Over the past few years many longtime environmentalists have noticed that an air of total intolerance has permeated the Green movement generally, and the issue of atmospheric pollution in particular. It has now got to the stage where anyone who puts forward views that are not in line with the "anthropogenic cause of global warming" perspective are being shouted down at scientific conferences as well as at public meetings. This is a deeply disturbing trend. Central to any understanding of an anthropogenic contribution to climate change must be a well-balanced and rational atmosphere for scientific debate, and hysterical scaremongering coupled with intolerance to contrary viewpoints will only serve to stifle that debate and lead to erroneous conclusions justifying equally erroneous actions.
Independent scientists who have studied the causes of the Late 20th Century Warming, and who do not conclude that carbon dioxide (CO2) is primarily to blame, have been subjected to campaigns of verbal abuse in public forums, secretive campaigns of personal vilification, and even death threats as this fascist trend gets out of control. Many of the green activists who once championed the cause of open and free debate on environmental issues have recently been taking an increasingly intolerant view of those who disagree with them.
For example, the respected scientific website, CO2 Science, was subjected to a cyber-terrorist Denial of Service Attack in early 2008 from which they are now almost recovered - thankfully. Exactly who was responsible for this sabotage attempt is not clear, but it certainly fits the known pattern of "green fascist" activity that has reared its ugly head far too often in recent years.
This nonsense has got to stop before the whole of the environmental movement becomes thoroughly discredited in the eyes of the general public, and all the progress made in the past 35 years or so in making recycling, legal curbs on river, sea and air pollution, energy efficiency and ethical investments acceptable public policy, in countries all around the world, becomes fatally undermined in the inevitable blowback from such intolerant fascist activity.
One of the most remarkable aspects of this rise in intolerance to scientific debate is that the green activists who promote it are totally ignorant about where the idea - that man-made carbon dioxide (CO2) is causing global warming - had actually originated. Initially, it was proposed by just a handful of climate scientists, a close-knit community that was still smarting from the embarrassment of the mid-1970s "global cooling" hysteria that had many of them "predicting a new ice age'" in the next 10 to 20 years. The lead scientists of this pathetic attempt to 'scare-up the research funding' looked pretty silly a few years later as it got warmer, but not before they called for 'Urgent Action' to prevent a 'Global Catastrophe'.
Sound familar? It should do. Just substitute the word "warming" for "cooling" and you've got an about-turn with a bizarre sense of déjà vu.
It wasn't taken all that seriously at first, until the former UK Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, seized on it as an excuse to justify her devastation of the UK coal industry by promoting the idea that human use of fossil fuels were to blame for the rise in CO2 as part of her policy of smashing the British Trade Unions. This was especially so for the National Union of Mineworkers, and was undertaken so that her pro-nuclear agenda might be portrayed as a 'planet-saving' alternative that could be 'spun' in language acceptable to environmentalists.
If someone had written a fictional works about how a Conservative Prime Miniter conned the far-left and environmental activists into promoting the return of nuclear power, the scenario would have been deemed so unlikely that no-one would have published it. It most certainly would have been a non-starter candidate to be made into a film. Yet this scenario is exactly what has happened in real life.
It was in September 1988 that Margaret Thatcher revealed her 'new' policy in a speech to the Royal Society, which left many commentators wondering what had caused the 'greening' of the then Prime Minister. Nigel Calder, former editor of the New Scientist, commented:
"The speech to the Royal Society was a step in a project that she had pursued for two years, and which was already well advanced. In the political background, Europe was making endless trouble about British pollution of fresh water, the beaches, the sea and the air. On the other hand, the idea that nations should resolve to curb their carbon dioxide emissions suited the United Kingdom exceptionally well, given the impending demise of the nation's coal industry and the Prime Minister's support for nuclear power."
SOURCE: Calder, N., "The Manic Sun", Pilkinton Press, London, 1997, p 198.
At that time Prime Minister Thatcher was disturbed that the environmental lobby was using the growing concern about environmental issues to attack capitalism. She did not like the assault on industry, and on growth in general. As Calder put it:
"She wanted authority in the environmental debate 'to ensure a sense of proportion'. Leading the defence against green socialism would be science."
What most 21st century environmental acivists don't appreciate is that much of the so-called "science" that underpinned Thatcher's green policies were simply the theories of people like John Houghton of the UK Meteorological Office, where his fellow climate scientists were busily trying to match temperature observations with the "predictions" of early computer models. It was a team led by Houghton that co-ordinated the various scientists around the world who were trying to prove a cause & effect link between human-generated CO2 and "global warming" for the newly set up Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
In July 1996 the various parties to the Climate Convention, which had been signed four years earlier in Rio, met in Geneva. Amongst them was Thatcher's UK Environment Minster, John Gummer, who was visiting the Geneva meeting along with other ministers for 2 days beginning on July 17th. Their job was to try to help finalise a decision to reduce greenhouse gas emmissions, given the opposition from those countries whose economies were dependent on oil exports, and who had been joined by China which was/is heavily dependent on coal-fired power stations. Gummer's statement surprised and delighted the many green organisations present:
"Alarm bells ought to be ringing in every capital throughput the world."
