The Great Global Warming Swindle

Two months ago I was showing my friends a film called “The Great Global Warming Swindle.” As the title suggests, the topic of the movie is the global scale deceit about the man-made global warming. A number of important scientists argue that man has nothing to do with the rise of temperature and everything happens of natural causes.

Link: The Great Global Warming Swindle

After a hacker broke into the computers at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit, stole and published on the internet tens of megabytes of data and emails, it seems that the premises for the greatest scandal in modern science are set, and the truth will be finally revealed. These information show that top scientists have deliberately alter data to exaggerate global warming, destroyed embarrassing data, pushed for discrediting scientists that had other views on the topics, and others. This scandal is now referred to as Climate-gate.

I suggest that you watch the movie. It explains both what is causing the rise in temperature and why all the fuss around this phenomenon.

Now, the theory about man-driver temperature rise is based on two ideas: temperature variations depend on CO2 level variations, and man activity increases the CO2 in the atmosphere. Here are two charts from Wikipedia that show the variation of temperature in the last 150 years and last 1000 years.

Source: Wikipedia - Temperature record of the past 1000 years
Source: Wikipedia - Temperature record of the past 1000 years
Source: Wikipedia: 1000 Year Temperature Comparison
Source: Wikipedia: 1000 Year Temperature Comparison

You can find more charts here.

What these charts show is that in the last 150 years the temperature has risen and fallen. The greater rise occurred before 1940. And after 1940, when the world entered an economic boom, the temperature dropped for 3 decades. That doesn’t make any sense if the original hypothesis, that the more CO2 the greater the temperature, is true, because booming economies mean more CO2 being produced. In fact, the scientist were alarmed that a new ice age was coming. On April 28, 1975, Newsweek published an article about cooling and the effects on the planet. Here is a quote from the article:

There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production – with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.

Read the entire article here.

Then the question is, is there a link between CO2 and temperature? The answer is yes, but it’s mostly the other way around: the temperature is driving the CO2 level, with CO2 lagging 800-1000 years behind the temperature changes. Here are some charts of atmospheric CO2 concentration and temperature in lower atmosphere for the last 400,000 years.

Atmospheric CO2 Concetrations for last 400,000 years
Atmospheric CO2 Concetrations for last 400,000 years
Temperature of Lower Atmosphere for last 400,000 years
Temperature of Lower Atmosphere for last 400,000 years

Here are several articles on this topic:

The rise of temperature causes a rise of atmospheric CO2 because when the ocean warm the solubility of CO2 in the water falls, which leads to more CO2 being released into the atmosphere from the oceans. The amount of CO2 released in the atmosphere by man is much less than the one released from the oceans. Why is there a lag between the rise of temperature and CO2? Because the oceans act as a big buffer, but the exact dynamics are not yet well known. However, this doesn’t mean that the greenhouse effect doesn’t exist. It does. As more CO2 is released into the atmosphere, it absorbs more radiation reflected by the earth surface, heating the atmosphere.

So why is temperature rising? What is driving it? Well, the answer is the sun. The more solar activity, the more solar wind and cosmic dust hit the atmosphere which influences the formation of clouds and eventually the temperature. The next images shows the correlation between solar sunspots and global temperature variations.

Solar sunspot activity vs. Global temperatur variations
Solar sunspot activity vs. Global temperatur variations
400 years of Suspot Observations
400 years of Suspot Observations
Temperature, Co2 & Sunspots
Temperature, Co2 & Sunspots

You can read more about sunspots observations here:

Of course, not everybody agrees that Temperature, CO2 & sunspots correlate. For instance, you can read the following article that claims the opposite. It could be possible that this hypothesis is wrong, as many other theories were proved wrong over time.

Hopefully in the coming years (because this will take some time) the truth will be revealed. It would be silly to waste our efforts on the wrong direction. However, whatever the truth is, consuming the planet’s resource on a ever growing pace will prove catastrophic. We will never be able to kill the planet. But the planet can terminate us at any time.

8 Replies to “The Great Global Warming Swindle”

  1. Hi,

    I won’t go into any details here – because you can start looking for them in the very wiki-articles posted here.

    BUT: first of this is no new deal. Most scientist agree that sunspots elevate temperature on earth but does this really matter?

    We began not a very short time ago to burn things that took millions of years to build up. By growing those trees and plants, that we now use to feed our enourmous energy hunger, – aka oil, bound a LOT of CO2 and even if CO2 is not the worst (the worst indeed is steam) it is one of the worst gases that heat up our athmosphere.

    So now just use plain old logic: we set free huge amounts of CO2 that was reduced over very long times in a very very short time – and you still think this won’t have any impact? come on

    On the other hand – sorry to say but it’s true – there are a lot of organisations and countries (the US included) who are interested in “cooling” down the debate – there is a lot of money involved.

