Solar Evidence Refutes Global Warming Causes

Why Earth may be entering a new Ice Age

by Terrence Aym

All data points to the sun as the primary source of short-term and long term climate change on Earth. While volcanic eruptions such as the current one in Iceland can affect short-term weather conditions over a region, planetary climate is governed by solar activity-or lack of it.

The first inkling that something had changed with the sun was the recognition of an abnormal sunspot cycle. Then, astronomers noted that all the planets were heating up-even little Pluto on the outskirts of our solar system.

While climatologists on Earth massaged the data to make it seem like man-made global warming was real, major climate changes were occurring on Mars.

During the peak of the global warming debate, the prestigious National Geographic Magazine published a ground-breaking article by Habibullo Abdussamatov in 2007, "Mars Melt Hints at Solar, Not Human, Cause for Warming, Scientist Says."

Kabibullo Abdussamatov, an astrophysicist and head of space research at St. Petersburg's Pulkovo Astronomical Observatory in Russia, stated that solar activity caused the climate change on Earth and that observations of Mars revealed the shrinking of the carbon dioxide ice caps at the Martian South Polar region.

In that article, Abdussamatov explained: "The long-term increase in solar irradiance is heating both Earth and Mars." The scientist, accurate in past predictions, has recently pronounced his belief that Earth will enter a "little Ice Age: as early as 2014 and lasting as long as two centuries. The last one occurred between 1650 and 1850 and accounted for many crop failures, outbreaks of famines and mass migrations.

Abdussamatov contends, "Long-term variations in the amount of solar energy reaching the Earth are the main and principal reasons driving and defining the whole mechanism of climatic changes from the global warmings to the Little Ice Ages to the big glacial periods."

If his theory is true—and the International Space Station will be testing parts of it over the next six years—then use of hydrocarbon technology should not be diminished, but increased. Only through technological applications in growing economies would humanity be able to "to maintain economic growth in order to adapt to the upcoming new Little Ice Age in the middle of the 21st century," he asserts.

Whereas global warming would be a good thing (despite the gloomy forecasts) a mini-Ice Age could be disastrous: growing seasons would be shortened, more energy must be extended to stay warm, and food shortages may lead to breakouts of regional warfare.

"Observations of the sun show that as for the increase in temperature, carbon dioxide is not guilty." The Russian scientist is concerned about this move towards an extending cooling period. He states, "and as for what lies ahead in the coming decades, it is not catastrophic warming, but a global, and very prolonged temperature drop."

If Abdussamatov's calculation is true—and the observable and historical data seem to support it—then the countries of the world are moving exactly in the wrong direction to deal with an impending Ice Age. Al Gore notwithstanding, global cooling is much more dangerous than global warming.

"The observed global warming of the climate of the Earth is not caused by the anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gasses, but by extraordinarily high solar intensity that extended over virtually the entire past century," Abdussamatov wrote. "Future decrease in global temperature will occur even if anthropogenic ejection of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere rises to record levels.

"Over the past decade," Abdussamatov warns, "global temperature on the Earth has not increased; global warming has ceased, and already there are signs of the future deep temperature drop."

Links

"The sun defines the climate," Habibullo Abdussamatov

"Look to Mars for the truth on global warming," Lawrence Solomon, Financial Post

Project Astrometria

China gearing up for Hollywood expansion

Commentary: Expect Chinese company to buy U.S. studio

By Schuyler M. Moore and Lex Kuo

Ni hao ("hello" in Chinese). The next two years are likely to see a significant expansion of connections between China and Hollywood, and don't be surprised if it culminates with a Chinese company buying a U.S. studio. Having just returned from Beijing, and after meeting with people in the entertainment industry both in the government and at private and public companies, we offer the following reasons for this prediction:

-- Similar to India, China has a huge, sophisticated entertainment industry. While most of it is focused on the rapidly expanding Chinese market (it helps to have 1.3 billion people), it is practically bursting at the seams to expand internationally. The industry aspires to make big-budget films, which will require financing based on revenue outside China. This in turn will require a U.S. release as an anchor for foreign sales, which will mandate English-language productions (even if also made or dubbed in Chinese) and the tapping of Hollywood creative talent.

-- Chinese entertainment and investment companies, many of which are controlled by the government, have vast financial resources. China could cash in a small part of the U.S. debt it owns to buy all of Hollywood. The nation will have to do something with all the U.S. dollars it holds, so why not invest them in Hollywood?

-- Even with only 6,000 screens (though many more are being built), China ranks among the highest foreign boxoffice territories for U.S. films that get through the quota system there, including being the No. 1 overseas territory for such recent hits as "2012" and "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen." And ticket prices in China are equivalent to, and in some cases higher than, ticket prices in the U.S.: A ticket to "Avatar" in Beijing now is $22 a person.

The underlying forces at work will lead to numerous opportunities for cross-border cooperation and financing. For starters, a huge untapped reservoir of successful Chinese films that have proven their mettle in the crucible of a darkened theater could be remade for an international audience. Thus, the trend that began with remakes of "The Ring" and "The Grudge" from Japan will be expanded to Chinese films, as already occurred with "The Departed."

More importantly for U.S. studios, China has an annual 20-film quota on foreign films released in China, and notwithstanding the recent World Trade Organization ruling against that system, we were advised that the quota is staying -- hell or high water -- whether as China's interpretation of the WTO ruling or under the rubric of China's censorship rules. But the one key exception to the system is a co-production with a Chinese company, even for English-language films, if the co-production receives the official blessing of the China Film Co-Production Corp. Thus, we would expect studios with an eye on China's huge and growing market would use these co-productions to produce English-language films in China to get the exemption, with a side benefit of producing films at a much cheaper cost if local crews are used.

There also will be a push by U.S. studios to produce Chinese-language films for the Chinese market, just as they have expanded into local production in other countries, because local-language productions recently have been beating Hollywood films in many territories ("If you can't beat 'em, join 'em"). These local productions by U.S.-controlled companies also will have to get through the quota system, and again a government-approved co-production with a Chinese company is the answer. Disney has taken the lead in China on this front and is producing a Chinese-language remake of "High School Musical" as an approved co-production with a Chinese company.

Finally, as Chinese film companies seek to expand beyond China's borders, the next logical stop is Hollywood. They will have to make English-language films to play to a worldwide audience, and that will bring them to Hollywood to tap its creativity and talent pool. A logical steppingstone would be to set up or finance production companies here, perhaps even as large as the DreamWorks-Reliance transaction, and the endgame might be the acquisition of a major studio, as what occurred with Matsushita's acquisition of Universal or Sony's acquisition of Columbia. There would not be the same political resistance to such an acquisition as there was to the acquisition of an oil company by China because the U.S. does not view Hollywood as a precious natural resource. Even beyond a strategic acquisition by a film company, an acquisition could be made by a Chinese investment fund as a pure financial play, and such funds are in the works.

One unanswered question, however, is just how much China is willing to allow filmmakers to flex their creative muscles and address themes and plotlines provocative enough to entice mass audiences. In short, anodyne might have to give way to out-there and edgy if the Chinese cinematic culture is to resonate worldwide. How that process shifts into gear will be fascinating to watch.

In any case, even as this creative tussle goes on, get ready for the next wave of cross-border financing.

Thank you Hollywood Reporter.