Despite his well-known support for Prime Minister Thatcher's pro-nuclear power policy, Gummer received the loudest applause from environmentalists when, in the words of Nigel Calder, he:
"... lambasted the Australians for thinking their coal exports to Japan more important than the future of their own children."
From the 1996 Geneva Climate Convention onwards, the atmosphere around the so-called "scientific consensus" towards anyone who dared to challenge it became increasingly hostile. Scientists whose studies showed no correlation between CO2 and observed world temperatures began losing funding on a massive scale, and found that many peer-reviewed journals refused to publish the results of their work.
While the intolerance of many new recruits to green activism got uglier and uglier, economic ministers around the developed world were increasingly salivating over the thought of the unlimited amount of "green taxes" they would be able to levy against their own peoples once they had swallowed the pseudo-scientific nonsense that the computer models churned out.
The fact that the actual real-world observations didn't support the results of the computer models seemed to bother them little. There was big money to made from "green taxes" - money that would be needed to fund the "ramped-up global security state" that would be inevitable once the new generation of nuclear power stations begin to come online. Nuclear power plus the "war on terror" would provide the ideal combination to justify ever greater erosion of civil liberties in all countries.
Here we present a selection of books, DVDs and VHS videos concerning the issue of climate change that take the contrary view to the supposed "scientific consensus" that "global warming" has been definitively proven to be caused by human activities. Since the latest IPCC report was published this increasingly intolerant viewpoint has dominated the mass media reports about this issue, and we hope that by making these alternative viewpoints available in one place that the "stifled debate" about climate change can be restarted.
2010 Reality Check
The recent summit meeting in Copenhagen was NOT about so-called anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. It was simply about new ways to tax everyone in the whole world. The 'solutions' that were proposed by the leaders of all the countries that attended were desperate efforts to save their respective centralised energy grids. ONLY with centralised energy generation and distribution can consumers be taxed.
What those goverments don't want to see is a movement towards genuine self-sufficiency, where 'MICRO-GENERATION' replaces the centralised national distribution grids. What they really fear is the fact that they simply cannot tax you if you don't consume the commodities that are centrally controlled - hence the CO2 scam and The Great Global Warming Swindle.
Now that the integrity of many of the IPCC Assessment Reports, and especially their 'Summary for Policymakers' documents are coming under independent scrutiny, the dishonest and unscientific manner in which these publications were compiled is becoming ever clearer. An example of this is the January 2010 revelation that the Himalayan glaciers overall are NOT MELTING, and will NOT BE GONE BY 2035.
Furthermore, the glaciers in the mountains of New Zealand have been expanding for a number of years, even during those years that the global warming disinformation networks were telling us were the warmest since records began - or some similar nonsense.
Some of the books and information sources on this page were compiled and written when the CO2 scam and the great global warming swindle were at their height and their disinformation networks were in full swing. This means that many of the authors were influenced by the climate change disinformation that the whole world has been bombarded with over the past few decades.
Nevertheless, the many and varied brilliantly practical ideas on how to become genuinely self-sufficient are still as valid now as they were before the "ClimateGate" scandal that erupted in November 2009 confirmed what 'natural environmentalists' had suspected for many years. Best to ignore the global warming rubbish and simply get on with the job of micro-generating your own way to self-sufficiency...
around November 18, 2009, the news broke that someone had leaked data from the Climatic Research Unit's email servers
what emerged were numerous emails between climate scientists, some discussing how to hide the data in the image below
click the image above and find out more about the hacking of the CRU's embarassing emails.
The Climatic Research Unit (CRU) is based at the University of East Anglia
The constant denials from those who were caught outright, condemned by their own words, and the many and various attempts to cover-up their importance, got so predicably boring we abandoned the listing of the headlines...........
The Climate Change Controversy
books to balance the media monopoly of the alarmists
simply click on the book titles or covers to order those titles directly from Amazon.com,
or click on the UK Edition link
to order them directly from Amazon.co.uk. Some titles may not be available in both US and UK editions ...
"The book's 500 pages and 230,000 words and 2311 footnotes are the product of 40 years' research and a depth and breadth of scholarship. As Plimer writes:
"An understanding of climate requires an amalgamation of astronomy, solar physics, geology, geochronology, geochemistry, sedimentology, tectonics, palaeontology, palaeoecology, glaciology, climatology, meteorology, oceanography, ecology, archaeology and history."
The most important point to remember about Plimer is that he is Australia's most eminent geologist. As such, he thinks about time very differently from most of us. He takes the long, long view. He looks at climate over geological, archaeological, historical and modern time. He writes:
"Past climate changes, sea-level changes and catastrophes are written in stone."
