SCIENTISTS VS GLOBAL WARMING

Ricardo Felício and Luiz Carlos Molion are two leading figures in Brazilian meteorology and climatology. I can't even say I'm a student of either; I simply appreciate their argumentative presentations.

Over the years, I've always struggled with environmental issues, of which I'm a voracious advocate. But the hypotheses about ozone layer depletion, the greenhouse effect, global warming, melting polar ice caps, and rising sea levels didn't convince me when I reasoned and digested the media hype, because I could see through the fantasy of the news articles. The lying advocates of global warming and climate change were already making up too much. Cow farts were affecting the Earth's climate, and so on... I think humans think they're gods and that they can regulate the Earth's climate with the stupid and idiotic measures they began to preach throughout my generation.

It doesn't matter how many people defend an idea. Truth is not established democratically by a simple majority. Two wise men are worth more than an academy of scientists. I remember when 100 scientists wrote a book against Albert Einstein, refuting his theory of the bending of light. A decade later, an eclipse observation conducted in Australia and Brazil proved Einstein right.
This book is just a glimpse into the well-founded teachings of Professor and PhD in Climatology Ricardo Felício, a famous Brazilian scientist who boldly confronted the universal lie of GLOBAL WARMING.

2. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 2 ]
PURPOSE OF THIS WORK
This book, like the others I have published, aims
to lead people to become better, to love God above all
else and their neighbor as themselves. My works are not
intended to entertain, but to provoke reflection on our
existence. In God there is an answer for everything, but
the journey to knowledge is gradual, and we will not reach
answers for everything because our minds do not have
enough free space to support them. But in this book, you
will find some answers to some of the dilemmas of our
existence.

AUTHOR: Scribe of Christ holds a degree in
Biological Sciences and History from the Metropolitan
University of Santos; a degree in Business Management
from UNIMONTE in Santos; a Bachelor of Theology from
the Faculty of the Assemblies of God in Santos; technical
training in Judicial Police from USP (University of São
Paulo) and two diplomas from Harvard University in the
USA on Pauline Epistles and Medieval Manuscripts. He is
a professional radio broadcaster from SENAC in Santos,
recognized by the Ministry of Labor. Born in Itabaiana,

3. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 3 ]
Sergipe, in 1969. In 1990, he founded the Center for
Universal Evangelism; today he dedicates himself to
writing books and ministering intercession. He has no
interest in giving lectures or participating in events,
avoiding social gatherings.

CONTACT:
WhatsApp Biblical Teaching Center with audios,
lectures, and texts from the Scribe of Christ.
WhatsApp study group
55 13 996220766 with the Scribe of Christ
https://youtube.com/@escribadecristo

4. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 4 ]
Dados Internacionais da Catalogação na Publicação (CIP)












9798262581368
CENTRO DE EVANGELISMO UNIVERSAL
-CNPJ 66.504.093/0001-08









M543 Scribe of Christ, 1969 –

Scientists vs Global Warming

London/England, Amazon.com, Draft2.com,
Uiclap.com, Clubedesautores.com.br,
2025, 111 p.; 21 cm

ISBN: 9798262582532 First Edition

1. Ricardo Felício 2. Global Warming
3. Greenhouse Effect 4. Ozone Layer
5. Climatology

CDD 550

CDU 55 / 551.5

5. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 5 ]

VENDA DE LIVROS
POR
UM DOLAR
OU
SEIS REAIS
No final está a minha coleção de livros que venho
escrevendo desde 1990. Você pode selecionar vários
deles e envio cada um pelo preço acima. Envio livros no
formato PDF e você faz o pagamento via pix. Contribua
com esta missão pessoal fazendo doação na conta
abaixo:
Contato: Valdemir whatsapp [phone]
Pix CPF 069.925.388-88
Valdemir Mota de Menezes,
Banco do Brasil
CPF 069 925 388 88 –
Agência 6721-0 conta 12.646-2

6. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 6 ]
Sumário
INTRODUCTION ................................................................. 7
FELÍCIO AT APROSOJA .................................................... 31
FELÍCIO AT AUN / USP .................................................... 35
FELÍCIO IN THE NORTHERN TRIBUNE .................... 39
PART 2 .................................................................................. 45
GLOBAL WARMING FARCE ............................................. 45
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................ 46
HUMANS ARE DESTROYING THE PLANET ............... 47
THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT ......................................... 48
1. GLOBAL MEAN TEMPERATURE ................................ 50
STATION NUMBERS ......................................................... 66
CORRECTION OF UNCERTAINTIES ............................ 67
COUNTRY NUMBERS CORRECTED ............................. 68
SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE ...................................... 70
TEMPERATURE OSCILLATION ..................................... 71
LOCAL TEMPERATURES ................................................. 79

7. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 7 ]
TOP 10 LIES OF ................................................................... 83
GLOBAL WARMING ........................................................... 83


INTRODUCTION

Ricardo Felício and Luiz Carlos Molion are two
leading figures in Brazilian meteorology and climatology. I
can't even say I'm a student of either; I simply appreciate
their argumentative presentations.

Over the years, I've always struggled with
environmental issues, of which I'm a voracious advocate.
But the hypotheses about ozone layer depletion, the
greenhouse effect, global warming, melting polar ice caps,
and rising sea levels didn't convince me when I reasoned
and digested the media hype, because I could see
through the fantasy of the news articles. The lying
advocates of global warming and climate change were
already making up too much. Cow farts were affecting the
Earth's climate, and so on... I think humans think they're
gods and that they can regulate the Earth's climate with
the stupid and idiotic measures they began to preach
throughout my generation.

It doesn't matter how many people defend an
idea. Truth is not established democratically by a simple
majority. Two wise men are worth more than an academy
of scientists. I remember when 100 scientists wrote a book

8. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 8 ]
against Albert Einstein, refuting his theory of the bending
of light. A decade later, an eclipse observation conducted
in Australia and Brazil proved Einstein right.
This book is just a glimpse into the well-founded
teachings of Professor and PhD in Climatology Ricardo
Felício, a famous Brazilian scientist who boldly confronted
the universal lie of GLOBAL WARMING.







FELÍCIO ON JÔ SOARES

Ricardo Augusto Felício audio transcription

Published by Transcriptions on 2018-01-27

Ricardo Augusto Felício. The audio transcription
features a revealing interview with the climatologist on Jô's
Show. Read the full interview and draw your own
conclusions: is the greenhouse effect a hoax? Are the
polar ice caps melting, or is it all just a larger planetary
cycle?

Ricardo Augusto Felício audio transcription (Jô
Soares)

Audio Player
Speaker Identification

9. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 9 ]

Q1: Jô Soares (interviewer)

H1: Professor Ricardo Augusto Felício
(interviewee)

Q1: Today we're also going to talk about global
warming with a climatologist who says global warming is
just talk. I don't know if the cow prefers to sleep in the
shade. I'm going to talk to Ricardo Felício. Come here.
((applause))
((music))
Q1: You're a professor in the Geography
Department at USP. And what do you study? Climatology.
Is that it?

M1: Antarctic climatology, of the Antarctic
continent for 20 years.

Q1: Just of the Antarctic continent?

M1: Yeah. My specialty, but the rest too, you can't
separate. ((laughs))

Q1: [00:01:01] Yes. No, of course. And have you
been to Antarctica a few times?

M1: Twice, already.

Global warming lacks scientific proof.
Q1: [00:01:06] What do you think of the theories
that global warming is melting the continent's ice?

10. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 10 ]

H1: Yes. It's not even a theory anymore, it's just a
hypothesis, so it doesn't require scientific proof. And then,
the worst part is, you're...

P1: No?

H1: [00:01:21] No. There's no scientific proof of global
warming. In fact, this story has been around for 3,000
years. Our researchers on the Climageo team have
already been looking for this information. This was already
discussed in the agoras of the Greek cities: if you cut
down trees, it would change the planet's climate.

P1: Was this already discussed in Ancient Greece?

H1: [00:01:43] Yes. And in the Roman Senate, whether or
not to build aqueducts would change the climate. And so it
went, and to this day we're stuck with this same old story,
that the climate will change, that humans are messing with
the planet and I don't know what, but it doesn't change
anything.

The devastation of Easter Island
P1: But it's funny. There are reports of a civilization, I don't
know if it's the Inca or the Aztec, where they were cutting
down forests to use the wood, including to burn it for
heating, etc. And when they reached the last trees, the
forest was destroyed, and the civilization also began to
fall, to decline. Doesn't one thing have anything to do with
the other? You destroyed here and there are no
consequences?

11. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 11 ]

H1: [00:02:37] No, no. You have to be very careful with
this because these are local actions, not planetary actions.
Three-quarters...

P1: But locally, it works.

H1: [00:02:45] Even so. The change is very small. The city
of São Paulo creates its own microclimate, for example.

The circular discourse of global climate change
P1: Yes. No, I'm talking about...

H1: [00:02:53] And the global climate is another thing, but
these people's argument is that the city alters the planet's
climate. Therefore, the city has to adapt to the climate
change it itself has caused. But wait a minute. That's
circular reasoning.

The polar melting and freezing cycle
P1: Now, what's that? You mean the water... the ice isn't
melting there?

H1: [00:03:12] No. The ice melts and freezes again. It has
its cycles, this has been well known since the end of
World War II. First, the war itself was the polar scenario.
We're used to always seeing the world on a planisphere,
thinking the United States is on this side and Russia is on
the other side, and they're going to kill each other with
missiles over the Atlantic. No. They're going to kill each
other over the polar region. ((laughs)) Actually, they're
pretty close to each other, aren't they? So, knowledge of

12. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 12 ]
ice in the military era is already widespread. So, in the
International Geophysical Year itself, from 1957 to 1958,
extended until 1959, the first two American mission was to
cross the pole and even place a nuclear submarine there.

Climate and militarism go hand in hand.
P1: Yes. Under the ice cap.

M1: [00:04:01] That's right. Exactly. First, it was the
Nautilus submarine that managed to cross the entire polar
ice cap in 1957. And the Skate submarine managed to
pierce the ice. I mean, they already knew exactly where
the (polyelas) [00:04:12] are, which are the openings in
the Arctic ice, so they could place the weapon of war
there. So climate and militarism always go hand in hand.

P1: Everything.

M1: That's right.

Sea level isn't rising.
P1: Everything is going hand in hand with militarism.
What's the deal with sea level? Isn't it rising year after
year?

M1: [00:04:30] No. Sea level remains in the same place.

P1: But is there a story like that?

H1: [00:04:33] There's also this story: "Oh, if the ice caps
are melting." No. First, if anything were to melt, it would
have to be Antarctica. So, yes, you would have a

13. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 13 ]
considerable rise in sea level. But for Antarctica to melt,
between us, you have to have a temperature on Earth
that's about 20 to 30 degrees higher.

P1: Yes. But what about sea level measurements? Is it
rising? What's that like?

H1: [00:04:57] No. It has small variations. For example,
only El Niño, which is a completely natural phenomenon,
changes the sea level by half a meter. And then the worst-
case scenarios from the IPCC, the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, their worst-case scenario is 50
centimeters.

P1: In how long?

H1: [00:05:17] In a hundred years.

Sea level hasn't risen since 1780.
P1: But isn't there a measurement made by Captain
Cook?

H1: [00:05:22] Yes.

P1: And when is that from?

H1: [00:05:24] I think it's around 1780.
P1: And from there to here?

H1: [00:05:28] It's in the same place. Sea level is in the
same place.

14. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 14 ]
P1: So. What a relief you give me. Wow.

H1: [00:05:36] No, there's a funnier situation. I closed my
account at a bank that claims to be sustainable and stuff
like that. I hate that story. "No, but what do you do?", "I'm
a climatology professor," "Oh, ((scared)) and the world is
going to end?" And I'm like, "Oh, my God." People are
like, terrified, "the world is going to end."

Global warming has become a scapegoat for all of
humanity's ills.
P1: No, Mariana was really worried, she even covers
every mirror to this day, afraid of seeing the reflection of
global warming.

H1: [00:06:03] Yeah. Global warming has become the
scapegoat for all of humanity's ills.

The Great Greenhouse Effect Lie
P1: And speaking of global warming? What about the
greenhouse effect?

H1: [00:06:16] Yeah. That's the worst of all. That's
impossible physics.

P1: Oh, I'm so happy today. Wow.

P1: I mean, the world ending in 2012, no way?

H1: [00:06:27] No way.

P1: Right. So, let's move on to the greenhouse effect.

15. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 15 ]

H1: [00:06:31] The greenhouse effect is the biggest
scientific fallacy in history. First, it's based on a scientific
concept that doesn't exist. The Earth has this temperature
because it has an atmosphere, receives energy from the
sun, interacts with the atmosphere, and by the law of
gases—note, it's not a theory. It's the law of gases,
pressure, temperature, and volume. So because we have
an atmosphere, we have this temperature. And I love this
discussion, where warmongers who work for global
warming say, "No, but the biggest example that CO2
would really destroy planet Earth is Venus." And then I
say, "Oh, yeah?" "Yeah." "Right. And what's the
atmospheric pressure on the surface of Venus?" "Oh, I
don't know." "Yeah, it's 90 times Earth's atmospheric
pressure. So the temperature there is 400 degrees on the
surface. It's not because of CO2, it's because of the
atmospheric pressure of Venus' atmosphere."

P1: And Venus also has the shirt problem, right? Which
must have some influence.
The greenhouse effect on planet Earth doesn't
exist.
P1: Now, does that mean there's no greenhouse
effect?

H1: [00:07:42] No. That physics doesn't exist.

P1: So, have you heard about the New Zealand
sheep farting thing?

H1: [00:07:49] Yes.

16. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 16 ]

P1: Right? That it's such an absurd amount of
farts that it will cause the "apumcalypse," which will burst
with the...

The ozone layer doesn't exist.
P1: ...With the famous ozone layer. What's that?

H1: [00:08:06] That it doesn't exist, the ozone
layer is something that doesn't exist.

P1: It doesn't exist?

H1: [00:08:10] No.

P1: My God, what a relief I am today.

P1: So, sheep can fart at will? I know there's a
farmer teaching sheep to hold back. Can you let go?

H1: [00:08:26] The story of ozone is known to
serious scientists, not those "white label" sellouts we call
who work for the government, companies, etc. Serious
scientists, the father of this thing is (Dobson), who during
the International Geophysical Year proposed to go to
Antarctica precisely to find out what the ozone variation
was over the polar ice cap. He already knew that ozone
completely disappeared in Antarctica. And then, since
then, these guys have been hiding this information and
saying it's your deodorant that destroys the ozone layer.

17. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 17 ]
The ozone layer is just a pretext to protect patents
on industrial gases.

P1: Wow. ((silence)) I'll never catch a guy smelling
like that again. I'll argue with him: "Go put on some
deodorant, you bastard."

