It has been quite a long time since I posted here and there are several reasons for that that I would like to address. First and foremost is the fact that my mind is made up in more ways than one. I started out being skeptical but I am not skeptical any more. Secondly, I thought long and hard about giving up on this site for more than one reason but I just can’t bring myself to pull the plug so I am not going to, at least not just yet. I certainly can’t stop trying to read everything out there about gullible warming (I search for “global warming” using Google almost daily and read at least 3 to 5 resulting hits and often more like 5 to 10 and also keep an eye out at multiple news outlets for gullible warming headlines and read anything that even might be related) but just as certainly can’t get all that excited about trying to post the things I am finding here. Instead, I am going to take a different approach.

One of the things I have learned about gullible warming is the gullible warming crowd seems to be absolutely convinced it is the skeptic’s job to prove them wrong. I thought long and hard about that and realized they are the ones insisting man is the cause of gullible warming. They are the ones predicting catastrophe if we don’t start following rules they dictate. They are the ones making claims so to me it is exclusively and completely their responsibility to make the case for those claims being true, especially if they want people to consider them leaders and follow them. They aren’t presenting a case for their claims being true but rather they are insisting the “science is settled” and the “debate is over” and the “science is overwhelming” and there is “consensus”. That should have been most people’s first clue something was wrong with this picture. I know it was one of my first indicators.

Good science is not about consensus. Good science includes putting the results of studies and exactly how they were obtained out there for everybody’s scrutiny (not just other scientists on the same team while arrogantly insisting others are not “real scientists”). If the truth is there it will stand the test of scrutiny and time. Good science is about the facts, not opinions. Good science is about observable and verifiable results. Consensus is about opinions. Consensus is about belief.

The biggest reason I haven’t posted is I have seen enough. I no longer have any doubts and I am no longer on the fence in any way and my mind is made up. Anthropogenic global warming is a farce. I am completely convinced that there are just too many lies for it to be legitimate. Call me whatever at this point but I think I am fed up with the lies and the distortions and I just can’t see how there would need to be the level of vilification etc. there is if the science was as good as they claim. I don’t think the world has seen this much active vilification and assassination of people’s character since the Inquisition. Most skeptics are attacking the premise of anthropogenic global warming. Many in the gullible warming crowd are attacking anybody and everybody who doesn’t agree with that premise. They are simply not proving them wrong – just insisting they are. They are not presenting their case man is the cause – they are trying to create rules for the entire world to follow. They want to create regulations for all the governments and all the people of the world to follow and abide by. I think I will go ahead and call a duck a duck and say that that means they want to create a world government and I think they are succeeding. I have to doubt people will stop being gullible in time to stop that.

Among the lies when it comes to gullible warming is there are two sides (in the debate they try hard to get people to believe is long over) and there are only about three people on the skeptic side (or as they prefer to call them – deniers). The reality is there are multiple camps in the debate. On the skeptic side there are actually at least a couple of distinct groups of people. There are people who think that climate change is happening but it is not man that is the cause. This is a significantly larger group than the gullible warming crowd would have us believe and it is growing all the time as a result of things like the temperatures going down or studies showing the climate may not be as sensitive as the gullible ones think. There is another distinct group of people who debate whether or not gullible warming is even happening. This is a much smaller group but again it is significantly bigger than portrayed. This is the group they like to call deniers. They seem to get a real kick out of coming up with new and nastier ways to make people look bad. The gullible warming crowd consistently tries to make anybody who thinks man may not be the cause out to be a denier, possibly to try to make their numbers appear smaller or belittle them more. They essentially try to group anybody not 100% on board with their little scheme in one group and make them out to be a common enemy. The more I see of their “us against them” mentality the more I am turned off by them and the more I think they are being just plain dishonest. If we really do all need to “do our part” I think they will need to stop treating the rest of us like an enemy among other things.

The lie that really gets to me is the portrayal of man as the cause of climate change being a fact or being proven. Taking a poll and saying they have consensus does not even come close to proving man is the cause. Think about it. They are saying man is changing something that has been constantly changing all along and changes with or without influence from man. Change is what the climate does.

This website wasn’t supposed to be about my opinions and I really wanted to keep mine and other people’s opinions down to a bare minimum and mainly stick to actual science. In the process of all this I realized gullible warming is not about the science. It is about a socialist religion. They are basing their actions on a belief system. It is a belief system I no longer want any part of.

If the science is so overwhelming where is it? I realize I am a complete oddity at this point because I am still not buying into gullible warming even though they seem to have most people convinced. But that is one of the illusions created by lies. I have to say I really think there are all too many people buying into gullible warming because everybody seems to be buying into gullible warming. Wouldn’t that be one of the exact definitions of gullible?