Much of what we have read about climate change, he argues, is rubbish, especially the computer modelling on which much current scientific opinion is based, which he describes as "primitive". Errors and distortions in computer modelling will be exposed in time. (As if on cue, the United Nations' peak scientific body on climate change was obliged to make an embarrassing admission last week that some of its computers models were wrong.)"
The Earth's climate is driven by the receipt and redistribution of solar energy. Despite this crucial relationship, the sun tends to be brushed aside as the most important driver of climate. Calculations on supercomputers are primitive compared with the complex dynamism of the Earth's climate and ignore the crucial relationship between climate and solar energy.
"To reduce modern climate change to one variable, CO2, or a small proportion of one variable - human-induced CO2 - is not science. To try to predict the future based on just one variable (CO2) in extraordinarily complex natural systems is folly. Yet when astronomers have the temerity to show that climate is driven by solar activities rather than CO2 emissions, they are dismissed as dinosaurs undertaking the methods of old-fashioned science."."
"Is The 'Scientific Consensus' on Global Warming a Myth?
"Yes, says internationally renowned environmentalist author Lawrence Solomon who highlights the brave scientists--all leaders in their fields-- who dispute the conventional wisdom of climate change alarmists (despite the threat to their careers).
Al Gore and his media allies claim the only scientists who dispute the alarmist view on global warming are corrupt crackpots and 'deniers', comparable to neo-Nazis who deny the Holocaust.
Solomon calmly and methodically debunks Gore's outrageous charges, showing in one 'headline' case after another that the scientists who dispute Gore's doomsday scenarios have far more credibility than those who support Gore's theories.
These men who expose Gore's claims as absurd hold top positions at the most prestigious scientific institutes in the world.
Their work is cited and acclaimed throughout the scientific community.
No wonder Gore and his allies want to pretend they don't exist."
This is the one book that PROVES the science is NOT settled.
The scientists profiled are too eminent and their research too devastating to allow simplistic views of global warming - like Al Gore's - to survive.
Al Gore says any scientist who disagrees with him on Global Warming is a kook, or a crook.
Guess he never met these guys ...
Dr. Edward Wegman - former chairman of the Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics of the National Academy of Sciences--demolishes the famous "hockey stick" graph that launched the global warming panic.
Dr. David Bromwich - president of the International Commission on Polar Meteorology--says "it's hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now."
Prof. Paul Reiter - Chief of Insects and Infectious Diseases at the famed Pasteur Institute--says "no major scientist with any long record in this field" accepts Al Gore's claim that global warming spreads mosquito-borne diseases.
Prof. Hendrik Tennekes - director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute--states "there exists no sound theoretical framework for climate predictability studies" used for global warming forecasts.
Dr. Christopher Landsea - past chairman of the American Meteorological Society's Committee on Tropical Meteorology and Tropical Cyclones--says "there are no known scientific studies that show a conclusive physical link between global warming and observed hurricane frequency and intensity."
Dr. Antonino Zichichi - one of the world's foremost physicists, former president of the European Physical Society, who discovered nuclear antimatter--calls global warming models "incoherent and invalid."
Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski - world-renowned expert on the ancient ice cores used in climate research--says the U.N. "based its global-warming hypothesis on arbitrary assumptions and these assumptions, it is now clear, are false."
Prof. Tom V. Segalstad - head of the Geological Museum, University of Oslo--says "most leading geologists" know the U.N.'s views "of Earth processes are implausible."
Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu - founding director of the International Arctic Research Center, twice named one of the "1,000 Most Cited Scientists," says much "Arctic warming during the last half of the last century is due to natural change."
Dr. Claude Allegre - member, U.S. National Academy of Sciences and French Academy of Science, he was among the first to sound the alarm on the dangers of global warming. His view now: "The cause of this climate change is unknown."
Dr. Richard Lindzen - Professor of Meteorology at M.I.T., member, the National Research Council Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, says global warming alarmists "are trumpeting catastrophes that couldn't happen even if the models were right."
Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov - head of the space research laboratory of the Russian Academy of Science's Pulkovo Observatory and of the International Space Station's Astrometria project says "the common view that man's industrial activity is a deciding factor in global warming has emerged from a misinterpretation of cause and effect relations."
Dr. Richard Tol - Principal researcher at the Institute for Environmental Studies at Vrije Universiteit, and Adjunct Professor at the Center for Integrated Study of the Human Dimensions of Global Change, at Carnegie Mellon University, calls the most influential global warming report of all time "preposterous . . . alarmist and incompetent."
Dr. Sami Solanki - director and scientific member at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany, who argues that changes in the Sun's state, not human activity, may be the principal cause of global warming: "The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures."
Prof. Freeman Dyson - one of the world's most eminent physicists says the models used to justify global warming alarmism are "full of fudge factors" and "do not begin to describe the real world."
Dr. Eigils Friis-Christensen - director of the Danish National Space Centre, vice-president of the International Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, who argues that changes in the Sun's behavior could account for most of the warming attributed by the UN to man-made CO2.
