I am not a climatic scientist; I am an experienced electrical engineer, drawn to study this subject by the peculiarity of the news I was observing. And it became obvious, very quickly, that something weird was going on. So I began to collect data, news, and other factual information that gradually became available. I have now assembled a wide range of proven, factual details on global warming (which became climate change when warming stopped in 1998 and temperatures began to drop), the claims and counter claims that have been published over the years, and some of my own observations arising from an engineering point of view. My purpose is to put all of the facts I have assembled in one location, for ease of observation and analysis, and to show the absolute foolishness involved. Others who also became interested have seen much of this information before, reported as individual elements or events, and responded to one at a time. In each case, global warming enthusiasts have responded to each individual weakness reported with the comment that, “yes, that was one little problem … but with all things considered, man-made global warming is `settled science.'” It will be interesting to see their responses to the entire range of factual information as developed by reputable scientists and engineers, some of which are listed below, when all are presented in detail and absolutely refute the idea that, “man-made global warming is `settled science.'” · Surface and marine temperature measurements - - totally lacking in the accuracy necessary to detect the small variations involved. We show that, absolutely. · Global temperatures have not affected the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere -- they have no relationship to each other. We present data to show that absolutely. Global warming cannot possibly be causing an increase in CO2. Human's activities are exonerated, absolutely. · Satellite measurements have been shown to be highly inaccurate - all records since their installation in 2000 are exposed as highly erroneous. Reports from the Great Lakes area helped that. · The terrible environmental disasters created by global warming, as presented by UN reports. are shown to be untrue. · The glaciers haven't disappeared, as reported - failing sensors missed an area the size of California. · The “scientists” engaged in improper activities to change temperature-record data to suit their contentions have been exposed; details are shown, absolutely. Russia helped with the revelations. · The global-temperature data from the four responsible agencies do not agree. The agencies do not share expertise, and the differences in their data, one to the other, differ more than the small variations in contention. The average yearly temperature rise from the year 1850 to that of 2008 was only 1.38 ºF. The existing sensor locations will not allow that degree of accuracy. · Temperatures were higher 1000 years ago, than they have been in the twentieth century. The “scientists” efforts are shown as they struggle to lower the temperatures of those early years.
During my engineering days (1950 to 1965) with General Electric Company, writing about evolving technology and industrial-automation activities was extremely important. Those who could use and needed automation, didn't know anything about it, machinery equipped with the new systems was much more expensive, and labor unions in the manufacturing sector, quite strong in those days, were adamantly opposed to its use. For these reasons, the company gave engineers, not known to be effective communicators, formal instructions in a wide range of subjects, one of which was effective presentation (oral and written). We were taught writing skills, but the importance of knowing what we were writing or speaking about was emphasized. It was more important to know the subject - what we were writing or speaking about, and to write or speak with clarity -- than it was to have journalistic abilities: to be able to present the story in the very best manner. My objective in writing or speaking was generally to describe some automated phenomenon, improvement in a production cycle, or the production of a miraculous product that I had witnessed; and readers of the publications, extremely interested in the advances being made in automation and machining technology, read my stuff and that of others religiously. It was only necessary to write with clarity and to avoid “engineering-speak.” In the `80s and early `90s, small-computer technology was advancing rapidly, and machine manufacturers and users of the machines thirsted for information. I was engaged by a trade publication to inform readers about these advancements. The editor sought me out because of copious material I had written about computers and automated machines - using words and terms that were understandable to interested people who were not engineers or professionals in industry.