sorry Mate donno how to...
u may try this link its all his blogs n then u may search
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/
Thanks for the link. It's really good.
Bhai parveen ibe big problem nahi se to ho jyagi thode saal me. Itna to notice karya e hoga ki dharti ka taapman har saal badhta ja rha h. Haryane ka e le le bhai. Main jib 10th me tha 42-43 te upar nahi jaya kare tha, er ib garmiya me 49 tai chla ja se (Specifically Hisar and Rohtak). 7 degree kam nahi hoti bhai. Er nu te se na ke Suraj ghna taata hon laag gya ib (yes, earth is definitely moving towards sun every year but that can't alone be a reason), hum deforestation karte hai isliye ho rha h aisa.. Chamaase ki jagah garmi aagi er jaadya ki jaaga chamaase.. itna ferbadal ho rha h environment me ye sab global warming ki vjah se hi h. Sari duniya me aisa ho rha h akele bharat me nahi..
Ha ye jarur hai ki developed desh jyada contribute kar rahe hai is global warming me, par piche hum bhi nahi hai.
Studies shows that even Gangotri is in danger. Burf nahi theek se pdegi to muskil ho jayegi. And its scientifically proven that trees help a lot in rain. Forest hta kar factory laga dete hai..
Je ye Glacier nu e pighle gaye to ye New york - pyu york kuch na rhna.. sab nu e pani ke tale chale jange.
Even a scientific community accept that it's not such a big issue. I am just pasting the content of link mentioned by deepshi. Hopefully it will help in clarifying some of your doubts.
Andrew Bolt
Wednesday, July 16, 2008 at 11:01am
(Data sources: Hadley Center monthly combined land and sea surface temperature anomalies; University of Alabama at Huntsville Microwave Sounding Unit monthly lower-troposphere anomalies; Linear regressions.)
What consensus? The
American Physical Society reports:
So it has opened a debate, kicked off by Christopher Monckton:
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) concluded that anthropogenic CO2 emissions probably caused more than half of the “global warmingâ€� of the past 50 years and would cause further rapid warming. However, global mean surface temperature has not risen since 1998 and may have fallen since late 2001. The present analysis suggests that the failure of the IPCC’s models to predict this and many other climatic phenomena arises from defects in its evaluation of the three factors whose product is climate sensitivity…
More importantly, the conclusion is that, perhaps, there is no “climate crisis�, and that currently-fashionable efforts by governments to reduce anthropogenic CO2 emissions are pointless, may be ill-conceived, and could even be harmful.
What follows is a detailed argument on mathematics and climate theory that ends with this brilliant and irresistible conclusion:
Even if temperature had risen above natural variability, the recent solar Grand Maximum may have been chiefly responsible. Even if the sun were not chiefly to blame for the past half-century’s warming, the IPCC has not demonstrated that, since CO2 occupies only one-ten-thousandth part more of the atmosphere that it did in 1750, it has contributed more than a small fraction of the warming. Even if carbon dioxide were chiefly responsible for the warming that ceased in 1998 and may not resume until 2015, the distinctive, projected fingerprint of anthropogenic “greenhouse-gasâ€� warming is entirely absent from the observed record. Even if the fingerprint were present, computer models are long proven to be inherently incapable of providing projections of the future state of the climate that are sound enough for policymaking. Even if per impossibile the models could ever become reliable, the present paper demonstrates that it is not at all likely that the world will warm as much as the IPCC imagines. Even if the world were to warm that much, the overwhelming majority of the scientific, peer-reviewed literature does not predict that catastrophe would ensue. Even if catastrophe might ensue, even the most drastic proposals to mitigate future climate change by reducing emissions of carbon dioxide would make very little difference to the climate…
The correct policy approach to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing.
Irresistible? Well, not quite:
David Hafemeister and Peter Schwartz in the same issue argue that the IPCC theory that man is heating the world is the best that’s available.