"Talk about really inconvenient truths--that's one of the many you'll find in Iain Murray's rollicking exposé of environmental blowhards who waste more energy, endanger more species, and actually kill more people (yes, that's right) than the environmental villains they finger.
Did you know that estrogen from birth control and "morning after" pills is causing male fish across America to develop female sex organs? Funny how "pro-choice" and "environmentalist" liberals never talk about that.
Or how about this: the Live Earth concert to "save the planet" released more CO2 into the atmosphere than a fleet of 2,000 Humvees emit in a year?
We hear a lot about AIDS in Africa, but the number one killer of children in much of Africa is malaria--and guess who was responsible for banning the pesticide that used to have malaria under control?
Iain Murray, a sprightly conservative environmental analyst with a long record of skewering liberal hypocrisy, has dug up seven of the all-time great environmental catastrophes caused by the Left and exposed them in The Really Inconvenient Truths. Murray lays bare:
* How ethanol, the liberals' favorite fuel, is destroying the world's rainforests--and could cause global food shortages
* How Al Gore's hero Rachel Carson cost the lives of millions of Africans through her efforts to ban DDT
* How the environmentalists have covered up the polluting effects of contraceptive and chemical abortion drugs
* How the Endangered Species Act actually endangers species
* How Gore's vision of greater state control over the economy has already produced some of the greatest environmental disasters in history
From the Author
"I wrote Climate Confusion for several reasons. In contrast to other works, I wanted it to be an entertaining and easily understood primer on how weather and climate works, showing why manmade global warming is unlikely to be a serious problem for humanity.
Furthermore, I wanted to explore the political, philosophical, and religious underpinnings of beliefs in catastrophic global warming, helping the reader to better appreciate why scientific research in this area has become tainted and untrustworthy.
Finally, and possibly most importantly, by using basic economic concepts I wanted to counter currently proposed policy "solutions" to global warming that will have devastating effects on the world's poor."
"Modern society has regularly, in recent years, been gripped by a series of headline making "scares" -- from mad cow disease to SARS -- which have become one of the most conspicuous and damaging features of our modern world.
This book is the first to tell the inside story of each of the major scares of the past two decades, showing how they have followed a remarkably consistent pattern. It analyzes the crucial role played in each case by scientists how have misread or manipulated the evidence; by media and lobbyists who eagerly promote the scare without regard to the facts; and finally by the politicians and officials who come up with an absurdly disproportionate response, leaving us all to pay the price, which may run into billions of dollars.
Scared to Death culminates in a chillingly detailed account of the story behind what the authors believe has become the greatest scare of them all: the belief that the world faces disaster through manmade global warming. In a final chapter, the authors take on its proponents such as Al Gore in a devastating critique of the consensus on global warming and its consequences."
"Singer and Avery present, in popular language and supported by in-depth scientific evidence, the compelling concept that global temperatures have been rising mostly or entirely because of a natural cycle. "Unstoppable Global Warming" explains why we're warming, why it's not very dangerous, and why we can't stop it anyway.
The work refers to a vast amount of scientific research in a wide variety of scientific journals indicating a natural sunspot magnetic wave is causing what little global warming exists. Man created carbon dixoide has very little effect on the earth's climate.
Pseudoscientists and others with a vested interest in controlling the global economy by use of the global warming hoax will not like this work. However informed readers concerned with human welfare and human progress will find this book invaluable."
"This book should have been written years ago. It reveals a dark secret of the ideological environmental movement.
The movement imposes the views of mostly wealthy, comfortable Americans and Europeans on mostly poor, desperate Africans, Asians and Latin Americans.
It violates these people's most basic human rights, denying them economic opportunities, the chance for better lives, the right to rid their countries of diseases that were vanquished long ago in Europe and the United States.
Even worse, in league with the European Union, United Nations and other bureaucrats, the movement stifles vigorous, responsible debate over energy, pesticides, biotechnology and trade.
It prevents needy nations from using the very technologies that developed countries employed to become rich, comfortable and free of disease. And as a consequence, it sends millions of infants, children, men and women to early graves every year.
The ideological environmental movement is a powerful $4-billion-a-year US industry, an $8-billion-a-year international gorilla. Many of its members are intensely eco-centric, and seem to believe that wildlife and ecological values are more important than human progress or even human life."
"This book is the first one I've seen that tells the truth and lays it on the line." -
Patrick Moore, Greenpeace co-founder
"There is no greater way to underline the point of Paul Driessen's brilliant and meticulously foot-noted book than to read the review here that blindly criticizes it (from a brave anonymous reader). Just for a start the book and its message is endorsed by the man who FOUNDED Greenpeace - and that message is that the Radical Environmental movement has become so entrenched in dogma and a vision of a world without people that they summarily ignore the suffering, famine, disease, and death of millions." - Amazon Customer Review
"'Shattered Consensus: The True State of Global Warming', convincingly demonstrates the remarkable differences between what we commonly read about global warming and what is really happening.
