistic could, and has, been manipulated to justify their agenda.

However, the account of the solar magnetic fields doubling over the last 100 years was completely ignored because it disavowed their scheme to blame carbon dioxide levels on human influences.

Solar activity, CO2 levels and Earth’s surface temperature are interlaced factors defining climate parameters. As modern man has been using fossil fuels which disburse carbon dioxide, it made perfect sense for the IPCC to turn this obvious fact into an attack on man through fear-mongering and propaganda while suppressing natural processes.

The infamous computer models used by the IPCC to justify their claims that CO2 levelsare a direct causation of anthropogenic impact and regard solar influence as negligible. The IPCC inserts an “unknown amplifying mechanism” to explain away observed solar activity and its effect on the Earth’s overall temperature.

Henrik Svensmark, a Danish physicist, has devised a computer model that takes into account the sun’s direct influence on the Earth. While his research is still in its infancy, the projections promise to clarify how much of an influence the sun truly has.

Vanrenholt asks: 
The IPCC’s current climate models cannot explain the climate history of the past 10,000 years. But if these models fail so dramatically in the past, how can they help to predict the future?
Considering how weak an influence CO2 is on the climate, as observational data concludes that it would only generate “a moderate warming of 1.1°C per CO2”, the IPCC’s assumptions are over-blown. They fail to include water vapor and cloud effects which intensify solar amplification. CO2 needs an amplifier to become the aggressive agitator that the IPCC would have everyone believe.

The alarmist assertions that temperatures will rise to 4.5 degrees Celsius by a magical doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere is scientifically unfounded.

The solar magnetic field patterns have lowered significantly in the past 150 years, resulting in an obvious de-intensification to be observed in the decades ahead. In reality this would mean that global warming would stop and gradually reverse by 2030 to 2040.

This fact proves the IPCC’s assertions to be completely false.

A global climatic catastrophe that the IPCC claims is coming is not. And thescientific community’s efforts are being wasted in the propaganda of an overheated planet, when they should be working toward understanding how Earth is affected by its solar environment with an impartial and open mind.
To fully understand these implications:
  • Comprehensive research must be attributed to natural climate drivers.
  • The warming “trend”, if viewed as a pause in the temperature of the Earth, could give us “time to convert our energy supply in a planned and sustainable way.”
In the UK and Germany, major efforts by the government have been taken to utilize sustainable energy with the advent of wind turbines and solar panels that not only cut economic costs in the long run, but fully utilize the potentials of our natural resources while facilitating the continuance of our modern lifestyle.

In Germany, solar energy is replacing nuclear as the nation plans to shut down all nuclear reactors by 2022.

The solar power delivered to the German national grid is 50% of the nation’s total energy quota, said the director of the Institute of the Renewable Energy Industry .

The German government has invested quite a bit of money in restructuring their nation’s energy infrastructure in an attempt to move away from nuclear energy. They can currently generate over 4% of their energy needs from solar power.

The German government will also invest in wind and bio-mass as alternative forms of renewable energy.

While exposures like Climategate and the advent of skeptics to man’s direct causation to the ups and downs in the Earth’s temperature, the global Elite and their front for one world government, the UN, have hit a roadblock: scientific proof of their assertions.

Perhaps Vahrenholt’s appearance at the globalist think-tank, the Royal Society, is some proof that they are beginning to alter their tactics. If fear fearmongering the public by decrying global catastrophes due to man-made global warming is no longer effective, then it might be that the global Elites are shifting their public agenda, inventing more subversive propaganda that appears to support renewable energy.

Susanne Posel is the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism. Our alternative news site is dedicated to reporting the news as it actually happens; not as it is spun by the corporately funded mainstream media. You can find us on our Facebook page.


BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW


BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.

7 comments:

King of the Paupers said...

"the account of the solar magnetic fields doubling over the last 100 years was completely ignored because it disavowed their scheme to blame carbon dioxide levels on human influences."
Jct: They "failed to see" because they had their eyes closed.

Anonymous said...

I'm a horticulturalist by trade. I believe we have major concerns around protecting our environment and improving our custodianship of the planet. However from my observations the "global warming" paradigm has become far too politicised, C02 remains a trace gas, a little extra may well be of benefit to humanity. It may be of modest benefit in food production, for example. From what I can see, solar variation is surely the main driver of climate. I can't help suspect that "global warming" fears are just a distraction from more genuine environmental and social issues. Who is profiting from the hysteria?

lauri said...

What would true environmentalism look like?
1) Ban nuclear energy/devices.
2) Ban GMO organisms.
3) End pesticide and herbicide use.
4) Ban CAFOs.
5) Promote alternative energy use.
6) Promote alternatively powered transportation.
7) End subsidies for fossil fuels.

There - was that so difficult???

ANDRE OUELLET said...

I am a bit confused by this article. We read "However, the account of the solar magnetic fields doubling over the last 100 years was completely ignored" and "The solar magnetic field patterns have lowered significantly in the past 150 years". While logically not mutually exclusive statements, I doubt if both could be true in reality. From what I have read, the "consensus" seems to be that the magnetic field has decreased, with no consensus as to why.

Anonymous said...

Somewhat confusing, isn't it???

The solar power delivered to the German national grid is 50% of the nation’s total energy quota, said the director of the Institute of the Renewable Energy Industry .

The German government has invested quite a bit of money in restructuring their nation’s energy infrastructure in an attempt to move away from nuclear energy. They can currently generate over 4% of their energy needs from solar power.

Anonymous said...

This man made CO2 warming is a tax and power grab. It also serves as a distraction to the real problem- massive industrial pollution, not of the carbon variety (BP, Fukushima etc).
Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa said in 2005: Global warming "is the biggest scientific hoax being perpetrated on humanity. There is no global warming due to human anthropogenic activities. The atmosphere hasn’t changed much in 280 million years, and there have always been cycles of warming and cooling. The Cretaceous period was the warmest on earth. You could have grown tomatoes at the North Pole"[29]

Nicki said...

Man made global warming is a hoax to get more taxes out of the people and to scare them yet again into terrified submission. There is nothing we can do to 'Save Planet Earth' - she will look after herself as she has done for countless millions of years. What we really mean is 'save human beings'!! What we should be focussing on is saving and protecting the enviroment. The toxic overload, the destruction of earths biosphere and all its eco-systems in the pursuit of growth, and greed and money is what we should all be in a panic about.
OK so the earth is in a warming cycle - that could be used to our benefit. With sustainable farming (NOT GMO's) replanting of lost forests etc. etc the earth and its inhabitants can survive, and flourish.
Think how much more of a disaster it would be if we were in a cooling period and facing another ice age!
Get rid of the 'Corporate Puppet Governments' Put people in charge who really understand what is happening ansd see what a difference can be made

Post a Comment