H1: [00:09:10] Then, when you see what happens,
the patents on CFCs, the refrigerant gases, are broken.
So in '87, the patents start to expire, they become public,
and you no longer have to pay royalties on them. So the
entire industry that holds these patents launches a
replacement called HCFC, which is an organochlorine like
any other, but it costs. The CFC now costs $1.38 per kilo,
and the other one goes to $38 per kilo. But the big
advantage is that it doesn't work in any of the previous
refrigerators, air conditioners, and everything else. So it's
extremely sustainable; you have to sell it, throw it all away,
and buy everything new. Today, patents expire in 25
years. So the talk now is that HCFCs have miraculously
discovered that they're also harmful to the ozone layer and
global warming.

The prices of the new refrigerant gases are sky-
high and make all equipment obsolete.
P1: What a relief, right?

H1: [00:10:14] No, but the best part is the price of
the replacement, which companies have now said they'll
guarantee won't cause any more problems. "Oh, yeah?"
$128 per kilo, and they won't work in other equipment
either.

18. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 18 ]

P1: Yeah. They always have that trick, don't they?

H1: [00:10:30] Yeah. If you realize now, it's not
just about changing the refrigerant gas. Entire industrial
parks have to be replaced because there are central
refrigeration systems, boilers, and everything else. So, if
you realize now, all products are switching to butane
again. When CFCs arrived in the late 1940s and 1950s,
they were introduced precisely to solve the problem of
factory explosions because they're a completely inert gas;
there are no problems with them. So today we're going
back to the beginning of the 20th century again because
of a lie: that this gas destroys the ozone layer.

Q1: What gas destroys the ozone layer?

H1: [00:11:15] The hypothesis, again an
anthropogenic hypothesis, which has never been proven,
is that CFCs, organofluorochlorine gases, can destroy the
ozone layer.

Q1: And butane?

H1: [00:11:25] Butane isn't.

Q1: Is butane exempt?

H1: [00:11:28] Yeah. They're there. For now,
right? Until someone finds a problem with them.

The strategy of manipulative catastrophic news

19. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 19 ]
P1: There's one thing that really catches my
attention, Ricardo, is that whenever you see an
announcement about an astronomical phenomenon or a
meteor strike, or a geographic or physical phenomenon, it
always goes like this: "The temperature reached I don't
know how many degrees, which hasn't happened since
1920," "The blizzard that happened this year hasn't been
seen since 1887"... meaning that the previous one, before
that...

H1: [00:12:06] Something similar happened.

P1: ...Was there anything worse?

H1: [00:12:09] Yes. Wow, much worse.

P1: Yeah. So why this catastrophic thing of
thinking that the next one will be the worst? If that never
happens?

H1: [00:12:21] No, paleoclimatic records show
things like that being much worse. Like the sea level will
rise 50 meters in 100 years, the temperature will rise 8
degrees in 50 years. And people are saying it will rise half
a degree in 100 years? And is that a joke? That's a joke.

P1: Look, there are people in the audience
already wanting to ask questions. Want to? Go ahead.

São Paulo of the Drizzle: The Drizzle is Back
P1: ((audience)) Yeah, you said this whole global
warming thing has nothing to do with it. And so, my father,

20. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 20 ]
and a lot of older people I know say that São Paulo in the
60s and 70s was known as the land of the drizzle, which
was very cold. And now, when you get to the summer, it's
incredibly hot, unbearable. What can you explain about
that?

H1: [00:13:10] Yeah. That's the effect of the local
climate. So this isn't a global effect. In the case of drizzle,
for example, we had a scientific study conducted in 2009-
2010 showing that in the last three years it returned with
the same intensity as in the 1930s and 1940s. So, in fact,
drizzle is also a cyclical phenomenon. What's sorely
lacking today is observation. We have very little
observation of weather phenomena within cities. We even
say it's the city climate, actually. And in general, we also
have little observation. Starting in the 1990s, weather
stations were closed all over the world. President Collor
de Mello himself closed several weather stations here in
Brazil as well. So, we lack a lot of on-site meteorological
information. Satellites measure it, but there's always a
methodological problem, anyway. It's not that easy.

Is there no influence of deforestation on the global
climate?
Q1: Is there an influence of deforestation on the
global climate?

H1: [00:14:15] It doesn't exist. No. Unfortunately.

P1: It doesn't exist?

H1: [00:14:21] No.

21. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 21 ]

P1: And the local climate?

H1: [00:14:24] More or less. One thing people also
don't know is...

The Amazon isn't the lungs of the world.
P1: So the Amazon isn't the lungs of the world?

H1: [00:14:31] You have to be careful. It never
was the lungs of the world. ((laughter)) It never was.

((audience murmur))

H1: That theory was already debunked in the
1980s. It's the oceans.

P1: But not even the pleura, nothing?

H1: [00:14:42] No, it's the oceans.

P1: I'm going to continue here with Ricardo
Augusto, another segment with him because, my dear
friend, brother Juca de Oliveira, there's a theory I want to
put to Professor Ricardo so we can discuss it. And I also
see that there's someone else who wants to ask a
question. So we'll open the next segment with that
person's question. Can we continue? What do you think?

P1: ((audience)) Yes.

The oceans are the lungs of the world.

22. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 22 ]
P1: I think so too. Let's go. I have Professor
Ricardo Augusto Felício, a climatologist, here next to me.
We're talking about the climate, and we closed the last
segment by saying, much to my dismay, that the Amazon
isn't the lungs of the world. And doesn't it have an
influence? Doesn't deforestation have an influence on the
climate?
H1: [00:15:40] You have to be careful with that,
because when I say that, it means I'm authorizing the
destruction of the forest.

P1: No, not at all. Imagine.

H1: [00:15:47] No. But we have to be careful,
because the contribution of environmentalism is this
against people who talk about, deny the hypothesis of
global warming. So it all mixes together in a bag of tricks.
"Oh, see? This guy is authorizing the destruction of the
forest."

A 6,000-kilometer aquifer
P1: No. The Amazon is there, it shouldn't be
destroyed. In fact, I don't think it's even possible to destroy
the Amazon, since much of it is planted below. I mean, it's
underwater. To get to the root would be...

H1: [00:16:18] There are 6,000 kilometers of this
new aquifer they discovered beneath the Amazon. It's
bigger than the Guarani Aquifer. Recently discovered.

P1: I have no idea what that is. But it must be
incredibly important.

23. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 23 ]

P1: Why 6,000 kilometers?

Forests arise because of rainfall, not the other
way around.

P1: There's an aquifer. And what about the forest?
The rain? What's that like?

H1: [00:16:41] Yeah. Actually, it's like that. We
have to understand that the oceans rule the planet. And
then, by chance, there are continents. Three-quarters of
the planet's surface is covered in water. So most of the
exchange of mass and energy with the atmosphere is
done with the oceans. So every now and then they feel
sorry for us: "Poor little continents, that little thing. Throw a
little water at them." Throwing a little water at them brings
all the disasters we imagine. The main water inflow to the
continents comes from the tropical part, which are the
trade winds, which everyone has heard about and studied
countless times in school. Köppen himself [00:17:22], who
was one of the first people to study climatology back in the
18th and 19th centuries, when he began these studies,
said, "But how am I going to study climate? The
atmosphere is invisible, highly dynamic, and there's
nothing we can do about it." Well, he managed to verify
that vegetation responded to climate. So he saw it like,
"Look, funny. This entire part of the planet, with a few
regional exceptions, has extremely virtuous and immense
forests. And it's precisely where it rains a lot, where you
have the main thunderstorm cells; lightning fixes nitrogen
in the rain and therefore releases it to the surface." So

24. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 24 ]
there's a whole symbiosis between atmospheric
phenomena. So forests—the technical name for forest in
English, for example, is rainforest. So, "rain forests." Yes,
the forest is there because it rains, and it doesn't rain
because there are forests. Do you understand?

What happens if the Amazon disappears?
P1: ((laughs)) It's the opposite of what you
imagine.

H1: [00:18:22] If you cut it, let's suppose, let's
make a hypothetical center. Since they love to create
scenarios, let's do that too. Let's suppose you remove the
entire Amazon from there. Remove everything. And 20
years later, everything is growing.

P1: But it takes 20 years.

H1: [00:18:37] 20 years. Which is nothing in the
history of the planet. ((laughs))

P1: No. Not at all. Who wanted to ask a question?
Right?

Rio Mais 20 is about colonialist politics.
P1: ((audience)) I'm a USP student too. I'd like to
know: the Rio Mais 20 event, which will be held here in
Rio de Janeiro and will discuss sustainability, whether
human action has little or no connection with global
warming, the hole in the ozone layer, and the greenhouse
effect. After all, what are they going to discuss at Rio Mais
20?

25. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 25 ]

H1: [00:19:13] They're going to discuss how to
keep their colonies on a leash. ((laughs)) Come on. 1492,
they arrive here and convince us that we need mirrors to
survive. 1992: Five hundred years exactly, they come with
the story of Rio. This whole thing about the world ending
and so on and so forth. There are precedents for that. So
it started with the ozone layer story. In 1987, the first
intergovernmental panel, called the IOTP, was formed for
the ozone layer. In 1988, the IPCC, the climate change
panel, was formed. In 1989, the Berlin Wall fell. Then you
say, "Oh, but what does that have to do with it?" It has
everything to do with it. It's the capitalist system
expanding, and at the same time, when you have this,
wow. Half of the world's scientific staff worked for the Cold
War. The free ride is over. If you look at the history of
these scientists working on global warming today, they're
the same ones who worked on all the atomic, nuclear, and
other disasters. So, what did these scientists know how to
do? Scenarios on computers, I program and create
scenarios: "Look, if you drop a nuclear bomb here, it will
do this, not what." They just swapped the thing called
global thermonuclear war for global warming.

P1: (Derico) wanted to ask you a question.

The aggradation of ocean degradation
P1: ((Derico)) He mentioned sea level, and you
can see that the sea is destroying not the entire coastline,
but some parts of it. Those who live along the coast are
gone, they don't live there anymore. The avenues no
longer exist. It's not that they don't exist and then they

26. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 26 ]
come back. The sea took over and destroyed it, so the
coastline shrank. It's getting closer; it seems like Brazil's
coastline is coming here. Why is that?

H1: [00:21:13] No. This is a phenomenon that has
been studied by geomorphology for a long time, called
aggradation and degradation. So we say it like this, we
use the word degradation thinking: "Oh, we're destroying
the planet." No. The planet itself moves, changing its
shape. So it, too, the sea also carries out its aggradation
processes, forming beaches and degradation, it also
destroys the beaches. This is a natural process too.

P1: What about when there's a landfill? Does that
water leak somewhere else?

H1: [00:21:45] No. ((laughs))

P1: You put... look, Alex...

P1: ((Alex)) no.

P1: It was. It was you.

P1: What happened, Alex? Tell me.

P1: ((Alex)) Nothing here, Mr. Jô. Back there
maybe, nothing here.

P1: It's already a little late, he's packing up to
leave.
P1: Didn't I already tell you not to do that?

27. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 27 ]

P1: ((Alex)) I'm just paying attention, Mr. Jô. I
didn't even move here.

P1: Huh? ((laughter)) No, you didn't move. Of
course. Good. Sorry. That image I made, which is
absolutely childish, of course, you land here, doesn't the
sea expand in another direction somewhere else?

H1: [00:22:32] No. The area is minimal. There's no
way. ((laughter))

The sun is the most important energy source for
transforming the planet.

P1: It has no influence at all?

H1: [00:22:36] No. The influence, 99 percent of
the energy on the Earth's surface comes from the sun. 99
percent. 99.99, actually. Geothermal energy is
insignificant compared to the geographic stratum.

P1: No, yes. But I say local. Suddenly.

H1: [00:22:51] No. Even so. It still isn't. The sun,
for example, everyone says, "Oh, the sun is a constant."
Galileo almost went to the stake when he started finding
sunspots. And I think the sun isn't a constant. It isn't. The
sun has its cycles of change, the main one being 11
years. So, for 11 years, its activity increases and
decreases. So, about 4 years of rising and 7 years of
falling. And there are also other 90-year cycles, other 200-

28. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 28 ]
year cycles. So now, for example, we're entering a calmer
period for the sun that lasts until 2046. So, if you're
thinking there's going to be global warming, no. There's
actually going to be a cooling. It's actually been happening
since 1998.

The sun has cycles of high and low activity,
medium and long cycles.
P1: What? A cooling?

H1: [00:23:33] Yes. Temperatures are actually
already decreasing.

P1: And the sun's influence on our climate is total?

H1: [00:23:40] Total. 100 percent. Then you have
the moon, a bit of Jupiter too, and Saturn messing with the
gravitational fields. But the rest will be the sun in the first
echelon. The second echelon are the volcanoes. And then
the third echelon are the oceans.

P1: The volcanoes?

H1: [00:23:59] Yeah. The volcanoes. Volcanoes
can cool the planet.
P1: Doesn't it have something to do with Juca's
theory [00:24:05]: suddenly, the heating of this water,
which is actually a great conductor of heat, heat, and heat,
and then, "boom," cause a tsunami?

H1: [00:24:13] Volcanoes have the opposite
problem. Their answer is negative: they throw volcanic

29. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 29 ]
ash into the stratosphere. It would be the second main
layer of the atmosphere, and then it doesn't allow solar
energy to reach the surface. So, when there's volcanic
activity in general, when it's intense, you already have the
next summer and winter colder. Krakatoa was a big
problem. The following year, there was no summer.

P1: The volcano.

H1: [00:24:40] Yeah. After it became active, the
following year, there was no summer. Because of all the
volcanic ash it threw into the stratosphere.

P1: Thank God, we don't have any regions with
large volcanoes here, do we?

H1: [00:24:54] But it's okay. Wherever they are,
they... ((laughs)) The Chilean now...

P1: Do you find that funny? He finds it funny.
Anywhere.

P1: The Chilean one?

M1: [00:25:04] The Chilean volcano erupted at the
end of the year. Well, it affected the southern states, didn't
it?

P1: Wow, Alex was still knocking things down
there.

El Niño and La Niña

30. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 30 ]
P1: And El Niño? You mentioned El Niño. Even
today, there's a lot of talk about El Niño.

M1: [00:25:21] El Niño is a very interesting
phenomenon. Completely unknown. Very complicated, it's
a high-frequency phenomenon. Sometimes it lasts four or
five months, then disappears for another 15. It's polarized;
there's El Niño, La Niña, and sometimes it's kind of in
between, not moving one way or the other.

The Pacific Decadal Oscillation
P1: Is there La Niña too?

H1: [00:25:39] There's La Niña too. And they're
also linked to another phenomenon called the Pacific
Decadal Oscillation. This is a longer one. It was
accidentally discovered during fishing in the Pacific that
fish would disappear for a period of time, followed by a
complete abundance of fish. And then they saw that it was
linked to the sea surface temperature. So the Pacific has a
polarity of being colder and warmer very close to the solar
oscillation. And it had to be. We always forget, the Pacific
is a third of the size of the Earth. A third of the size of the
Earth is the Pacific.

Farewell to Professor Ricardo Augusto Felício and
Jô Soares
P1: Well. I think we'll sleep either more relaxed or
more worried after our conversation here with Ricardo
Augusto Felício ((amused)) Professor, thank you very
much for your presence. Thank you to all of you here too.
And we'll be back in a little while.

31. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 31 ]
((fim da transcrição)) [00:26:38]
(4)

FELÍCIO AT APROSOJA

"Global warming is a hoax to mask geopolitical
interests," says climatologist Ricardo Felício.
The professor was a guest at the 2019 edition of
the University Circuit, sponsored by Aprosoja-MT.

October 21, 2019

He argues that global warming is nothing more
than a hoax to mask geopolitical interests. Skeptical, São
Paulo native Ricardo Augusto Felício, a geography
professor at USP and a climatologist, was a guest at the
2019 edition of the University Circuit, sponsored by
Aprosoja-MT.

Felicio became known for being part of a
movement considered "denialist" by scholars who follow a
different line of thought, which he vehemently refutes. "We
are skeptical scientists. Calling us deniers is pejorative.
They use this vulgar term to defame and discredit us.
Denialism is alluding to those who denied the great
holocausts that occurred on the planet," he said.

Global warming is based on the claim that the
planet's temperature is rising and that external factors
caused by humans —such as deforestation, CO2

32. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 32 ]
emissions into the atmosphere, and agribusiness—are
largely responsible for the climate phenomenon. This
theory is disputed by the professor.

"Temperature variations are minimal. They take
advantage of extremely hot days to defend the idea of
global warming. As if global warming chose alternate days
to show its face," he said.

Without mincing words and voracious in what he
said, the scholar answered the 5 Questions for LIVRE.
Check it out!

1 – Why is this theory that global warming is a
hoax ignored by the media?

Ricardo Felício – Actually, it's not a theory, but a
hypothesis. This theory has been floated, but there's no
evidence to support it, not even that, first, CO2 controls
temperature; second, there's no evidence that CO2
controls the planet's macroclimate; and, worse still, they
can't provide evidence that the average global
temperature means anything in terms of climatology.

It's been 31 years since the so-called global
warming emerged. A third of the century has passed and
nothing has happened. The thermometers haven't risen
even 1 degree. The media works for this system. They
make money from it. Global warming has become a major
industry in the last 30 years.

33. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 33 ]
2 – Could this be the reason there's no popular
support in Brazil for demystifying global warming?

Ricardo Felício – The brainwashing is done in
schools, with completely compromised teaching materials
and a complete ideological foundation. Children grow up
accepting this as truth in Brazil. When the Berlin Wall fell
in 1989, for example, most communists became "green"—
that is, environmentalists. Take the case of the European
Parliament: Angela Merkel is a member of the Communist
Youth, but she still partners with Putin because she
depends on Russian gas to keep Germany running. So
the geopolitical ties are deeper than we might imagine,
and there's zero interest in exposing this to the public.

3 – How much does this climate cycle affect the
agricultural calendar? Have the first signs already
emerged?

Ricardo Felício – The impact on agriculture has
already begun. The first ones are in the Northern
Hemisphere. The geopolitical landscape is also beginning
to become clearer. Why are major political leaders
clashing directly with Brazil? Emmanuel Macron is
engaging in a "fight" with Brazil because it is a major
supplier of agricultural products and doesn't want
competition.

China and the United States know they will suffer
from low temperatures, as the Northern Hemisphere is the
first to suffer from the cold, and so they want to secure
food reserves, and that's where Brazil is. Africa isn't

34. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 34 ]
enough. It's a "fight" with several regions fighting among
themselves. Brazil is a single nation and has a gigantic
tropical area, and it can produce even in colder climates.
When we double our agricultural area, we will feed half the
world's population. This will happen out of necessity. And
the true purpose of "global warming" will be revealed.

Note the stance of Queen Elizabeth – who never
gets involved in arguments – when the British Parliament
started to curry favor with Macron, she went there and
canceled the session. Do you really think she wants a
"fight" with Brazil? And these are the details that go
unnoticed. And this is something the current
administration has been failing to do, as it could build a
narrative based on these episodes and establish itself.

4 – Before starting the lecture, you mentioned
being stunned by the dismissal of a research colleague.
Are you afraid the same thing will happen to you?

Ricardo Felício – My research colleague and
zoologist Susan Crockford, who worked as an adjunct
professor, was fired from the academy for climate and
polar bear studies. She refutes with data and extensive
research the fact that the polar bear population is
declining due to global warming. That's why she was laid
off; it's disturbing.

There are many skeptical scientists, but many are
afraid to come forward and defend their theories. We're
messing with powerful people. I'm already feeling the
effects of fighting this fight. I'm a professor at the

35. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 35 ]
University of São Paulo, and my salary was cut to one
thousand and seventy reais after 10 years of teaching. I
challenge anyone to justify my pay cut other than a
boycott.

5 – What argument should I use against that
neighbor who advocates global warming and sends a
petition on Facebook and raises the "save the planet"
banner?

Ricardo Felício – Just explain simply that humans
are insignificant compared to nature. At the same time, we
disregard nature's power to recover. Everything in nature
is gigantic in scale. Including the explosion of life in algae
and vegetation. One rainy day in the Amazon, and
everything starts to turn green. That's how nature works.
The planet will heat up and cool down, and we don't care.
Our scale is ridiculously small. To say that humans control
climate variability is ridiculous. "Ah, but cities are warming
the planet." Wow! Look at the size of cities in relation to
the planet; it's 0.05 times the surface; you can't even
compare that to the size of the Pacific Ocean, for
example. (1)

FELÍCIO AT AUN / USP

There's No Greenhouse Effect, Says Ricardo
Felício
By Fernando de Oliveira

36. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 36 ]
São Paulo (AUN - USP) - With this statement, one
of the country's most controversial scientists casts doubt
on the basis of all climate discussions in recent decades.
Ricardo Felício, who holds a degree in Atmospheric
Sciences from the Institute of Astronomy, Geophysics and
Atmospheric Sciences (IAG) at USP and a PhD in
Physical Geography from the School of Philosophy,
Literature and Human Sciences (FFLCH) at USP, claims
he is discriminated against and censored within the
University itself because of his ideas. "I'm the only
professor at USP who doesn't have a computer," he
declares. "I buy everything here with my own money."

According to Felício, all global warming theories
stem from numerical computer models that simulate
natural conditions. The professor claims that these models
do not accurately represent reality, as they do not simulate
the Sun and the atmosphere, only greenhouse gases, the
existence of which he denies.

His main argument is based on the relative rarity
of CO2 (carbon dioxide), the supposed main culprit in the
fight against global warming. One of the so-called trace
gases (the name given to the least abundant), it has a
concentration of approximately 0.033% in the atmosphere.
According to the scientist, this low concentration prevents
it from exerting a significant influence on the climate.
Felício disputes the very idea that carbon dioxide absorbs
infrared rays emitted from the Earth's surface and re-emits
some of them, since the gas molecules move, expending
the absorbed energy and transferring it to more abundant
elements, such as nitrogen and oxygen, with which they

37. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 37 ]
collide during movement. Furthermore, the re-emission
would occur in all directions, with the Earth's surface being
just one of the targets. "That's if water vapor, which
absorbs almost all of the energy, were to let it go," he
adds.

According to the researcher, what keeps the
Earth's temperature mild are not greenhouse gases, but
the atmosphere, which prevents sudden and violent
changes based on variations in solar radiation. To
illustrate this concept, he cites the Moon, which has no
atmosphere and therefore has a highly unstable
temperature, around 150°C during the day and -130°C at
night. Felício also attributes a significant influence on the
climate to water vapor, much greater than that of carbon
dioxide. According to him, between 25% and 33.33% of
Earth's energy exchanges are controlled by clouds.

One of the strongest pieces of evidence he
presents against the role of carbon dioxide in global
warming is the fact that, during the last two Ice Ages, its
concentration was ten times higher than it is today.
Furthermore, he states that human activity accounts for
about 2% of the planet's CO2, too little to have any
significant impact.

Felício also discredits the data used by the IPCC
to prove the increase in carbon dioxide concentrations,
largely coming from the Hawaiian observatory of Mauna
Loa, near the volcano of the same name. "Currently, the
CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is the lowest in
history," he says. "Eighty-three percent of the data was

38. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 38 ]
contaminated by the volcano." He goes further, claiming
that, in 1820, measurements already indicated values of
450 ppm (parts per million) of CO2, long before the
proliferation of the contemporary industrial system.
According to the scientist, to avoid this, "the IPCC claims
that the Pettenkofer method [used in these
measurements] is no longer valid," but without explaining
why they abandoned it or why they revived it in current
measurements, after deeming it invalid.

The researcher points out errors even in the work
of the 19th-century Swedish scientist Svante August
Arrhenius to calculate the influence of the Greenhouse
Effect. Arrhenius was one of the first to attribute the
phenomenon to the regulation of Earth's temperature and,
in 1896, stated that, without it, our planet would have an
average temperature of -18°C. However, according to
Felício, the enormous discrepancy between this value and
the Moon's average temperature is a clear sign of a flaw in
the calculations. "The Moon and Earth are astronomically
very close objects," he points out. Arrhenius, using a
formula created by Stefan-Boltzmann in his calculations,
made a fundamental error in calculating the fourth root of
the mean temperature. "He took all these energy inputs,
added them together, then averaged them and plugged
them into the equation," he explains. Felício says that,
instead, Arrhenius should have taken the fourth root of
each measurement and then calculated the average. "This
project was only recalculated now, in 1995," he reports.
"And so we arrive at the Earth's effective temperature of -
129°C." This, without the atmosphere.

39. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 39 ]
Another controversial point in his theories
concerns the deterioration of the ozone layer, which, he
claims, doesn't even exist. He defines ozone as a highly
reactive material, a transient form of oxygen that depends
on the Sun to remain stable. Therefore, the amount of
ozone in the atmosphere is constantly changing and
cannot be effectively measured. This is why the layer
disappears during the winter months, when Antarctica
(where the current hole is located) receives no sunlight.

Where does all the support for these theories
come from, then? In the researcher's opinion, it's due to
the interest of developed countries in slowing the advance
of poor nations by forcing the adoption of more expensive
production methods. "Sustainable development, in fact, is
zero development," he attacks. (2)

FELÍCIO IN THE NORTHERN TRIBUNE

Refuting the argument that climate change and
global warming are caused by human action,
meteorologist and professor at the Department of
Geography at USP, Ricardo Augusto Felício, explains that
the main culprit of the greenhouse effect is not carbon
(CO2) and that emissions from human intervention
worldwide do not affect the climate. "CO2 does not control
the Earth's climate." He categorically states: "The main
question is financial. It's a game of interests of large
countries, of selling new products, maintaining patents,
which will interfere with consumer relations and the mode

40. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 40 ]
of production," he emphasizes. In an interview with
TRIBUNA DO NORTE, the scientist explains what causes
the changes, reveals that the forecast is for global cooling,
advocates for rational development, and dismisses
assumptions of what he calls the "fake climate triad"
(climate change, global warming, and environmental
chaos). "All of this ends up being used to promote a
concept of sustainability that isn't even defined by the
IBGE. It's an empty rhetoric aimed at selling an ideology,
which in turn doesn't stand on its own two feet," asserts
the doctor of climatology. Watch the interview.
The expert explains that the main culprit of the
greenhouse effect isn't carbon (CO2) and that humans
have little influence on climate change.
You argue that human-caused global warming
doesn't exist. If not, why do so many advocate it and why
are there so many policies trying to reverse it? The story
of CO2 is tied to the villain gas that causes this
phenomenon called global warming and that, in turn,
human emissions are increasing the concentration of this
gas, which in turn causes the greenhouse effect, which in
turn causes global warming, which in turn alters the
Earth's climate. It's a lot of assumptions. The questions we
raise will impact several of these assumptions. First, it's
not CO2 that controls the Earth's climate. Second,
humans have nothing to do with changing the
concentration of this gas in the atmosphere; our emissions
are ridiculously small. Third, CO2 doesn't have the power
to cause the greenhouse effect. And we question these
hypotheses because there's no scientific evidence that
this exists. The big question is: how can all human
development, socioeconomic development especially in

41. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 41 ]
developing countries like Brazil, be conditioned by a
fallacy? They're trying to tie all human development to the
big lie of global warming, climate change, and
environmental chaos, as if we were destroying the world.
But when you can indoctrinate people with this theory, you
can impose issues that are of interest to developed
countries. It's a game of interests for large countries, of
selling new products, maintaining patents—a game of
interests that will interfere with consumer relations,
industry, the mode of production, services, and
agriculture. What's at stake is something else.
And what's at stake?
The big question is financial, like carbon credits.
They created a system in which a country can't produce,
transfers production as if it were gas, CO2, and then they
come to underdeveloped countries and sell the surplus of
their production, with the money deposited in fiduciary
accounts, meaning it's already earmarked for the
purchase of another product from those countries. It's a
greedy market that keeps emerging countries in a state of
submission to the rich, while the big ones grow, dominate,
and sell all the technologies. All through this almost
religious indoctrination of climate change, which manages
to change laws and impose this as a consumption target.
The industry is limited to using a production model. One
example is the gases in refrigerants; those who didn't sign
the Montreal Treaty didn't receive financial aid from the
IMF (International Monetary Fund), a true give-and-take.
This is what happened with the gases in refrigerators.
They managed to promote the ozone story worldwide. And
now, 20 years later, when patents are falling, they're
resuming the argument, offering another option.

42. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 42 ]

And what are these climate changes due to?
They're normal phenomena; they always happen.
We can't accept that they simply say they're increasing.
It's a lie. In the last 20 years, what has grown is monitoring
the planet through remote sensing and meteorological
stations. We're seeing what's happening. And at the same
time, more people are occupying areas of the planet, and
global poverty has also led more people to live in at-risk
areas. But it's not about climate issues, but about
economic issues. So, measures to promote sustainability,
conferences like Rio+20, and international policies are
worthless. Development doesn't have to be sustainable.
Instead, it must be rational.

What do you define as rational development?
It's about weighing the pros and cons of
development so that it is effectively balanced. We're not in
a 19th-century economy. Of course, we need to consider
market structures. To achieve this, it's obvious that we
shouldn't use resources to exhaustion, but rather have
strategies that ensure their rational use. And there are
professionals for this, such as environmental engineers,
chemical engineers, and various qualified professionals.
The idea that everything will always be the same is
fallacious. No. Nothing in the cosmos is eternal. It's
incoherent to adopt measures and actions that are
inefficient, expensive, and unproductive within a capitalist
system that dictates otherwise, and in a country where
these measures and actions haven't achieved any of their
goals. It's completely incoherent. Let's weigh up what we

43. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 43 ]
have and how we apply them in agriculture, industry, the
economy, and society.

If it's not CO2, what controls climate change?

The sun's variations, which have different activity
cycles, and any variation is reflected on the planet due to
its proximity. And within the Earth's climate system, we
also have the oceans, which remain a huge unknown,
along with the clouds. Volcanoes are the wild cards, as we
never know when they will erupt and what the climate
response will be, which is generally negative, as they have
a lower temperature range. These are huge unknowns, far
greater than any human action. But all of this ends up
being used to promote a concept of sustainability that isn't
even defined by the IBGE (Brazilian Institute of
Geography and Statistics). It's all one thing, an empty
rhetoric aimed at selling an ideology, which in turn doesn't
stand on its own three pillars: the triad of climate change,
global warming, and environmental chaos.