Nine chapters describe major problems with computer simulations of future climate that are the basis for wrenching policies being proposed by world leaders.
Anyone who reads this book will come away with a new appreciation of the complexity of the climate issue and will question the need for expensive policies that are likely to have little or no detectable effect on the planet's temperature."
Elsewhere in the book, the scientists explain how the climatic system is extremely sensitive so as to be impossible to model with current knowledge. An error in precipitation of only 0.1 inch equates to an error of 1.77 degree Fahrenheit."
"The appropriation of plants and traditional knowledge by corporations and other entities is often called biopiracy. Such practices arise from a cultural milieu that systematically marginalizes non-Western forms of knowledge, which are devalued as "folk knowledge" or characterized as inferior. Global Biopiracy rethinks the role of international law and legal concepts, global patent systems, and international agricultural research institutions as they affect legal ownership and control of plants and the knowledge that makes them valuable.
Ikechi Mgbeoji first examines the Western assumptions and biases that inform the patent system, international law, and institutions affecting farmers around the globe. He next analyzes the cultural and economic traits that divide the industrialized world and the developing world. Finally, Mgbeoji confronts the phenomenal loss of human cultures and plant diversity that has already occurred and that will continue in the future unless protective measures are implemented and enforced."
These books' dismal visions of a poisoned, overpopulated, polluted, resource-depleted world spiralling downward toward environmental collapse are today's conventional wisdom. According to a number of respected scientists, however, leaders of the environmental movement are guilty of twisting - and sometimes manufacturing - facts in an effort to frighten people into joining their cause.
In this eye-opening book, some of the most respected researchers in the US explode the myths behind much of the doom and gloom of today's environmental movement. Readers will discover how the hysteria about global warming, overpopulation, mass extinctions, coming food shortages, biotechnology and energy shortages are grounded not in reason but in false science and fear of progress."
"Fred Singer, the former director of the U.S. Weather Satellite Service, predicts that cutbacks in energy use mandated by the climate change treaty "will cost citizens literally hundreds of billions of dollars in higher product costs and lost wages -- all to mitigate climate 'disasters' that exist only on computer printouts and in the feverish imagination of professional environmental zealots."
Singer disputes the "evidence" for global warming, denies that its impact would be harmful even if it were occurring, and rejects the contention 'that scientists know which atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases are 'dangerous' and which are not.'
Singer's scientific and sensible formula for a hospitable future, with or without global warming, is 'economic growth and continued technological advances.'"
"Hot Talk, Cold Science will be difficult to dismiss, though many will undoubtedly wish to do so."
"Is global warming just a lot of hot air? The authors of this book believe so. They expose, what they believe to be, the exaggerations misstatements and outright lies of the global warming lobby, with particular emphasis on the American political scene.
Their main thesis is that politicians and the media have blown this issue out of proportion, manipulating currently known information in order to fulfill their own objectives. The authors also assert that the current scientific paradigm accepts as fact both global warming and humankind's contributions to its acceleration. Scientists therefore tend to ignore contradictory data.
Michaels and Balling present a good discussion of the climatological factors and theories of climate change and of the human activities that could be influencing climate. They counter each currently held theory with data and theory that support their own perspective."
"The Skeptical Environmentalist challenges widely held beliefs that the environmental situation is getting worse and worse. The author, himself a former member of Greenpeace, is critical of the way in which many environmental organisations make selective and misleading use of the scientific evidence.
Using the best available statistical information from internationally recognised research institutes, Bjorn Lomborg systematically examines a range of major environmental problems that feature prominently in headline news across the world.
His arguments are presented in non-technical, accessible language and are carefully backed up by over 2500 footnotes allowing readers to check sources for themselves. Concluding that there are more reasons for optimism than pessimism, Bjorn Lomborg stresses the need for clear-headed prioritisation of resources to tackle real, not imagined problems."
"The authors explain their theory that sub-atomic particles from exploded stars have more effect on the climate than manmade CO2. Their conclusion stems from Svensmark's research which has shown the previously unsuspected role that cosmic rays play in creating clouds.
During the last 100 years cosmic rays became scarcer because unusually vigorous action by the Sun batted away many of them. Fewer cosmic rays meant fewer clouds - and a warmer world.
The theory, simply put here but explained in fascinating detail, emerges at a time of intense public and political concern about climate change.
Motivated only by their concern that science must be trustworthy, Svensmark and Calder invite their readers to put aside their preconceptions about manmade global warming and look afresh at the role of Nature in this hottest of world issues."
"In the global-warming debate, definitive answers to questions about ultimate causes and effects remain elusive. In Global Warming: Myth or Reality? Marcel Leroux seeks to separate fact from fiction in this critical debate from a climatological perspective. Beginning with a review of the dire hypotheses for climate trends, the author describes the history of the 1998 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and many subsequent conferences. He discusses the main conclusions of the three IPCC reports and the predicted impact on global temperatures, rainfall, weather and climate, while highlighting the mounting confusion and sensationalism of reports in the media.
