Additional References and Links

• Is the Global Warming Bubble About to Burst?

  By Sherwood, Keith and Craig Idso
  Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
  Editorial Commentary
  Volume 6, Number 37: 10 September 2003

...[T]wo scientists from the Institute of Solar-Terrestrial Physics of the Siberian Division of the Russian Academy of Sciences challenge the politically-correct global warming dogma that vexes the entire world.  Bashkirtsev and Mashnich (2003) say that "a number of publications report that the anthropogenic impact on the Earth's climate is an obvious and proven fact," when in actuality, in their opinion, "none of the investigations dealing with the anthropogenic impact on climate convincingly argues for such an impact."....

In light of these several sets of real-world observations, we would not be at all surprised to find that Bashkirtsev and Mashnich will indeed be proven correct in their prediction of imminent, if not already-in-progress, global cooling.

• Asking the Right Questions About Climate Change & the Kyoto Protocol
  By Ross McKitrick, Associate Professor of Economics in the department of Economics at the University of Guelph (Feb 2002)
     Ross McKitrick specializes in the study of the impact of environmental trends on the economy (he identified that the real income of the average Canadian household will be reduced by 5.5% or $2,700 per year if the Kyoto accord is adopted by Canadian Parliament as ordered by Jean Chretien).  In this paper he asks, among other things, whether the Kyoto Protocol will solve the problem of global warming.

If the reader is still convinced that IRAGs [infra-red- absorptive gases] are warming the climate and that this is a bad thing, this still does not provide support for the Kyoto Protocol.  If we suppose that the Protocol is fully implemented, the effects on the climate are negligible. Wigley (1998) presents forecasts based on three Kyoto scenarios.  Under the basic implementation scenario, with universal compliance, no defections and no leakage effects (transfers of emitting activity into non-compliance zones), a doubling of the concentration of CO₂ in the atmosphere is only delayed by about 5 years.  Globally-averaged temperatures in 2100 are only 0.08 °C below the baseline (2.5 °C) increase. With Kyoto plus 100 years of ever-tightening constraints on carbon dioxide emissions, temperatures are only about 0.3 °C below baseline. If a 2.5 °C warming is a problem, so is 2.2 or 2.4 degrees.   Furthermore, the compromises worked out at Bonn and Marrakech, which among other things, give Russia the right to practically unlimited credits for CO₂ sinks in its forests, make Kyoto pretty much useless.

See also: Ross McKitrick, Global Warming: Competing Views

• 40 Shades of Green: The Rise of Radical Environmentalism
  By William A. Borst, Ph.D.; Mindszenty Report, August 2005, Vol. XLVII-No.8

• HOOPER VIRTUAL NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM
  
  Ottawa-Carleton Geoscience Centre
  
  Department of Earth Sciences, Carleton University
  Department of Geological Sciences, University of Ottawa

[The museum provides information on historical, archeological and paleontological climate variations.]

• Glaciation — The Milankovich cycle

The calculations done by General Circulation Models (GCMs) are the main source of the information that fuels the global warming hysteria.  Nevertheless, not one of them comes acceptably close to accurately calculating what the climate presently is at any location, let alone of the whole Earth.  Not only that, but all of the GCMs differ widely from one another as to what the climate was in the past, and as to what it is supposed to be in the future.

Therein lies the problem.  No one in his right mind will base any decisions about the future on tools that cannot determine with acceptable accuracy what the present is and the past was.

• Reality check: UAH (University of Alabama in Huntsville) monthly globally averaged lower atmospheric temperature variations since 1979 as measured by NOAA and NASA satellites.