Global Warming not happening

Here is a good argument against it. I'm quoting it in its entirety as it has plenty that is important to say:

www.canadafreepress.com...

Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide
Global Warming: The Cold, Hard Facts?
By Timothy Ball

Monday, February 5, 2007

Global Warming, as we think we know it, doesn't exist. And I am not the only one trying to make people open up their eyes and see the truth. But few listen, despite the fact that I was the first Canadian Ph.D. in Climatology and I have an extensive background in climatology, especially the reconstruction of past climates and the impact of climate change on human history and the human condition.“Few listen, even though I have a Ph.D, (Doctor of Science) from the University of London, England and was a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg.” . For some reason (actually for many), the World is not listening. Here is why.


What would happen if tomorrow we were told that, after all, the Earth is flat? It would probably be the most important piece of news in the media and would generate a lot of debate. So why is it that when scientists who have studied the Global Warming phenomenon for years say that humans are not the cause nobody listens? Why does no one acknowledge that the Emperor has no clothes on?

Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.

Mod Edit: Posting work written by others.– Please Review This Link.



[edit on 5/2/2007 by Umbrax]

Huge conflict of interest here.

Timothy Ball is the "scientific advisor" of Friends of Science Society (FoS).

FoS is based in my town of residence, The FoS was outed by The Globe and Mail in August 2006 as being partly funded by the oil and gas industry.
www.charlesmontgomery.ca...


I'll add it to the list later.

Dr. Timothy Ball - SourceWatch
ExxonSecrets Factsheet: Tim Ball, PhD

Looks like Dr. Tim Ball is prone to fabricating his credentials:
Dear Tim Ball: sue me
Tim Ball: Finding New Ways to Fudge His Credentials



Ball's crediblity cause many to wonder.

[edit on 5-2-2007 by Regenmacher]

Originally posted by Umbrax
Huge conflict of interest here.

Timothy Ball is the "scientific advisor" of Friends of Science Society (FoS).

FoS is based in my town of residence, The FoS was outed by The Globe and Mail in August 2006 as being partly funded by the oil and gas industry.
www.charlesmontgomery.ca...

I'll add it to the list later.

I think there is a causation problem here. The implication is that he is basing his opinions on who is funding him. Rather, based on my reading, it seems as though his funding is based on his opinions. He has been saying the same things since 1993, 9 years before oil interests started funding his travel. Just as I would not accuse Al Gore of being a pawn of Greenpeace if they were funding him because he has been giving his opinion for years, so I think the same conclusion is inappropriate here without a correlation between his funding and his statements.

I am not opposed to looking at evidence, but I posted a question here that was never answered. Global warming is something that I have puzzled about for years. I am trained as a mathematician; sometimes models--especially ones so complicated as the atmosphere--are as valid about as far as you can throw them. On the other hand, there is definitely a quantifiable change in temperature and environment that is happening. The question of causation, however, seems still open, based on the academic articles that I have read.

Originally posted by Togetic
Just as I would not accuse Al Gore of being a pawn of Greenpeace if they were funding him because he has been giving his opinion for years, so I think the same conclusion is inappropriate here without a correlation between his funding and his statements.

In order to look at this evidence, would mean that Dr. Ball has to publish his climate hypothesis in a peer reviewed journal. I'm still trying to find it. That and he isn't a Professor of Climatology at the University of Winnipeg and never was. He was a Professor of Geography.



PR Guy Tim Ball in Love with Publicity? We Think Not

[edit on 5-2-2007 by Regenmacher]

I don't know about him having a phd or not or who he's funded by, but it doesn't seem like he is offering anything in the way of evidence.

He seems to be doing nothing other than offering arguements from authority.

This man has been saying the same thing for many years. He has never offered up to any peer review any evidence to support his claims. As stated by others this man is actually paid by the main oil lobbies, in addition to that what is not often mentioned about him is his family links to the oil industry. Also there are unconfirmed reports that he has a lot of $ invested in the oil industry with shares.

Well he’s a PhD, which is obviously something to be respected. What I am wondering then is if he is saying C02 is not contributing to Climate Change how come? By studying the climate over earth’s history from naturally reoccurring phenomena and also other systems such as the effects of living organisms on the environment, it has been shown to be a fact in the past that an increase in the PPM of greenhouse gases has caused an increase in the temperature then. So this rule of science within or environment ceased to exist when mankind started adding the same gases? How come PhD or not its just a simple scientific process that can and has been reproduced both in mans small labs and the huge experiment we are now running on the Earth.

Unless the little men in green have decided to start sucking out carbon Dioxide from the almost closed loop of an fragile environment of the climate, since man decided to start putting his own mix of greenhouse gasses into the air...well nothings going to change because one or two "nutty Professors" against the thousands of others of his peers, who have evidence and experiments running at present and in the past to back up their claims. They unlike him have actually done the work behind the scenes of the hot air this debate has produced.

Be aware though all... the debate is well and truly over.... mankind has now repeatedly and factually has contributed to global warming. Infact if it wasn’t for the pollution of the past in particulates, the effect of another proven phenomena "global dimming" we would be looking at 4-12 c rise in the next 30 years which would mean 3/4 of the worlds population being homeless within 40-50 years... when most of us are still not retired (well maybe me lol).

The danger is bigger than is being recorded, greenhouse gases do more harm but we’ve abated the worst due to this other phenomena for the moment, but it still is and will happen and mankind is to blame like I said unless someone has some good STS mission videos with some very very big Hoover and gas extraction systems in view!

Wake UP its really not rocket science, its simple infact its less complex to understand (not the models or the forecasts just the effect of blanketing caused by greenhouse gases into a sample of air) than the respiration process.


I just can’t believe this absolute and utter trash for science and facts is being banded about still.

Regards

Elf.

www.prisonplanet.com...

"When NASA was confronted with this glaring error, they then attempted to compensate for the lower temperatures in Russia by claiming they had discovered a new “hotspot” in the Arctic, despite satellite imagery clearly showing that Arctic sea ice had massively expanded its coverage by 30 per cent, an area the size of Germany, since summer 2007."

Global warming is not happening. Plants use carbon dioxide to grow. If anything, more carbon dioxide is what we need with all the deforestation going on.
"Scientists" will manipulate the truth or outright lie in seeking grant money. Convince a people the sky is falling and they'll pay money to prop it up so it doesn't fall on them.

I would say that there has been global cooling at least this year because of the lack of sunspots. The last time we had no sunspots we had the little Ice Age!

The Little Ice Age!

Shush! Don't let this news get out.The powers that be would never be able to shove the carbon credit,or the green tax down our throats.If everyone found out global warming was a scam.

ok so there are these countless posts on ATS, google, blogs etc saying there is no global warming or global cooling with proof and stuff.

Ok that's fine.

So answer this question.

If there is no global warming/cooling, which lots of people seem to agree on.
Can all these people agree on what is happening to the planet?
Crazy winters. Snow in places where its rarely seen. Heatwaves in countries that are usually temperate. Unusual tsunamis, hurricanes and tornadoes. Entire glaciers melting. Sea levels rising.

What is happening to the planet?

Because something is and if people can't see that, then we have very serious problem to face.

[edit on 19-12-2008 by warrenb]

reply to post by warrenb


That is an excelent question (if you leave the tsunamis out, the tsunamis are created by earthquakes, and there has been no unusual tsunamis, at least that I know), and one that the people that are always discussing if there is a global warming or not, or if men is the responsible or not should be interested in answering, because that is the real question: What is happening?