Gullible warming is essentially a colossal marketing campaign. If you don’t think so consider the current 300 million dollar marketing blitz by one group alone. Consider how often you hear the word green during commercials or see ads with the word green on the internet or in magazines. Why do they have to spend so much time and money advertising gullible warming if the science is so overwhelming? Wouldn’t they just be out there proving their case instead of portraying themselves as infallible? If it is really all about “raising awareness” I have to ask – who isn’t aware of gullible warming at this point? Somebody living in a cave with no access to TV or the internet maybe but other than that I have doubt there are all that many not aware of the gullible warming hype. Another ad is not going to get to them. Telling a lie repeatedly does have the affect of people starting to believe it anyway however and in my opinion that is by far more likely. I think it was Stalin that proved that to be something that could work.

Don’t get me wrong. I realize we have been putting all kinds of pollutants in the air and I am certainly all for stopping that and cleaning up pollution and heading towards alternative energies. I don’t doubt that climate change is happening and I don’t doubt mankind has had an influence. But I also realize carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. Plants turn carbon dioxide into oxygen. Plants need carbon dioxide to survive. We need plants to survive. I just refuse to believe we have the amount of control over the thermostat and the degree of influence the gullible warming crowd would have us believe. Again, the climate changes with or without our influence.

At this point I have to say I have been seeing less and less science supporting the anthropogenic theory and more and more science that supports other theories including and mainly solar variability. One of the things I just can’t forget and think has never been properly addressed by the gullible warming crowd (my theory – because they can’t) is global warming happening on Mars and multiple other planets and moons in the solar system. It seems like common sense to me that if global warming is happening on as many bodies of the solar system as it is then there would absolutely have to be a common variable and the variable that sticks out like a sore thumb is the Sun. There are actually a number of variables that could be coming into play out in space other than the Sun.  There are cosmic rays and some would insist they have a considerable affect on cloud cover and formation. There is the rotation of the Earth around the Sun and the rotation of the Sun around the galaxy. I certainly don’t think the orbital path of the Earth around the Sun is causing gullible warming but I do think we know very little about the orbital path of the Sun around the black hole at the center of the galaxy and the influence that has.

I read recently that global warming on Mars was a result of dust. That certainly may be true but it seems to me there would have to be more to it than that. My understanding is that Mars is not geologically active and we have known for a long time dust storms can cover the whole planet so it seems to me there would have to be something causing stronger or longer storms for it to be dust. That makes me wonder about the dust theory. I really have a hard time believing dust explains global warming on all the solar system bodies we know are experiencing it. I am not saying dust being the cause of global warming on Mars is not true. But do they really want me to believe it is dust on Mars, us on Earth, something else on Jupiter, Saturn, Neptune, Tritan, or Pluto etc. and it is just coincidence they are all warming at the same time? I am just saying I am very skeptical. You see, that is something else vital to good science. Being skeptical wasn’t even portrayed as a bad thing for the most part, let alone vilified, until gullible warming came along.

Another reason I haven’t posted here is I have lost all respect for the gullible warming crowd and I don’t care anymore that they don’t have any respect for me. I simply can’t have respect for people that think anybody who doesn’t think exactly like they do and agree on all counts is somehow devoid of intelligence.  Their “prophet” seems to think anybody who doesn’t agree isn’t even smart enough to know the planet is round. I think it was about the time I learned how to assemble and program a PBX capable of handling sixteen thousand phone lines that I completely stopped buying it when people tried to imply I was stupid.

I have read articles where they said there is nothing good about gullible warming and commented that at the very least there would be less cold related deaths and I would consider that a good thing. I was amazed when I was essentially attacked for that opinion and got the distinct impression they thought I was some kind of evil person for thinking there could be good. How does that make sense?

One of the lessons I have learned reading up on all this is common sense is only common to the people that have it in the first place.

My last post is also about the time I started getting very little but vilified as a result of this little endeavor. This was pretty much a bit of a side project (just me in my spare time with zero outside funding – proving all skeptics being bought and paid for by big oil is yet another lie) but it has turned into something more like a bad job. I have a hard time sticking with a job when I realize most in that organization are extremely negative and things like teamwork and the truth get thrown out the window. If I spend too much time around negative people I get sucked into being more negative myself and that has certainly been happening here. I guess I start thinking I am fighting fire with fire or something but all I know is I get considerably more sarcastic etc. and I don’t like being sarcastic and negative so I have to separate myself and move on. In the case of gullible warming I am distancing myself somewhat and this website is essentially just my statement to anybody reading it that I don’t buy it.

At this point, even if the gullible warming crowd is right I don’t care anymore and I have little or no respect and I have no intention of following them. They ruined any chance of that themselves by calling me things like flat-earther. If they think they can vilify and yet somehow still demand respect I think their cheese slid off the cracker. I am going back to the old school idea that respect is earned or you don’t get it. I have the utmost respect for a lot of people but they have earned it. The people who have been acting like anybody who doesn’t agree is also convinced that the moon landing was faked have only destroyed it.

