Channel 4, The Great Global Warming Swindle
Posted on: March 9, 2007 - 9:23am

Channel 4, The Great Global Warming Swindle
British channel 4 has made a dokumentary called The Great Global Warming Swindle that aired this week. I havent seen it yet but it might be interesting. It has recived critisism as expected. Channel 4 have made great dokumentaries before, like Undercover in the secret state a film about north korea.
Here is a link where you can download it:
http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3635143/Channel_4_-_The_Great_Global_Warming...
And here is a blogpost that talks about it.
http://globalisation-and-the-environment.blogspot.com/2007/03/great-glob...
[MOD EDIT - fixed links]
































yer i saw it, at first i was very skeptical since i'm currently doing an atmospheric physics module at uni which indicates global warming is anthropogenic, so i was torn. If the "facts" they presented were true then it does bring about some good controversy. Also the people being interviewed were doctors at Cambridge, MIT, Harvard... so i'm guessin they had a clue
The link in the first post didn't work for me. Here's another link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6IPHmJWmDk&mode=related&search=
I don't like Capitalism, because I believe in free markets.
I don't like Socialism, because I believe in cooperation over conflict.
I don't like the State, because I believe in justice, peace, and security.
--Contrarian Credo
It's important to bear in mind that the only evidence for the existance of Satan is the media. Seriously, although Channel 4 are probably the best channel on terrestrial T.V. and all the different offshoots tend to provide the best entertainment, controversial subjects garner the most attention, meaning more viewers, meaning they then have more reason to churn up advertising prices and money money money.
I'll be auditioning Gods in my office on monday morning. - Aesop Rock
Though I believe in Global Warming it seems to me that man has very little to do with it. Unless we are also responsible for the heating up of EVERY OBJECT in the solar system. I realise that Earth is the center of the universe but other objects do effect us... not just man.
Read this link for more. http://www.redicecreations.com/specialreports/2006/11nov/solarsystemwarming.html
"Those who have stepped into the arena shall forever cherish a feeling the protected will never know."
While I'm back to fence sitting on the matter, I am aware that even if other planetary objects are warming(which I've seen absolutely nothing to suggest is remotely accurate), it is a logical fallacy to assume climate on Earth and Pluto are the slightest bit related.
Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, & Gaming God.
It's all the sun. I've poured through the data, read all 3 IPCC reports and examined documents from the upcoming, examined the ice core data. It's clear, humans have added to the total CO2, but it is so insignificant to the natural causes it does not warrant panic. CO2 is a product of the Earth's temperature and not a cause. Solar output, temperature and CO2 all follow the same lines. However CO2 is erratic and actually lags temperature a few hundred years, which makes perfect sense knowing how the sea functions. Yet solar energy and temperature line up almost perfectly.
In the show the "rebel" scientists were talking about how noone really will speak out against global warming without getting slammed by the rest of the scientific community, does this not indicate a fundamental issue that needs to be dealt with. The beauty of science is its independance from politics or other influences, is this being lost?
I believe the human effect on climate change is very small, but I also believe that anything that gets funding to science is good. The earth's climate has been changing for millennium, why would we suddenly expect a balance?
This is my problem with global warming and public policy. It seems like politics has gotten its teeth into it and that always throws up red flags for me. A good case in point is compact fluorescent lights. They use A LOT less energy so now there is legislation in progress that would mandate their use. Cool, except for the problem that these bulbs contain mercury and wholesale adoption of them would create serious problems with mercury pollution. But it is a real easy feel good measure that politicians can wear proudly - as long as the mercury thing does not become widely known.
My Artwork
I've read the IPCC report for most parts and from all I can tell, the only logical explanation is that the global warming is caused by humans. When I have the chance to decided whom I believe, I'd rather believe in the majority of scientists than in Bush and oil concerns.
Science is organized knowledge. Wisdom is organized life. - Immanuel Kant
The mercury emissions from coal plants are much higher than the mercury content in the bulbs. A regular light bulb uses about three times as much mercury over it's lifespan (10mg) compared to an average CFL which uses about 2.4mg (and the CFL lasts much longer). The technology for the mercury in the bulbs can change and the bulbs can be disposed of so as not to contaminate groundwater. There is no control for mercury emissions from power plants as indicated by higher levels of mercury in the food stream.