After taking a hard look at the reality of the greenhouse effect, the ‘evidence’ from climate models, and the models’ limitations, Leroux postulates alternate causes of climate change and analyzes the trends for global temperatures, rainfall patterns, and sea level. He poses the ‘heretical’ question if warming may be considered a benefit in some regions. Finally Leroux suggests a number of priorities for climatologists to better understand processes of climate change, to integrate them into climate models, and to predict accurately future changes in climate."
"For decades, environmentalism has been the Left's best excuse for increasing government control over our actions in ways both large and small. It's for Mother Earth! It's for the children! It's for the whales! But until now, the doomsday-scenario environmental scares they've trumped up haven't been large enough to justify the lifestyle restrictions they want to impose.
With global warming, however, greenhouse gasbags can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only "global governance" can tackle such problems. Horner reveals the full anti-American, anti-capitalist, and anti-human agenda of today's environmentalists, dubbing them "green on the outside, red to the core."
He details how they use strong-arm legal tactics--and worse--against those who dare to point out the weakness of their arguments for global warming."
"Why is news about global warming always bad? Why do scientists so often offer dire predictions about the future of the environment?
In Meltdown, climatologist Patrick J. Michaels says it’s only natural. He argues that the way we do science today - when issues compete with each other for monopoly funding by the federal government - creates a culture of exaggeration and a political community that then takes credit for having saved us from certain doom.
He starts with a succinct discussion of climate-change science and then unrolls a litany of falsehood, exaggeration, and misstatement. He cites hundreds of errors and exaggerations in scientific papers, news reports, and tv sound bites - from the "National Assessment" of global warming, a Clinton-era document that used computer models that its authors knew did not work, to the infamous New York Times story about the melting of the North Pole, published in September 2000 and halfheartedly retracted three weeks later."
"This publication is a review of political, media, and scientific coverage of environmental topics for the past year and the trends of attitudes and environmental measurements over the past several years and decades. It is full of interesting articles, extracts, graphs, and a few photos.
"The 2006 Index of Leading Environmental Index highlights the positive trends occurring in key areas including climate change, air quality, water quality, toxic chemicals, and biodiversity in the U.S. This eleventh edition also includes a special report on China’s environmental progress.
Dr. Steven F. Hayward is a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute (PRI). He has been the author of PRI’s annual Index of Leading Environmental Indicators since its launch in 1994. He is also the F.K. Weyerhaeuser Fellow at the American Enterprise (AEI) and author of AEI’s Environmental Policy Outlook."
"This book sets out the case for Hard Green, a conservative environmental agenda. Modern environmentalism, Peter Huber argues, destroys the environment.
Captured as it has been by the Soft Green oligarchy of scientists, regulators, and lawyers, modern environmentalism does not conserve forests, oceans, lakes, and streams - it hastens their destruction. For all its scientific pretension, Soft Green is not green at all. Its effects are the opposites of green.
This book lays out the alternative: a return to Yellowstone and the National Forests, the original environmentalism of Theodore Roosevelt and the conservation movement. Chapter by chapter, Hard Green takes on the big issues of environmental discourse from scarcity and pollution to efficiency and waste disposal. This is the Hard Green manifesto: Rediscover T. R. Reaffirm the conservationist ethic. Expose the Soft Green fallacy. Reverse the Soft Green agenda. Save the environment from the environmentalists."
"'Societies unravel when they lose the glue that holds them together.' The opening words of Global Warming in a Politically Correct Climate reveal author M. Mihkel Mathiesen's passionate struggle to reveal how the truth has become controversial in the modern community.
Mathiesen explores the paralyzing effect political correctness has on society and the associated environmental scares the public has accepted as fact for 30 years. As the title indicates, Mathiesen's work culminates in a relentlessly objective analysis of the real causes of the present global warming.
Based on the latest scientific findings, the book contains densely packed information never before published in a format accessible to the non-scientist. With the forgiving veil of political correctness lifted, the roles of advocacy groups, bureaucracies, politicians, industry, the legal profession, and career-conscious scientists are examined."
"Is the Temperature Rising? Well, yes, according to S. George Philander, a geoscientist at Princeton University whose introductory course in climatology provided the seed of this book.
Written in a clear, literate style aimed at the layperson, Philander is a welcome antidote to the all-too-often sensational claims made by one side or the other in the global-warming debate.
Is the Temperature Rising? Rather than rant about imminent doom or deny it, Philander explains just why it is so difficult to forecast the consequences of global warming. Clouds, for example, are a huge uncertainty, since they can either heat or cool the earth depending on their form.
In simple, nontechnical language, Philander describes how the interplay between familiar yet endlessly fascinating phenomena - winds and clouds, light and air, land and sea - maintains climates that permit a glorious diversity of fauna & flora to flourish on Earth."
