The Sun: The Real Climate Driver

this is info I have been waiting for.
Debunking the whole global warming (I won't say myth)figures that have been "interpreted" in the most profitable and controlling manner for the powers who control the world economy behind the scenes and move the pawns of humanity as they please. I'm including the first half of the summary put forward by Mitch Batros from Earthchanges TV as there is quite a bit. The information is obviously a summary of the true findings put out to the scientific community in Febrary of this year and just now to the plebs. Enjoy!
Now that the latest IPCC report which was announced in February 2007, and just now made public and available to all scientists, immediate blowback has forced the IPCC to recant many of their exaggerated studies. No surprise to many of us who know of the political fingerprints all over this mess --- of which they are trying to claim as science. Thank God there are enough of us who have not fallen prey to the lock-step fascism as presented by the global warming army. Let's not forget Al Gore, their commander-in-chief, has told the world: "The scientific data is in, there is no more debate. You are either with me, or you are with the polluters, now what's it going to be". (Al Gore).A recent report by Joseph D'Aleo - ICECAP (Intl' Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project) has presented an outstanding overview of the recent discoveries fraught throughout the IPCC report. The report's final summaries had several failings. First, it blindly accepts a 20th-century carbon dioxide rise of 36 percent, when direct measurements (1) suggest the change is closer to 15 percent. Their models assume an annual increase of 1 percent, although over the last 50 years the long-term annual average consistently has been less than half that, 0.43 percent. Their models treat the oceans as distilled water when in reality they are an infinite buffer for atmospheric CO2. Burning all the Earth's fossil fuels would amount to no more than a 20 percent increase. It could never double (2). In any event, ice cores tell us carbon dioxide lags, not leads, the temperatures by as much as 800 years.
The IPCC acknowledges no problems with the global data bases, stating urbanization has a negligible effect on global changes, and ignoring dozens of peer review papers that show urban contamination is significant (in diverse areas including China, central Europe, and even Barrow, Alaska). During the 20th century, the population of the world increased four-fold, from 1.5 billion to 6 billion. More and more areas are urbanized. Airports, once rural, find cities growing around them. The report ignores the fact that total global stations decreased by 66 percent after 1990, and there was a ten-fold increase in months with no reported data from the remaining stations, mainly in the former Soviet Union and Africa. They also ignore the issue that the majority of world stations may not meet World Meteorological Organization standards for sitting instruments, a problem that has also been widely documented in peer review journals. They ignore the half-dozen peer review papers suggesting that these problems could well account for 50 percent or more of the warming shown for the world data bases. The National Climatic Data Center has a network of 1,221 stations in the U.S. that is more stable and continuous than the rest of the worlds. Those stations adjust for urbanization and thus are more likely to produce data that more accurately represents the climate change picture. Data from those stations show changes that are cyclical in nature with a smaller rise over time, some man-made and some natural.When dealing with cycles such as those shown in the long range graphs, trends in changes are best determined by looking at maximum to maximum and minimum to minimum. In both cases, the changes are just 0.25 degree Fahrenheit over 75 years or 0.37 degree Fahrenheit for the entire record. This is well under half the global trend and the often quoted U.S. temperature trend. (The late 90s are the apparent peak, as many of the measures have been declining, certainly in the last 5 years.) This same cyclical behavior can be seen in Greenland and the Arctic.What could be behind the temperature cycles? The data strongly indicates it is the Sun and oceans, whose cycles are very much in-sync with the observed station data.