LED light bulbs contain no mercury and are more energy efficient than CFLs. Currently the price for those bulbs are quite high but, like the CFLs, are expected to go down.
1
I havent seen this video and im not sure what their view is on this subject but no matter what the view the facts remain unchanged.
global warming is not due to humans. It has happend several times in the last 4.5 billion years. There is money in causeing panic for us in global warming. The global temprature has risein 1-3 degrees F in the last hundred years, it has risein 5 the hundred yrs before that proveing these people are full of shit. This trend of warming will result in an ice age. There is no shortage of oil, trees, waste dumps or fresh water. We cant change it, stoping anything we have done the entire existance of our human race wont save the planet, the planet is fine, if we dont change our hippy bullshit ways we wont be fine thats all there is to it. THE END
"Freedom of religion, means freedom of religion"
-ME
So those thousands of scientists and hundreds of studies are wrong and you're right because? It's quite something to go against numerous scientific findings. Much like creationists who say the thousands of scientists are wrong about evolution I'm sure you'll present the scientific evidence that completely blows all this research out of the water.
So far, like the creationists, nobody has. Perhaps the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is part of a huge, massive global conspiracy, but probably not.
sometimes in the universe NEW things happen. that is my problem with the evidence they put forward on the show, it was entirely based on the past.
It is true that the disolution of CO2 into water is exothermic and so heating the oceans has a reversing effect releasing some of it. This is some of the cause of climate change in the past, as you say CO2 lags solar energy variations. However what can be seen from the data is once that oceanic CO2 is released, if there is enough released into the atmosphere the earth is pushed out of its stable equillibrium and pushed into a new equillibrium, most of the time an ice age.
The thing about anthropogenic CO2 is that it's simulating the oceanic CO2 release which can cause the runaway effect. In the past few decades CO2 count in the atmosphere has risen by almost 40%, most of which CAN be accounted for by our emissions and deforestation etc. Obviously CO2 isnt the only greenhouse gas, we produce methane aswell (cows etc) and also the warming and cooling towers can produce more steam which is also a greenhouse gas.
Anyway i'm just rambling but my point is there is a point where runaway occurs as the imbalance causes more imbalance.... We are producing that imbalance in a NEW but very REAL way so talking about ice records is useless as this is a very different issue.
Can you explain why there is mercury in an incandescent lamp. I thought they were constructed of a tungsten filament in argon (metal in an inert gas).
G
"Wait what are you talking about? Studies on what? Global warming? Global warming due to us? The study how hippys saved the world? The scientific community has given us a straight answer on all of this. Global warming is true, we cant stop it, we didn't cause it, the only thing we can do is survive it, which can be found in many of discovery channel programming. The people you may be talking about contradicting the words i have said above are the same people controlling your religion and media, its a scare tactic to get small minded people to worry, and spend money and then they will tell us they have beaten global warming making them god in your eyes. Being a hippy will get you no were but dead, its survival of the fittest and that includes whose toughest against the weather."
"Freedom of religion, means freedom of religion"
-ME
Exactly.
There are still the few hundred scientific studies that show that it's our fault though. Also, it may be true that we can't stop it entirely, but there's a thing called "limitation of damage". Instead of watching the discovery channel, maybe you should take a peek at the ICPP report and make up your own opinion.
Science is organized knowledge. Wisdom is organized life. - Immanuel Kant
From what I read at Wiki the mercury is needed to control the gas pressure. Newer designs are lowering the amount of mercury used and Wal-mart is pressuring it's suppliers to reach a lower content so we should expect in the near future to have less mercury content than we have now.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change controls the media and religion? Better keep on wearing that tin foil hat, it helps reflect the sun back. I'll stick with the science, you keep on with those bizarre conspiracy theories like scientists plotted to create the thermostat for their ultimate plot to get people to drive hybrids.
I'm very interested in this because I am an electronics tech involved exclusively in entertainment technology so I work with a lot of Intelligent lighting and Audio equipment. A major change recently has been the RoHS restrictions which is an international initiative to reduce the amount of hazardous chemicals in our landfill. The three major concerns are lead, mercury and cadmium. I won't go into the frustration of the reliablility of leadfree solder (leadfree solder is mostly tin and tin grows whiskers over time and causes failures as well as having a smaller useable temperature range... a massive drama to manufacturing)
The RoHS compliance definition states "Any RoHS compliant component must have 100 ppm or less of mercury and the mercury must not have been intentionally added to the component."
