Copyright 2009 Georgina von Marburg

Today I will be speaking to you on a topic which is so relevant to our

generation: Manmade Global Warming. We hear about it on the radio, TV,
magazines, newspapers, films…everywhere we go - by bicycle or our gas-
guzzling BMW four-wheel-drive – we are forced fed the “inconvenient truth”
that we all are, in one way or another, guilty of bringing about the destruction of
Earth. However, although all the hypothesises behind Global Warming have
apparently by proven beyond doubt, many well recognised scientists have
completed studies which show otherwise. And since science cannot contradict
itself, one side of the underground Climate Change debate is worthy of heeding,
and the other is only worthy of a yet another supportive rock concert. I aim to
prove to you that, by using the evidence of extensive scientific research
organizations, that the current Global Warming is NOT manmade and is merely
one of the earth’s temperature cycles.
SUNSPOTS
You will often hear that mankind is releasing “substantial” quantities of Carbon
Dioxide into the atmosphere. Now, it is perfectly reasonable for us to assume
that substantial must mean over 50%. However manmade CO2 emissons only
account for 3%, hardly substantial; the other 97% is natural. As it seems highly
unlikely that man is contributing to such a dramatic change in temperature,
there is another reason for the temperature increase. This is the constant change
of temperature the earth undergoes due to sunspots – temporary regions of the
sun with higher heat than its surroundings. The more sunspots are focused on
the earth, the warmer the temperature. When graphing the history of Sunspots
with Earth’s temperature, the sunspot activity correlates almost exactly with the
temperature.
TEMPERATURE
So if the earth has been warming and is warming again right now, what is
causing this? Well, a graph from the Solar and Stellar Physics Division for
Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics, shows that the earth’s
temperatures from 1800 to the present are almost completely in line with Solar
Irradiance. Now, Al Gore’s and the UN’s CO2 vs Temperature Graph had two
significant flaws. Firstly, his graph reaches back apparently 650,000 years –
clearly Mankind was NOT producing carbon emissions until the 18th century
during the Industrial Revolution. Secondly, the UN keeps the temperature graph
and the CO2 graph separate, which gives the impression that they are in sync.
However, when the two graphs are correlated, temperature is above the CO2,
which means that the temperature causes CO2 to change, not the other way
around.
In Al Gore’s Academy Award winning film, he states 2005 was the hottest year
in the past 14 years and the past 10 of these fourteen years have been the hottest
years ever recorded. However, fellow Australian Bob Carter, a geologist at
James Cook University, became somewhat notorious in 2006 for playing the
Greens at their own game; he noted that “the official temperature records of the
Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia(based in the UK) show
that for the years of 1998-2005 the global average temperature did not increase”
– meaning it actually cooled after 1998. Al Gore of course ignores, like many
other facts, this reading, yet if he were still raving on about Global Cooling like
he was in the 70’s, I’m sure we would see this fact all over movie posters next
to Leo’s face.
SEA LEVELS Yes, the sea level has risen; in fact it has risen over 120m – over
the last 10,000 years that it is. The level is still rising slowly today because we
are in what is called the Holocene interglacial cycle. For the past 1 million
years, eight of these cycles, in which glaciers melt into the sea, have occurred;
I’m sure many of you have seen numerous videos of immense chunks of ice
crashing into the depths of the ocean, but since this has been happening for the
last 10,000 years, is it not logical to assume that our industrialisation is not
causing this? As for Al Gore’s prediction of seas levels rising - quote – “20 feet
in the near future”, new studies conducted by NASA scientists on ice mass
balance changes and effects on sea levels show that the combined net loss of ice
from Greenland AND Antarctica would only account for a rise of 0.05 mm per
year over 10 years. At that rate, it would take 120,000 years for the sea level to
rise by 20ft. Personally, I wouldn’t accept 120,000 years as being in the “near
future”. And by the time 120,000 years has come around, we will be in a new
interglacial cycle.
Although there are mountains of evidence to send Al Gore and his counterparts
on a walk of shame, the media has made it increasingly difficult to do so. Room
for questioning has seemed to have disappeared among the hysteria of an
ignorant population controlled by power hungry politicians selling carbon
credits. However, sceptics of Climate Change don’t stand alone in the fight to
expose the truth. On May 20th, 2008, 32,000 scientists, 15 times the number in
the UN’s IPCC, gathered at the Oregon State University. 9000 of these had
PHD’s, and 72 were Nobel Prize Winners. Here they signed a petition which
strongly denied that there was convincing evidence of harm from CO2
emissions and denounced the alarmist assertions of Al Gore and the UN IPCC.
If there is more evidence against Climate Change than there is for it, I suggest
you rethink sending yourself on a guilt trip the next time you turn on a light
bulb.
Thank you.