Posted on 12/26/2006 10:36:26 AM PST by wagglebee
WASHINGTON, D.C., December 22, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The general warming of global temperatures in recent decades appears to mostly be the result of a regular, sunspot induced climate cycle that has been occurring roughly every 1500 years for at least the past one million years. Climate physicist S. Fred Singer and Dennis Avery, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, discussed the substantial evidence for their new book "Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years," at a Hudson Institute book forum in Washington, D.C. last month.
The book is said to make a very powerful case that the current climate trends we are currently seeing are in fact part of a product of a solar-linked cycle that creates harmless naturally warmer conditions approximately every 1500 years.
Dennis Avery, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, an agricultural economist and former senior analyst in the Department of State, began the discussion noting that the Romans grew wine grapes in Britain in the first century and records indicate grapes were being grown there again in the 11th century, both situations indicating that today's temperatures are not unprecedented.
Additionally, scientific analysis of ice cores from Greenland and the Antarctic found that there is a clear record of a moderate, abrupt 1500-year climate change cycle running all the way through all the major warmings and all the ice ages. Cores taken from the seabed of six oceans, including the Atlantic, the Pacific and the Arabian Sea have also revealed the same unmistakable 1500-year cycle.
The authors relate that one seabed core from near Iceland that goes back a million years revealed that the 1500-year cycle runs through the whole million years.
Avery and Singer, a professor emeritus of environmental research at the University of Virginia and the former first director of the U.S. National Weather Satellite Service, have concluded that the alarmist predictions about how much the earth will warm in the near future are based on a radical overestimate of how much carbon dioxide changes the earth's temperatures.
The massive and natural release of carbon dioxide by the oceans; the fact that "three-fourths of our modern warming occurred before 1940, which was before much human-emitted CO2"; demonstrably false claims of a scientific consensus on global warning; and the fact that it isn't even as warm today as "it was during the medieval warming when the Vikings were able to grow crops in Greenland" - bolster the authors' politically incorrect claims on this dominating issue.
Avery and Singer do not deny the greenhouse effect but state that it is small. They state, "What we're suggesting is that both history and the recent pattern of things, particularly the warming before 1940, would indicate that the CO2 impact is a good deal smaller than the climate models which are telling us to be frightened."
Avery concludes, "it looks to me as though 75 to 80 percent of the warming I see can be credited to the natural cycle". Even then, the authors emphasize, the degree of overall warming that can be expected will be relatively harmless and does not warrant the alarmism and extreme economic and political measures being proposed.
The highly influential scientific magazines, Science and Nature, are also called to account by the two climate experts for their serious omissions and misrepresentations on the entire global warming issue.
To read the full fascinating transcript of this book forum see:
http://www.hudson.org/files/publications/UnstoppableGlobalWa...
Bookmark ping
I suppose a mitigating factor in that calculation would be the word "roughly" prior to the "1500 years."
Mostly they want us to be firghtened so that the spineless government will give them more research funding thus claiming they are doing something about the "problem". It is a scam. FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!
I hope hundreds of right thinking consevatives make sure they see this report and ask them to please explain why they do not accept it!!!
I guess we'll be seeing this one making the skeptic rounds a few times before it fades away:
Avery and Singer will soon be stoned.
The problem with the sunspot theory is that it doesn't justify the dismantling of capitalism and the imposition of global Socialism. Therefore it is "inconvenient".
Bump
Senator Snowe wants so-called "skeptic" authors such as these to be BANNED. Take note, Maine voters.
Michael Crichton's State of Confusion
Michael Crichton’s State of Confusion II: Return of the Science
Fat chance of that happening.
Stratospheric Ozone: An Electronic Textbook
Your assignment: determine all the factual errors in this Electronic Textbook.
When a cycle is irregular and varies from 1000 to 2000, it is reasonable to refer to it as "about 1500". Many might say "averages 1500", scientists would normally say "about 1500 +- 500".
If the article had included a few hundred data points, the meaning would have been more clear.
A recent conversation with one of our young, very liberal, but intelligent engineers went something like this:
Every time I have talked to him he has become more convinced that the truth is not a part of the search among the alarmists and he has to be ever more cautious even in his criticism of obvious errors, but he is a dogged sort and I know that he is not going to author or sign on to anything which he believes is not testable.
Do yourself a favor and read the link and then read the book - Singer does not lie.
What if Fred is wrong, and SCOTUS declares CO2 a pollutant???
You seriously are linking this to discredit what Singer has published?
Go back and read this link, where is the science here?
Boy, you're ridin' the wrong horse.
The general location, size and time of occurence have changed only by small degrees each year since first measured in 1948; the numbers of skin cancers have not been calamitous at any time and the hole is not "closing up."
Overall, since 1985 when all the noise started, the one thing that has changed is that people no longer listen - they think it has been fixed!
I am beginning to think you have a dog in this fight.
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.