I was never under the assumption incandescent lamps contained any mercury and I found on this Wiki page... "Disposal and recycling | The disposal of phosphor and particularly the mercury in the (flourescent)tubes is an environmental issue. (Incandescent lamps do not contain mercury.)"
I agree with your conclusion that due to the emmissions of mercury from power stations a CFL is more friendly but I find it weird our governments while enforcing RoHS seem to overlook the violation to RoHS compliance with respect to intentionaly added mercury in CFLs.
G
Don't be naiive (I mean that in the nicest possible way). With the global political climate the way it is these days, isn't it possible that someone's calling the shots for all these issues? And Explicit didn't say it was the IPCC that controls media and religion, but suggested that they're controlled by the same people at a higher level. I'm not saying we should go overboard with conspiracy theories, but things aren't exactly adding up right.
Explicit, please stop referring to people who believe in global warming as "hippies." Even if its not true that we cause global warming, giving a crap about the environment shouldn't be labelled negatively. Have some respect.
On the actual issue at hand, I was recently promoting awareness of global warming but I realise now that there's as much evidence one way as there is the other way. All those scientific studies that claim global warming is our work focus on change in the last 150 years or so, if that. The studies of the LONG-TERM climate changes (hundreds of thousands, if millions of years) suggest that we SHOULD be experiencing a period of warming right now. So do you assume that it's a natural occurence, or do you expect that perhaps we're experiencing an anomaly because of C02 emissions of our own causes?
The main argument I've heard in defense of global warming relating to C02 is that, in most studies, C02 levels start to rise AFTER the environment heats up, not before, contradicting the claim of causality. Global Warming scientists say that this is simply 'lag.' In a recent New Scientist article I read, the suggestion was made that we shouldn't assume there'll be a perfect correlation between past temperature and C02 levels but this doesn't change the fact that C02 is a greenhouse gas and affects temperature.
What needs to be included in assessment are the implications of taking one or the other path. If we take Global Warming as caused by humans to be true, what are the global economic factors such including the affects on third-world countries exporting materials that might be replaced by other technologies, such as African nations' oil. If we don't say it's caused by humans, should we switch to more environmentally-friendly technology anyway?
My general impression is that the effects are too far underway to be stopped, and natural "disasters" are going to be more frequent for a while. What matters to me, then, is what we can do to reduce the damage that will occur.
I've seen both the Great Global Warming Swindel and another BBC doc called Global Warming: Doomsday Called Off.
The predominant theory in both is a combination of man-made Co2, Solor Magnetic activity, cosmic rays and Global Dimming.
The concept is very simple and a wrote about it a long time ago on my old blog. It's long winded and I don't want to write it all out again, so I'll just quote from my writtings there:
Targeting The Global Warming Bandwagon!
My faithful readers will remember that some time back I posted the FACTS about how the scientific community and the media has been attempting to skew findings when it comes to the warming of the planet earth. Any information that seems to dispute the coming "Global Warming/Global Climate Change" disaster tends to get poo-pooed and ignored in the media.
I also laid out this remarkable little gem of evidence that I stumbled upon at the Junk Science website which shows just how ALARMIST and GOOFY the Enviro-Fascists have gotten when it comes to Global Warming. The fact that the supposedly alarming increase in global temperatures of 0.6 degrees Celsius is within the margin of error ( +/- 0.7 degrees Celsius) for all of the data recorded since 1951, and the fact that some areas of the earth are not warming or are actually cooling tends to shed some light on the issue at hand.
So what do we know? Well, we know that the warming isn't GLOBAL, that the average change in the climate is well withing the margin of error for the data collected, and that climate change is nothing new for the planet Earth.
But wait, you exclaim! Don't we have evidence that SUVs and fossile fuels are destroying the environment? Don't we know that man is responcible for all this drastic global warming?
Nope, and anyone who tells you that they DO know that we're causing Global Warming is lying because we now have VERY CONVINCING EVIDENCE that concept of Global Warming is a thing of the past and that we may well have found the REAL culprit behind the 0.6 degree change in the average global temperature of the planet Earth, and here's a hint: There is nothing we can do to stop it because WE DIDN'T CREATE IT IN THE FIRST PLACE!
