A video on YouTube raises some fundamental questions about our changing climate.
Let me say straight away that my belief in Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is based on instinct, and not on me understanding the science, simply because I am not a scientist; far from it! As I share on this blog:
Paul Handover is a child of the post-war era in Great Britain having been born in London a few months before the end of WWII. After a rather shaky attempt at being educated, including 2 years studying for a Diploma in Electrical Engineering, Paul’s first job was as a commercial apprentice at the British Aircraft Corporation. He then joined the sales desk of British Visqueen, a polythene film and products manufacturer located in Stevenage, Hertfordshire, and part of ICI Plastics Division. In 1968, he travelled out to Sydney, Australia and became part of the sales team at ICIANZ’s Inorganic Chemicals Division.
I am a fundamentally a retired salesman/entrepreneur with a very out-of-date knowledge of electrical engineering and radio communications (G3PUK), and now struggling to be an author. 😉
Plus, my generally sceptical view of how countries are governed, my awareness of a terrible lack of integrity in politicians, plays to those instincts of mine that humanity is, indeed, responsible primarily for our changing climate. And there is no shortage of supporting evidence!
A very quick web search found this NASA site that included the following graph and text (in part):
The Earth’s climate has changed throughout history. Just in the last 650,000 years there have been seven cycles of glacial advance and retreat, with the abrupt end of the last ice age about 7,000 years ago marking the beginning of the modern climate era — and of human civilization. Most of these climate changes are attributed to very small variations in Earth’s orbit that change the amount of solar energy our planet receives.
Scientific Consensus
Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities, and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position.Click here for a partial list of these public statements and related resources.
However, a dear and close friend of nearly 40 years, Dan Gomez, is sceptical and simply says to me: “Paul, follow the money!” Dan is a very widely-read person and a great thinker.
Plus, among our wonderful neighbours there is a couple, Dordie and Bill, that we get on with extremely well. Bill is a sceptic of AGW and recently sent me the link to the following video.
Please watch it. If you have evidence that all or many of the facts on this video are incorrect then I would love to hear from you.
For this is way too important for the truth not to be widely promoted.
Learning from Dogs 
Paul your post is very enlightening.. And the video presented is one of the best I have seen on giving factual evidence of what is happening with statistics and how it is being loaded by those ‘who Follow the Money’ as Dan Gomez correctly identifies..
This is why I spoke about the graphs in the books I had read, that is spoken of in one of Gregg Bradens books, Which others condemned as not being scientific.. I see what is happening above my head most days, and have many a photo similar to those shown on Geo-engineering in the video..
The Earth is in its own cycle, as are the planets. Our meddling has probably contributed much more to the severity of storms..
I have long understood how after a Solar Flare my own energy has altered, and you can also see how it connects to Earth quakes etc, We on Earth are not separate from our Solar System we are part of it.. And all have a ripple effect throughout the Universe..
A great share.. I hope more take the time to watch it in full
Blessings Sue
LikeLiked by 1 person
PS, I have added this video to one of my own Pages about Climate Change.. So Good I thought it to be.. Thank you
LikeLike
Sue, loved your reply being the first in. Thank you. I have my fingers crossed that others will share their responses over the coming hours.
LikeLike
A powerful message for us all to heed Paul!
LikeLike
Val, I do hope so. Great to have that response from you.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m looking at the video right now. So enlightening … And somewhat disturbing that we are being fed incorrect data to meet the needs of politics and economics!
LikeLike
How did the minds we trust get it so wrong? …. indeed. Florida is looking like a good option more and more!
LikeLike
Val, to my mind, the video raises legitimate questions. Nothing more: nothing less. As I implied in my reply to Hariod a few minutes ago.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m going to see what this winter brings … and then decide where I want to live!
LikeLike
Sorry Paul, I couldn’t get past three minutes of the video; it just sounded like more Koch Brothers inspired nonsense – short term observations are completely irrelevant to the science.
LikeLike
Hariod, that is a shame you couldn’t view the video to the end. For despite the pace at which the material is delivered there are many references to serious science. That being the reason I published it. Only good, peer reviewed, scientific refutations of what was presented are needed. Plenty of AGW sceptics, and I don’t consider myself one of them, believe the science of AGW is not perfect.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Okay, I’ve watched the whole thing now Paul, and my view hasn’t changed a bit. This chap Ben Davidson is confusing himself with his own narrowly selective views – quasi-science in itself, and barely that even – and in my view is way out of his depth, talking about conspiracists as if he weren’t one himself whilst posturing as a neutral and qualified to give an overview of the world’s science on AGW/Climate Change.
He says of himself on his website “I am now considered an independent researcher”. By who? He goes on to state that “to fully understand a situation you need to understand the law, the numbers, and the science”. Fair enough. So what is his training, what his specialisms? He worked for a venture capitalist(!) and began a mini-enterprise with his childhood buddy, called ‘Suspicious Observers’ – how unbiased is that?! He has a basic BA degree and was a ‘golf champion’ at college. Great.
Sorry Paul; it’s nonsense, meaning no disrespect to your neighbour Bill.
LikeLike
Hariod, that’s a fabulous retort to my previous and just the quality of discussion I was hoping for. I am ashamed to admit that I didn’t do the level of research about Davidson that you did – sorry correct that to I didn’t do any research.
Thank you! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
All you need to know:
http://www.suspicious0bservers.org/about-faq/
I think George Monbiot might raise an eyebrow or two.