The reason I say there are too many lies is there are too many lies. One of the main reasons gullible warming has been picking up steam is their portrayal of it being caused by man as a fact. That is a bold faced lie and I challenge anybody to prove me wrong on that. The reason it is a lie is because that is a theory. It is certainly the prevailing theory but a theory nonetheless. To portray it as fact is beyond arrogance. It is beyond deception. Any honest scientist will at least stick to terms like high confidence or very likely or even almost certainly but will never make that leap of calling a theory a fact until it is proven beyond a shadow of doubt. You cannot mix 1% falsehood with 99% truth and still have the truth. If people aren’t going to like me for valuing those kinds of principles then I guess I just have to give up on everybody liking me. I never had any illusions about that anyway.

I could go on and on showing lies and stating reasons why I think gullible warming is a farce and I could even provide hundreds and hundreds of links to articles etc. that brought me that conclusion. But that is also not what this website was supposed to be about. All I am saying, in a nutshell, is don’t be gullible. Don’t expect me to provide links and prove gullible warming is a farce. Think for yourself. Search for the truth yourself using things like Google. Don’t believe hype and advertising without at least scrutinizing and questioning and considering the validity of what is being said. I don’t expect people to believe me or even care what my opinions are. I just wish they would think more and be gullible less.

Don’t expect me to feel guilty about my carbon footprint. I drive a Honda. I am a renter. I rarely travel. I have been practicing things like “pack it in, pack it out” since the 70s. I even would have called myself an environmentalist for many years but I am now totally ashamed to admit I gave money for a time to some of those groups. I still think some of those groups were and are extremely respectable because I am no fan of what we have been doing to this planet and the job we have done as stewards of it and I think some are genuinely trying to change that but I think many of these groups now are just plain anti-progress, anti-capitalist, and even anti-human.

I have even lost a lot of respect for scientists because they used to be humble.  I remember when they would say things like we think this or we think that but we just don’t know for sure. That kind of attitude I can respect because it indicates they are being humble and keeping in mind the truth is bigger than they are and there is a difference between a theory and a fact. I have always had a love for science and the truth and I think of all people scientists should be in the group that understands some of the reasons we should all be considerably more humble than we are.

I once read an astronomy book that put it better than I ever could but I will try to describe what the author was saying well enough you should get the point. He basically pointed out that at one point in time we thought the Earth was the biggest structure in the universe. As we gained in understanding we realized the Sun was bigger and expanded that understanding. Soon enough we realized the solar system could be thought of as a structure and thought it was the biggest structure in the universe. After that we realized there was such a thing as a galaxy and thought it was the biggest structure in the universe. Then we realized there were clusters of galaxies, called them galaxy clusters, and thought they were the biggest structure in the universe. Then we realized there were bigger yet structures and called them superclusters of galaxies. Every step in that process came along with a seed that was the knowledge there was more to it than that. Currently we know that there is something bigger than superclusters of galaxies but don’t yet have a clue what it is. I believe for now it is called the “Great Attractor”. We don’t know much of anything other than it has gravity great enough it is pulling superclusters of galaxies towards it and it is therefore most likely a bigger yet structure. The same pattern seems to be true when we look the other way and look at smaller and smaller things and gradually realize the things we thought were the smallest were actually made up of yet smaller things. We think we have a good grasp on matter but matter as we know it supposedly only makes up something like 10% of the universe so it should be somewhat obvious we scarcely know anything yet. We speculate about a great many things but in reality we just don’t know much for sure.

If the climate scientists had been displaying that kind of humility from the start I might have bought into gullible warming. If the media had stuck to portraying it as a theory I might have had more respect instead of losing what little was left. I had already lost most of my respect for politicians when it became obvious to almost all how corrupted they have become yet they make little or no effort to change. Their approval ratings are in the gutter because people are not as stupid as they suppose. If the gullible warming crowd had proven their case for the cause being man and catastrophe on the horizon instead of manipulating and vilification and what amounts to a propaganda campaign I might be on board. But they didn’t so I am not on board and I am ok with that.

The climate has been warmer and it has been cooler. Is there a common sense conclusion we can derive from that? Whether or not there is a warming or a cooling trend depends entirely on your beginning point of reference. If your beginning point of reference is a lower point your graph would show a warming trend. If your beginning point of reference is a higher point your graph would show a cooling trend. Any other point is a matter of speculation about what is normal or the perfect temperature if there even is such a thing. It looks to me like variation in temperature is infinitely more important than any static temperature.

Ask yourself why the mantra has been changing from global warming to climate change.

