Posted on 12/11/2010 7:44:20 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
From Climate Depot, read more here
INTRODUCTION:
More than 1000 dissenting scientists (updates previous 700 scientist report) from around the globe have now challenged man-made global warming claims made by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and former Vice President Al Gore. This new 2010 320-page Climate Depot Special Report — updated from 2007′s groundbreaking U.S. Senate Report of over 400 scientists who voiced skepticism about the so-called global warming “consensus” — features the skeptical voices of over 1000 international scientists, including many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN IPCC. This updated 2010 report includes a dramatic increase of over 300 additional (and growing) scientists and climate researchers since the last update in March 2009. This report’s release coincides with the 2010 UN global warming summit being held in Cancun.
The more than 300 additional scientists added to this report since March 2009 (21 months ago), represents an average of nearly four skeptical scientists a week speaking out publicly. The well over 1000 dissenting scientists are almost 20 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media-hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers.
The chorus of skeptical scientific voices grew louder in 2010 as the Climategate scandal — which involved the upper echelon of UN IPCC scientists — detonated upon on the international climate movement. “I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple,” said noted Princeton Physicist Dr. Robert Austin shortly after the scandal broke. Climategate prompted UN IPCC scientists to turn on each other. UN IPCC scientist Eduardo Zorita publicly declared that his Climategate colleagues Michael Mann and Phil Jones “should be barred from the IPCC process…They are not credible anymore.” Zorita also noted how insular the IPCC science had become. “By writing these lines I will just probably achieve that a few of my future studies will, again, not see the light of publication,” Zorita wrote. A UN lead author Richard Tol lead author grew disillusioned with the IPCC and lamented that it had been “captured” and demanded that “the Chair of IPCC and the Chairs of the IPCC Working Groups should be removed.” Tol also publicly called for the “suspension” of IPCC Process in 2010 after being invited by the UN to participate as lead author again in the next IPCC Report.
Other UN scientists were more blunt. South African UN scientist declared the UN IPCC a “worthless carcass” and noted IPCC chair Pachauri is in “disgrace”. He also explained that the “fraudulent science continues to be exposed.” Alexander, a former member of the UN Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters harshly critiqued the UN. “‘I was subjected to vilification tactics at the time. I persisted. Now, at long last, my persistence has been rewarded…There is no believable evidence to support [the IPCC] claims. I rest my case!” See: S. African UN Scientist Calls it! ‘Climate change – RIP: Cause of Death: No scientifically believable evidence…Deliberate manipulation to suit political objectives’ [Also see: New Report: UN Scientists Speak Out On Global Warming -- As Skeptics!] Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook, a professor of geology at Western Washington University, summed up the scandal on December 3, 2010: “The corruption within the IPCC revealed by the Climategate scandal, the doctoring of data and the refusal to admit mistakes have so severely tainted the IPCC that it is no longer a credible agency.”
Selected Highlights of the Updated 2010 Report featuring over 1000 international scientists dissenting from man-made climate fears:
“We’re not scientifically there yet. Despite what you may have heard in the media, there is nothing like a consensus of scientific opinion that this is a problem. Because there is natural variability in the weather, you cannot statistically know for another 150 years.” — UN IPCC’s Tom Tripp, a member of the UN IPCC since 2004 and listed as one of the lead authors and serves as the Director of Technical Services & Development for U.S. Magnesium.
“Any reasonable scientific analysis must conclude the basic theory wrong!!” — NASA Scientist Dr. Leonard Weinstein who worked 35 years at the NASA Langley Research Center and finished his career there as a Senior Research Scientist. Weinstein, is presently a Senior Research Fellow at the National Institute of Aerospace.
