Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus. blog comments powered by Disqus

Solar Cyclist denies timely Consumption of Plant Food

Getting chilly
Re: "Planting season delayed weeks by late snow, frost," April 6.

Unlike global warming, which extends growing seasons,
global cooling, which started in 2002, will shorten growing seasons for at least the next two decades.

This delayed planting season is a warning for Canadians to prepare for what is to come, but instead of addressing the real threat from global cooling, Canada is still attempting to meet the ludicrous commitments of the Kyoto accord to address the fabricated crisis of human-caused global warming.

The Liberals ratified Kyoto in 2002 without doing the independent scientific verification that would have demonstrated that global warming resulted from changes in solar activity and not from greenhouse gas emissions, since
satellites clearly showed that the enhanced greenhouse effect never occurred.

Stephen Harper, the Alliance party leader at the time, was the only political leader who demanded open scientific debate before adopting Kyoto, but the NDP, Green party and Bloc all supported Jean Chretien in ratifying Kyoto and legislating Canada's Kyoto commitments. They blindly followed fraudulent IPCC dogma and violated their obligation to the public for proper due diligence.

Today, with looming food shortages from global cooling, Canada produces two billion litres of ethanol as "biofuel commitments" to Kyoto, removing enough wheat and corn from the global food supply to feed more than 33 million people.

Norm Kalmanovitch,


© Copyright (c) The Calgary Herald

Schweinsgruber says: Norm belongs to the Friends of Science cult in Calgary. He ‘publishes’ extensively in the letters section of the Calgary Herald and on the internet. More of his denial stuff is here and here, for example.

John Cook of
Skeptical Science says: The “it’s cooling” argument is a perfect example of climate denial – denial of the full body of evidence which shows unequivocal warming:

So responding to this argument is an opportunity to reinforce the narrative – climate deniers are denying scientific evidence, and quote some of the more vivid examples.