Thursday, May 01, 2008

An Open Letter


Raymond S. Kraft

Dear Mr. McCain

It seems that some leading Republicans such as yourself and Newt Gingrich, and even President Bush, have accepted the premise of Anthropogenic Global Warming - that man is spewing millions of tons of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) into the atmosphere each year, and that this is causing an unprecedented rise in earth's temperature that threatens us all. And, that if we spend enough money to reduce CO2 emissions, we can change it.

I urge you to reconsider. More than 19,000 scientists have signed the Global Warming Petition to protest the Kyoto accord, and declare their opposition to the theory that man's CO2 emissions are causing Global Warming (the Global Warming Petition at Written and sponsored by Dr. Frederick Seitz, past president of the National Academy of Sciences, the Petition reads:

Global Warming Petition

"We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan, in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases, is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of Earth's climate. Morever, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide [willl] produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

There is certaintly no "concensus." The IPCC Report on Global Warming (2007) from the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change states that it was "reviewed" by 600 authors from 40 countries, and over 620 experts and governments. The 19,000 scientists who have signed the Global Warming Petition outnumber those who have "reviewed" the IPCC report by more than 15 to 1.

The illustrations below are from, a website created to graphically illustrate the evidence for Global Warming Theory, and since they were created by proponents of Global Warming Theory, I will adopt them, and stipulate to their accuracy, and explain very simply why this evidence produced by the Global Warming proponents proves them wrong.

The Global Warming theorists always point to rises in temperature (by fractions of a degree) within the last 200 years, or the last 1,000 years, but such a small sample of climate history is not historically representative, and is not a large enough data set to be scientifically meaningful. It's cherry-picking the evidence. To be intellectually honest, we must look at all the evidence we have, not just a small fraction of it. To be scientifically meaningful, we must look to the long history of climate changes, as shown in the six illustrations below.

Exhibit 1. Holocene Temperature Variations: The IPCC Is Wrong. Here we see that the present Warm Era (the Holocene) began almost 12,000 years ago. It peaked circa 8,000 years ago at 1.5 degrees above the baseline, a full 1 degree warmer than now, at the beginning of what climatologists call the Holocene Optimum.

According to the IPCC Report on Global Warming, rising CO2 causes Global Warming, and CO2 now is higher than at any time in the last 650,000 years. If this were true, then it would be warmer now than at any time in the last 650,000 years. But it is not. 8,000 years ago, CO2 was 120 parts per million lower than now, and the climate was warmer than now. Now, CO2 is higher, but the climate is cooler. Thus we know that the IPCC's global warming theory is false. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is wrong. Openly and obviously wrong. Clearly and conspicuously wrong. Irrefutably wrong.

We also know that prior to 12,000 years ago, sea level was 400 feet lower than now. Most of that water was bound up in vast glaciers on the northern continents, in some places as much as three miles deep. From 12,000 to 6,000 years ago, there was so much glacial melting that sea levels rose 400 feet to their present level. That is, before the present era of Global Warming began, 12,000 years ago, sea level was 400 feet lower than now.

Before Global Warming began, twelve thousand years ago, you could walk from Alaska to Siberia on the Bering Land Bridge, or Beringia, a thousand miles of dry land, north to south, as large as Australia, now under the cold ocean of the north Pacific, the Bering Sea. You could walk from England to France on dry land under what is now the English Channel.

Exhibit 2. The Surface Temperature Record: Here we see the recent trend line rising 1/2 degree (0.5 degrees) from 1980 to present, with temperature spiking circa 1998 to 0.7 degrees above the 1980 benchmark, and cooler since then. One half a degree. In San Francisco, the temperature can rise or fall by half a degree in a minute. And, for most of us, a half degree change in temperature is too small to notice.

Exhibit 3. Reconstructed Temperatures:

Last 1,000 Years. While this looks fairly "dramatic," this is only because the scale of the graph is so narrow. It is only 1.6 degrees from the bottom to the top of the chart, barely enough climate change for most of us to feel. From the benchmark of 0 at 1000 CE (for Common Era, or A.D., as we used to say, one thousand years ago), the chart only shows a range of 0.6 degrees up, and 1 degree down. Since 1000 years ago, global temperature fell 0.9 degrees to the bottom of the Little Ice Age, four hundred years ago, and then it began rising, and has risen about 1.3 degrees to reach 0.4 degrees above the benchmark of 0 from 1,000 years ago. Thus, we see that our climate today is a trivial 0.4 degrees warmer than it was 1,000 years ago, before the Little Ice Age. Less than one-half of one degree. And a full degree cooler than at the peak of the Holocene Optimum, eight thousand years ago (Exhibit 2).