Do you believe it's possible to undo this already
widespread triad?
It's quite difficult, because philosophy itself
demonstrates this; millennialism preaches and sells the
end of the world to the four corners of the earth. Stuck in
humanity's greatest fears: death, the future, and change.
The world is constantly evolving, the climate is always
changing, and that's normal. It's part of the climate issue.

Do so-called "clean" renewable energies survive
rational development?

44. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 44 ]
Rational development shouldn't adopt anything
that isn't long-term. Renewable energy doesn't work. You
can't maintain the performance of a blast furnace in a
windmill. It's impossible. This, to me, is environmental
chaos. Thousands of intermittent power towers cause
numerous environmental problems, harming wildlife.
When they're not working, they need to be powered by
electricity, as they can't be left without power for more
than three hours. For those who own and sell this
technology, it's great that underdeveloped countries are
buying into the idea. We need to study more, invest more,
and make greater use of hydroelectricity, coal, and
nuclear energy. We can't afford not to want to study these
technologies. We can't be trapped by ecological
indoctrination. Rational development must weigh what can
be lost in nature and what can be lost. Humans are part of
the environment in which they live; they are here to enjoy
it, not to be detached. We cannot separate humans, the
environment, society, or nature.

There are lines of research that suggest that the
melting of the polar ice caps is due to global warming, and
there is the advance of the sea, especially in coastal
cities...
You in Natal can rest assured that the sea will not
destroy coastal cities. Several factors cause the advance
of the sea; the melting of glaciers is only one, and the
least of them. Since 2007, there has been a decrease in
ocean temperatures, and there is no indication that we will
see a contribution to sea level rise due to the melting of
glaciers.

45. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 45 ]
There have been several cycles, eras on Earth,
with deep freezing... Where will these climate changes
lead us?
Your question is perfect. Our current society is
only like this because we are in the planet's warm period.
But the planet's next phase is a glacial period, but it's
impossible to predict when that will happen. If the planet
enters an intense glaciation process, unlike the Little Ice
Age of medieval times, from 1500 to 1700, which was
already chaos for Europe, imagine losing 8 to 10 degrees
Celsius in temperature. This would mean the extinction of
the way of life and economy we see today. (3)



PART 2




GLOBAL WARMING FARCE

46. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 46 ]



This work is based on the translation of Vincent
Gray's text: THE GLOBAL WARMING SCAM, published in
2008.

1. INTRODUCTION

ENVIRONMENTAL RELIGION

The global warming scam is the result of
widespread belief in a new religion, based on the
deification of a nebulous entity, "The Environment."

"The Environment" is an extension of the concept
of "Nature," which was considered sacred by the
Romantics, but is a much more demanding deity,
demanding constant and increasing sacrifices from
humans.

Environmentalism is only the latest attempt to find
a replacement for the theory of evolution, and it is
paradoxical that it should be so widespread when next
year (2009) marks Charles Darwin's 200th birthday and
the 150th anniversary of the publication of his major work,
"On the Origin of Species as a Result of Natural
Selection."

47. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 47 ]
All the basic beliefs of Environmentalism are in
direct conflict with the contemporary understanding of
Darwinian principles. Despite this, many scientists are
supporters of environmentalist dogmas, and some are
prepared to claim that they are compatible with
Darwinism.

HUMANS ARE DESTROYING THE
PLANET

The religious belief (from Genesis chapter 1,
verse 20) that humans have "dominion" over the earth is
now extended to include humans assuming the role of
God and being responsible for all other creatures. Human
influence is purely negative and destructive. Other
creatures would be better off without us. We are
destroying the planet. Because this proposition is absurd,
desperate attempts must be made to find evidence to
support it.

Campaigns have been waged against the human
use of chemical pesticides (“Silent Spring”), against the
“depletion” of “resources” (“Club of Rome”), against the
“population bomb” (Ehrlich), and even against plastic bags
and baby bottles. The most recent and successful
campaign is the claim that the Earth is being dangerously
warmed by human greenhouse gas emissions. The
widespread restrictions on “emissions” that followed led to
the collapse of the global energy industry, with rising oil
and electricity prices and the deliberate promotion of

48. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 48 ]
global poverty by using agriculture to produce “biofuels”
instead of food.



THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT

A greenhouse allows for higher temperatures
because it prevents the release of warmer rising air
caused by solar radiation. This is quite different from the
alleged “greenhouse effect”; the absorption of Earth’s
infrared radiation by some of the components of the
Earth’s atmosphere, called “greenhouse gases.” This
absorption heats the atmosphere and causes “global
warming.” The whole question is: by how much, and does
it matter?

The claim that human emissions of greenhouse
gases are dangerously warming the Earth was first made
by the Swedish chemist Arrhenius (1865; see Wikipedia
2008). The claim was criticized at the time, and as global
temperatures dropped over the next 15 years, followed by
World War I and an economic crisis, the claim lost its
urgency. However, it was revived in 1938 by Callendar,
who selected atmospheric carbon dioxide results
consistent with his theory from among the many available.
He suffered a similar fate to Arrhenius, as global
temperatures fell over the next 38 years. During this
period, confident predictions of the coming ice age were

49. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 49 ]
made, some by the same scientists (such as Rasool and
Schneider 1971) now predicting future warming.

RECENT REVIVAL

As temperatures appeared to be rising once
again, the claim that human-emitted greenhouse gases
were warming the Earth was adopted by the
environmental movement in the late 1970s as yet another
example of their belief that humans were harming the
Earth. To prove this proposition, they faced three
intractable problems.

• It is not possible to measure the average
temperature of the Earth's surface. To do so, it would be
necessary to place thermometers or other measuring
equipment randomly and representatively across all parts
of the surface, including the 71% that is ocean. Since this
is currently impossible, it is equally impossible to
determine whether the average temperature is rising.

• It is not possible to measure the average
concentration of greenhouse gases in all parts of the
Earth's atmosphere by randomly placing measuring
equipment.

• Since the weather cannot be reliably predicted
more than a week or so in advance, it is impossible to
provide reliable forecasts further out.

None of these problems have been solved, but
environmentalists have managed to persuade many

50. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 50 ]
people that they have provided scientifically acceptable
solutions.

This article examines the "evidence" presented so
far and shows that it is all scientifically unsound.

1. GLOBAL MEAN TEMPERATURE

THE GLOBAL MEAN SURFACE TEMPERATURE
ANOMALY

HANSEN'S SOLUTION

In a speech to the United States Congress on
June 23, 1988, James Hansen of the Goddard Institute for
Space Studies in New York suggested a solution to the
global mean temperature problem that used temperature
measurements from weather stations. The history of this
suggestion has been reviewed by the IPCC (Solomon et
al. 2007). The world would be divided into
latitude/longitude squares. The monthly mean temperature
would be obtained from the classification stations in each
square and compared with the mean for a reference
period. The difference would be a monthly and then
annual temperature anomaly, which appeared to be
increasing based on his calculations. The increase was
very small (less than one degree Celsius per century),
intermittent, highly irregular, occurred largely at night, and
occurred primarily before significant increases in
greenhouse gas emissions occurred, but it was

51. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 51 ]
considered sufficient to support the environmental
campaign to blame the increase on carbon dioxide
emissions.

Hansen (2008a), however, clearly expressed his
doubts about the reliability of such weather station
temperature measurements, as follows:

“GISS Surface Temperature Analysis

The Elusive Absolute Surface Air Temperature
(SAT)

Q. What exactly do you mean by SAT?

A. I doubt there is general agreement on how to
answer this question. Even in the same location, the
temperature near the ground can be very different from
the temperature 5 feet above the ground, and different
again from 10 feet or 50 feet above the ground.
Particularly in the presence of vegetation (say, in a tropical
rainforest), the temperature above the vegetation can be
very different from the temperature below the top of the
vegetation. A reasonable suggestion would be to use the
average temperature of the first 50 feet of air above the
ground or at the top of the vegetation. To measure SAT,
we have to agree on what it is, and as far as I know, no
such standard has been adopted. I can't imagine that a
weather station would build a 50 -foot stack of
thermometers to be able to find the true SAT at your
location.

52. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 52 ]
Q. What do we mean by daily SAT?

A. Again, there is no universally accepted correct
answer. Should we record the temperature every six hours
and report the average, should we do it every two hours,
hourly, have a machine record every second, or should we
simply average the highest and lowest temperatures of the
day? On some days, the various methods can lead to
drastically different results.

Q. What SAT does the local media report?

A. The media reports the reading of a specific
thermometer from a nearby weather station. This
temperature can be very different from the true SAT even
at that location and certainly has nothing to do with the
true regional SAT. To measure the true regional SAT, we
would have to use many stacks of 50-foot thermometers
distributed evenly throughout the region, an obvious
practical impossibility.

Having stated that there is no agreed-upon way to
measure surface air temperature, he talks about the “true”
value that no one agrees on; Essex et al. (2007) argue
that “there is no physically meaningful global
temperature.” There are theoretical reasons why Earth’s
average surface temperature cannot be measured.
Because the sun doesn’t shine half the time, its variability
is nonlinear. It is impossible to simulate it with any of the
mathematical functions used by statisticians, and even if it
were possible, there are a variety of possible averages,

53. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 53 ]
such as the arithmetic mean, the geometric mean, or the
harmonic mean.

Hansen (2008a) goes on to say that even when
you can’t agree on how to measure SAT, you can
measure “anomalies” using models and assumptions!

He even tries to “guess” Earth’s average
temperature as “anywhere between 55º and 58ºF” (12.8ºC
to 14.4ºC), for which he gives a “global average.”
convincing claim of "about 14°C," apparently emanating
from models. He has no real evidence.

A recent version of this "Global Annual Mean
Temperature Anomaly" is shown in Figure 1. (Brohan et
al. 2006). The "error bars" cannot be justified
mathematically.



Figure 1. Annual mean global surface temperature
anomaly (Brohan et al. 2006) showing 95% confidence
levels.

54. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 54 ]
There are many reasons why this record is
unreliable, some of which have already been pointed out
by Hansen (2008).

UNREPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE S

Weather stations are not distributed uniformly and
representatively over the Earth's surface.

You cannot obtain a plausible average unless you
start with a representative sample (see Wunsch et al.
2008).

Those who conduct public opinion polls know very
well that their results are meaningless unless they have a
sample that covers the entire population in a random and
representative manner. Similarly, television authorities
need a way to set rates for advertisers. Unless they do,
the rates will be unfair and they will lose money. They face
many problems finding a representative sample of the
population whose TV sets they can place their sets in,
which determines their rates.

The key point of these examples is that their
errors quickly become apparent. Climate “projections” and
even “predictions” are always so far ahead that no one
can verify them, and therefore, they can never be verified
for validity.
Weather stations cannot provide a representative
sample. They are almost all located near cities or airports
and do not include most of the Earth's surface. There are
no measurements of farms, pastures, forests, deserts,

55. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 55 ]
glaciers, or ice caps. 71% of the Earth's surface is ocean,
but measurements there are even less representative,
with very poor quality control.

NO LOCAL AVERAGE

If you want a “global mean anomaly,” you should
certainly start with a “local mean anomaly” derived from a
local mean. No actual measurements of a local mean
temperature are made, or at least published. Because
temperatures are irregular, it is unclear what the term
“mean” can mean. Since there is no sunlight at night, the
distribution is skewed, so it cannot be modeled by a
symmetric function. Even if it were possible to find an
acceptable mathematical model, there would be several
possible alternative "averages", such as mean, median,
geometric, harmonic, etc.

At most weather stations, only one temperature
measurement is recorded per day. If a maximum and
minimum thermometer are available, a daily maximum
and a daily minimum may be recorded. It seems to be
assumed that the average of these quantities represents
some kind of mean, but Hansen (2008a) denies its
validity. Gray (2007a) showed that if this average is
compared with the average of 24-hour readings from one
midnight to the next, a large bias is obtained. For the
average of 24 New Zealand weather stations, this was
+0.5°C for a typical summer day with a range of +2.6°C to
-0.4°C, and an average of +0.9°C with a range of +1.9°C
to -0.9°C for a typical winter day. The positive bias of the
maximum/min average over the average hourly value may

56. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 56 ]
therefore be greater than the claimed greenhouse
warming effects. However, this unsatisfactory "average" is
used to derive a "global mean temperature anomaly."

Then there's the question of how they calculate
each "anomaly"? The following explanation appears on
the NCDC website (2008):

"NOTE: From February 2006 to April 14, 2006, the
anomalies provided in the links below were inadvertently
given as deviations from the 1961-1990 average. The
anomalies are now given as deviations from the 20th-
century average (1901-2000)."

Now, perhaps they were able to calculate an
average for the year 2000 from 1,600 stations and 500
grids available, and in the year 1901 they had 1,600
stations and 300 grids (see Figure 2).

It seems comparable; But the world was a very
different place in 1901 than it was in 2000. The total
number of possible 5°x5° grids is 2,592, so even today,
they cover only 20% of the earth, and mostly near cities.
In fact, it was better in 1985, when there were 6,000
stations and almost 900 grids. Many have since been
closed, especially in rural areas, where the results are
less contaminated by urban heating.

In 1901, Antarctica, Central Africa, South America,
and most of Siberia had no weather stations. Ocean
readings were minimal, and most stations were in the
Northern Hemisphere. It's worth noting that there were

57. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 57 ]
never any readings near the North Pole because the
Arctic is an ocean. Yet, they keep telling us it's getting
warmer, without supporting observations.

In 1901, thermometers were graduated in one-
degree Fahrenheit intervals, and equipment, shelter, and
supervision standards were very different from today.

TIME OF OBSERVATION BIAS

The "Daily Mean Temperature," obtained by
taking a daily reading of the maximum and minimum
temperatures of the previous 24 hours, is considered the
average of these two values. However, the actual 24
hours to which it applies are the previous 24 hours of
measurement time, not the actual 24 hours of the day.
The measurement of Max and Min is taken at different
times in different locations and also changes over time
and from one place and country to another.

This bias in "daily mean temperature" is called
"Time of Observation Bias" (TOB) by the Americans, and,
along with all the other inaccuracies in their
measurements, they make a gallant effort to try to
"correct" it. These efforts are described by Vose et al.
(2003). There is some very interesting information in this
article. We learn, for example, that "the majority of the
U.S. Cooperative Observing Network is composed of
volunteers." I wonder what their qualifications are, or
who verifies them, and what situations apply in other
countries?

58. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 58 ]
They also state, "When the observation day differs
from the calendar day, a 'carryover' bias of up to 2.0°C is
introduced into monthly mean temperatures.

Furthermore, "Non-calendar day observations also
result in a 'drift' bias of up to 1.5°C in the monthly mean"
because there is a carryover from the previous month. If
the day differs, the month and year also do.

They claim there was a systematic shift in the
preferred observing time in the United States, requiring a
large correction. They recorded temperatures near sunset
before the 1940s and shifted to mornings after that, giving
a 'slight' warm bias to later readings.