I've said it before and I'll say it again; We simply DO NOT KNOW enough about the climate of our planet to be able to make any kind of decisive statement about what is causing what we KNOW to be a moderate warming trend on the planet earth. Despite this FACT, the Enviro-fascists are hard at work producing propaganda and misinformation designed to stop or eliminate our way of life.
Make no mistake, the Enviro-fascists have rapidly descended from their perches high up in the redwood trees that they love to hug, with the spotted owls they love to snuggle. No, the Tree-hugging, spotted owl tongue kissing, environmental alarmists are less and less concerned with protecting the environment and more and more concerned with the destruction of capitalism and the American way of life.
Global Warming has become their favorite weapon with which to bash capitalism and the American economy. We all have heard the hysterical comments about "Big Oil," "Halliburton," and "SUVs." We've heard about how America is the biggest pollution producer in the world and that we all need to be driving hybrid vehicles and dismantling the industrial complex. We've been beaten over the head with the Kyoto treaty and how George W. Bush was an idiot for not signing onto a treaty that required America to clean up it's already "cleaner than most" industrial complex while exempting China and other BIG polluters from ANY enforced changes.
Well, it's all a big steaming pile of class-one, grade-A, USDA Certified Bullshit.
First and foremost, the so-called Third World and Industrial "new comers" in South America and China are responsible for MORE pollution and MORE environmental damage than the United States of America. American Industry is, more often than not, cleaner than her counterparts in China or anywhere else for that matter. The reason is that we have regulations in place and the companies often make enough money that they can invest in equipment that reduces or eliminates harmful pollutants. While we do drive a LOT of cars and trucks and SUVs, Americans drive more modern vehicles that produce less pollution. Look at the third world and what do you see?
The TRUTH is that our rivers, lakes, streams, air, and soil are CLEANER than most any other nation because for the most part we DO CARE about the environment. And that's why the enviro-fascists are so effective in their attacks on our way of life. Why, if we all care about the environment, all they have to do is tell us how someone doesn't care to rally support. And they've tried to rally that support to a treaty that would have CRIPPLED the American Economy and done NOTHING to reel in polluters in other nations.
The Kyoto Treaty would have let countries like China go on exempt from the treaty while the American Economy would be forced to absorb a lot of the costs. So far, the Kyoto Treaty has cost the nations that signed onto it almost $99 Billion to enforce and has produced a "POTENTIAL" temperature savings of 0.001024986 °C. Yep, $99 Billion for 1/1000th of a degree in temperature savings.
But nowhere have the enviro-fascists been more effective than in their "Global Warming" Jihad.
The lie has been shouted from the roof-tops for so long and so loud that it's taken root and people actually believe that man has been able to do more damage to the Earth and her delicate atmosphere than has ever been done before. People readily accept that we have caused the climate to change and the planet to warm.
But if that is the case, then what about Mars?
Scientists have recently announced the discovery that the Southern Polar Ice-cap on the planet Mars is retreating at an alarming rate. After an unprecedented recent couple of years actually observing Martian climate and geology, we've found that not only is Mars warming up, it's also losing it's southern Ice Cap and is going through a warming trend of it's own.
Let's break this down. What is it that both planets have in common that COULD be the reason that Mars is experiencing the same warming trend that Earth is?
Well, it's not animal or plant life. There is pretty much a universal acceptance that there is no life left on Mars, though there may have been some at some distant past. We've not sent any astronauts to Mars for the purpose of exploration, so we know that there are no humans on Mars. Last time I checked, the Mars Rovers are solar powered and are not producing any toxic, environment-killing green house gases. Last I checked, NASA has been the only entity to receive a no-bid contract to explore Mars, and Halliburton is nowhere near that planet. So what could possibly contribute to the warming of the planets Earth and Mars at the exact same time?
There is only one thing that both of these planets have in common, and it's something that EVERY planet in the solar system has in common with each other.
It's the sun.
It turns out that according to scientific records and data, the sun is shining brighter than it has in the last 8000 years. In fact, recent scientific work has revealed that everything we know about the connections between the cycles of the sun and the cycles of the climate of the planet Earth are directly related.
In 2003, the same team of scientists announced the correlation of the brightness and the number and severity of sun spots with the warming and cooling trends going back 1000 years.