I decided I am going to go back to writing things like my first book. Doing some writing in that book is also one of the reasons I haven’t posted here although one of the lesser reasons. I am going to try to stick to writing more about things I know and less about things I am trying to learn about. When it comes to my love of science and learning I am going to go back to astronomy. Maybe someday I will start an astronomy blog as a side project. If I did I would try harder to keep it from pulling me away from my main projects as much as gullible warming has. I am going to go back to studying how to succeed and thinking about how I can help others do the same. I am going to go back to trying to help the people who ask for it instead of trying to help people that would act like that is what they want when they really just want power and control over other people’s lives or some kind of warm fuzzy feeling. For some reason, I need to be on a team and I need to feel like I am helping the team. I don’t think I am helping the gullible warming team and I don’t think I am helping the skeptical team and I don’t think I am on or a part of either team. I think it is debatable if either group can even be called a team. So I must respectfully bow out of the debate, what little debate there is. I must leave the main gullible warming battle to better people than myself. After all, what can one person, so broke I can’t pay attention, do to counter a propaganda campaign with hundreds of millions of dollars in backing?

I may post again if things change drastically. (Keep an eye out for results from studies related to the Aqua Satellite Mission in what little honest media there is. I may even post something here since that project may prove that catastrophe needs to be taken off the table. That would be devastating to the whole gullible warming theory. I would also recommend reading up on the Argo system. ) I may post again about my upcoming book even though it is completely unrelated to gullible warming. I may post if somebody contributes in some way including some convincing science either way in an email or comment. I may post if the gullible warming crowd completely amazes me and actually does prove man is the cause although I would be nearly certain they aren’t even going to try. They have obviously convinced themselves and they don’t truly care what everybody else thinks. I may even post if I get a wild hair and decide to. But I may also just keep the site out there as long as I can afford to as a statement I don’t buy gullible warming and I am not going to until the people who are insisting I change for them do some changing themselves.

Think and stop gullible warming. That is a pretty strong statement. Let’s consider why I make it for a moment. For starters, I fully believe that the vast majority of the problems that mankind faces could be solved by rational thinking and careful planning with the aid of the truth and the facts and a little teamwork. I say stop gullible warming because I think I know some ways to stop gullible warming either way. I call it gullible warming because I think people that believe in the “inevitable annihilation of the planet” are the ones that are being gullible. If gullible warming is, as myself and others suspect, a result of solar variability and normal cycles on earth then I think I know some good ways to help people realize they have been a little too gullible. If the gullible warming crowd does turn out to be right and it is entirely caused by man I think I have a few good suggestions to solve problems and possibly avoid wasting trillions of dollars.

I believe I have come up with a way to make it fairly easy to see that a person has to be gullible to buy into a significant portion of what the gullible warming crowd is saying. If you follow my instructions you will soon see that the debate is certainly not over and the one thing that is definite is that there is something very wrong with the global warming picture.  It is really very simple and the only thing that is absolutely required is honest thinking.

To me the best place to begin to learn the truth about gullible warming is to open a web browser and point it to Google or your favorite search engine. I use Google mainly so I am not sure about results in other search engines but I would have to think they would be similar. Once you are at your favorite search page type in “hockey stick graph” (including the quotes) and plan on going through at least three or four pages of results with an open mind. That is the only way you are going to get a better overall picture and get both sides of the debate in order to avoid being too gullible. As you read the various articles and pages you should learn about what the hockey stick graph is and notice some distinct differences. The name mainly refers to the fact it looks like the temperatures were almost a flat line up until recent times and then they took a sharp turn up. A good portion of the pages are going to be defending or singing the praises of the hockey stick graph and a good portion of the pages are going to be doing just the opposite. This is due to the fact that the hockey stick graph is one of the main tools the gullible warming crowd is using to try to pin the cause of gullible warming on man. It is the “iconic symbol of humanity’s contribution to global warming.” Simply by seeing the distinct contrast in opinions about the supposed smoking gun indicating mankind is causing gullible warming should at least somewhat dispel the myth that everybody is in agreement.

You should start seeing that there is clearly deception and outright lies when it comes to gullible warming. After all, if there are people saying the hockey stick graph is proof mankind is causing gullible warming and there are other people saying the hockey stick graph is severely broken simple common sense would dictate that somebody is lying. I tend to think that a person can’t mix 1% falsehood in with 99% truth and still have the truth. If some of the things that you will read about the hockey stick graph are true there is quite a bit more than 1% falsehood being mixed in. Among the things that are said about the hockey stick graph are that it removes entire periods of time in order to get the flat line approaching modern times and also make it look like it has never been warmer. I would be somewhat certain they did remove the “medieval warm period” and the “little ice age”. Many of the sites that were defending the hockey stick graph didn’t dispute that the medieval warm period was taken out but rather say it was left out because it was only in the northern hemisphere that it occurred for example. Wouldn’t common sense say that if they were graphing global temperatures the temperatures in the northern half of the planet would be a factor to say the least? I think they left it out because it showed that temperatures were warmer not all that long ago than they are today because it tends to ruin the idea there is a crisis along with the idea that it is all caused by man.