A diagram showing the distribution of observing
times today for USHCN (United States Historical
Climatology Network) stations shows a wide level of
variability. They make a 'correction' for the US, which may
not apply elsewhere. It is doubtful that knowledge of
conditions 100 years ago is very reliable.

URBAN WARMING AND LAND USE CHANGE

Unrepresentative meteorological temperatures
are often measured in places with growing
populations, more buildings, more concrete, sparse
vegetation, more cars, and more warming, and are
therefore subject to a positive bias. The evidence that
this is happening is overwhelming. It is the only
authenticated "anthropogenic" effect on climate (Gray
2000; McKitrick and Michaels 2004, 2008).

59. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 59 ]

The IPCC has repeatedly cited the paper by
Jones et al. (1991) as evidence that urban warming is
negligible. These authors examined an “extensive” set of
temperature data from rural stations for three regions of
the world—

European parts of the Soviet Union, Western
Australia, and Eastern China. When combined with similar
analyses for the contiguous United States, the results are
considered representative of 20% of the land area of the
Northern Hemisphere and 10% of the Southern
Hemisphere.

They calculated the linear slope of the
temperature anomalies for the rural series in each case
and compared it with the same slope for several gridded
series. For the Western USSR, it covered the period
1901–1987 and 1930–1987, for Eastern Australia it was
1930–1988 compared to 1930–1997, for Eastern China it
was 1954–1983, and for the contiguous United States it
was 1901–1984. The differences between urban and rural
slopes were significant only at the 5% level for Eastern
Australia and for a set of Eastern China.

They concluded, “It is unlikely that the remaining
unsampled areas of developing countries in tropical
climates, or other highly populated parts of Europe, could
significantly increase the overall urban bias above 0.05°C
during the 20th century.”

60. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 60 ]
It is unclear whether this small correction was
made for the most recent version of the Jones et al. global
temperature series (Figure 1).

There are several things wrong with the Jones et
al. (1991) article.

• The data quality is even worse than usual. They
admit, "It is regrettable that separate maximum and
minimum temperature data are not more widely available."

• Qualifying for a "rural" location is a population
below 10,000 for the Western Soviet Union, below 35,000
for Eastern Australia, and below 100,000 for Eastern
China. There is ample evidence (Gray 2000) that urban
effects exist in such locations.

• They chose countries with a continuous record of
effective scientific oversight. These are not representative
of the rest of the world, where country changes and
adequate oversight are much less common.

Even these countries raise questions. Russia had
a tyrannical regime in which statistics were frequently
manipulated for political purposes. China experienced a
major famine during the "Great Leap Forward" between
1958 and 1959, and also experienced statistical
manipulation.

Two of these countries, the contiguous United
States and China, have reliable records that, when
corrected, show no global warming or residual urban

61. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 61 ]
influence (see Figures 3 and 4), but these two well-
monitored countries cannot be considered "typical" of the
rest of the world.

That same year, another article appeared in
Geophysical Research Letters, including two of the
authors of the previous article, Wang and Karl (Wang et
al. 1991).

The abstract for this article states

“We used surface temperature data from 1954–
1983 from 42 pairs of Chinese urban (average population
1.7 million) and rural (average population 150,000)
stations to study the effects of urban heat islands.
Although the rural stations were not truly rural stations, the
magnitude of the heat islands averaged 0.23°C over the
thirty-year period, with a minimum (0.19°C) during the
decade 1964–1973 and a maximum (0.28°C) during more
recent decades.”

This study appears to have used the same
stations that, in the first article, claimed no urban bias, and
now there is an urban bias, even though “rural” now
includes places with populations up to 150,000.

The previous paper (Jones et al. 1991) states, for
Eastern China, "The stations were selected based on
station history: We chose those with few, if any, changes
in instrumentation, location, or observation time."

62. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 62 ]
Wang et al. (1991) say, "They were chosen based
on station histories. We chose those without any changes
in instrumentation, location, or observation time."

Both papers were written at the same time and
drew different conclusions from the same data. Recently,
Keenan (2007) showed that many of the Chinese stations
moved several times during the period in question, in one
case by 15 km, and accuses Wang of outright fraud, as he
should have known this at the time.

Confirmation of continued urban warming in China
was documented by Ren et al. (2008) that, from 282
meteorological stations in northern China from 1960 to
2000, there was an urban bias of 0.16°C per decade for
cities with more than 500,000 inhabitants, down to 0.07°C
per decade for small cities (100,000 to 300,000). The
national bias was estimated at 0.11°C per decade.
However, these were all in comparison to “rural”
measurements, which were considered immune to urban
warming.

Another article used by the IPCC (Solomon et al.
2007) as evidence that urban warming is negligible is
Peterson's (2000) "Assessment of Urban Versus Rural In-
Situ Surface Temperatures in the Contiguous United
States: No Difference Found."

This article provides much more information about
the observation process and its obstacles than has
previously appeared. The IPCC chose to take the phrase
"No difference found" as implying that it is evidence that

63. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 63 ]
there is no difference. The text shows that this is not true.
Peterson simply found that his sample size was
insufficient to obtain a statistically significant number.

He studied only three years of data, 1989–91, so
he was unable to study "trends." His excuse is quite
surprising. "A longer period would increase the problem of
missing data." The problem of missing data is not
otherwise mentioned, but it must be important if it has an
impact after only three years in the US. Data is not
provided, and the problem is likely even worse outside the
US.

He chose 40 clusters of stations for study, well
distributed throughout the country; A total of 289 stations
were located: 85 "rural," 191 "urban," and 13 "suburban."

It was surprising to learn that the United States
has a diverse array of instrumentation and shelters. There
were 106.9 maximum and minimum liquid -in-glass
thermometers in a Cotton Region Shield (CRS, similar to a
Stevenson screen), 142.8 thermistor-based instruments in
a MMTS shield, 35 hygrothermometers in an HO -83
enclosure, and 2.3 hygrothermographs. (The fractions are
changes over the three years.) Photos of these three
types exist. If Americans have several different
instruments, what types are used elsewhere?

Corrections had to be made for urban/rural
location, elevation, time of observation bias,
instrumentation, and location. The total remaining overall
urban/rural bias before the others were applied was

64. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 64 ]
+0.31°C. This is half the value claimed to be caused by
greenhouse gases since 1900. However, when the other
corrections were applied, along with their levels of
imprecision, the urban/rural bias was reduced to +0.04°C.

Time of Observation Bias was the largest,
accounting for a correction of -0.17°C. This is because
rural stations have a higher proportion of morning readers.
Differences in elevation accounted for a correction of -
0.11°C because rural stations in the US are generally
higher than urban stations. Differences in instrumentation
accounted for a bias of 0.05°C because rural stations had
a higher proportion of hygrometers that had a warm bias
during the period, and changes in latitude provided a
negative bias, -0.06°C, since urban stations tended to be
slightly farther north than rural stations.

The fully adjusted urban/rural bias of +0.04°C was
considered by Peterson to be equivalent to zero because
it was not significant at the 90% level. But this does not
mean that the bias does not exist. as assumed by the
IPCC. It simply means that Peterson's sample size was
not large enough to yield a result with a higher level of
significance. It is simply not true to state "No difference
found."


In most other countries, Peterson's complex
correction procedures are impossible because they lack
the number of sites for comparison, nor the scientific
oversight or expertise. Corrections for biases in
observation time, elevation, and instrument shift may be

65. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 65 ]
impossible, so Peterson's first unadjusted result, an
urban/rural bias of +0.31°C, could be the best estimate.

Two recent articles by Parker (2004, 2006) seek
to show that urban warming does not occur. He argues
that because average daily maximum or minimum
temperatures are not influenced by wind conditions, urban
warming is negligible. But the "day" that provides the
average wind conditions is usually a different "day" than
the one used for the daily average, maximum, and
minimum. In the second article, he seems to have realized
this after writing the paper, so he puts the problem in
Appendix A, where some "private communications" helped
him, but he does not list those that did not. The idea that
urban warming should be influenced only by wind strength
and not its direction, and that there are no other factors
involved, is simply a gross oversimplification of a complex
issue.

A few years ago, the Australians published
photographs of their weather stations. These were hastily
removed, as most could be considered biased. They
recently resurfaced with a new set of photos (BOM 2008),
all of which look satisfactory, although the Melbourne
station, at a busy intersection in the city, still appears to be
in disrepair.

Detailed information on the locations of weather
stations is not readily available. A recent Google search
for photographs of weather stations yielded few outside
the US or Canada, and few appeared to be free of urban
effects or were from official sources. One exception was

66. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 66 ]
the Oklahoma Climatological Survey, which provided a
wide range of photographs of their locations, from every
compass direction. They provided an article (Martinez et
al. 2007) that lists all the information they regularly record
for each site. It should be obvious that this information
cannot be obtained from a remote office and cannot be
extrapolated into the past.

There seems to be an improvement due to the
publicity being given to inadequate radio data, such as
those by Davey et al. (2005) and Pielke et al. (2007),
which showed that many of the locations in the U.S.
Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) are
inadequate. Perhaps these improvements are partly
responsible for the fact that surface and satellite records
now show a measure of agreement, and neither shows
any recent warming.

STATION NUMBERS

Another factor that has influenced the weather
station record is the varying number of available stations.
Figure 2 (Hansen 2008) shows how the numbers of
available stations and grids vary. The large increase after
1950 was primarily an increase in rural stations and airport
stations and is partly responsible for the drop in the
combined temperature from 1950 to 1975 shown in Figure
1. The wholesale closure of primarily rural stations in
1989, combined with increased energy release at airports,

67. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 67 ]
is partly responsible for the increase in the combined
temperature record shown in Figure 1 since 1989.

Figure 2. Numbers of available global weather stations for
the Northern and Southern Hemispheres (a) and numbers of available
grid boxes (b) from a theoretical total of 2,592 5°/5° latitude/longitude
boxes (Hansen 2008).

CORRECTION OF UNCERTAINTIES

The principles that guided the correction of Hadley's climate
data are provided in Brohan et al. (2006). They state in
"Uncertainties":

"A definitive assessment of uncertainties is impossible
because it is always possible that some unknown error has
contaminated the data, and no quantitative allowance can be made
for such unknowns. There are, however, several known limitations in
the data, and estimates of the likely effects of these limitations can be
made" (Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, press conference, June 6,
2002, London).

It is moving that Donald Rumsfeld's famous poem inspires
climate scientists. It's worth mentioning
"THE UNKNOWN

68. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 68 ]
How we know
There are known knowns
There are things we know we know. We also know
There are known unknowns. This means
We know there are some things we don't know
But there are also unknown unknowns. The things we don't
know
We don't know."

Runnalls and Oke (2006) showed that the temperature
recorded at weather stations can be influenced by "changes in
vegetation, development (buildings, paving), irrigation, cultivation, and
even the maintenance of the site and its instruments."

COUNTRY NUMBERS CORRECTED

The corrected temperature record for the
contiguous United States is shown in Figure 3 (Hansen
2008b). After correction, the highest temperature ever
recorded in the US since 1880 was in 1934. The current
temperature is higher than in 1880, but there is no steady
increase, as predicted by greenhouse gas theory, but
rather evidence of a periodic oscillation lasting about 70
years, with a previous peak around 1935. The most likely
future is a decline to another trough.

Below is the behavior of the Pacific Decadal
Oscillation (Mantua 2007) during the same period, which
follows the same periodic pattern.

69. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 69 ]



Figure 3. Corrected annual mean temperature anomaly
record for the contiguous United States (Hansen 2008b) compared
with the Pacific Decadal Oscillation Index (Mantua 2007).

A corrected temperature record for China is shown in Figure
4 (Zhao et al. 2005). It is very similar to the corrected record for the
contiguous United States (Figure 1.3). It incorporates the earlier
records from Wang and Gong (2000) and others and also shows a
subset of "China" from an earlier version of Figure 1 as the bold line
graph PJO8SCN. (Personal communication from Jones suggests this
increase is a result of using inferior records from elsewhere.).

70. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 70 ]

Figure 4 Temperature anomaly record for China (Zhao et al.
2005).

Figure 4 also correlates excellently with the Pacific Decadal
Oscillation. It also shows no evidence of the warming in Figure 1.

SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE

A globally averaged temperature anomaly must include 71%
of the Earth's surface that is ocean. Many temperature measurements
are available from ships, but quality control is much worse than on
land, and even then, entire regions lack data. Folland and Parker
(1995) claimed to have found a way to incorporate the data. One
difficulty is that many of the early measurements were made with
buckets retrieved from the sea, and it is sometimes unclear whether
the buckets were metal or wooden. During World War I,
measurements could not be made on deck. Furthermore, some
measurements are from a weather station on board, usually below the
funnel.

Both American temperature compilers, the Goddard Institute
for Space Studies (GISS) and the Global Historical Climatology
Network (GHCN), have never accepted the use of sea surface
measurements for a global average, and they have to resort to a
series of dubious devices to claim their figures are "global." They use

71. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 71 ]
recent satellite measurements of the ocean (Reynolds et al. 2002)
and extrapolate them into the past. It is highly suspicious that
incorporating sea surface measurements seems to make little
difference.

Although only 29% of the Earth's surface is land, it is notable
that, according to Figure 1, the maximum number of 5° x 5° grids of
land-based weather stations was 880 in 1980, which covers 34% of
the Earth's surface. This was achieved because there are many
stations on small islands surrounded by ocean, where the land
temperature is considered typical of the surrounding ocean.
Furthermore, a proportion of sea surface measurements come from
fixed buoys and meteorological ships. These and land-based stations
measure above the surface, while current sea surface measurements
are taken from the ship's engine intake, which is below the surface.

TEMPERATURE OSCILLATION

The IPCC (Solomon et al. 2008) does not appear to predict
that global temperatures could fluctuate or oscillate, perhaps
accompanied by oscillating energy "imbalances," something that
Hansen et al. (2005) also cannot believe.

72. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 72 ]
Figure 5 Global temperature oscillation identified
by Schlesinger and Ramankutty (1994)

Three global mean surface temperature records
(Jones, Hansen, Vinnikov 1992), biased by a simple
climate/ocean model, were compared with a single-
spectrum analysis of the same data.

The average duration of the identified oscillation
was estimated at 65, 66, 70, and 69 years for the four
temperature records studied.

They also applied the technique to 11 geographic
subsets of the Jones et al. (1991) data. Similar results
were obtained for all regions, with the best agreement
shown by the North Atlantic, North America, and Eurasia.

In a later paper, Andronova and Schlesinger
(2000) removed the modeled effects of presumed
anthropogenic warming, volcanoes, and the sun from
Jones's (1999) updated record and confirmed the
presence and progress of the previously identified
oscillation shown in Figure 1.5 for 1999.

Klyashtorin and Lyubishin (2003) recently
independently confirmed this "quasi-cyclical fluctuation"
with a period of about 60 years in the surface record of
Jones et al. (2001), and they demonstrated the existence
of a 50- to 60-year interval variation in reconstructed
temperatures over the past 1,000 years.

73. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 73 ]
The oscillation identified by Schlesinger and
Ramankutty (1994) can be observed in a range of
temperature records—global, regional, and local. In many
of them, the postulated anthropogenic contribution is not
evident.