Exhibit 4. Ice Age Temperature Changes: Lets look at some more history. Over the last 450,000 years we see 5 episodes of "Global Warming" above the 0 baseline. The previous four eras of Global Warming, approximately 120,000 years, 240,000 years, 330,000 years, and 400,000 years before now, were warmer than now, with very long intervening ice ages much cooler than now. The next ice age will be disastrous for agriculture in the northern half of the northern hemisphere. And, unless the long natural cycle of global warming and ice ages is somehow broken, the coming of the next ice age is a matter of when, not if. Perhaps we should be grateful for Global Warming while we have it.

It won't last forever.

In order to be credible science, Global Warming Theory must explain (a) what caused the last 5 eras of Global Warming, and (b) what caused the last 5 eras of Global Cooling. If it does not do so it is not good science, but merely opinion, merely speculation, an unproven hypothesis, that would not be admissible as evidence in any court under the Federal Rules of Evidence. To my knowledge, it does not do so.

To be admissible evidence in court, scientific evidence must be "generally accepted in the scientific community," as the U.S. Supreme Court held in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, 509 US 570 (1993). Otherwise it is deemed too speculative and unproven to be reliable, and therefore inadmissible. Since there are many thousands of scientists who reject Global Warming Theory, it cannot be seen as "generally accepted science," It is highly disputed science, a highly disputed, unproven theory. It is my opinion that this theory, and the crystal-ball computer models that purport to predict the future, the future of global climate changes, are not admissible as evidence to prove that they are true, unless they can first be proven to be "generally accepted science."

Are we to base national climate and energy policy on a theory that is not even sufficiently proven and accepted to be admissible as evidence at trial, in a judicial proceeding, in a court of law?

If we were to do a computer model of future climate changes based on extrapolations and inductions from historic patterns and cycles of climate change, it would very likely tell us that the earth will soon enter another long era of Global Cooling, another periodic Ice Age.

Exhibit 5. Five Million Years of Climate Change: Looking back 5 million years, we see that (a) there have been dozens of cycles of global warming and global cooling over the past 5 million years, (b) the swings between the extremes of global warming and global cooling in each cycle have been growing more dramatic, and (c) there has been a steady long-term cooling trend over the last 5 million years. Earth's climate, in the long trend, is growing colder, not warmer.

Exhibit 6. Sixty Five Million Years of Climate Change: Here we see (below) that over 65 million years global temperature has risen and then fallen dramatically from the Eocene Optimum, some 50 million years ago, not in a straight line, but in a general, long term cooling trend. Unless this long trend is somehow reversed, the earth is slowly cooling, not warming.

Thus it becomes clear that:

(a) The present era of Global Warming (the Holocene Era) began some 12,000 years ago, long before human civilization or modern technology. It was warmest circa 8,000 years ago, and has been slowly getting cooler ever since, with some short term warming cycles, but a long term cooling trend.

(b) The present era of Global Warming is right on schedule in the long cycle of Global Warming and Global Cooling approximately every 120,000 years.

(c) The present Global Warming is cooler than each of the four previous warm eras, and the climate has been on a long-term cooling trend since the Eocene Optimum, some 50 million years ago.

(d) We see per the IPCC report that CO2 is higher now than in the last 650,000 years, yet during that time there have been at least four (4) eras of Global Warming with temperatures higher than now.

This fact conclusively disproves the hypothesis that rising CO2 causes global warming. If the premise that CO2 causes global warming were true, then the climate now would be warmer than at any other time in the last 650,000 years.

But it is not.

Let us also note that the CO2 rise from 280 ppm (parts per million) to 380 ppm as stated in the IPCC Report is a rise from a mere 0.028% of the atmosphere to a mere 0.038% of the atmosphere. Our atmosphere is more than 99.9% nitrogen, oxygen, and argon, and less than 0.1% everything else. At 380 ppm, or 0.038%, CO2 is less than 4% of 1% of the atmosphere.

Over the last 100 years, the increase in CO2 has been a trivial 0.01% of the atmosphere, or 1% of 1% of atmospheric composition, one part in ten thousand. To visualize this, imagine that you have a swimming poool that holds 10,000 gallons of water. Then you add 1 gallon. That is how much atmospheric CO2 has increased in the last 100 years. According to the IPCC. Not much.