They supposedly also did things like use the data from only one tree to show the entire 1500s. I read in several places where scientists put random data in the computer program used to create the hockey stick and it still produced a hockey stick shaped graph. There are plenty of people defending the hockey stick graph and there are plenty of people attacking it. That should tell you something. The people who created the graph calling people who disagree “pathetic” should tell you something as well.

After you have learned a bit about the hockey stick graph go back to the search engine and type in “heat island effect” in quotes and global warming after it so you end up with the following:  “heat island effect” global warming (I just put quotes around heat island effect but not the rest of it. There are lots of different variations that will give you nearly the same result so it doesn’t matter much if the search is not exactly the way I did it. The idea is simply to get more targeted results.)  The EPA describes the heat island effect this way. “This phenomenon describes urban and suburban temperatures that are 2 to 10°F (1 to 6°C) hotter than nearby rural areas.” (Due to things like asphalt and concrete) Simply put, the heat island effect is something that makes it questionable if the temperature readings from many urban areas paint an accurate picture and there are many who argue that the trend upward we are seeing is greatly increased by the heat island effect. The gullible warming crowd likes to put up pictures of melting ice as if that is somehow proof of gullible warming even though ice accumulates every winter and melts every spring in most locals regardless of gullible warming. Pictures of some of the stations that are used for temperature readings are quite a bit more telling.

You should see some more contrasting opinions and notice that some will say the effect is negligible or they have taken required steps to remove its influence from the raw data and some will say it is greatly influencing the data and no steps have been taken to remove the influence. The only thing that looked certain to me was that there were numerous stations where readings would be affected and therefore inaccurate unless compensated for properly. If they are not compensating properly then it will make (and has made?) the temperature trends look higher than they should and warming more drastic than it really is. With extreme views such as the one that said we are going to lose 1800 species an hour I think there are many people who would be fine with making things look more drastic than they really are and that is exactly what many are doing. That just makes it fit better with their claims of impending doom unless we line their pockets and let them have their way.

Next, go back to the search engine and type in “global warming” Mars. That should bring back plenty of results about global warming happening on Mars and the other planets in the solar system. You can type “global warming” Jupiter or “global warming” Triton (a moon orbiting Neptune) or many of the other planets and moons to see more.  Gee, do you think that if global warming is happening on numerous other planets in the solar system the Sun might be a factor? I sure think so and I am not alone but the gullible warming crowd has some pretty creative ways of trying to say that the Sun is not a factor and the warming on the other planets is completely unrelated. It seems like common sense to me that if we are observing warming on other planets and moons then the Sun is by far the most likely cause.

There are plenty of other search terms that will lead you to tons of information about gullible warming and the theories and ideas about what the causes are. Just be creative and think about things you learned along the way searching in the ways described. Doing some reading up on whether temperature follows carbon dioxide buildup or whether carbon dioxide buildup follows temperature change can be interesting. I would also recommend some thinking about the difference between “consensus” and scientific fact. Consensus means they took a poll. Scientific fact is when there is provable data and if you do the math over and over again you get the same result. Look more for the science than for the opinions or the politics and you might be surprised by what you find.

There are several good documentaries that provide good information and point out some of the flaws in the gullible warming debate much better than I ever could. I have some good ones posted at my MySpace site you can find here: http://www.myspace.com/successfisherman. You can also find some good ones on YouTube and Google Video. I highly recommend “The Great Global Warming Swindle” but some other good ones are “Exposed: The Climate of Fear” with Glenn Beck, “Global Warming Doomsday Call Off”, “The Greenhouse Conspiracy” (they were exposing gullible warming lies 17 years ago in that one) among others. Notice while watching these documentaries there are multiple people pointing out that the main theory behind gullible warming is that greenhouse gases are trapping heat that would be heading for space. Also notice that balloon data and satellite data does not support that theory. The facts don’t support the theory and if anything show the theory to be wrong. I have yet to see a good documentary on the other side of the debate.

I saw “Inconvenient Truth” and it looked more like a propaganda film about Al Gore than anything else to me. Watching him whine about the 2000 election did little more than turn my stomach. Self-righteousness and hypocrisy does that to me. The fact Al and just about everybody else on that side of the fence absolutely refuse to debate and insist any debate is over should point out there is a problem with this picture to anybody who loves science. The fact that Al says “we have to stop tolerating” should point out an even bigger problem. The gullible warming crowd acting like it is treason (with some even calling it treason) to not be in lock step with them should point out bigger yet problems. The fact that one climate scientist was saying it wasn’t his model that had a problem but rather reality should point out that his cheese has slipped of the cracker. The fact that people from the U.N. are saying things like “Under no circumstances can the U.N. process be brought into question” should raise red flags the size of continents to anybody who values freedom.

