Fox News Special Report ran this story yesterday:
Ahoy Alarmists!
The ship logs of Lord Nelson, Captain Cook, and other British sailors are casting more doubt on the theory that global warming is man-made.
The Telegraph newspaper reports that a group of British academics and scientists has examined more than 6,000 logs which describe an increasing number of storms over Britain in the late 17th century.
Many scientists currently believe such storms are caused by global warming. But these storms occurred during a period known as the Little Ice Age which affected Europe from about 1600 to 1850. The records also show Europe experienced a spell of rapid warming during the 1730s, well before man could have had any impact on climate change.
Sunderland University researcher Dennis Wheeler says, “Global warming is a reality, but our data shows climate change is complex. It is wrong to take particular events and link them to carbon dioxide emissions.”
The Telegraph story is here.
I have written two articles specifically pertaining to the science (and pseudo-science) surrounding global warming:
What the Science REALLY Says About Global Warming
What You Never Hear About Global Warming
There is virtually no question that the moderate global warming we see today is the result of 1,500 year (+/- 500 year) climate cycles that have virtually nothing to do with carbon dioxide. It is also becoming clear that out magnificently created planet has the capability to deal with excess carbon by means of such”natural theormostat” capacities as a tropical climatic heat vent.
What we should realize is that warming is generally a good thing. Human civilization has historically flourished when the climate was warm – even warmer than now – and struggled through ice ages.
I have come to realize that the people who are screaming about “the crisis” of global warming – including the scientists – are the same people who would be avidly pursuing the exact same socialist redistribution policies if there weren’t any global warming. In other words, their politics are the cause of their scientific conclusions, rather than the result of them.
What is truly frightening is not global warming, but the fact that in this age of postmodernism, politicians, scientists, and journalists are increasingly willing to pervert science and misrepresent reality in order to advance a political agenda. The pursuit of leftist ideology is replacing the pursuit of truth in institution after institution. It is increasingly being considered okay to engage in revisionism, whether it is in history, anthropology, journalism, or science, as long as it is for a “good cause.” Hence we have Al Gore, who clearly engaged in extremist and paranoid bogus fact claims, receiving a Nobel Prize alongside “scientists” for his film.
That’s the real reason for alarm over “global warming.”
Tags: 17th century, 6000 logs, Al Gore, Britain, Captain Cook, carbon dioxide, Dennis Wheeler, global warming, ideology, journalists, little ice age, Lord Nelson, politicians, Postmodernism, pseudo-science, science, scientists, ship logs, storms
Start Thinking Right 
September 13, 2008 at 12:41 pm
This is rubbish. For an accurate discussion of Wheeler’s work, see this Sunday Times article.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4449527.ece
Unlike other newspapers, the Sunday TImes actually spoke to Wheeler.
Later, Ben Goldacre spoke to Wheeler, who is pretty livid about the blatant misrepresentation of his work by the client change denialist loonies:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/13/1
Lesson 1 about client change denial: the denialists lie.
September 13, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Sorry, but the facts are not quite what you’re claiming they are. Ben Goldacre, writing in The Guardian, says:
Goldacre: “Don’t let the facts spoil a good story”
September 13, 2008 at 2:56 pm
I read your article. Now read mine:
https://startthinkingright.wordpress.com/2008/06/16/what-the-science-really-says-about-global-warming/
There is no question that the ships logs in and of themselves don’t “prove” anything. But they certainly DON’T in any way argue FOR global warming; the only question is to what an extent they argue against it.
Wheeler cites that the ship data do not provide temperature data; but a LOT of other scientific and historical sources do. They confirm that we have had numerous warmings and coolings. At this point, only a fool – or someone with a major axe to grind – can doubt that. Ice core samples, myriad historical accounts that DO note temperature conditions, are simply overwhelming.
September 14, 2008 at 7:22 am
Hopeless. I suppose it would be too much to expect t hat you would simply correct your article and issue an apology for the misrepresentation.