The updated surface temperature record in Figure
1.1 (Brohan et al. 2006) confirms the 65- to 70-year
oscillation for the most recent measurements, where the
expected peak of the oscillation appears to have now
been reached and is subsequently expected to decline in
the coming years. The steady increase in temperature,
presumably due to anthropogenic causes, appears to
have ceased since 2002.

The global mean surface temperature anomaly
record (Figure 1) shows a temperature increase imposed
on the oscillation, which is not present in most other
records, such as those shown below. Therefore, it is an
artifact of the methods used in collecting and processing
the surface temperature data, rather than an indication of
warming due to increased anthropogenic greenhouse
gases.
Figure 5 Global temperature oscillation identified
by Schlesinger and Ramankutty (1994)

Three global mean surface temperature records
(Jones, Hansen, Vinnikov 1992), biased by a simple
climate/ocean model, were compared with a single-
spectrum analysis of the same data.

74. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 74 ]
The average duration of the identified oscillation
was estimated at 65, 66, 70, and 69 years for the four
temperature records studied.

They also applied the technique to 11 geographic
subsets of the Jones et al. (1991) data. Similar results
were obtained for all regions, with the best agreement
shown by the North Atlantic, North America, and Eurasia.

In a later paper, Andronova and Schlesinger
(2000) removed the modeled effects of presumed
anthropogenic warming, volcanoes, and the sun from
Jones's (1999) updated record and confirmed the
presence and progress of the previously identified
oscillation shown in Figure 1.5 for 1999.

Klyashtorin and Lyubishin (2003) recently
independently confirmed this "quasi-cyclical fluctuation"
with a period of about 60 years in the surface record of
Jones et al. (2001), and they demonstrated the existence
of a 50- to 60-year interval variation in reconstructed
temperatures over the past 1,000 years.

The oscillation identified by Schlesinger and
Ramankutty (1994) can be observed in a range of
temperature records—global, regional, and local. In many
of them, the postulated anthropogenic contribution is not
evident.

The updated surface temperature record in Figure
1.1 (Brohan et al. 2006) confirms the 65- to 70-year
oscillation for the most recent measurements, where the

75. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 75 ]
expected peak of the oscillation appears to have now
been reached and is subsequently expected to decline in
the coming years. The steady increase in temperature,
presumably due to anthropogenic causes, appears to
have ceased since 2002.

The global mean surface temperature anomaly
record (Figure 1) shows a temperature increase imposed
on the oscillation, which is not present in most other
records, such as those shown below. Therefore, it is an
artifact of the methods used in collecting and processing
the surface temperature data, rather than an indication of
warming due to increased anthropogenic greenhouse
gases.

LOWER TROPOSPHERE TEMPERATURE
ANOMALY

RADIOSOUND RECORDS

There are no global instrumental records other
than the global mean surface temperature anomaly
(Figure 1) that extends back to 1850. The only alternative
record dating back to 1958 is that of radiosonde
measurements in the lower troposphere. Figure 6 shows
the radiosonde record from Thorne et al. (2004), which
also provides error bars.

76. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 76 ]


Figure 6: Globally averaged temperature record in
the lower troposphere (500hPg), indicating 95%
confidence levels (Thorne et al. 2004)

Figure 6 agrees quite well with that portion of
Figure 4 since 1958 and confirms that the expected peak
global temperature anomaly may have already been
reached. It shows a "climate shift" in 1976. It shows no
evidence of an additional steady increase during the
period that could be attributed to anthropogenic
greenhouse gas forcing.

2.2.2 The MSU

The most reliable and most accurate
comparatively recent measure of globally averaged
temperature anomalies is from measurements at various
levels in the atmosphere by Microwave Sounder Units
(MSUs) on NASA satellites since 1978, which derive
temperature from the microwave spectrum of oxygen in
the atmosphere. (MSU 2007) The monthly global anomaly
record for the lower troposphere is shown in Figure 7. This

77. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 77 ]
temperature record has persistently disagreed with the
global mean surface temperature anomaly (Figure 1),
(Gray 2007b).












Figure 7. Monthly global temperature anomaly
record from MSU (satellite) since 1979 for the lower
troposphere (MSU 2007).

The MSU record faithfully reflects temperature
anomalies from observed volcanic events (El Chichon
1982, Pinatubo 1991) and oceanic oscillations (particularly
El Niño 1998), but it does not show the increase in
temperature from the surface record, which is attributed to
"global warming" from greenhouse gas emissions
between 1979 and 1999 and between 2001 and 2007.
The temperature change of about 0.3°C in the period
2001–2007 is already beginning to diminish.

79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07

78. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 78 ]

Since adequate "corrections" for the surface
record are impossible, extreme efforts have been made to
try to prove that the MSU results are flawed. This
culminated in a claim in a NOAA paper (CSSP Report),
Karl et al. (2006), published only online, that the global
mean annual surface temperature anomaly (Figure 1.1)
and the MSU record (Figure 1.6) were reconciled, as the
MSU results show the same "trend" as the surface record,
attributed, of course, to greenhouse gases. This is
because the 1998 temperature spike caused by that year's
El Niño oceanic event is most prominent in the lower
troposphere. If this event is ignored, the two records would
be very different.

I recently showed (Gray 2007b) that the
"reconciliation" claim is false. For the main periods of the
record, 1978–1997 and 2001–2007, the MSU record
shows no temperature change. The increase in the 1976-
1997 surface record cannot, therefore, be attributed to
increased greenhouse gases, since it is not evident in the
lower atmosphere, where it should be most prominent.

79. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 79 ]
Both records show no change in the second period, from
2001 to 2007, which is compelling evidence that increases
in greenhouse gases are not influencing global
temperatures, even though they are measured.

LOCAL TEMPERATURES

There are a few individual long-term local
temperature records where the local trend may have
remained reasonably stable and which provide records
that exhibit the oscillation identified in Figure 24. This
effect is particularly evident in the Arctic land regions,
where the last warm period was around 1940. The current
outcry over Arctic melting is merely a repeat of the 1940
situation and will likely subside in the same manner.
Several of these more reliable long-term local records are
available on the websites of John Daly (2007) and Hansen
(2007).

Schlesinger and Ramankutty (1994) applied a
statistical technique called "singular spectrum analysis" to

80. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 80 ]
four global mean surface temperature records that were
downscaled using a simple climate/ocean model based on
the assumed radiative forcing due to increased
atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations. The result of
this exercise applied to the surface temperature record
reported by Folland et al. (1992) is given in Figure 5.



Figure 8 Temperature record for central England
since 1650.

Figure 8 provides the known temperature record
for central England since 1650. The fluctuations have
almost disappeared. A small recent increase is almost
certainly due to urban warming.

Figure 9, for Alice Springs, Australia, shows the
influence of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, but no overall
warming.

81. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 81 ]


Figure 9 Temperature record for Alice Springs,
Australia, (Hansen 2008)



Figure 10: Columbia Temperature Records.

Figure 10 provides three records from Columbia.
Two show no overall change. The third shows a decline..

82. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 82 ]


Figure 11 Temperature Record for Pudahuel
(Andes Mountains)

Figure 11 is a temperature record for Pudahuel in
the Andes. The oscillation, correlated with the Pacific
Decadal Oscillation, is marked.

83. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 83 ]





TOP 10 LIES OF

GLOBAL WARMING

84. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 84 ]

The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) raises
money by scaring Americans about global warming,
including in its latest fundraising letter. Read the article
challenging the EDF letter in Heartland Institute's
Environment & Climate News, Vol. 18 No. 8, September
2015, written by James M. Taylor, vice president for
external relations and senior fellow for environmental and
energy policy at the Heartland Institute.

It's not uncommon for the environmental left to
make false claims to attract media attention and raise
money. But EDF's recent correspondence "may have set
a new low," Taylor writes in a 12-page response to EDF.

“The only good thing about EDF’s absurd mailing
list is that it can be used to show open-minded people the
difference between global warming alarmists and global
warming truth-tellers,” he writes.

Taylor’s extensive footnoted response addresses
10 “alarmist claims” made by EDF:

1) Bats Fall from the Sky - In 2014, a scorching
summer heat wave caused more than 100,000 bats to
literally fall dead from the sky in Queensland, Australia.

2) Spread of Lyme Disease - Warmer
temperatures are contributing to the expansion of the
range and severity of tick-borne Lyme disease.

85. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 85 ]
3) National security threatened - The impacts of
climate change are expected to act as a "threat multiplier"
in many of the world's most unstable regions,
exacerbating droughts and other natural disasters, as well
as leading to shortages of food, water, and other
resources that could spur mass migrations.

4) Sea Level Rise - Higher temperatures are
causing glaciers and polar ice sheets to melt, increasing
the amount of water in the world's seas and oceans.

5) Allergies Worsen - Allergy sufferers beware:
Climate change could cause pollen counts to double in the
next 30 years. High temperatures are causing weed
growth to increase, a bane for allergy sufferers.

6) Beetles Destroy Iconic Western Forests -
Climate change has caused tree-killing beetles called
mountain pine beetles to skyrocket. Under normal
conditions, these beetles reproduce only once a year, but
the warming climate has allowed them to produce an extra
generation of new insects each year.

7) Canada: The New America - The "lush"
vegetation growth typically associated with the United
States is becoming more common in Canada, scientists
reported in a 2012 study in Nature Climate Change.

8) Economic Consequences - The costs
associated with climate change rise along with
temperatures. Severe storms and floods, combined with
agricultural losses, cause billions of dollars in damage,

86. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 86 ]
and money is needed to treat and control the spread of
disease.

9) Infectious Diseases Thrive - The World Health
Organization reports that outbreaks of new or resurgent
diseases are increasing and in more disparate countries
than ever before, including tropical diseases in previously
cold climates.

10) Glacier Reduction - In 2013, an iceberg larger
than the city of Chicago broke off Pine Island Glacier, the
most important glacier in the West Antarctic Ice Sheet.
And in Montana's Glacier National Park, glaciers have
shrunk from 150 to just 35 in the past century.

Taylor concludes:

There you have it. These are the 10 best
arguments global warming activists like EDF can make,
along with the objective scientific facts that prove them
wrong. It's no wonder global warming alarmists are so
afraid of people seeing both sides of the debate.

87. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 87 ]
REFERÊNCIAS

1 - https://olivre.com.br/aquecimento-global-e-
farsa-para-mascarar-interesses-geopoliticos-diz-o-
climatologista-ricardo-felicio
2 -
http://www.usp.br/aun/antigo/exibir.php?id=4580

3 http://www.tribunadonorte.com.br/noticia/o-
aquecimento-global-e-uma-grande-mentira/259336

4 - https://transcricoes.com.br/ricardo-augusto-
felicio-transcricao-de-audio/
5 - https://www.georgiapolicy.org/issue/top-10-
global-warming-lies/ e
www.heartland.org/sites/default/files/edf_rebuttal_final.pdf.


Abrussamatov, H. I. 2007.
http://www.gao.spb.ru/english/astrometr/index1_eng.html

Arrhenius S, 1896 On the Influence of Carbolic
Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Ground. Phil.
Mag. 41, (251) 237-276.

Andronova, N G. and M Schlesi nger 2000.
Causes of global temperature changes during the 19th
and 20th centuries Geophys. Res. Lett. 27 2137-2140.

Bailey, F. 2007.Textbook of Gravity, Sunspots and
Climate. Bailey, Plymouth England.

88. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 88 ]
Beck, E-G, 2007. 150 Years of Atmospheric Gas
Analysis by Chemical Methods, Energy and Environment
18 259- 281.

Blasing, T.J., C.T. Broniak, and G. Marland, 2004.
Estimates of monthly carbon dioxide emissions and
associated δ13C values from fossil-fuel consumption in
the U.S.A. In Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global
Change, Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy,
Oak Ridge, TN, U.S.A.

BOM (Australian Bureau of Meteorology) 2008,
Australia’s Reference Climate Station Network
http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/reference.shtml#rc
smap.
Brohan, P., J J Kennedy, I. Harris, S. F, B, Tett,
and P. D. Jones. 2006, Uncertainty estimates in regional
and global observed temperature changes: A new data set
from 1850. J. Geophys. Res. 111,
D12106.doi:1020/2005JD006546.

Callendar G S 1938. The Artificial Production of
Carbon Dioxide and its influence on Temperature. Quart.
J. Roy. Met. Soc. 64 223-40.

Castles, I. and D. Henderson 2003.. The IPCC
Emissions Scenarios: An Economic Statistical Critique.
Energy and Environment 14, 139-185.

89. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 89 ]
Daly, J. 2000 Testing the Waters. A Report on
Sea Level.
http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/articles/2000/sea.htm

Daly, J. 2007. What the Stations Say.
http://www.john-daly.com/stations/stations.htm.

Davey, C. A., and Pielke, R Sr. 2005. Microclimate
Exposures of Surface -Based Weather Stations.
http://ccc.atmos.colostate.edu/pdfs/BAMS_Davey&Pielke_
Apr05.pdf

Douglass, D..H., J..R. Christy, B..D. Pearson and
F.. Singer, 2007. Int. J. of Climatology 28 (13), 1693 -
1701 DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651.

Encyclopaedia of Earth (2008),
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Atmospheric_composition

Essex, C, R R McKitrick, and B. Anderssen. 2007.
Does a Global Temperature Exist? J Non -Equilib.
Thermodyn. 32, 1-27.

Fasullo, J T and K E Trenberth 2008,The Annual
Cycle of the Energy Budget, Part I Global Mean and Land-
Ocean exchanges, J Clim. 27, 2297-2311; Part II,
Meridional Structures and Poleward Transports. 2313-
2325

Folland, C. K. and D..E. Parker.1995. Correction
of instrumental biases in historical sea surface
temperature data. Quart. J. Met. Soc. 15 1195-1218.

90. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 90 ]

Gray, V. R. 1998. The IPCC future projections: are
they plausible? Clim, Res. 10, 155-162. Gray, V. R. 2000.
The Cause of Global Warming. Energy and Environment.
11, 613-629.
Gray V R 2002. The Greenhouse Delusion: A
Critique of ‘Climate Change 2001’ Multi -Science
Publishers UK.

Gray V R 2007a. Climate Change 2007: The
Physical Science Basis: Summary for Policymakers.
Energy and Environment. 18 433-440.

Gray, V R. 2007b. Temperature Trends in the
Lower Atmosphere Energy and Environment 17 707-714.

Gregory, K. 2008 The Saturated Greenhouse
Effect
http://www.friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/The_S
aturated_Greenhouse_Effect.htm

Hall P, 2007. What the South Pacific Sea Level
and Climate Monitoring Project is Telling Us.
http://www.bom.gov.au/pacificsealevel/presentations/briefi
ng_paper_spslcmp_nov_2006.pdf

Hansen, J. and 14 others. 2005. The Earth’s
Energy Imbalance: Confirmation and Implications. Science
308 1431- 1434.

91. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 91 ]
Hansen, J., 2008a, GISS Surface Temperature
Analysis, The Elusive Absolute Surface Air Temperature
(SAT) http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/abs_temp.html

Hansen, J., 2008b. GISS Surface Temperature
Analysis: Station Data
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data/.

Hansen, J., Goddard Institute of Space Studies
(GISS), US Temperature .2 008c.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.D_lrg.gif

Holland, D, 2007 Bias and Concealment in the
IPCC Process, the “Hockey Stick” Affair and its
Implications. Energy and Environment, 18 951-983.

Houghton, J, T. G. J. Jenkins, and J..J. Ephraums,
Eds) 1990. Climate Change: The IPCC Scientific
Assessment. Cambridge University Press

Houghton, J. T, B A Callendar, and S K Varney.
1992 Climate Change 1992: The Supplementary Report.
Cambridge University Press..

Houghton, J T,, L. G Meira Filho, J. Bruce,
Hoesing Lee, B, A Callandar, E. Haites, N Harris, and K
Maskell. 1994 . Radiative Forcing of Climate Change and
An Evaluation of the IPCC IS92 Emissions Scenarios.
Cambridge University Press.

Houghton, J T., Y. Ding, D. J. Griggs, . Noguer, P,
J. Van der Linden, X. Dai, K. Maskell, and C A Johnson

92. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 92 ]
(Eds) 2001. Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis.
Cambridge University Press.

Humphreys, W J, 1940. Physics of the Air , Dover
Publications, New York.

Jaworowski, Z. 2007. CO2: The Greatest
Scientific Swindle of Our Time. EIR Science (March), 38-
55.

Jin, M., R.E. Dickinson, and D-L. Zhang The
Footprint of Urban Areas on Global Climate as
Characterized by MODIS. 2005 J. Clim. 18, 1551-1565.

Jones, P. D., P. Ya. Groisman, M. Coughlan, N.
Plummer, W. C. Wang & T. R. Karl 1990. Assessment of
urbanization effects in time series of surface air
temperature over land , Nature 347 169- 172.

Jones P. D., T. M. Wigley, & G. Farmer, 1991. in
Greenhouse-Gas-Induced Climate Change: a Critical
Appraisal of Simulations and Observations Ed.
Schlesinger, M E , 153-172, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

Jones, P. D., M. New, D. E. Parker, S. Martin and
.I. G. Rigor 1999 Surface air temperature and its changes
over the past 150 years. Rev, Geophys., 37 (2), 173-199.

Jones P. D, et al. 2001. http://www.cru.uca.ac.uk

Karl, T.. R., S.J. Hassel, C.D. Miller, and W.L.
Murray (Eds). 2007. Temperature Trends in the Lower

93. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 93 ]
Atmosphere: Steps for Understanding and Reconciling
Differences. A Report by the Climate Change Science
Programme (CCSP) and the Subcommittee on Global
Change Research.
http://www.climatescience.gov/Library/sap/sap1-
1/finalreport/default.htm

Keeling, C. D, R. B. Bacastow, A. F Carter, S. C.
Piper, T. P. Whorf, M. Heimann, W. G. Mook, and H.
Roeloffzen. 1989 A Three Dime nsional Model of
Atmospheric CO2 Transport, Based on Observed Winds.
1. Analysis of Observational Data. Geophys. Monograph
55 165-235.

Keeling, C.D, A.F. Bollenbacher, and T.P. Whorf.
2005. Monthly atmospheric 13C/12C isotopic ratios for 10
SIO stations. In Trends: A Compendium of Data on Global
Change. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy,
Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S.A.

Keenan, D. 2007. The Fraud Allegation Against
Some Climatic Research of Wei-Chyug Wang. Energy and
Environment, 18, 985-995.

Kiehl J. T. and K. E. Trenberth 1997. Earth’s
Annual Global Mean Energy Budget. Bull. Am. Met. Soc.
78 197-208.

Klyashtorin, L. B. and A. A. Lyubashin. 2003. On
the Coherence between Dynamics of the world fu el

94. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 94 ]
consumption and global temperature anomaly. Energy
and Environment. 14, 771-781.

Labohm, H,, 2008 , Private Communication

Landscheidt, T., 1998, Solar Activity: A Dominant
Factor jn Climate Dynamics. http://www.john -
daly.com/sun-enso/sun-enso.htm

Landscheidt, T. 2002, Trends in Pacific Decadal
Oscillation Subjected to Solar Forcing http://www.john-
daly.com/sun-enso/revisit.htm

Loehle. C. 2007.A Global Temperature
Reconstruction Based on Non Tree ring Proxies. Energy
and Environment, 18, 1049-1057.

Loehle, C. and J.H. McCulloch, 2008. Correction
to: A 2000-year global temperature reconstruction based
on non- tree ring proxies. Energy and Environment 19, 91-
100,

Mann, M E, R.S. Bradley and M.K. Hughes 1998
Global scale temperature patterns and climate forcing
over the past six centuries. Nature 392, 779-787,

Mann, M E, R.S. Bradley and M. K. Hughes, 1999,
Northern Hemisphere Temperatures During the Past
Millennium: Inferences, Uncertainties and Limitations
Geophys. Res. Lett. 26 759-762.

95. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 95 ]
Manning, M. R., A.J.. Gomez, K.P. Pohl 1994.
http://cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/baring.htm

Mantua. N. 2007, Pacific Decadal Oscillation.
http://jisao.washington.edu/pdo/

Martinez, J E, C .A Fiebrich and R. A. McPherson,
(2007).The Value of Weather Station Metadata.

McIntyre, S and McKitrick, R.R, (2003).
Corrections to Mann et al. (1998) proxy data base and
northern hemisphere average temperature series. Energy
and Environment 14 751-777

McIntyre, S., and McKitrick, R.R ,(2005). Hockey
sticks, principal components and spurious significance.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 32, L03710 ,
doi:10.1029/2004GL021750

McKitrick, R.R. and P.J. Michaels, 2006 A
test of corrections for extraneous signals in gridded
surface temperature data. Clim. Res, 26, 150-173

McKitrick, R.R. and P.J. Michaels, 2007,
Quantifying the influence of anthropogenic surface
processes and inhomogeneities on gridded global climate
data, J. Geophys. Res. 112, D24S09,
doi:10:1029/2007JD008465

MSU (Microwave Sounder Unit, Channel 2) Data.
2007. http://vortex.nsstc.uah.edu/data/msu/t2lt/uahncdc.lt

96. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 96 ]
Nakicenovic, N, and R. Swart. (Editors), 2000.
IPCC Special Report: Emissions Scenarios. Cambridge
University Press.

NCDC (National Climatic Data Center) 2008
Global Surface Temperature Anomalies.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/anomalies/
anomalies.html

Niroma, T, 2007 The Effect of Solar Variability on
Climate. http://www.tilmari.pp.fi/tilmari5.htm

NOAA ( National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration) Figures 2008.
ftp://ftp.cmdl.noaa.gov/ccg/figures/

Nordemann, D.J.R., N.R. Rigozo and H.H. de
Faria. 2005. Solar activity and El-Niño signals observed in
Brazil and Chile tree ring records. Advances in Space
Research 2005, 35, 891-896.

Parker, D. E, 2004. Large-scale warming is not
urban. Nature 432 290

Parker, D/.E. 2006. .A Demonstration That Large-
Scale Warming Is Not Urban. J.Clim. 19, 2882-2895

Pepin, M C, and J D
Lundquist, 2008 Geophysical Research
Letters 35, L14701 doi
1029/2008GL034020 "Temperature Trends at High
Altitude over Tropics"

97. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 97 ]
Peterson, T C., 2000 Assessment of Urban
Versus Rural In Situ Surface Temperatures in the
Contiguous United States: No Difference Found. J. Clim.
16 2051 -2959

Pielke, R.A Sr, and 12 others 2007. Unresolved
Issues with the Assessment of Multi-Decadal Global Land-
Surface Temperature Trends. J Geophys.l Res,, 112,
d24s08, doi:10.1029/2006jd008229.

Quirk, T W , (2008).Energy and Environment.
Paper Submitted.

Randel, D.L. T.H. Vonder Haar, M.A. Ringerud,
G.I. Stephens, T.J. Greenwald, and C.L. Combell, 2004. A
New Global Water Vapour Dataset
http://www.cira.colostate.edu/climate/NVAO/bulletin.htm

Rasool,, S .I and Schneider, S H. 1971.
Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide and Aerosols: Effects of
Large Increases on Global Climate Science 173.138 -
141:

Ren, G, Zhou, Y, Ziying, C, Hangxing. Z, Aiying,
Z, Jun, G, and Xuefeng, L, 2008, Urbanization Effects on
Observed Surface Air Temperature Trends in North Chine.
J Climate 21, 1333-1348.

Reynolds. R.W., N.A. Rayner, T.M. Smith, D.C.
Stokes, and W. Wang, 2002 An Improved In Situ and
Satellite SST Analysis for Climate. J. Climate 15, 1609-
1624.

98. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 98 ]

Robinson, A. B, N/ E Robinson, and W. Soon.
2007. Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric
Carbon Dioxide. Journal of American Physicians and
Surgeons 12, 79-96.

Runnalls K.E. and Oke, J. R. 2006. A technique to
Detect Microclimate Inhomogenuities in Historical Records
of Screen-Level Air Temperature. J. Clim. 19, 978.


Scafetta, N., and B.J West/ 2005. Estimated solar
contribution to the global surface warming using the
ACRIM TSI satellite composite, Geophys. Res. Lett. 32
L18713. doi.10.1029/20005GL023849.

Scafetta. N. and B., J. West 2006a
Phenomenological solar signature in 400 years of
reconstructed Northern Hemisphere temperature record.
Geophys. Res. Lett. 33 L17718, DOI:10.1029.

Scafetta, N. and B., J. West 2006b,
Phenomenological solar contribution to the 1900-2000
global surface warming Geophys. Res. Lett. 33. doi:10.1-
29/2005GL02553910.1029/2006GL025539 .

Schlesinger, M E , & Ramankutty 1994. An
oscillation in the global climate system of period 65-70
years. Nature 367 723-726

Solomon, S., D Qin, M. R. Manning, M. Marquis,
K. Averyt, M. H Tignor, H. L. Miller, and Z. Chin. (Eds.).

99. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 99 ]
Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis
(IPCC), Cambridge University Press.

Soon, W. and S. Baliunas, Clim. Res. 2003, 23,
89-110..

Soon, W. 2005 Geophys. Res. Lett. 32 .L16712,
doi:10.1029/2005GL02342.

Svensmark H. et al 2007.Experimental evidence
for the role of ions in particle nucleation under
atmospheric conditions. Proc. Roy. Soc. A 463 385-396 "

Thorne, P. W., D. E. Parker, S. F. B. Tett, P.D.
Jones, M. McCarthy, H. Coleman and P/ Brohan. 2005.
Revisiting radiosonde upper air temperatures from 1958 to
2002. J. Geophys. Res., 110, D18105,
doi:10.1029/2004JD00575.

Trenberth, K. E, 1990 Recent observed
interdecadal climate changes in the Northern
Hemisphere., Bull Amer Meteorological Soc. 71 988-993.

Trenberth, K. E., D P Stepanak and J M Caron
2002. Interannual variations in the atmospheric heat

Trenberth, K. E., J. M. Caron, D. P. Stepanak, and
S. Worley. 2002. Evolution of El Niño-Southern Oscillation
and global atmospheric surface temperature. J Geophys.
Res.. 107 D8 10.1029/2000JD000298

Tyndall, J. 1805 Heat a Mode of Motion, London

100. Scientists vs. Global Warming – Scribe of Christ

[ 100 ]

Tsonis, A. A., K. Swanson & S. Kravisov 2007 . A
new dynamical mechanism for major climate shifts.
Geophys. Res. Lett.. 34 L13705; doi:10:1029/GL030288.

Vose, R. S., C. N. Williams Jr., T. C. Peterson. .T.
R. Karl and D. R Easterling. 2003. An evaluation of the
time of observation bias adjustment in the US Historical
Climatology Network Geophys. Res. Lett. 30 No 20,
2046.doi:10:1029/2003GL018111.

Hans von Storch, H. E. Zorita, J. M. Jones, Y.
Dimitriev, F. González-Rouco, S. F. B. Tett. 2004.
Reconstructing Past Climate from Noisy Data. Science
306. 679 – 682 DOI 10.1126/science.1096109

Wang, S, & D. Gong 2000. Enhancement of the
warming trend in China. Geophys. Res. Lett. 27 2581-
2584. Wang, W-C, Z. Zeng, T. R /Karl,1990. Urban Heat
Islands in China. Geophys. Res. Lett. 17, 2377-2380.
Wikipedia 2008 Svante Arrhenius.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svante_Arrhenius

Wunsch, C, R M Ponte, and P Heimbach, 2007
Decadal Trends in Sea Level Patterns, 1993-2004, J Clim.
20 5889-5911

Zhao, Zongci, Y. Ding, Y. Luo, and S. Wang,
2005.Recent Studies on Attributions of Climate Change in
China. Acta Meteorologica Sinica 19. 389-400. (in
English).