The earth's climate has been changing continuously for millions of years, as far back as we can reconstruct it, and doubtless long before that, for as long as the earth has had a climate to change. Nature changes continuously everywhere we look. Nothing in nature stays the same. Our contribution of CO2 to the atmosphere is truly trivial, less than one part in ten thousand, less than 1% of 1% - even if we assume that all of the CO2 increase in the last 100 years has been due to us, which may not be true. Has it been proven?

Before the United States makes enormous changes in public policy and spends hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars to "stop climate change," don't you think we should demand some pretty convincing proof that the climate change we see is not natural? Is the climate change we see really man-made, and can we really change it? Or is it the unchangeable natural cycle of Global Warming and Global Cooling?

Raymond S Kraft

Links worth your time

The Wisest Mind Has Something Yet To Learn!




Editor's Note:

Snake Hunters weblog is known widely for its fair and balanced Open Forum approach to controversial subject matter.

Since "Global Warming" has been so heavily postured and politicized in recent years, we offer any qualified person ample space to submit a meaningful rebuttal to this format.
For those of us that remain unimpressed with the half-degree change in the last 1000 years,

we would like to suggest a revisit to a totally different, but equally important subject that is sadly overlooked. Mr Raymond S. Kraft's short, but brilliant summary of WWII, which was posted here on S/H, dated July 4th, 2006.

Winfred Mann said...

I agree with Kraft. My only concern is that we keep the air and water clean, protect our resources. In addition, I feel we can accomplish this without resorting to leftist hysteria, which if you closely examine the suggested remedies for these problems, always comes down to taxing America, or restricting America's growth.


Yes indeed, Winfred!

Perhaps it would be helpful for the politically charged Left to acknowledge that 'Dubya didn't do it', and that China & India have replaced the U.S. Industrial Complex as the world's chief environmental hazzards for the 21st
Century, and that in filing future complaints should rightly re-focus their attention on Beijing and Mumbai (Bombay). reb



Should any weblog wish to duplicate
this Open Letter (with your Logo of course)

be our guest. The more traffic, the better exposure, the greater benefit to all. reb


Winfred Mann said...


I wrote a post regarding the Basilan Island model: another oversight of the MSM.

Pooh Bear


Tom, The Redhunter is in Israel with a fact-finding group for a
couple of weeks. His hard-hitting comments will be missed.

Keep yourself low-profile Tom, those Hamas and Fatah guys are
shooting at clouds when they
can't find each other. Stay safe.



You've taken on a tough chore in attempting to divert the MSM (mainstream media) Attention away from Obama-Mania, and onto Basilan, a South Phillipine Island infested with al Queda radicals.

It does confirm that U.S. military
presence is required globally to protect friendly nations.

No Easy Solutions to be found without first conferring with Al Gore, Ted Kennedy, Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul. reb

WomanHonorThyself said...

great read my friend!..I wrote a post too but not quite as intellectual heh! u can check it out here if ya like:

Yankee Doodle said...

It reminds me of a book I've read one year ago, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism. I recommend this book on my profile.


Tap July,2006. A very worthy post!


Thanks Angel, (womanhonorthyself).

Loved the cartoon featuring our
Weather Czar, Al Gore.

A bit of added goofy humor a most welcome touch to the grim world of Outrageous Politics! reb



Loop, you've been somewhat critical of S/H recent comments on William Charles Ayers. You might enjoy this item found on Prof Donald Douglas Post, American Power.

Tap: Burkean Reflections link to American Power. See Apr 27, 2008...

"Obama's Ties To Ayers & Dohrn Aren't Trifling."

We found this thru 'Vinegar & Honey, an A.P. linkage. reb



skillfully crafted by MoveOnDotOrg and UnitedForPeaceJustice, U.F.J.P. et al, since 9/11/01 is in evidence with the National Disapproval Ratings lingering at 70% for the Bush/Cheney Administration. The methods employed to achieve these numbers have long duration, are brutal and very expensive.

After the Democratic Primaries have reached a conclusion, the emphasis and target is about to shift to yet another political entity, Senator John McCain.

This noble gentleman will be hammered, ridiculed and despised with the same intense methodology, the same ad hominum attack strategies that have been proven effective against "Dubya Bush" can bet your last dollar on that.

The "bosses" of propaganda that lurk in the shadows of our political arenas, bending the minds of the most naive "grass-roots"
true-believers, working to convince us that negativity and hatred has a valid place in our nation's political process. They are still there; still stirring up the fires of discontent.