September 14, 2008 at 6:53 pm
I published your source, which I could have NOT done.
For the record, the ships logs are now a matter of public record, and Wheeler is not the arbiter of WHAT they claim. RE-READ the article I cite: “a group of academics and scientists.” If the guy doing the interviews was opposed to man-caused global warming, would you still be harping that HIS view represent the sum-total of reality? I kind of doubt it.
I stand by my contention that the logs prove climatic cycles FAR more than they prove man-caused global warming. If I am mistaken, please show me how those ship logs support anthropogenic global warming, and I will consider such an apology.
Core samples from all over the world; cave stalagmites; numerous isotope studies; fossilized pollen; solar studies; ancient historical accounts; ALL come to the same conclusion. And the ship logs support that conclusion.
For all your righteous indignation, did you demonstrate as much outrage while global warming alarmists for YEARS claimed a “scientific consensus” when there was no such thing? Did you? Did you show your outrage over the fact that Al Gore’s movie is documented to be fraudulent in at least 10 separate areas? Did you show your outrage when this propagandist received a Nobel science prize? The fact that you didn’t is why I am round-filing your pseudo-outrage new.
I notice that you don’t allude to the articles I cited. I read yours. You didn’t bother to read mine. Whose more open minded? Who’s less “hopeless”?
September 14, 2008 at 10:28 pm
I think if you look back you’ll find I was here to correct a serious error of fact, not to engage in an argument on the interpretation of core samples.
You seem to be determined to deny the global consensus. Well best of luck to you, bonny lad.
September 14, 2008 at 10:55 pm
And this is where I demand that you issue an apology for even claiming that there is a “global consensus.”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2007/08/29/less-half-published-scientists-endorse-global-warming-theory
I guess I was right on target in my above analysis that your brain is permanently stuck in the wrong gear.
September 15, 2008 at 4:39 am
You don’t get to demand an apology. I can’t stop you pumping out your lies and distortions,but I can catch you in one every now and then.
September 15, 2008 at 8:39 pm
Well, I did.
I notice you don’t mind pumping out lies and distortions of your own. There are a number of studies that verify what a lie your “global consensus” is.
Meanwhile, you do a great job as a character assasin – calling me a liar without bothering to produce my “lies.”
I think if anyone comes along and reads the story I quote, they will see that the Wheeler statement – which is an accurate quote – isn’t used in an inappropriate way. It’s just you who are inappropriate.
November 5, 2009 at 8:35 am
Even letting the debate continue, when our species may hang in the balance, says something about us. I argue that there is a certain presumptuousness surrounding our approach to how we are addressing global warming that goes well beyond simply having a short-term perspective. What if the cockroach has a more sustainable position? I recommend the following post: http://euandus3.wordpress.com/2009/11/05/climatic-presumption-what-is-the-forecast/
November 5, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Well, I am at least as worried about global warming as the cockroach is.
Let me get this straight: if I make an outrageous claim that the world will end if you don’t do “X”, and demand that you change your entire way of life, and give me all your money, you will feel compelled to do it “just in case”? You go right ahead.
Al Gore was worth less than $2 million after his days as VP and before he made global warming alarmism his main deal. Now he is worth HUNDREDS of millions. Great gig. Go ahead and give all you’ve got to him, euandus.
Global warming? The best evidence now is global COOLING.
The funny thing is that some of the biggest “scientists” – such as NASA’s Dr. James Hansen – behind global warming USED to advance the view that the earth would succumb to an ICE AGE.
I had no axe to grind re: “global warming” one way or another. But when the Kyoto Treaty got passed by everyone but the U.S., I realized what a crock it was, and what a bunch of re-distributionist socialists were behind it. They let “developing” countries, and nations like Russia and China, completely off the hook. Nope. Only Europe was supposed to change their whole way of life, dismantle their economy, and pay up the wazzoo. And frankly, nothing has changed since.