Now let’s pretend for a few that the gullible warming crowd is right and climate change is caused by carbon dioxide even though carbon dioxide follows temperature increases and not the other way around. Is banning the combustion engine going to solve the problem? I highly recommend having something better in place before getting rid of something so vital to mankind before doing that. Is putting chemicals into cows to keep them from burping and farting going to solve the problem? I laughed at that idea until I realized they were serious and have already spent millions trying to do just that. How about putting blankets on the glaciers and ice caps? How about millions of little umbrellas in the atmosphere? How about putting millions of tons of Iron into the oceans? How was that one supposed to solve gullible warming again? There are people coming out of the woodwork with ideas on how to solve gullible warming. Some are great ideas but others are borderline lunacy. Regulating how many squares of toilet paper are used per sitting and every other aspect of our lives sounds like lunacy to me, sorry. Don’t lose sight of the fact that freedom including freedom of thought is going to play a role.

If you want solutions that will really work I suggest putting a muzzle on the attack machine, work on ways of adapting rather than feeble attempts to control nature (“it’s not nice to fool with mother nature”), and put the primary focus on creating the kind of teamwork that will make the creation of a viable replacement for the combustion engine and other power generating techniques such as coal fired power plants a reality. We need to head that direction regardless of gullible warming. Refuse to believe that letting the U.N. run the planet is going to solve the problem. Start believing that ingenuity and being resourceful and creative and making it a team effort and using the principles of success etc. can and will solve the problem. Being convinced we have failed is one of the only ways it really becomes true. Being focused on success may be one of the only ways to make it happen.

I have kicked around a motor design in my head for over 20 years and I am convinced it would actually be fairly easy to create an electric motor that will easily supply the kind of power needed to replace the combustion engine and even the coal fired power plants if scaled properly. If many would stop being so hateful of anybody who has an opinion they don’t like and learn a little teamwork and lose a little selfishness it could be much easier to create solutions that will work. Researching and expanding on our understanding of electro-magnetism and gravity could play a key role. Don’t think in terms of what is impossible but rather what is possible and expand on that. Don’t ridicule ideas but rather fully explore them. Don’t go by opinion but rather by facts. Don’t go by the politics or the hype but rather the sound repeatedly provable science. Take another look at things we thought would never work or would never lead to solutions and make sure we didn’t miss anything. Teamwork is the name of the game and what can be the glue to bring it all together and make it a cohesive approach to solving the problems that mankind will have to solve. Political correctness is destroying it. Bringing it back into the picture and expanding on it can and will solve huge problems. Without it, I would personally have little hope. Some people just need to realize there are things out there more important than they are.

Above all else when it comes to gullible warming, don’t be gullible!

Tom Boland
http://www.gulliblewarming.com

If you look at the comments section of my first post on this blog you will see a comment by somebody named Jerry that I originally decided I was not going to publish. After thinking about it extensively I have decided to go ahead and publish it and create a post with my response to him and anybody else who thinks "there are no opinions on global warming".

I am the kind of person where if somebody says that I am in denial I am going to think quite a bit about whether or not they are right. After all, I am willing to accept that I may be wrong. I thought long and hard about it and I just can't help but think about how my basic position is that I haven't seen enough proof one way or the other what the causes of gullible warming are and therefore I am essentially undecided. How can I be in denial if I am not convinced what the specific causes are? Correct me if I am wrong but wouldn't it be considerably easier for me to be in denial if I was convinced I am right and anybody with another opinion is wrong? One of my basic points and also one of the main reasons I created this website in the first place is I see people insisting ALL agree but when I do the kind of research Jerry has no clue I do I see anything but agreement. In fact, I see plenty of opinions and a large portion that the Jerry's of the world would obviously have a problem with. I intended to try to leave my own personal opinions out of the discussion but since I am being judged you might as well know my opinion is that gullible warming is most likely caused by the sun and at the very least the causes are questionable but again, I am undecided and still searching for the truth. I have noticed there are a variety of theories including the sun, carbon dioxide of course, the ocean, and natural fluctuations due to a coming ice age among others. I have seen strong arguments for all of the above.

Here are Jerry's comments in their entirety and then I will address some of the statements individually.

"Ridiculous, so you found two scientist that disagreed with the fact that we have a negative impact with our emissions, big deal. Maybe you should do some actual research. If you do (which i doubt you will because you're only looking for articles to support your false conclusion) you will find that NASA the NOAA (the worlds most intelligent association of scientists) ALL agree that we have a negative impact on the planet and that if we do not make drastic changes then the consequences we've already seen will increase. Its funny that you would ask me to leave my opinions at home. There are no opinions on global warming. It is a fact. And your in denial."

