Our Position on AGW/Global Warming/Climate Change:
Since we have had the ability to have an internet presence (right after Algore invented it) our position on this subject has remained consistent. In 2001, the IPCC (The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) the political body governing the science of AGW as it was then known, issued their agreement with our position: “In climate research and modeling, we should recognize that we are dealing with a coupled non-linear chaotic system, and therefore that long-term prediction of future climate states is not possible.” This is buried in the IPCC’s Third Assessment Report (2001), Section 126.96.36.199. page 774. We call this the prime principle of climate science, and agree with it except for one reservation, and that is the solar activity of the sun with its cyclical patterns.
Because the IPCC was never organized to be anything but a political body striving to prove a false theory (AGW) what their contributing scientists wrote was simply skipped over if it did not agree with the IPCC’s predetermined outcome. This is not science. This is propaganda. Therefore, ignoring their own prime principle has led to the deaths of millions of wild animals, the waste of billions of dollars, and the corruption of science on a massive scale. All enumerated on our Stop Conflict Energy page.
Until the prime principle (above) can be proven wrong, all climate models produced on the biggest, smartest, fastest computers are proving themselves wrong in the real world. The models fail because the variables in the theory are enormous and very few have been included in the models. Here is an example of just one of the huge variables. While the biggest green house gas, water vapor, is not even part of the assumptions in creating the 102 models that have all shown themselves to be wrong. Carbon dioxide is barely perceptible compared to water vapor, and is not a toxic gas as the EPA has ruled. It is the gas of life, without which, this discussion would not be taking place. The world is warming, but not because of carbon dioxide and nowhere near as alarmingly as the political schemers at the IPCC want you to believe. Follow the money and you will see exactly who is getting rich in the process.