Laugh or Cry, CFCs cause Global Warming

1 Jun 2013

Ignoring the fact the weather is far from hot, global warming is still the chosen field for throwing money at - and one of the latest offerings is a study published in the International Journal of Modern Physics B (at the end of May, 2013) see http://phys.org/print289149026.html. It claims that Chloroflourocarbons are to blame for global warming in the 1970s to 1990s, an apparent about face. However, the intriguing point they claim as evidence is that a worldwide UN ban on the use of these CFCs has resulted in the cooling witnessed in the 2000s. What they say they have done is a statistical experiment. High use of CFCs corresponds with AGW and lowered use of CFCs corresponds with a flattening of global temperature - voila! Well, are they being cheeky we might ask, taking advantage of the public's gullibility (or trying to) or are they serious. Serious money is certainly involved but CFCs being involved in AGW ignores the fact that for years the Chinese have been manufacturing CFCs in order to claim subsidies to destroy them from the really gullible western politicians that swallowed the bait so conclusively.

The study of course brings back the hoary chestnut about CFCs causing the ozone hole - and all that. The ozone hole is convenient as it allows greater levels of cosmic rays to enter the atmosphere - but what they really mean is the solar wind. However, the point of the exercise is to avoid the role of the Sun, and especially the solar wind. The so called 'in-depth statistical' analysis comes up trumps, they say, and CFCs are clearly the driver of AGW - rather than co2.

The latter has the benefit of some disputed science and physics - but CFCs? How will this effect the environmentalist war on Big Oil and King Coal. Once again a natural cycle is not mentioned - the role of the Sun and it's higher and lower periodic intensity is out of the question. It's not the Sun - it must be humans. Yes, here we have the vital piece of the jigsaw. The use of CFCs in fridges ruined the atmosphere - we are all to blame for wanting to keep our food fresh. The author of the study, Qing-Bin Lu, claims 'eureka' but is it - why have they ignored the earlier warming event, in the 1920s and 1930s, part of a 60 year natural cycle. It is said temperatures were constant prior to the warming in late 20th century - the graph is flat. Why then is 1934 the warmest year of the century? Obviously, he has not read HH Lamb's books on climate (in the first half of the 20th century) or visited Steve Goddard's blog at http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com ...which is constantly dredging into old weather records. Unfortunately, there is a political edge to the statistics on this blog but if you have the resolve and a crisp filtering ability it is worth visiting, just to see how the 'modern' so called extreme weather events were very often much more extreme in the past - and he rarely goes back much more than a hundred years. It puts alarmism into perspective. Take Hurricane Katrina - AGW was responsible the environmentalist lobby are likely to say. Was it? The problem is that tax dodging is rife in the US, in particular by the rich and the powerful, and the corporates. We have had a whole list of US companies in the news here in the UK as they have been avoiding paying tax on their earnings in this country. Not against the Law - but not a lot of help to a government seriously short of funds and overspending at record levels (and lots of it going on the crackpot CAGW mission). The bottom line is that little money was available for civil engineering enterprises required to update the levies at New Orleans or flood control measures in New York. The most successful people and companies in the US establish Trusts to which they contribute funds - and avoid big tax bills in the process. These Trusts spend the money on what they think is appropriate - not what the governments feels it is necessary to target. The are self righteous to the very extreme. Lots of that money feeds the CAGW scam - and in turn is hoped to generate a goodly profit in the process. Environmental organisations, CAGW projects and campaigns, have been awash with money - billions and billions of dollars have been blown and yet the infrastructure has suffered. In other words, the sanctimonious rich have reaped a harvest of 'unforeseen consequences' - resulting in death and misery for hundreds of fellow Americans in the floods that struck New Orleans and New York. The poor have paid the price while the rich have waxed lyrical, full of conceit with the cleverness of it all. Playing the system.

In one of those strange lopsided loops, who might get the blame? Big Oil and King Coal of course, and heavy industries that emit lots of co2. The real culprits seem to get away with it - and they say the mafia are criminals. At least you know what they are about. All in all we can expect further disasters as there is no apparent let-up in the CAGW bubble - it has not yet burst, and does not appear to be going to burst in the near future. The paper above is clearly designed to keep the gravy train on track. It is also something of a broken spoke - will the wheel come off the co2 is an evil gas message?