"Most climate experts agree that industrial emissions of carbon dioxide either already have led or will soon lead to an increase in global temperatures.
While many consider that reason enough to undertake dramatic political action, economist Thomas Gale Moore asks, So what? Both historical and economic analysis suggests, he argues, that a warmer climate would be, on balance, beneficial to both mankind and the environment.
The book calls into question the entire campaign led by Vice President Al Gore and others to ratify the proposed treaty on global warming scheduled to be debated in the U.S. Senate early in 1998."
His meaningful points are that overall agricultural production is unlikely to suffer in a warmer world and that attempts to cut back on fossil fuel use now may be prohibitively expensive."
"This book is a disappointment because of the way it is written. The material is not presented clearly. However some readers will upon at least some effort be able to pick up some gems of information not available elsewhere. These gems include:
The earthshine series, or the amount of the earth radiation to the dark side of the moon, is the longest series of earth radiation. This series is statistically much more related to the measures of solar radiation and sunspots than the atmospheric quantities of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.
The United Nations International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) overestimates the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. The IPCC assumes that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has a half life of 500 years. Researcher Peter Dietze made his estimations of the CO2 in the atmosphere by measuring the half life decay of carbon and other radioactive materials in the atmosphere. He found that the atmospheric carbon dioxide half life to be 38 years.
"Well, whether or not you believe in global warming (even I don't claim to be 100% sure), there is probably at least one scientist in this book who shares your viewpoint.
In the first half of the book are the "hard science" essays, and there are all sorts of different predictions represented here - ranging from catastrophic floods and worldwide famines to insect plagues and a land rush in the Arctic.
On the other hand, there are a few essays that say that the "problem" of global warming will bring us more blessings than it will take away. And then there are quite a few essays arguing that global warming is caused by the sun or does not exist at all.
The second half of the book is devoted to essays promoting or debunking various cures and remedies for global warming."
"Is the planet earth headed for disaster? Are we depleting the ozone level too quickly? Are chemicals and pesticides going to kill us all? What about acid rain and nuclear power?
Environmentalists claim that greenhouse gases are going to warm the earth so much that the polar ice caps will melt and there will be coastal flooding and mass hysteria. But is all of this really true?
Is there really an environmental crisis that mankind has caused, or is this all just another fallicy created by environmental extremists and power- hungry politicians in order to scare the public and push their respective agendas on the people?
With global warming, for instance, the public has been scared into believing that the earth is going to get so warm that the ocean levels will rise and cities like Miami and New York will be submerged under water.
What the authors argue is that the slight warming of the earth is natural and has occurred many times in the past, when the earth has gone through periods of cooling and warming.
The contribution of mankind, to the warming process, is too miniscule to make any significant difference and we don't really have enough weather records, from far enough back, to draw any definite conclusions."
"Modern environmentalism is thoroughly polluted by junk science and cynical hysterics. As Ben Bolch and Harold Lyons detail in their new book Apocalypse Not, a vast portion of what passes for environmentalism is little more than scare-mongering.
Unfortunately, environmental groups have sometimes found that donors and members are more responsive to (dubious) claims about environmental problems that supposedly put the donor's health at risk, and are insufficiently interested in genuine environmental problems that do not pose a threat to the donor."
"Many professors of Climate Science realize that carbon dioxide generated by human activity has caused little or no global warming.
Essex and McKitrick, even as outsiders to the field, provide the most entertaining exposé of climate modeling nonsense I have seen.
The flaws in climate modeling, the absence of water vapor as the most important greenhouse gas in most enviro manifestoes, the fraud behind the "hockey stick" graph of temperature over the last 1,000 years that claims that the 20th century has been the warmest of the millenium, and the lack of coverage of the remaining ground temperature measurement stations are all revealed, and backed with citations to peer-reviewed journals.
Even the dynamics of human group polarization are explained at length as the reason why this subject receives almost no serious scientific discussion."
The reality of scientific research is that it is almost always undertaken using funds traditionally provided by partnerships between academic institutions and industry.
Even the many scientists who have contributed to the reports published by the IPCC (the Non-Governmental International Panel on Climate Change) which are responsible for the current hysteria about global warming, have at some stage in their careers undertaken scientific research that has been funded by just such partnerships.
There is nothing wrong with that of course, but when a scientist who disagrees that the 'main cause' of global warming is the activities of humankind, his or her work should not be dismissed out-of-hand just because he or she once undertook scientific research that was funded partly by industry.
Yet this is exactly what has been happening to scientists all over the world in recent years, as radical green organisations pursue a policy of total intolerance towards anyone who questions the science behind their increasingly self-righteous political agendas.
Below are a selection of videos and DVDs which question the soundness of much of that science and expose these green fascists' agendas for what they really are ...
