Tuesday catch up.

I think I'm free now- the doctor, optician and barber aren't a big deal and at my leisure to call (barber first). No plans either but past worrying as I'm free and will make the most of it. While the Americans are crapping themselves over gay marriage and mosques on Facebook I realise what a shame it is people worry about harmless and irrelevant things that don't affect them while there are so many genuine issues to care about. They are confused and I could explain why but they won't hear until they are prepared to listen, which may be when hell freezes over.

As the Big Brother final's on all night my phone calls will have to wait another day, and spent today getting my strimmer back and finding how to make it work again and getting air in the car tyres, what used to be free anywhere and now spend more on petrol finding a free source that also works. I then cut all the front garden and will finish the hedge when I've done this here. After the roofer removed all but the few green tiles from my garage when I said he could have a few the ones removed from next door are now in a heap and coming my way as they are having the roof extended. The divorced woman opposite now has a whole side facing me rotted away and the whole side of the roof is being supported on nothing. She's just spent all her cash buying out her ex husband so doubt she can afford the roof repair, and if it collapses she'll be looking at ten times the amount. None of my business besides the fact I can see it all the time. The supporting beam is sagging more and more and now a foot gap between it and the roof where the edge tiles are now slipping off as a result. My guttering and boards already rotted and were replaced a few years ago before they got that bad so had the same ordeal already.

I wonder now if there are any jobs I haven't done, as when it's quiet I worry I may have missed something important I should be doing as well, but can't think of any. I have just got back another email saying my global warming enquiry was being dealt with, so not forgotten and currently setting up tables of data from the few scientists who get it to show the believers. Nothing less can work as I've discovered. And whatever the science the climate skeptics are all the nicest most sensible people I've come across while most of the believers are left wing, scatty, emotional and judgemental. It seems to follow the personalities, as the 'solutions' to supposed climate issues are purely based on cash extraction and curbing of freedoms, something the left have always been keen on. I've never trusted them all my life as taking people's money they earned legitimately seems the basis of a diseased ideology. Jealousy, resentment and judgement, resulting in the loss of freedom and individuality is something no one want, but the left want to impose it on others without realising if they actually lived in Cuba or North Korea they'd hate it as much as the right. After all, the leaders don't live the way the people do anyway so those imposing the system on the innocent are always outside it as they are using all that money extracted from them in the first place. The global warmists are trying to impose this worldwide and I am one person doing all I can to stop them.

The bottom line on climate change 2

I reckon all anyone needs is part 1 but there are many details. The biggest clue climate change is not what it seems is the actual results. The taxation and research grants have put the world on a war economy, sucking up every spare resource for the countries and paring people's free cash to a minimum. In economics every spending choice has an alternative which has been rejected, the 'opportunity cost'. The greatest opportunity cost here is third world aid. The money already spent on this cause could have wiped out malaria, provided clean water for the third world and stopped genuine industrial pollution. These are people who need it now, not some vague time in the future even the worst projections admit will never be known as we'll all be dead by the time it happens.

There are the inevitable bandwagon jumpers, divided between the leaders (ie those who know) and the followers (ie those who trust). The leaders are simple frauds on the biggest scale ever seen and can basically go fuck themselves. The followers are what saddens me the most as being dishonest makes sense to those with no morals, but being dead stupid is something people are stuck with. My estimation of the world average IQ has been decimated since this began, as besides the converted most people I present this long researched case to simply ignore it all. They can't support their case (besides one scientist who I can't actually understand as I'm not one myself so have sought the support of one for myself), but refuse to accept the figures all around them. The rabid left wingers just see it as another symptom of capitalism so happy to add 'climate' change' to whatever other perceived evils they see in the very system which allows them to protest about it. Let them all fuck off to China and Cuba and protest against theirs instead. Oh, they can't.

In a criminal case the defendant (here being mankind itself) needs to be proved beyond reasonable doubt. Both sides seem convincing once a case gets to trial (the others fall beforehand), and the jury then needs to decide if there's enough evidence for guilt (not in France but they still tend to get it right using their system) to convict them. In science this should not be the case. They try themselves to disprove a theory until it's almost impossible to, and then they publish their figures to be reviewed by peers.
The fact here that because this idea arrived along with the internet the other scientists are able to publish their own findings as well, unlike before when only the strong were reported. Now for reasons best left to the imaginations of the readers, there are totally different measurements found by satellites, ice cores and all the other methods submitted to the IPCC. The IPCC are not peers either, but a jury of politicians. They include scientists but their role is meant to be to decide if there is enough evidence to make policies.

As anyone can find two equally convincing (to be fair the figures against global warming are more so as they are all based in the present and past so certain) sets of figures then there is reasonable doubt. Unless that doubt is proved to be false there is no case. What more can I add?