“Please remain calm: The Earth will heal itself — Climate is beyond our power to control…Earth doesn’t care about governments or their legislation. You can’t find much actual global warming in present-day weather observations. Climate change is a matter of geologic time, something that the earth routinely does on its own without asking anyone’s permission or explaining itself.” — Nobel Prize-Winning Stanford University Physicist Dr. Robert B. Laughlin, who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1998, and was formerly a research scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
“In essence, the jig is up. The whole thing is a fraud. And even the fraudsters that fudged data are admitting to temperature history that they used to say didn’t happen…Perhaps what has doomed the Climategate fraudsters the most was their brazenness in fudging the data” — Dr. Christopher J. Kobus, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at Oakland University, specializes in alternative energy, thermal transport phenomena, two-phase flow and fluid and thermal energy systems.
“The energy mankind generates is so small compared to that overall energy budget that it simply cannot affect the climate…The planet’s climate is doing its own thing, but we cannot pinpoint significant trends in changes to it because it dates back millions of years while the study of it began only recently. We are children of the Sun; we simply lack data to draw the proper conclusions.” — Russian Scientist Dr. Anatoly Levitin, the head of geomagnetic variations laboratory at the Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism, Ionosphere and Radiowave Propagation of the Russian Academy of Sciences.
“Hundreds of billion dollars have been wasted with the attempt of imposing a Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory that is not supported by physical world evidences…AGW has been forcefully imposed by means of a barrage of scare stories and indoctrination that begins in the elementary school textbooks.” — Brazilian Geologist Geraldo Luís Lino, who authored the 2009 book “The Global Warming Fraud: How a Natural Phenomenon Was Converted into a False World Emergency.”
“I am an environmentalist,” but “I must disagree with Mr. Gore” — Chemistry Professor Dr. Mary Mumper, the chair of the Chemistry Department at Frostburg State University in Maryland, during her presentation titled “Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming, the Skeptic’s View.”
“I am ashamed of what climate science has become today,” The science “community is relying on an inadequate model to blame CO2 and innocent citizens for global warming in order to generate funding and to gain attention. If this is what ‘science’ has become today, I, as a scientist, am ashamed…Science is too important for our society to be misused in the way it has been done within the Climate Science Community.” Swedish Climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring,
“Those who call themselves ‘Green planet advocates’ should be arguing for a CO2- fertilized atmosphere, not a CO2-starved atmosphere…Diversity increases when the planet was warm AND had high CO2 atmospheric content…Al Gore’s personal behavior supports a green planet – his enormous energy use with his 4 homes and his bizjet, does indeed help make the planet greener. Kudos, Al for doing your part to save the planet.” — Renowned engineer and aviation/space pioneer Burt Rutan, who was named “100 most influential people in the world, 2004″ by Time Magazine and Newsweek called him “the man responsible for more innovations in modern aviation than any living engineer.”
“Global warming is the central tenet of this new belief system in much the same way that the Resurrection is the central tenet of Christianity. Al Gore has taken a role corresponding to that of St Paul in proselytizing the new faith…My skepticism about AGW arises from the fact that as a physicist who has worked in closely related areas, I know how poor the underlying science is. In effect the scientific method has been abandoned in this field.” — Atmospheric Physicist Dr. John Reid, who worked with Australia’s CSIRO’s (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization) Division of Oceanography and worked in surface gravity waves (ocean waves) research.
“We maintain there is no reason whatsoever to worry about man-made climate change, because there is no evidence whatsoever that such a thing is happening.” — Greek Earth scientists Antonis Christofides and Nikos Mamassis of the National Technical University of Athens’ Department of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering.
“There are clear cycles during which both temperature and salinity rise and fall. These cycles are related to solar activity…In my opinion and that of our institute, the problems connected to the current stage of warming are being exaggerated. What we are dealing with is not a global warming of the atmosphere or of the oceans.” — Biologist Pavel Makarevich of the Biological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences
“Because the greenhouse effect is temporary rather than permanent, predictions of significant global warming in the 21st century by IPCC are not supported by the data.” — Hebrew University Professor Dr. Michael Beenstock an honorary fellow with Institute for Economic Affairs who published a study challenging man-made global warming claims titled “Polynomial Cointegration Tests of the Anthropogenic Theory of Global Warming.”
