LETTERS News Weekly
, October 13, 2012
Global warming 1
Kim L. Critchley’s letter to News Weekly (September 29, 2012) expressed concern that Arctic ice was shrinking in response to human-induced global warming.
History shows that the growth and loss of Arctic ice is not unprecedented. The Norwegian polar explorer Roald Amundsen sailed through the Northwest Passage in 1906, as did others in the 1940s. The submarine, the USS Skate, surfaced at the North Pole in August 1959.
Variation in Arctic ice extent is not unexpected as ocean cycles play the major role in determining it. This has been confirmed in long-term research by NASA, the University of Fairbanks, Alaska, the National Snow and Ice Data Centre and the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science.
The recent summer ice melt was accentuated by severe storm activity.
Satellites have been measuring Antarctic ice since 1959. The amount of sea ice has confounded the computer models by substantially increasing over the satellite era and is currently at a near record extent.
Obviously, the processes responsible for the observed increases are not being simulated correctly in the models. The mass media ignores the Antarctic unless a massive build-up of ice pushes some of it into the ocean. This is then produced as “evidence” of human-induced dangerous climate change.
It is no accident that the ABC and like-minded media will not allow an open debate between government-funded and sceptical scientists, to enable the scientific evidence on climate change to be examined by the public.
Reasoned discussion is the enemy of alarmism. Those curious about climate issues can readily find information on websites such as WattsUpWithThat.com, www.IceCap.us, and Dr Benny Peiser’s Global Warming Policy Foundation (www.thegwpf.org).
Global warming 2
How naïve can some readers get on this issue of global warming? Kim L. Critchley (Letters, News Weekly, September 29) seems to indicate a belief that there are two scientific sides to the arguments over global warming.
If so, the writer should start to read what the overwhelming majority of scientists are reporting on this subject – but not from some computer programs!
He will find that the real scientists agree almost to a man that the climate is warmer than previously, which is to be expected since it was below average for a couple of hundred years (the Little Ice Age). They also report that any signs of climate change or temperature increases are following the solar outputs at that time. This also follows the current trend downward due to cooler solar radiation. If you don’t believe me, go online to read the Global Warming Petition Project — signed by 20,000 of the world’s top scientists.
All this is happening without man’s puny contributions of carbon dioxide or other so-called greenhouse gases. The temperature trends started to rise about the early 1800s, long before coal, oil or gas was having any effects.
The writer will find no argument about changing climates, which most scientists agree changes quite dramatically. So what?
The real arguments begin with something mankind has no control over at all. What the believers in man-made climate change don’t tell you about is the huge benefits arising from the increases in carbon dioxide and temperature increases. It turns out to be a bonanza in wealth, both from the plant systems and the animal systems, with a spin-off in many new regions which were recently too cold to farm. There are even signs that such an abundant time occurred many times previously. It is not new!
Is it any wonder that the Australian government, along with the United Nations directorate, wants to tax carbon?
Wake up, you climate doubters, and be positive for a change! This trend will make the world richer and a better place to live than before. And it has almost nothing to do with man’s carbon footprint.
Bellevue Heights, SA
Japan with its decades of racially purist anti-immigration policy and appalling high abortion rate is a real-time, real-life laboratory of the long-term effects of anti-natal policies on a society. For the first time, adult nappies now outsell baby nappies in that country. (See Babette Francis’s article in News Weekly, June 9, 2012).
Could there be a more poignant, more significant example of what happens to a nation when it accepts the vicious anti-natalist propaganda of those who advocate a “woman’s right to choose” or utter drivel about “overpopulation”?
The nation that 70 years ago bombed Pearl Harbour and fanned out throughout the South Pacific in a seemingly unstoppable wave of conquest is now the biggest old people’s home in the world, headed for dribbling incontinent impotency. I have read previously of the population of the island of Okinawa placing life-sized dolls of children about their parks and streets to emotionally compensate for the lack of real children there.
China with its vicious one-child policy is another example of the truism that moral failure has practical consequences. It is now being predicted to be the first nation in history to get old before it gets powerful.
One consequence of this is that more and more Chinese who can afford to do so are migrating from the country, and their numbers now comprise the largest group of immigrants into Australia.
With our Medicare-funded, pro-abortion, “woman’s right to choose” policy, Australia’s birth rate is below replacement rate, so we can hardly object if others wish to share in the bounty of a virtually empty land with so much promise.