The first statement is proof he is judgmental and jumping to conclusions. For one, I never said once that we are not having a negative impact. In fact, I would be one to practically insist we have had plenty of negative impacts on the environment. I am just not convinced the reason for climate change is entirely anthropogenic (man-made). By implying I have only found two scientists who disagree with the gullible warming crowd he shows that he doesn't know me from Adam and has no clue whatsoever what research I have done or what I have found in my research let alone what I am looking for when I am researching. This is one of the things that disturbs me about the gullible warming crowd. He can't possibly know what research I have done or what I am looking for when I research but that doesn't stop him from thinking he does. Do these people think they are psychic or something? I wonder if it ever occurred to him I work 50 to 60 hour weeks at least and have very little time to be posting everything I have learned here let alone more research on gullible warming specifically. This website is not for me to make money (although I certainly hope it can eventually generate enough to at least pay for the cost of the site) or advance an agenda but rather a simple attempt to start a discussion and a request for somebody to provide us with a little more to go on than what is being reported in the media. I wonder where and how he became so judgmental as to assume everything I find gets published here or even more how he could even begin to know what I am looking for. The fact of the matter is I have found significantly more than two scientists who disagree. I would put the number at well over 17,000 actually.

The statement suggesting I do some actual research is so far off base it is laughable. I am no stranger to research and spend time doing it in one form or another almost every day and have been for roughly 25 years. I have been researching gullible warming for about the last 4. One of my lasting life goals is to make enough money I can quit working for everybody else so I can research more about magnetism and electricity so I can continue working on a motor design I have been working on for over 20 years. Research is simply part of who I am and what I do. When I research gullible warming I mainly look for proof about whether it is anthropogenic or not and also look for discussions about gullible warming in general, news articles about gullible warming (no matter what they say - if there is any mention of gullible warming I try to read it regardless) etc. and I am mainly looking for the truth, period. It is interesting he should mention NASA and NOAA because I have been spending time on NASA's sites for roughly 15 years due to an extreme interest in astronomy. I literally started with NASA sites and NOAA sites when I started researching gullible warming. In fact, that is where I discovered we still haven't warmed a single full degree and that is what made me start wondering what the truth really was. If we have only warmed up less than one degree how does that translate into the "inevitable annihilation of the planet" I was reading about? How do we know that is not due to normal cycles? Regardless of my own questions, I really have problems believing that "ALL" agree. Since when did the entire population of the planet agree on anything other than death and taxes being unavoidable?

It was also at a NASA site where I first read about global warming happening on Venus. Several years later, I read about how global warming was happening on Mars and have since seen several articles about how the polar caps on Mars are melting. I have even read about how global warming is happening on other solar system planets and moons. The only article I have read that tried to explain how global warming could be happening on other planets and moons and yet that was somehow different from what is happening here was weak to say the least. I wasn't even remotely convinced there is no connection. Global warming happening on other solar system objects is one of the reasons I lean strongly towards what we are seeing here being caused mainly by the sun. There are a growing number of scientists who think solar variability is the cause actually.

The statement that really got my goat was "There are no opinions on global warming." Excuse me?? What about this one: anybody who believes anything the media tells them about gullible warming without question is being GULLIBLE? Doesn't that qualify as an opinion? It is just sheer lunacy to think there are no opinions. I really shouldn't have to spend any time whatsoever proving there are plenty of opinions and that statement is not only not true it can't even remotely be true because everybody has opinions and everybody is entitled to have opinions. This is one of the surest indicators something is wrong with the gullible warming picture. It is a Stalinist tactic to try to stifle dissent and intimidate people with opinions they don't agree with. By insisting there are no opinions they prove they have a hidden agenda. It is pure propaganda, plain and simple.

What the Jerry's of the world fail to recognize is people are entitled to have an opinion and they aren't entitled to choose what that opinion is. It is not for them to choose what people believe or don't believe. If they are right they can present evidence and truth and if it stands up to scrutiny and testing then and only then will people start fully believing them. I really think they fail to recognize that I am not obligated to believe them. I am not obligated to believe them, I am not obligated to have respect for them, I am not obligated to have loyalty to them, and I am not obligated to trust them. I am not even obligated to give them the time of day. The Jerry's of the world obviously think they are entitled to an opinion but others aren't. His "ridiculous" comment is his opinion. His statement that I am in denial is his opinion. If we reach insanity to the point we start having laws that say I have to believe the Jerry's of the world I will still not believe them without at least questioning them. Figuring out things for ourselves is one of the only true freedoms we have left and I am not about to give up on the idea that freedom is a good thing.