EU English Version
All Regions DVD playable anywhere with a multi-region DVD player & compatible TV
"Everything you've ever been told about Global Warming is probably untrue. From Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth to news reports from the popular media outlets and even public classrooms which, in chicken little fashion, seem to be screaming - the sky is falling. But is it really? This film blows the whistle on what may be the biggest swindle in modern history. We are told that 'Man Made Global Warming' is the biggest threat ever to mankind and that it may even threaten our very survival; and, if we do not change our ways and reduce CO2 emissions - polar ice caps will melt, coastal areas will flood and hurricanes like Katrina will become common.
With nearly Gestapo like tactics we are told not to question! There is absolutely no room for doubt because there is a 'scientific consensus.' Anyone who questions the data or conclusion is an enemy of the state and humanity. Well, bring it on because this is exactly what this well documented film does. The Great Global Warming Swindle uses a plethora of leading scientists who will not bend to political or philosophical or ideaological pressure. So watch this film and make up your own mind."
"Al Gore calls the host of negative consequences he predicts will accompany the on-going rise in the air's CO2 concentration 'a planetary emergency - a crisis that threatens the survival of our civilization and the habitability of the earth.' James Hansen similarly claims that the earth 'is close to dangerous climate change, to tipping points of the system with the potential for irreversible deleterious effects', and he contends that 'ignoring the climate problem at this time, for even another decade, would serve to lock in future catastrophic climatic change."'
Do these dire contentions reflect reality? Or do they portray but a marvelously-crafted and hugely-effective illusion? Carbon Dioxide and the Climate Crisis: Reality or Illusion? explores this perplexing problem through an insightful review of numerous scientific studies that have been largely ignored by the world's climate alarmists, and by illuminating commentary provided by a number of researchers who have spent the better parts of their careers studying the many facets of this complex subject. Topics addressed in the DVD include: Climate Models, Earth's Climatic History, Extreme Weather Events, Ice Sheet Disintegration, Sea Level Trends and Atmospheric Methane. In addition, the entire text of the film is accessible from a pdf file on the DVD, along with an extensive list of complete citations to the peer-reviewed scientific papers that support the many footnoted statements of fact that are presented in the text.
See what science really has to say about the issue. Is the ongoing rise in the air's CO2 content truly 'a planetary emergency'? Or is it something far, far different from what the world's climate alarmists incessantly claim it is? These are high-priority questions that all of us are going to have to confront in the not-too-distant future. We owe it to ourselves, and to all who will follow us, to be thoroughly prepared for the choice we will have to make when the day of decision arrives."
"Is there an agenda that motivates supporters of catastrophic man-made global warming? Are the leaders and advocates really a benevolent confederation of concerned scientists and citizens who simply desire to protect the environment and care for the poor? Or are they being used by others who have a political goal in mind? In this eye opening documentary, Global Warming or Global Governance (DVD) you will not only hear from leading scientists and climatologists who refute the current crop of alarmists cries; but also congressman, economist, newscasters and sociologists who believe that something more sinister is involved."
"What effect does the burning of fossil fuels and the resulting emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) have on the earth's biosphere? This question is posed to a number of leading scientists in The Greening of Planet Earth, an enlightening documentary that examines one of the most misunderstood environmental phenomena of the modern age. The Greening of Planet Earth examines the role that CO2 plays as one of nature's basic building blocks of life in the process of photosynthesis and the evolution of the earth's biosphere.
Evidence is presented to show how current CO2 levels, which are 30 percent higher than in the pre-industrial era, have greatly enhanced the growth of trees and other plants. Results from controlled studies show how a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere, which is expected to occur over the next century, will increase crop yields by 30 to 40 percent, double the water-use efficiency of most of the earth's vegetation and possibly triple the productivity of forests. The impact and implications of such change are far-reaching."
"The controversy over the effects of increasing levels of carbon dioxide (CO2) on nature -- and the fossil fuel combustion that contributes to it -- continues to intensify. Despite solid evidence to the contrary, many media reports speculate that increasing CO2 levels will result in apocalyptic global warming and eventual environmental disaster. In The Greening of Planet Earth Continues, expert scientists assert that CO2 is not a pollutant, but a nutrient to life on earth. The video further explores issues addressed in our first video, The Greening of Planet Earth, which has been distributed to more than 30,000 people worldwide.
Learn the facts about climate history and the problems with computer simulations used to predict the impact of increasing CO2 levels. Discover what increasing CO2 levels really mean - faster plant growth, greater agricultural yields and improved water-use efficiency in plants. Evidence shows a picture of the ongoing industrial evolution of humankind as the greening of planet earth continues."
"Scientific Censorship" stifling scientific debate and corrupting the climatology peer-review process
From the 1996 Geneva Climate Conventaion onwards, the atmosphere around the so-called "scientific consensus" towards anyone who challenged it became increasingly hostile. Scientists whose studies showed no correlation between CO2 and observed world temperatures began losing funding on a massive scale, and found that many peer-reviewed journals refused to publish the results of their work.