The bottom line on climate change 1

I am absolutely appalled how easy it was to convince the average person we have something to fear from our climate. I may not be a scientist but a law degree trained me to judge evidence and a counselling diploma trained me in understanding people's minds, and unfortunately both here are totally lacking.

This is a summary of their case. SOME (mainly kept secret- for "commercial reasons"- clue there for a start) temperature measurements show the average temperature has increased since 1970, combined with an increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. That's it.

The current CO2 is 380ppm. The temperature rose .5' in the last century. We are leaving an ice age so the temperature has risen since the last one, an ice age means there is polar ice, and there currently still is. Once all the polar ice melts then the ice age will be over until the next one.

These figures are presented as if they mean more than that. In 1961 Time-Life books published one on earth science, and then the CO2 concentration was accepted not as an absolute figure but a variable. 240-400ppm. Now in 2010 it is 380ppm. So if that was normal in 1961 how is it not in 2010?
Secondly what we are told to fear is not the present, but extrapolations based on so many variables (the very same chaos theory is based on, a second clue there), showing a 2-6' rise in the next century. That was made about ten years ago, and although there are still various sets of quite different figures (not anything to base my confidence on) most show the temperature stabilised soon after and has not actually risen yet. It clearly isn't linear or logarithmic, but as the theory suggests, chaotic. Too many variables. Philip Stott who is qualified says we only know 5% of what drives the climate, and why would he invent such a figure?

So once the fear was created the worst case scenario was presented as a problem that needed a solution, a classic totalitarian formula. Want safety from terrorists? You'll have to lose many of your liberties but better than being blown up? No, not really. Anyway, Al Gore and James Hansen took the worst possible result from the far end of their projections and presented it as inevitable (even though they were clearly at the crazy end of the range). As a result, despite no actual changes beyond the norm (can they tell what it would have been like without the extra CO2, which is about 3%?) they have convinced the UN to tax energy usage. As people have no choice to heat or travel then they have to pay the tax and save in other areas (funny how the biggest tax burden in history coincided with a worldwide recession in 2007 onwards) thus creating a net equality of usage and vast increase in revenue. The oil and energy companies are accused by the sheep/bedwetters of sponsoring people like Philip Stott, David Bellamy, Johnny Ball, Nils Axel Morner, Piers Corbyn and every other scientist who disputes this as total bollocks. The fact BP and Shell are actively campaigning for said taxes seems to go straight over their heads despite the fact oil companies get a huge share of this extra revenue.

None of this is complex. None besides the absorption spectrum of air gases and the Aqua satellite findings that water vapour (the greatest natural greenhouse gas) displaces CO2 (not very powerful at all) are beyond most primary school children to understand, yet so far people either work this out themselves as I have or ignore every fact that implies the whole authority system of the world is indeed corrupt and they can no longer trust them. So that being so frightening they'd rather believe the sky is going to fall in despite historical records showing man thrived in warmer times and always will. And despite having no polar ice the bears are still here.

The actual consequences of global warming (the full phrase is climate change due to global warming, but they dropped that bit when it was clearly not happening) are not chaos, but well known. The weather patterns move north, the sea level rises as it always does, and whatever weather people were getting to the south/prevailing wind area before shifts to the next area along. The end result is colder areas become more habitable while deserts move north, while the lowest lying land is swamped over hundreds of years as the ice is the last thing to melt due to the latent heat required to do so meaning it has to be more than 1 over zero for some time before it responds. The time it takes to clear low lying land, which should in most cases never have been colonised in the first place, is a lot less than it takes to be flooded. If there is so little room on this planet people had to settle flood plains then there are too many people here.

So yes, eventually the sea level will rise noticeably, but not until many generations of humans have passed. Our climates will change, places like Greenland and Iceland will become more like Scotland, and places like England will become more like Spain. But nowhere will not become like somewhere else, and at present the only land which is uninhabitable is the South Pole, due to the ice. There are deserts everywhere and few people live there, but many animals and plants do, and if you dig down far enough you'll usually find water there. Again, if there's not enough room for the desert dwellers to move north that's not the climate's fault, but there are too many people. And although no prediction is really science if not on a fixed path like the heavenly bodies, one did say severe weather does not increase as the temperature rises. Unfortunately Al Gore's film couldn't be edited that late so is still part of the new bible. They certainly move around so Britain could get the odd hurricane if the Atlantic heated enough in the summer, but Florida is still heavily populated with no shortage of them there. Apart from hurricanes and tornadoes (which are so rare they even have their own region across the USA) the only other effect could be floods. I've already dealt with them, if you build in sensible places only then the water can't reach you. If you have proper drainage then the water is channelled away as it falls, if not immediately within a day or so. The monsoon areas are very heavily populated and they know what to do during the season and don't bugger off to the high ground either.

So, heat, wind and rain. That's it. The heat is here now and like the low lying areas people move away when they become impossible to inhabit, they always have. We have the rain and wind already and people live with it. Have I missed something?