Your website leads me to believe we share the concerns about this attempt to sell out our country for profit and power. Would you help me promote a book I have written examining this hoax? It is intended to make readers angry over being played for patsies. If enough people read it, it would create a public backlash against that legislation, but through my own efforts, I have been unable to sufficiently publicize this work. Would you also pass this e-mail on to all your peers you think might agree and help?

The book is entitled “A Climate Crisis a la Gore” and is organized as follows:

• Introduction – the motivation behind the assembly of this information for public use.
• Part 1 – Excerpted ideas from Mr. Gore’s book, The Assault on Reason. I use Mr. Gore’s own claims regarding the proper and reasonable way to enter an argument or evidence into the marketplace of ideas, the forum of reason, the real power behind democracy.
• Part 2 – A claim by claim analysis of Mr. Gore’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. These are evaluated with simple logic, claims elsewhere in the documentary, Mr. Gore’s excerpted written principles of reasoning, and scientific research and findings regarding the subjects of his claims.
• Part 3 – Discussion and disclosure of players and special interest groups creating the perception of a global climate crisis. The history of the movement is examined, motives behind involvement, dollar amounts of profit already being reaped by promoters, and what they stand to gain if America enacts carbon legislation.
• Conclusion – The coming economic storm resulting from enacting this legislation and a plea to readers to contact legislators demanding such laws be reconsidered.

Excerpts can be reviewed and the book ordered at Amazon.com by entering the title, ISBN# (978-1-4196-8684-9) or by following the link http://www.amazon.com/Climate-Crisis-Gore-perception-warming/dp/1419686844/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1202424474&sr=8-1 If you are willing to inform your readers of its contents and availability, an informed (and angry) population of voters might be a real, and maybe the only, check and balance system capable of stopping Congress.

Sincerely,

Paul Spite

It does seem possible that volcanic activity along the 1,100 mile Gakkel Ridge in the Arctic would have an influence on sea water temperature.
The blogger at http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/5589 has a simiar view, backed by several references.

This is from an article in the NYT, What’s Up With Volcanoes Under Arctic Sea Ice,1 July 2008, http://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/01/whats-up-with-volcanoes-under-arctic-sea-ice/:

There was an eruption of assertions in recent days that the increasing summer retreats and thinning of Arctic Ocean sea ice might be a result not of atmospheric warming but instead all the heat from the recent discovered volcanoes peppering the Gakkel Ridge, one of the seams in the deep seabed at the top of the world. Several experts said it was not plausible from the get-go.

So, I suppose it is settled science?

The main Dutch new agency has posted an article based on this, as it seems to me, somewhat politically motivated story. What should we make of this? Wasn’t the story earlier this year that the ice had greatly recovered and we were well above the decline of last year? And considering global temperatures are a lot lower than in recent years, should we not search for a different explanation than ‘plain global warming’?

This has all the signs of a campaign. A taped interview, a blog (does he write it himself?), a TV crew, newspaper articles…

To a level exceeded in 23 of the winters since ’79.

Not since 1979 has there been such a surge in our ice machine. While it is true that perennial ice was at its lowest since 1979 at 3 million sq km before our cold winter, the media and scientists alike equally failed to report the subsequent record breaking surge.

Perhaps because it wasn’t a record, it was a return to a lower than average value from a minimum that was lower by a million sq km than the previous record, no surprise.

I would be willing to bet that one has to go back a few more years prior to 1979 to see the same amount of seasonal ice regrowth as was measured in 07-08.

Without a doubt since it would be predicated on a record low minimum!

Are we to believe that global warming turns itself off and on?

In the polar regions, yes, it’s called winter and the sun doesn’t shine there for several months!
You should also note that multiyear ice such as extensively melted last summer produces fresher melt water which floats on top of salt water and refreezes faster than the normal first year melt.

Easier though than kayaking to the North Pole.

Berrimilla made it through at about the first possible date and had to squeeze through some tight gaps in the ice for a couple of days, that bottle neck has been clear since.
This is what they sailed through, up the east side, green stands for ‘go’ less than 3/10ths but still hairy in a 33′ yacht!
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS138C/20080813000100_WIS138C_0003912315.gif
and
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS38CT/20080815180000_WIS38CT_0003916928.gif
This is what it looks like now:
http://ice-glaces.ec.gc.ca/prods/WIS38CT/20080830180000_WIS38CT_0003943775.gif

Berrimilla sailed fairly close to three polar bears swimming in the ocean that’s not an encounter I’d like to have in a kayak!

If global warming is a constant, the logic must be thus: Global warming caused the record breaking 07 Summer melt of both seasonal and perennial ice. Therefore global warming caused the record breaking subsequent re-growth of what would now be called seasonal ice. If one of these statements is not true, the other one cannot be true either.

Fascinating question.

The build-up of ice at the poles is one reason the US navy (being in charge of the world’s clocks) adds leap seconds to the calendar when needed. The Length Of Day depends on the rotation of the planet which can be altered by ice levels much like a ballerina pulling her arms toward her body to alter rotational speed.

If you are inclined to further investigate this phenomenon you could do worse than to start with Jean Picard. He measured a degree of latitude, amongst other pioneering work, and used this to give the size of our planet. He was amazingly accurate for two reasons. He used astronomical calculations and, fortuitously, he did his measuring at the “best” degree of latitude (the earth is an oblate sphere, so the “half-way point” between pole and equator is not 45 degrees but approximately 51 degrees. Paris and Greenwich are close to this line. Ancient metrologists took this into account as did the Romans (by altering the spoke length of their pedometers so that a Legionnaire earned his daily salt by covering the same distance no matter how far from the equator they roamed.

The 2009 (scheduled launch) mission PICARD is named after him due to more of his work – the first accurate measurements of the solar diameter. These were made during the Maunder minimum (a cold period in our ever changing climate) when the sun was without sunspots for many years in the 17th century. Comparing the diameter during the minimum with the diameter when active revealed a change. This difference continues to pose a question as to whether solar diameter is in some way linked with solar activity.

Picard as a starting point will lead you through most of the scientific advancements to the current state of the art.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080828/arctic_ice_080827/20080830?hub=TopStories