LikeLike
H’mmm! From which I note:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Funny to see how many naïve people are roaming around, Hariod! This is the problem with ISIS: if it’s on the Internet, and it SOUNDS reasonable, then it’s reasonable. Give me a slug to pet, and all will be forgiven, forgotten
LikeLiked by 1 person
In other new, I decided to convert to Salafism after watching an ISIS video, not just, because Dog can’t be wrong, but to give the other side equal time.
LikeLike
Has my noble attempt at British style humor gone unnoticed?
LikeLike
Not at all, Patrice. I wanted to give it a coating of thought rather than trying for a smart-arse immediate response, and failing! Oh, and it’s humour if you want to be British! 😉
LikeLike
Paul, I can’t say that I’m too impressed by what this chap has to say about himself or his credentials.
“Law school is an exercise in painstaking research into complex materials to find subtle and often confusing truths, and then combining and communicating your findings in a helpful way.”
Hmm. Well this could be said of any discipline – science, sociology, health, history (which I studied at Uni) etc.
I watched the video. As far as his arguments are concerned, I’ve heard quite a few of them before, including from people associated with the fossil fuel industry.
The problem is that climate is such a complex matter. The unfortunate term ‘global warming’ has led many people to expect continually increasing temperatures everywhere and this has confused the issue. For example, it’s long been known that changes in the Gulf Stream ( and Jet streams) brought about by increased ice melt in the Artic could result in cooler, blizzard like conditions in Europe.
I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe that increasing levels of co2, which do correlate very closely with the Industrial Age, could affect the climate.
I have found the following website useful in my own deliberations.
http://www.skepticalscience.com
You’ll notice on the left that the “most used climate myths” are listed. You can click on them to see the counter arguments.
Of course we must all be careful of indulging in ‘confirmation bias’ and just looking at those websites or sources that bolster our preferred views. However, on so many issues these days, with the problem of information overload, it is increasingly difficult to know what the real story or truth is.
So let’s just say that Mr Davidson is right and that the climate changes presently underway are mainly the result of changing solar cycles. It’s still clearly the case that fossil fuels and chemicals generally are contaminating our planet’s air, oceans and lands. There is no question that marine life is being decimated by ocean acidification, toxins of all kinds and plastics. Cancers are increasing in humans. Bees, essential to plant life are threatened. Pure, clean water is getting harder and harder to find. Widespread deforestation, urbanisation and industrialisation are threatening plant and animal biodiversity and adversely affecting soils and waterways.
Meanwhile, the catastrophe that is Fukushima continues to unfold as we speak…
So it’s not just about climate change per se. Our present energy and chemical intensive lifestyles are making the planet increasingly sick. As the net world population continues to grow by an estimated 75 million each year (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/) things are only going to get worse….
Those humans who survive what lies ahead in the coming decades are going to be forced to live much simpler lifestyles.
LikeLike
Paul, I can’t say that I’m too impressed by what this chap has to say about himself or his credentials.
“Law school is an exercise in painstaking research into complex materials to find subtle and often confusing truths, and then combining and communicating your findings in a helpful way.”
Hmm. Well this could be said of any discipline – science, sociology, health, history (which I studied at Uni) etc.
I watched the video. As far as his arguments are concerned, I’ve heard quite a few of them before, including from people associated with the fossil fuel industry.
The problem is that climate is such a complex matter. The unfortunate term ‘global warming’ has led many people to expect continually increasing temperatures everywhere and this has confused the issue. For example, it’s long been known that changes in the Gulf Stream ( and Jet streams) brought about by increased ice melt in the Artic could result in cooler, blizzard like conditions in Europe.
I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe that increasing levels of co2, which do correlate very closely with the Industrial Age, could affect the climate.
I have found the following website useful in my own deliberations.
http://www.skepticalscience.com
You’ll notice on the left that the “most used climate myths” are listed. You can click on them to see the counter arguments.
LikeLike
At this point, the frightening bases are simple: the forcing of going from 280 ppm to 450 ppm of CO2 equivalent are clear: they entail a five degree Celsius rise.
LikeLike
And the science of this is clear? (And I’m not implying that it isnt.) In your opinion, Patrice, is it also scientifically valid to state that the primary cause of increasing CO2 levels is human activity?
LikeLike
(Continued) Of course we must all be careful of indulging in ‘confirmation bias’ and just looking at those websites or sources that bolster our preferred views. However, on so many issues these days, with the problem of information overload, it is increasingly difficult to know what the real story or truth is.
So let’s just say that Mr Davidson is right and that the climate changes presently underway are mainly the result of changing solar cycles. It’s still clearly the case that fossil fuels and chemicals generally are contaminating our planet’s air, oceans and lands. There is no question that marine life is being decimated by ocean acidification, toxins of all kinds and plastics. Cancers are increasing in humans. Bees, essential to plant life are threatened. Pure, clean water is getting harder and harder to find. Widespread deforestation, urbanisation and industrialisation are threatening plant and animal biodiversity and adversely affecting soils and waterways.
Meanwhile, the catastrophe that is Fukushima continues to unfold as we speak…
So it’s not just about climate change per se. Our present energy and chemical intensive lifestyles are making the planet increasingly sick. As the net world population continues to grow by an estimated 75 million each year (http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/) things are only going to get worse….
Those humans who survive what lies ahead in the coming decades are going to be forced to live much simpler lifestyles.
LikeLike
Marg, you will find my post coming out on Monday extremely pertinent to the thrust of your continued reply; for which many thanks for the time you spent composing it.
LikeLike
Giving Nazis equal time is not the way of wisdom. Nor is it the way of wisdom to ignore, or censor, real facts of the greatest significance.
[Just a general observation.]
LikeLike
Granted that it is perfectly clear to distinguish the difference at the time.
LikeLike