Global Warming Hoax

Global warming is a hypothesis, not a theory or a law.

What is the formal alternative ?
 
Werbung:
If anyone has any questions of comments please feel free to shot.

Do you guys already know Global Warming(GW) is not because of co2?

The reason why I'm putting this link up is because I have done the needed research and I'm conclusive that Global Warming is a not as advertised by Al Gore. IMHO, Global Warming was a scare tactic to sell books and keep funds high for the "scholars" on the subject who depend on grant money(no GW threat means less research funds, makes sense so far?) Also, they wanted to impose a global co2 tax and increase the cost of fuel(co2 producers) for a carbon tax.

Global Warming has little to do with co2 because over ~70% of greenhouse gases are water vapor. This is why deserts get so cold at night, because of the lack of water vapor to insulate. So if we really want to worry about greenhouse gases we need to find a way to control water evaporation(yes its silly).

Co2 is beneficial to plants and the plants actually act as a buffer to keep the co2 levels in check. There is a symbiotic relationship between plants and co2(obviously), so as long as there are enough plants around we will have a relatively constant co2 content. Our current co2 level in aprox ~350ppm (parts per million) and plants grow optimally at ~2000ppm. (So its a difference of almost 6 times more co2 for plants to grow optimally. Its been said that our plants are actually at a state of mild suffocation levels because co2 levels are so low in respect to plants) When there is higher concentration levels in co2 the plants grow bigger faster and suck in co2 quicker and pump out oxygen proportionally as fast-This is know as photosynthesis. In simple terms, less co2 means slower plant growth and the plants give off less oxygen in return, and higher levels of co2 means faster (up to TWO times faster growth in optimal conditions) and vigorous plant growth, the plant sucks up co2 and produces more oxygen. Hence the buffering action and symbiotic relationship.

Actually, if you carefully analyze Al Gores chart of co2 vs temp levels you can actually see that temps precede co2 fluctuation's by roughly 800 years(honestly, go look at his graph and you will notice that the temps change before co2.) So why would there be a lag on co2 levels you might be wondering... Well actually the ocean is a HUGE carbon sink and just as oxygen can be dissolved in water(thats how fish breath) co2 can does the same except at a much faster rate. The colder the water the more dissolved co2 it contains and the converse is true- hotter water equals less dissolved co2. So, the lag is because the ocean is so VAST that it takes many years to change the water temps. Candidly, hotter world equals hotter ocean water and makes the ocean purge co2, colder world equals colder ocean temps and it sucks up dissolved co2. (you guys following?)

So you might be wondering how the world changes temps drastically if co2 is not the catalyst, right? What changes the earths temps is the sun for the most part. The sun goes through cycles(its kind of funky actually) and gets hotter and colder sometimes. Sun spots also helps dictate earths temps also.

Just ask your self how in the world would the earth be able to go through such drastic temps changes in the past before the industrial revolution? How could we have ice ages and periods of global warming(the midevil period was hotter than present levels and for over a thousand years or so) when us humans were not producing co2 from our cars and factories? How could there be such large fluctuations of temps and co2 when there was no cars? Thats where the ocean and the sun come into play with the relationship I pointed out a couple paragraphs ago.

Hey, don't take my word for it! Do your own research and let me know what you come up with.


RON PAUL REVOLUTION


~PEACE~

Thing is 4Paul, for every article that contradicts the evidence on AGW there are a hundred by credible scientists which say it's real. Have you read any of them and if so by what experts? Hanson? Schneider? Yes? No? None you say? Can we trust you to be well informed?

Riddle me this: If the icecap on the south pole is melting then how come it's thicker lately?
 
Werbung:
Back
Top