To make a long story full of scientific terms a little shorter and easier to understand, scientists have been able to work out that the sun is producing more sunspots, and shining brighter than it has done in the last 8000 years. Outside the known 11 year cycle of solar activity, there exists at least one magnetic cycle that produces more sun spots, but increases the brightness of the sun. Further, Scientists in Ireland have found a direct correlation between solar activity and warming and cooling trends.
The key is cosmic rays. Cosmic rays interact with the atmosphere, creating isotopes like C-14 and Be-10 which in turn interact with water vapor in the atmosphere, turning that vapor into clouds and then as those clouds grow, those molecules act as condensation nuclei which in turn becomes the rain.
It's by this process that the C-14 is absorbed into plants and is how scientists can look at the rings of a tree and discover the level of cosmic radiation that made it's way to Earth in the years when those rings were formed. The same goes for the Be-10 which is found in the Polar Ice caps in Ice Cores.
In sort, as more cosmic rays reach the Earth, levels of lower atmosphere cloud cover increases, causing more of the solar radiation to be reflected back into space. This causes a general cooling trend and may have been more that partially responsible for the last ice age.
In the opposite case, when cosmic ray levels drop, so does the lower level cloud cover. This leaves the higher elevation cloud cover which acts more like a mirror pointed at the Earth, reflecting the infra-red radiation of the earth back toward the ground. Thus more radiation is absorbed by atmosphere, and less escapes from it which in turn leads to warming trends.
Whoa! Wait a minute! Didn't you just say that the Sun is shining brighter than in the last 8000 years? If that is the case, shouldn't there be more cosmic rays?
Well, yes. One would think that way, but the problem is that the brightness of the sun is directly related to the number of sun-spots on it's surface. Sun spots are caused by magnetic activity within the sun. These magnetic lines prevent cosmic rays from escaping the sun. They are grabbed, along with the plasma storms that make up the surface of the sun and pulled back down to the surface.
In this way, when the sun is at it's brightest and most active, LESS cosmic radiation can make it's way through space to the planet Earth.
The sun that we all depend on for life and warmth may well be the cause for EVERY warming and cooling trend that the planet earth has ever seen. Remember that the last time the Earth experienced solar levels like this was at the time that the last Ice Age was ending rapidly.
Remember the story about Global Dimming? Here is is, slightly edited for format and because I don't need to make this story any longer than it already is.
Let's tie these stories together, shall we?
Global Dimming, due to all the particulate matter in the atmosphere has been decreasing and more solar energy has been reaching the surface, with less material in the lower atmosphere to reflect solar radiation back into space, the surface temperature has begun to rise.
So aside from the fact that this story is telling us that air pollution was actually helping to keep the atmosphere cool (tell that to an enviro-fascist and watch their heads explode), but that the trend began in the 1950's and is reversing as of about a decade ago.
So we have a combination of pollution being slowed down and solar activity preventing solar radiation from reaching the planet that has led to an increase in temperatures over the last 100 years, but more drastically in the last 50 to 60 years.
I had to leave that last part in there just because it still makes me laugh...
But on a serious note, the data all fits together. We're BEGINNING to see that while there is still global warming to worry about, it's not all our fault. Hell, our attempts to clean the air are leading to higher temperatures! So we're damned if we do and damned if we don't.
Do you realize that there is an idea floating around that the best way to stand off global warming is the wide spread pollution of the atmosphere in order to create more low level clouding? Yes, enviro-fascists are beginning to advocate the intentional pollution of the atmosphere...
So does this mean that we're off the hook? No. There is evidence that increased levels of co2 can lead to the dreaded green-house effect. Does that mean that we're the cause of all that co2? Nope.
Case in fact. One single and significant volcanic eruption such as the ones at Mount Vesuvius that destroyed Pompeii, Mount Saint Helens, or Mount Pinatubo cause more damage than the entire history of human civilization.
In fact, the act of igniting oil wells in the first Gulf War did less environmental damage than a single, small-scale eruption of ANY volcano.
So what can we gleam from all this information? Well, we can clearly see that while we can have an effect on the level of green house gasses we produce and use, we have NO CONTROL over the influence of solar radiation on low level clouds which has been shown to be a driving force in the warming and cooling trends in the past.
So the next time someone tries to bring you down by telling you that your SUV is destroying the environment, or that Halliburton is the cause of Global Warming or that if we all just embraced socialism and abandon