I remember reading about how one scientist in the gullible warming crowd was proposing we spend roughly 4 TRILLION dollars putting millions of little umbrellas up in the atmosphere HOPING that might bring temps back down slightly. What kind of insanity is it that insists we shouldn't question such proposals? Where do these people get the idea nobody has a right to question them? I think if they are going to be spending trillions of dollars questioning where every penny is going to be spent is one of the first things that should be happening. At the very least, there should be some strong evidence it is going to work and there is going to be more to go on than hope. Evidently these people think money grows on trees but my parents proved me wrong on that one long before I became an adult.

Here's an opinion the gullible warming crowd is not going to like: I think they are taking it to the point it is literally a religion to them.

Tom Boland
"The Success Fisherman"
www.gulliblewarming.com
www.secretsofallsuccess.com
www.eagleimarketing.com

Search for the Truth:

Is it Gullible Warming? Or is it Global Warming?

I have been reading up on gullible warming for quite some time now - Oops, did I say gullible warming? Sorry, don’t mean to hurt anybody’s precious feelings or anything but I think I prefer the term. I certainly prefer not letting other people make all my decisions for me - and one of the things I keep seeing mixed in with all the hype from both sides is an insistence that we all just take their word for it. Doesn’t anybody value the truth any more? At least well enough to try to prove their position instead of expecting people to believe them without question? You know. Present an argument based on documentation and that thing us old fashioned people have a word for. We like to call it the truth. Not some new age “relative” truth. The next time somebody talks about how the truth is relative ask them if they owned a business and were in search of an accountant, if they would want a “relatively” honest person for the job. And not some agenda driven opinions but a well thought out presentation of the cold, hard facts. I didn’t have a problem with gullible warming, even though it still didn’t seem completely decided to me, until I started seeing the literal insistence it was not only decided but that it was decided it was caused by man. I have seen plenty of evidence that climate change is real but extremely little evidence that indicates it is caused by man.

So here is my challenge to anybody who cares to take me up on it. Leave your opinions at home for once and provide us with the facts and the truth only. Send an email here or post a comment if you have a link or facts that can help people decide for themselves. It will be reviewed and if it is determined it is an honest effort to provide facts and truth with a distinct lack of personal opinion, it will be posted here. I am talking about just the plain truth whether it supports either side of the argument. Extremely few opinions and as many facts as possible are the main goals of this website. If a submitted email or a post has any kind of vitriolic diatribe about how people who are skeptics don’t have a right to their own opinion or to question it will be immediately deleted, ignored, and forgotten. I really don’t think I can make it any clearer: I am not looking for opinions; I am looking for the facts. Specifically, the ones that prove or disprove gullible warming is caused by man.

I have to be honest and say that I am really not all that interested in most people’s opinion on the matter at this point but I am still searching for the truth, even if it is not what I would like it to be. The day I picked the name for this website was the same day I opened my browser and did some searching. Among the things I searched for was “proof global warming is man made” and I started reading about how “the debate is no longer” or the one that appears repeatedly on a huge number of sites “global warming caused by human activity”. I don’t want to burst any bubbles or anything but I think most of what I am reading is leaning way closer to this person or that person’s opinion than it is any kind of truth, let alone proof. I can’t believe how many times I read about how the proof was in an “unreleased study” or such and such computer model but there wasn’t any numbers or presentation that proves that what we are seeing is being caused by man. What is bothering me most here is the fact that I read time and time again how it is proven but I never seem to see any actual proof. Instead, I see people literally insisting that it has been decided and acting like anybody who disagrees with them is somehow insane or worse. It seems to me that if their argument was valid enough and it was really decided upon by all there wouldn’t be a need to vilify anybody with an opposing opinion or any attempts to silence them because the facts and common sense will.

I saw repeated references to reports and studies that proved it but rarely saw any links to those reports so I could read for myself what it said and repeated references to computer models but they rarely named the model or how it was designed. I have been working on computer networks for a living for a good number of years now so I have a pretty good understanding of the phrase “garbage in garbage out” but I think you don’t have to be experienced with computers to understand the concept.

One link that indicated it was going to lead to proof said this: “We are unable to locate the page you requested. The page may have moved or may no longer be available.”

The truth has a way of being more obvious than we seem to recognize.

I’m talking about things like facts and figures that show how much carbon dioxide was put into the atmosphere by mankind and how much was put there by natural forces. I think most people are typically alert enough to spot the truth when they see it.  

I really think one of the things that are escaping the gullible warming crowd is the fact that many of us don’t need them to think for us and are quite capable of deciding things more complex than what to eat for lunch for ourselves. I am not a scientist. I am not a genius but I am also not stupid. I am just an average person who would much rather see the facts and the truth than somebody’s opinion about anybody who disagrees. I know it is hard to separate fact from opinion and there will inevitably be at least some opinions posted here by myself and others but I honestly want to try to narrow them down to the ones that are based on facts and things that are proven to be true.

Tom Boland

“The Success Fisherman”

www.gulliblewarming.com

www.secretsofallsuccess.com