    And finaly: the fact, that there are of course scientists who want to push their careers in any possible way – even by faking facts. Doesn’t imply that the big picture is wrong – it just states that the tiny spot in this picture created by those persons MAY be wrong.


  2. I’m not saying that humans don’t have any impact on the environment in general and on the CO2 in atmosphere in particular. We have done great damage to the environment and unfortunately we continue to do it. But when it comes to CO2, the human CO2 emissions are much smaller than the natural emissions. As I already said, the greenhouse effect does happen and it might be possible that uncontrolled human CO2 emissions to disturb the natural balance and oceans ability to absorb CO2 (some say it absorbs half of human CO2, some say it only absorbs a quarter, so scientists don’t agree on this either). I believe we should use our natural resources wisely and take care of the environment at all levels. But when it comes to faking data, preaching a false idea or not necessary false, but an idea not sustained by observations, discrediting those who don’t agree, that is unethical, immoral, and definitely not the scientific way. It would not be for the first time that the mainstream “scientific” belief to prove wrong. As I said, four decades ago scientists were alarmed that man’s impact on the environment was responsible for the continuing dropping temperatures. When the trend changed and the temperature rose scientists started to blame man for that too. Maybe the truth is in the middle, but we need to learn it whatever it is and scientists that fake data to promote theories should pay for manipulating a whole world.

  3. You do realise that most of the items you raise have been widely discredited years ago? Human emmissions of CO2 are much higher than nearly all natural causes. Most natural processes are also balanced. Even volcanic activity does not match human CO2 amounts.

    The only real swindle here is the “documentary” you referred to. It has been reported that they lied to many of the participants involved in order to get more provocative responses from them and many have complained since and withdrawn any support for the programme.

    Scientific American recently had an article that refutes most of the points that skeptics raise along with a article from 1959 that warns of global warming due to increased CO2 from human activities.

    “Climategate” has little effect on the science either since much of the research is totally independent of their results.

  4. It is well known that volcanoes emit much less CO2 than human activities, currently about 130 times less.

  5. Nature has its ways of reaching an equilibrium. The temperature and CO2 graphs show periodicity which means there are mechanisms to adjust these parameters. I’m sure nature will find a way to reduce CO2 (which is way higher than ever – look at the third chart) even if it means reducing the number of people.

    Here are some points that do not add up in the article and film:
    1. there is a comment in the text and in the film related to the first graph that says after 1940 three (in film: 4) decades of temp drop were recorded. I can see a maximum of 10 years of cooling. Are these inaccurate drawings? if so, on what is the article based?
    2. In the film they say that if a global warming is to happen, the biggest temp differences should be visible in the upper atmosphere. If we are talking about the human impact on global warming we refer to the CO2 green house gas. This gas is heavier than O2 and it stays at low altitudes. So the upper atmosphere is not influenced by CO2 so we cannot see abnormal temperatures caused by humans there.
    3. Marius, your last post says: “It is well known that volcanoes emit much less CO2 than human activities”. The movie you posted says the contrary at min 24.37 . Why did you post it if you don’t believe what it says?
    4. There is an old man in the movie that says “CO2 is not pollution. We are all made of CO2.” I would like to ask him. O2 is no pollutant. But if atmosphere was 70% O2 would people still live?

  6. Interesting question about the atmosphere being made 70% of O2. I guess life forms would be different if the oxygen /nitrogen ration was different.

  7. Money, money, money. Control. Schools are showing Al Gores video??? Which includes some false evidence. What the…since when has anything been proven? Why don’t they show the other side of the debate? Hmmm…maybe it will create too many questions!!!Too many thinkers.

    Pay for your plastic recycable shopping bags that won’t biodegrate until 9999. What happened to good old fashioned paper bags, oh no we have to cut down too many trees… PS plant some more!!! God knows we need lots of trees. Large industries are making us a laughing stock and blaming us the consumer by making us feel guilty and then conjuring up another idea to play on our emotions so we can spend more money.

    Now where is this climate change fiasco going? Probably new laws will be made, more control over population, especially if only selected things are taught at schools…scary.
    What about the developing countries? Why are they still developing? I thought that with all the donations, all the help, all the people, all the medical teams thoughout these last few decades that have contributed to giving everyone the right to sustainablity that we would be at least generous to give some continuous power to medical centres so they can turn on the lights and fridge on at the same time!!!
    Think, think, think…when the climate starts getting cooler which it will, (the climate has been even hotter before)so it still could go up, and we are older and wiser don’t forget to tell your children what you have learned.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.