“The whole idea of anthropogenic global warming is completely unfounded. There appears to have been money gained by Michael Mann, Al Gore and UN IPCC’s Rajendra Pachauri as a consequence of this deception, so it’s fraud.” — South African astrophysicist Hilton Ratcliffe, a member of the Astronomical Society of Southern Africa (ASSA) and the Astronomical Society of the Pacific and a Fellow of the British Institute of Physics.
End Selected Excerpts
#
Background: Only 52 Scientists Participated in UN IPCC Summary
The notion of “hundreds” or “thousands” of UN scientists agreeing to a scientific statement does not hold up to scrutiny. (See report debunking “consensus” LINK) Recent research by Australian climate data analyst John McLean revealed that the IPCC’s peer-review process for the Summary for Policymakers leaves much to be desired. (LINK) (LINK) (LINK) & (LINK) (Note: The 52 scientists who participated in the 2007 IPCC Summary for Policymakers had to adhere to the wishes of the UN political leaders and delegates in a process described as more closely resembling a political party’s convention platform battle, not a scientific process – LINK)
Proponents of man-made global warming like to note how the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) have issued statements endorsing the so-called “consensus” view that man is driving global warming. But both the NAS and AMS never allowed member scientists to directly vote on these climate statements. Essentially, only two dozen or so members on the governing boards of these institutions produced the “consensus” statements. This report gives a voice to the rank-and-file scientists who were shut out of the process. (LINK)
The NAS has come under fire for its lobbying practices. See: NAS Pres. Ralph Cicerone Turns Science Org. into political advocacy group: $6 million NAS study is used to lobby for global warming bill & Cicerone’s Shame: NAS Urges Carbon Tax, Becomes Advocacy Group — ‘political appointees heading politicized scientific institutions that are virtually 100% dependent on gov’t funding’ MIT’s Richard Lindzen harshly rebuked NAS president Cicerone in his Congressional testimony in November 2010. Lindzen testified: “Cicerone [of NAS] is saying that regardless of evidence the answer is predetermined. If government wants carbon control, that is the answer that the Academies will provide.” [ Also See: MIT Climate Scientist Exposes 'Corrupted Science' in Devastating Critique – November 29, 2008 ]
While the scientists contained in this report hold a diverse range of views, they generally rally around several key points. 1) The Earth is currently well within natural climate variability. 2) Almost all climate fear is generated by unproven computer model predictions. 3) An abundance of peer-reviewed studies continue to debunk rising CO2 fears and, 4) “Consensus” has been manufactured for political, not scientific purposes.
Scientists caution that the key to remember is “climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables,” not just CO2. UK Professor Emeritus of Biogeography Philip Stott of the University of London decried the notion that CO2 is the main climate driver. “As I have said, over and over again, the fundamental point has always been this: climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically-selected factor is as misguided as it gets,” Stott wrote in 2008. Even the climate activists at RealClimate.org let this fact slip out in a September 20, 2008 article. “The actual temperature rise is an emergent property resulting from interactions among hundreds of factors,” RealClimate.org admitted in a rare moment of candor.]
# #
Read Full Report: Link to Complete 321-Page PDF Special Report:
“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.” — Michael Crichton
Thanks for adding that.
ping
Glad to.
How do liberal scams like global warming gain a foothold?
See this:
Most scientists in this country are Democrats. That’s a problem.
By Daniel Sarewitz
http://www.slate.com/?id=2277104
***********************************EXCERPT*******************************************
Cassandra King says:
Dear Michael,
Many thanks for your kind words of support, they mean a lot to me and I am glad that I can contribute in some small way to a larger understanding of the issues.
The greater tragedy is not a failed theory, science is littered with such dismal failures and it is how science progresses, treading on the broken remains of disproven theories. This one is different, the theory was exploited by the greedy the power hungry the carpet baggers the crooks and they used the ignorance and gullibility of useful idiots to do it, this cannot and must not be allowed to stand for all our sakes.