Knowing The Enemy At Home...and abroad, has become this great nation's epic challenge, and a solemn duty.

Stay Alert, be Aware! reb

Winfred Mann said...


Most know and understand by now that the only way the Left can accomplish anything is via the personal attack. Leftism is a bankrupt violent ideology that inflicts its harm on mostly the young or poor. Leftism creates the illusion that you can get something for nothing.


Elections/Indiana, No.Carolina
May 6, 2008

In N.C., 81% of voters said that 'RACE" was not important! Really folks?

Fact: Thirty-five percent of reg. voters in North Carolina are black,
and a whopping 92 percent of blacks went for Senator Barack Obama! Now, Is that Afro-Centric Partisanship ? Black Liberation Theology ?, or..."Chickens Comin' Home To Roost"? A 57/42 spread.
Indiana was close. Clinton wins a tight one, 52/48.

Fact: The Democratic Nomination Will Be Decided by...Howard Dean's
SUPER-DELEGATES, Some Old Union Bosses, and old party-hacks like Teddy Kennedy & Jimmie Carter in tow, with a few high-pressured "Conference Calls" at the end of June...

and not by the grass-roots people, not ever. (They just think, with all the hoopla, that they are part of the decision-makers action), well...Bless 'em all w/ a pat on the head. It's still a game of Big-Money Talks, and B.S. Walks.

CHANGE, or is it No Change?
That's Logical, right? After all, the "people" could make a mistake!

So, on with the $$$ campaigns!
Ain't it excitin' folks? reb

Anonymous said...

Hey, S.H.
I really enjoyed reading your clever blog.
Thanks for all the great work you put into it and thanks for your Service, I'm a ex- Amry man myself

Stay well


Winfred Mann said...

Don;t you just love the picture of William Ayers standing on the American flag.

"Goddamn William Ayers"
Please do not take this out of context.


Howdy DD2, Welcome!

We support the military guys, gals, their families. They carry the ball for all of us! My only weapon now is this blog. We have two really tough enemies today, the nutzies that fly planes into buildings, or strap bombs on their kids...

I think it's prudent for us to confront them, Off the Leaders NOW, rather than later.

The other group has many faces, The Hate Groups, and their Money Sources, and it takes serious digging to root them out, expose them. That's our focus, w/ Snake Hunters.
It began for us, w/ a discarded Windows 95, on 1/5/2006, with "Our Goals" (post) targeting U.F.P.J.

...and more recently The "Peace" Foundations listed in "Vast Left" (Post), and the leader George Soros, the Evil Master-Puppeteer.
He's the 'Head of the Snake'.

We Are Energized by comments from people that understand our effort.

Passing our web-address along is very much appreciated. Check Our Links, All Worthy Contacts. Thanks for your help. Stay Focused, Alert & Aware. reb


For The Politically Unaware that has never heard of GEORGE SOROS...

Check Archive Dates,

Tap Sept, 2007...Open Comments,

See First Comment from "Yankee Doodle". There It Is, SOROS sleazy
Full-Page N.Y. Times Ad...
Bum-rapping General David Petraeus.

That Nation-wide Ad Cost "MoveOn"
(A George Soros Enterprise, $180,000)

If you don't know about Uncle George's Agenda, It's Past The Time For You To Get Acquainted. reb

Anonymous said...

snake hunters sez,

CNN Breaking News, Beirut, Lebanon

Hezbollah leader, Nasrullah is intent on starting a civil war for Iran, with harrassing RPG and small-arms fire this morning in Beirut.
meanwhile, Israeli Intel suggests that Tehran is a couple months away from getting their Nukes,
and right here at home we see Hillary & "Obama-Mania Politics" rolling along, blissfully unaware of the rest of the world's quickly gathering fire-storm.

'Redhunter' is soon to return from Israel. Stay tuned in...reb



The Hezbollah Militia has seized
the western quarter of the city,
perhaps signalling the beginning
of major moves in the region by IRAN. reb



OUR SUN RADIATES, but it's not a Constant. Radiation varies, and those changes affect Ocean Currents that are always moving, changing. 'There is nothing so constant as Change'.

Our Earth Is experiencing the effects of those changing ocean currents. El Nino, El Ninia, are
effects we can see and feel.

The Northern Hemisphere is experiencing a recent impact on Arctic Ice, and the North Pole may soon have a seriously diminished Ice Pack. The Polar Bear would then be in real trouble!

Human concern about "Green-house" Gases may prove to be the least of our problems, and Sun Radiation may be far more troubling. reb