Posted on 12/16/2007 9:26:23 PM PST by jyro
These experts believe that global warming is a natural phenomenon, and they point to reams of data they say supports their assertions.
These conclusions are in sharp contradiction to those of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which reached its conclusions using largely similar data.
The UN body of about 3,000 experts, including several renown US scientists, jointly won the award with former US vice president Al Gore for their work to raise awareness about the disastrous consequences of global warming.
In mid-November the IPCC adopted a landmark report stating that the evidence of a human role in the warming of the planet was now "unequivocal."
Retreating glaciers and loss of snow in Alpine regions, thinning Arctic summer sea ice and thawing permafrost shows that climate change is already on the march, the report said.
Carbon pollution, emitted especially by the burning of oil, gas and coal, traps heat from the Sun, thus warming the Earth's surface and inflicting changes to weather systems.
A group of US scientists however disagree, and have written an article on their views that is published in The International Journal of Climatology, a publication of Britain's Royal Meteorological Society.
The observed pattern of warming, comparing surface and atmospheric temperature trends, doesn't show the characteristic fingerprint associated with greenhouse warming," wrote lead author David Douglas, a climate expert from the University of Rochester, in New York state.
"The inescapable conclusion is that human contribution is not significant and that observed increases in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases make only a negligible contribution to climate warming," Douglas wrote.
According to co-author John Christi from the University of Alabama, satellite data "and independent balloon data agree that the atmospheric warming trends do not exceed those of the surface," while greenhouse models "demand that atmospheric trend values be two to three times greater."
Data from satellite observations "suggest that greenhouse models ignore negative feedback produced by clouds and by water vapor, that diminish the warming effects" of human carbon dioxide emissions.
The journal authors "have good reason, therefore, to believe that current climate models greatly overestimate the effects of greenhouse gases."
For Fred Singer, a climatologist at the University of Virginia and another co-author, the current warming "trend is simply part of a natural cycle of climate warming and cooling that has been seen in ice cores, deep sea sediments and stalagmites . . . and published in hundreds of papers in peer reviewed journals."
How these cyclical climate take place is still unknown, but they "are most likely caused by variations in the solar wind and associated magnetic fields that affect the flux of cosmic rays incident on cloudiness, and thereby control the amount of sunlight reaching the earth's surface and thus the climate."
Singer said at a recent National Press Club meeting in Washington that there is still no definite proof that humans can produce climate change.
The available data is ambiguous, Singer said: global temperatures, for example, rose between 1900 and 1940, well before humans began to burn the enormous quantities of hydrocarbons they do today. Then they dropped between 1940 and 1975, when the use of oil and coal increased, he said.
Singer believes that other factors -- like variations of solar winds and terrestrial magnetic field that impact cloud formations and the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth's surface, and thus determining the temperature -- are much more influential than human-generated greenhouse gas emissions.
But what do they know? They’re just scientists, not politicians nor ambientalists.
interesting reading.
Bump...
No it isn't! It's been edited to look that way on FR.
The opening sentance has been deleted....
"A small group of US experts stubbornly insist that, contrary to what the vast majority of their colleagues believe, humans may not be responsible for the warming of the planet Earth."
Of course, no one can actually define this so called "vast majority" - the only people they cite are 3000 "UN Experts".
Well some of those 3000 experts threatened to sue to get their names off the list because they don't support the theory either.
And countering the so-called "UN Experts" by a factor of better than 6-1 is "The Petition Project" based out of Oregon signed by over 19,000 scientists.
So just who exactly is this "Vast Majority" ?
Perhaps they are like the Two Billion people that Al Gore repeatedly claimed participated in "Live Earth" - they can only come up with figures for less than TWO PERCENT of that total...
We are being scammed.
Me thinks somebody car is going to be keyed, cat killed, house egged and office ransacked.
Global Warming has never been about proof. The left is never concerned about proof they are concerned about political goals.
Lying little maggots!
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/968
It is like all the liberal issues of the past.
There never existed a large number of women having back abortions. It didn’t stop them from using it as an catalyst for one of the worst Supreme court rulings in the nation’s history.
There has never been vast discrimination or oppression of homosexuals but it hasn’t stopped the homosexual movement from pushing into the streets and trying to redefine marriage.
Public school success has never been correlated with the volume of money spent but it still doesn’t stop the constant attempts to increase funding no matter how bad the school.
Universal Health care or increased use of insurance has never correlated to lower costs or more affordable healthcare but there is still the constant push for it even though it would guarantee higher taxes which would eclipse what people pay today with added wait times and even less responsive service.
Issue after issue the left scams the American people. Global warming is just a vehicle for global taxation. It is the misanthrope religion of the faithless.
The opening sentance has been deleted....
-
yes that was a big mistake. we need to know what we’re up against
...Issue after issue the left scams the American people. Global warming is just a vehicle for global taxation...
Im no scientist but I note the record temps when I watch the weather. the trend I noticed was record highs generally fall in the late 1800s-early 1900s. well before man was industrialized enough to make a difference. the record lows generally land 8-20 years AFTER the highs, which tells this average citizen that mother Earth knows what shes doing and doesnt give a flip bout the micrcoscopic organisms [humans] crawlin round in her drawers...unless we have a nuclear armegeddon, that might kill us, but she wont care...
Global warming deniers who go against the dogma of St. Algore ...send for the environmental inquisition. (sarcasm)
..That would include...The Pope !
The UN lost it’s Oil For Food scam and are now looking for another way to tax the industrial world.
Simple arithmetic yields more than 3 billion cubic miles of atmosphere just up to the boundary of the tropopause. No model can predict the movement of that much gas over both liquid and solid surfaces each of which is heating/cooling at a different rate at every second of every day. No model can predict that.
Global warming is a fact. No, that is a lie. There has been a warming trend but global warming works on the premise that it will continue warming. There is absolutely no proof of that. None, zero, zip, nada.
Warming has increased during the last one hundred and fifty years: again, a lie. There have been cooling and warming cycles since temperatures have been recorded. In fact the idea that climate should be static, which is a tenet of global warming, is absurd. The earth is immensely old and the climate has changed several times in several parts of the world.
Climate and weather are two different things. Technically true but look up the definition of climate. Weather is in the first sentence. How can they predict that it will warm fifty years from now when they can’t even predict the weather, a major determinant of climate, a week from now?
I personally tend to doubt that man can affect change of three billion cubic miles of gas. I don’t think we can generate the gross energy for that. But that is only a theory. And global warming is only a theory as well. It is unproven and not fact.
~~Anthropogenic Global Warming ™ ping~~
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.