We need justice and we need to learn the lessons, not some meaningless platitudes spewed up by some politicians but real and hard lessons. BTW my humble posts belong to any who cares to read them as soon as I hit the send button, you may use and improve them as you see fit.
Yours
Cassie K
**************************************EXCERPT*****************************************
Alexander K says:
Anthony, the article is an excellent compilation of evidence which, no doubt, will quickly spread around the blogosphere and leak, ultimately, into the lazy reaches of the MSM where most journalists only interview their PCs. Thank you.
I habitually have a quick daily perusal of the MSM on line that isn’t hidden behind a paywall and have observed over the last couple of weeks that not only is any news from the Cooncan conference hard to find, but the number of silly Chicken Little-themed articles appears to have considerably diminished. Even Louise Gray of the Telegraph has reversed her usual ‘ CO2 disaster’ theme and published a story in today’s Telegraph about the UN admitting some glaciers are growing. Wow!
In the Guardian, which has been reliably the warmist flagship organ to date, the sceptics now tend to outnumber the warmistas considerably in CiF blog posts and a number of the usual ardently-ranting attack-warmistas on those threads are absent. I also observe that the Guardian moderators are tending to close strings off quickly when the sceptic comments wildly outnumber and outfact the warmist contributions.
Perhaps they have gone on holiday, or are sitting in their freezing and snowbound electric cars or lying beside their bicycles (the Guardian is very big on bicycles and I understand most ardent warmists won’t drive anything that produces CO2 and wave eco-themed placards at the ones equipped with 4WD) somewhere near Edinborough, Glasgow or York, waiting for a medic in a nice warm Armed Forces Landrover to rescue them.
Or maybe truth is dawning upon them and they are metaphorically creeping away red-faced, silent and embarrassed, thanking their lucky stars for the gift of anonymity allowed by blog editors. While a few of the faithful turn up every day to give witness, still chanting their mantras of ‘overwhelming numbers of scientists’ and ‘peer reviewed papers’ and spitting their customary vile language when reason and their woefully inadequate lexicons fail them,
**********************************************EXCERPT****************************************
zorro says:
Posted a critical comment here not expecting it to be accepted – to my surprise when I checked back later it was, along with a slew of far more acerbic remarks. The ABC has been a hot bed of alarmist fundimentalists. Looks like the tide is turning!!
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/42008.html
A choice comment:
**************************************EXCERPT******************************************
11 Dec 2010 1:02:13am
Frosty, get a grip.
Who are the deniers here? Do you understand the scientific method?
The only deniers here are Michael Mann et al (and their fellow deniers of the MWP) along with their little mate Rajendra Pachauri. Mind you, I’m not against the incompetent railway engineer chuffing along with the IPCC, since his very presence in that fraudulent body will continue to derail the alarmists’ credibility faster than the speed of a Chinese maglev.
This is where they’ve got to on Cancun:
"Climate Change Experts' Call for End to Developed World Economic Growth for 'The Next 20 Years'"
End economic growth! For the next 20 years?
Not even Dan Cass or the ACF could be this silly.
And these Einsteins think this is the way to raise Australia’s announced allocation of $599 million for the provision of fast-start financing to the panhandlers? Or that this is the way the Cancuntites propose to raise their $100 billion a year by 2020 from Western countries for an unnamed, new, UN controlled fund; or 1.5% pa of GDP, whichever is the greater.
Do you get the logic? They propose shrinking the Western economies that they want to clip, as a way of providing funds for the panhandlers.
Economic illiterates.
Even Marx wasn’t that stupid.
Read more:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2010/11/29/cancun-climate-change-experts-call-end-developed-world-economic-growth-n#ixzz17iG7bn4b
Devastating Too many smart people listed in just the first few comments
The ship of criminals continues to slowly list further to the side. Hopefully it will soon sink.
Love Michael Crichton, only where’s “The Andromeda Strain” when you need real heroics to save the planet?
Al Gore must be back in town. It’s a balmy 24 and Nashville’s coldest Dec. start since 1942. I understand it will be a blistering 7 tomorrow night.
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.