101. LISTA DE LIVROS PUBLICADOS
TEOLOGIA
Adultério é morte
Como evitar o seu suicídio
Histórias absurdas da Bíblia
Simbologia Bíblica
Os heróis da Bíblia
Os vilões da Bíblia
Tanatologia Bíblica
30 conselhos do sábio Salomão
30 mensagens marcantes de Jesus
Nefilins
Estudo sobre o dilúvio bíblico
Estudo das dez pragas do Egito
Estudo do voto e Jefté
Casa de Caifás
Vinho na Ceia do Senhor
Pastora é antibíblico
95 teses de Lutero explicadas
Refutando o determinismo de
Lutero
Jesus era chato e antipático
Parapsicologia Bíblica
Dicionário de Parapsicologia
Estudo sobre premonição
Compêndio teológico sobre o véu
Guia de Estudo Bíblico
Dogmatologia
Javé, o Deus da Bíblia
A Triunidade de Deus
Dízimo não é para o cristianismo
Como fundar uma Igreja
Sexologia cristã
Tratado teológico sobre a barba
Mulher não fala na igreja
Espiritismo X Cristianismo
Ilusão espírita Kardecista
APOCRIFOLOGIA
Livro ap. dos Jubileus Comentado
Livro de Enoque com comentários
Livro dos Segredos de Enoque
analisado
Livros de Adão e Eva
Pseudo-epígrafos de Barnabé com
comentários
Pastor de Hermas com
comentários (25)
BIBLIOLOGIA
Canonicidade Bíblica
Comentário bíblico: Gênesis à
Deuteronômio
Comentário bíblico: Josué a II
Crônicas
Comentário bíblico Esdras a Jó
Comentário bíblico – Salmos
Comentário bíblico – Provérbios a
Cantares

102. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 102 ]
Comentário bíblico – Profeta
Isaias
Comentário bíblico – Jeremias e
Lamentações
Comentário bíblico - Ezequiel
Os quatro livros biográficos de Jesus
Comentário bíblico – Ev. de
Mateus
Comentário bíblico – Ev. de
Marcos
Comentário bíblico – Ev. De Lucas
Comentário bíblico – Ev. De João
Atos dos apóstolos Explicado
Atos dos apóstolos Comentado e
Ilustrado
Comentário Bíblico – Carta aos
Romanos
Primeira Carta aos Coríntios
comentada
Estudo da 1ª carta aos Coríntios
Primeira epístola de Pedro com
comentários
Epístola de Tiago com
comentários
Apocalipse comentado
A Septuaginta
DEMONOLOGIA
O Diabo está ao seu lado
Lugares amaldiçoados
30 lugares sinistros
HAMARTIOLOGIA
O pecado da sensualidade
ESCATOLOGIA
Arrebatamento pré-tribulacionista
Juízo Final
O Fim do Mundo 41
ÉTICA
Bebida alcoólica não é pecado
Como se vestem os santos
Você é invejoso, entenda isso
Salto alto faz mal e é pecado
GEOGRAFIA BÍBLICA
Cidade Bíblica de Cafarnaum
Hotéis no Oriente Médio
Cidade do Cairo no Egito
Caná da Galileia
Via Dolorosa
Mar da Galileia
Grande Esfinge do Egito
As pirâmides do Egito
O Mar Vermelho
Monte das Oliveiras
Belém, onde nasceu Jesus
O Jardim do Éden na Bíblia
Basílica da Natividade em Belém
Sinai, o monte de Deus
O exótico Mar Morto

103. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 103 ]
Jericó, a cidade mais antiga do
mundo
Monte Carmelo e o profeta Elias
Mênfis, no Egito
Barreira israelense na Cisjordânia
Rio Nilo no Egito
PATROLOGIA
Apologia de Justino de Roma com
comentários
Cartas de Inácio de Antioquia
ilustradas e comentadas
Vida de Antão com comentários
Clemente de Roma
De Trinitate de Agostinho com
comentários
As vestimentas na Igreja Primitiva
- Tertuliano
Hexamerão de Ambrósio ilustrado
e explicado
Ambrósio de Milão, ilustrado e
comentado
Didascalia Apostolorum com
comentários
DEVOCIONÁRIO E SERMÕES
Cristo e eu de C Spurgeon
A imitação de Cristo de Tomás de
Kempis com comentários
O peregrino de John Bunyan
ilustrado e explicado
Experimentando Jesus através da
Oração (com comentários) –
Madame Guyon
Pecadores nas mãos de um Deus
irado comentado
Autoridade Espiritual com
comentários
Motivos para agradecer
TANATOLOGIA
O céu é de verdade com
comentários
Uma prova do céu – analisado
Vida após a vida com comentários
COLEÇÃO DO EX -PADRE ANIBAL
PEREIRA DOS REIS
Será que o crente pode perder a
salvação? Comentada
Senhora Aparecida com
comentários
Essas Bíblias católicas [com
comentários]
A virgem Maria [com comentários]
A imagem da Besta [com
comentários]
Anchieta, santo ou carrasco?
[com comentários]
As aventuras do cardeal [com
comentários]

104. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 104 ]
A guarda do sábado [com
comentários]
O cristão e o seu corpo {com
comentários]
Será que todas as religiões são
boas? [Com comentários]
A Senhora de Fátima [com
comentários]
O mais importante sinal da vinda
de Cristo [com comentários]
Cartas ao Papa João Paulo II [com
comentários]
O Diabo [com comentários]
Crente leia a Bíblia! [Com
comentários]
A Missa [com comentários]
Pedro nunca foi Papa! [com
comentários]
O Vaticano e a Bíblia com
comentários
COLEÇÃO REFLEXÕES DO
ESCRIBA DE CRISTO
Reflexões vol 1, Reflexões vol 2
Reflexões vol 3, Reflexões vol 4
Reflexões vol 5 Reflexões vol 6
Reflexões vol 7
CIÊNCIAS ESPACIAIS
Mitologia sobre o planeta Marte
Missões ao planeta Marte
ISS – Estação Espacial
Internacional – Maravilha de Deus
Terra plana dos insensatos
Terra Plana e os satélites
geoestacionários
Terra Plana e os ônibus espaciais
Os astronautas e a terra plana
Ciências X Terra Plana
Globo X Terra Plana – Volume 1
Globo X Terra plana – Volume 3
Globo X Terra plana – Volume 3
Globo X Terra Plana – 100 lições
CIÊNCIAS NATURAIS
Jardim da Bíblia do MAB
Museu de Zoologia da USP
Os Escochatos
Catálogo de mineralogia
Ricardo Felício e o aquecimento
Global
Cactos e suculentas, maravilhas
de Deus
Biologia, O mito da Evolução
Baleias, maravilhas de Deus
A sabedoria das formigas
Formigas, maravilhas de Deus
Pôr do sol, maravilha de Deus
Abelha sem ferrão, maravilha de
Deus
As palmeiras, maravilhas de Deus

105. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 105 ]
Orquídeas, maravilhas de Deus
Camelos e dromedários,
maravilhas de Deus
101 maravilhas de Deus, Volume 1
101 maravilhas de Deus, Volume 2
101 maravilhas de Deus, Volume 3
101 maravilhas de Deus, Volume 4
101 maravilhas de Deus, Volume 5
101 maravilhas de Deus, Volume 6
101 maravilhas de Deus. Volume 7
101 maravilhas de Deus, Volume 8
Botânica Bíblica
Produção de plantas
Zoológico de Sorocaba
GASTRONOMIA
Licores, maravilhas da
humanidade
SAÚDE PÚBLICA
Medicina Psicossomática
Doenças na Humanidade
História das pandemias
Pestes na Antiguidade
Tratamentos contra a Covid-19
Coronavírus e a histeria coletiva
Coronavírus e a imunidade
Coronavírus e as causas de morte
Revolta da Vacina e o Coronavírus
Coronavírus – Isolamento ou
distanciamento?
Coronavírus e os efeitos
econômicos
Virologia do Coronavírus
9 de abril de 2020 – pico do
coronavírus
Coronavírus – Conspiração
Chinesa
Coronavírus e o plano chinês
Coronavírus em cada nação
Coronavírus e suicídio
UFOLOGIA
Eram os deuses astronautas (Com
anotações)
A Bíblia da Ufologia
DIREITA
CONSERVADORA
CRISTÃ
COLEÇÃO: MENTES
BRILHANTES
Guilherme Fiúza, mente brilhante
Rodrigo Constantino, mente
brilhante
Augusto Nunes – mente brilhante
Allan dos Santos – mente
brilhante
Luciano Hang – mente brilhante

106. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 106 ]
Roberto Jefferson – mente
brilhante
Alexandre Garcia, mente brilhante
Olavo de Carvalho, mente
brilhante
Bernardo Küster, mente brilhante
Caio Coppolla, mente brilhante
Deltan Dallagnol, mente brilhante
Gustavo Gayer, mente brilhante
Adrilles Jorge, mente brilhante
Magno Malta, mente brilhante
ESTADOS UNIDOS
Governo Glorioso de Donald
Trump
CONSERVADORISMO
Deus é Conservador e o Diabo é
progressista
ESQUERDA
Os tentáculos malignos da
Esquerda
JUDICIÁRIO
Ministro Gilmar Mendes, o juiz
iníquo
CORRUPÇÃO
Planilha de propina da Odebrecht
explicada
SERIE: LULA
Os amigos de Lula
Todos os telefones do presidente
Lula
Lula e o caso do triplex 21
Lula X ACM
SÉRIE BOLSONARO
Jair Bolsonaro, presidente do
Brasil
Bolsodória – o perfil de mau
caráter
Bolsonaro X João Dória
Bolsonaro – traidor da Direita
SÉRIE: Presidente Moro 2022
– O caso do triplex
- Sigilo telefônico do Lula
COMUNISMO
As mentiras comunistas sobre o
Regime Militar
Comunismo em Cuba
Genocídio Comunista no Camboja
U.N.E. – A serviço do comunismo
Utopia da Igualdade
PARTIDO DOS
TRABALHADORES [PT]
Memorial criminoso do PT –
Volume I

107. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 107 ]
Memorial criminoso do PT –
Volume II
PT X Cristianismo
NAZISMO
Minha Luta de Adolf Hitler com
comentários
O lado bom do nazismo
DEMOCRACIA
Como Vladimir Putin e limina
opositores
Liberdade e democracia de Mentira
O fracasso da democracia
GEOPOLÍTICA
A China e o Anticristo
OMS à serviço da China
Antissemitismo na Alemanha pré-
nazista
Estatuto do Hamas com comentários
COMUNICAÇÃO
A Era das Fake News
Globolixo em charge
Globovírus
FEMINISMO
Homem é cabeça da mulher
Deus é machista 36
CIÊNCIA MILITAR
Manual do guerrilheiro urbano de
Marighella com comentários
A arte da Guerra com comentários
DIREITO
Direito Divino ao Trabalho
Direito Divino a Legítima Defesa
O instituto divino da Pena de
Morte
ESCRIBA DA
HISTÓRIA
ARTE E LITERATURA
O verdadeiro sítio do Picapau Amarelo
Refutando Os Protocolos dos Sábios
de Sião
O Talmud Desmascarado [analisado]
A vitória do judaísmo sobre o
germanismo com comentários.
1984 de George Orwell ilustrado e
comentado
Jesus segundo os artistas
As pinturas de Benedito Calixto
As pinturas de Akiane Kramarik
Pinturas de Caravaggio
As músicas diabólicas de Raul
Seixas
Hamlet de Shakespeare com
comentários
A arte poética de Aristóteles
comentada

108. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 108 ]
Minha Luta de Adolf Hitler com
comentários
O Guarani, ilustrado e comentado
A Revolução dos Bichos
comentada e ilustrada
A Guerra dos Mundos – Livro I
com comentários
A Guerra dos Mundos – Livro II
HISTÓRIA
Castelo de Robson Miguel
Cronologia de perseguiç ões aos
judeus – Volume 1 [do início ao século
XIX]
Cronologia de perseguições aos
judeus – Volume 2 [séc XX e XXI]
Guerras e crimes contra Israel
Igreja do Embaré em Santos
Código Hamurabi e a Lei de
Moisés
Introdução à Arqueologia
Egiptologia Bíblica
Museu de Arqueologia Bíblica
Museu Egípcio do Cairo
Museu Egípcio de Curitiba
Museu do Automóvel de Curitiba
Museu Mazzaropi
Museu do Brinquedo de
Pomerode
Museu histórico Sorocabano
História Eclesiástica de Eusébio
de Cesaréia
História do Universo comentada
História do Cristianismo
comentada
História da cidade de Jerusalém
Jerusalém na Bíblia
O anjo de quatro patas
A Epopéia de Gilgamesh
O livro dos Mártires com
comentários
Dragões existiram
História de Itabaiana
História da Ferrovia
HISTÓRIA ECLESIÁSTICA
O que é Igreja Católica Romana?
Finanças da Igreja Católica
Entenda a CCB – Volume I
Entenda a CCB – Volume II
História da Igreja Deus é Amor
A cúpula do Vaticano é homossexual
BIOGRAFIA
Jacó em férias de 2022
Maria de Lourdes – Mulher coragem
Cronologia da Vida do apóstolo Paulo
Vida de Antão com comentários
Vida de Constantino comentada
capítulo a capítulo
David Ben-Gurion – Herói de Israel

109. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 109 ]
Galileu Galilei X Igreja Católica
Lutero era antissemita
GEOGRAFIA
Balneário Camboriú no Brasil
Dubai, maravilha da humanidade
Vila Inglesa de Paranapiacaba
Cidade de Paraty no Brasil
Holambra, cidade das flores
AVIAÇÃO
Os acidentes aéreos no Brasil
Aeroporto Guarulhos, maravilha
da humanidade
Aeroporto de Tel-Aviv, maravilha
da humanidade
Airbus A380, maravilha da
humanidade
CIÊNCIAS SOCIAIS
Acumuladores
Os quatro temperamentos
Educação Financeira
Como ser feliz
Onde estão as moedas [com
comentários]
Controle Populacional ou o caos
O Estado Judeu de Israel
Os beduínos na Bíblia e hoje
COLEÇÃO SERVOS DE DEUS
Apóstolo Rina e a Igreja Bola de
Neve
Jerônimo de Belém da Judéia
Charles Finney –Vol 1
Charles Finney – Vol 2
FILOSOFIA
Anticristo de Nietzsche comentado
ACADEMIA DE
POLÍCIA
CIÊNCIAS POLICIAIS
A perigosa vida de travestis
Escrivão de Polícia é cargo
técnico científico
Manual de Necropsia
Plantão policial
Ocorrências Policiais
Sátiras Policiais
Anedotas policiais
HERÓIS DA POLÍCIA
Sargento Tonny Santos – Herói...
Gabriel Monteiro – Herói da p...
Coronel Telhada – Herói da p...
EM OUTROS IDIOMAS
Scientists vs. Global Warming
Yahweh, the God of the Bible
Jesus was boring and unfriendly

110. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 110 ]
Didascalia Apostolorum with
comments
Guide Study Bible [Ingles]
Creationist Biology vol 1 {inglês}
Creationist Biology vol 2 {inglês}
Creationist Biology vol 3 {inglês}
Creationist Biology vol 4 {inglês]
Creationist Biology vol 5 {inglês]
High heels are harmful and a sin
Diary Christopher Columbus
(Inglês)
Alcoholic drink is not sin (Inglês)
The Dress in the early church
(Inglês)
Biology, the myth of Evolution
(Inglês)
The Four-legged Angel (Inglês)
Life of Constantine (Inglês)
Last Judgment (inglês)
ArchéologieBiblique (Francês)
Jésus était ennuyeux et hostile
Barrière israeliénne em
Cisjordanie
Biologie, le mythe de l’evolution
La dîme n’est pas pour le chritianisme
Guide d’etude biblique [Francês]
Juicio Final (Espanhol)
Libro de los Jubileos - comentado
Guia de estudio de la Biblia
Paranormalidad en la Biblia
Indossare il velo (Italiano)
Guida allo studio della Bibbia
La decima non è per il
crestianesimo
Leitfaden zum Bibelstudium
[German]
生物学–進化の神話 (Japonês)
ليلد ةسارد باتكلا سدقملا [arabe]
Biblia Studa Gvidilo [Esperanto]
Gids Voor Bijbelstudie [Holandês]
Bybelstudiegids [Afrikkaner]
गाइड स्टडी बाइबल [Hindi]
什一税不适合基督教 [dízimo –
chinês]
HEBRAICO
אמח קוחתורעה םע ס [Estatuto do
Hamas comentado]
לושכמ ילארשי הדגב תיברעמה
[Barreira Israelense na
Cisjordânia]
דוד ןב ןוירוג, רוביג לארשי [David Bem-
Guiron – Herói de Israel]
387 livros publicados
1 livro oculto
Pseudônimo que uso:

Escriba de Cristo

111. LISTA DOS MEUS LIVROS PUBLICADOS


[ 111 ]
O Peregrino Cristão
Central de Ensinos Bíblicos
O Biógrafo
O Biólogo
O Crítico
Escriba da História
O Eremita
O Historiador
Direita Conservadora Cristã
Academia de Polícia