Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Swedish Scientist Accuses UN's IPCC of Falsifying Data and Destroying Evidence
http://newsbusters.org/ ^ | June 24, 2007 | Noel Sheppard

Posted on 06/24/2007 6:40:54 PM PDT by lowbridge

Swedish Scientist Accuses UN's IPCC of Falsifying Data and Destroying Evidence

Posted by Noel Sheppard on June 24, 2007 - 19:45.

If you listen to the global warming alarmists working for the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or folks like soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore, sea levels across the globe are rising at a rate that will eventually doom us all.

According to Swedish paleogeophysicist Nils-Axel Mörner, who’s been studying and writing about sea levels for four decades, the scientists working for the IPCC have falsified data and destroyed evidence to incorrectly prove their point.

Mörner was recently interviewed by Gregory Murphy of Executive Intelligence Review, and began by making it clear that the sea level claims made by the IPCC are a lot of nonsense (emphasis added throughout, h/t Eduardo Ferreyra):

[W]e can see that the sea level was indeed rising, from, let us say, 1850 to 1930-40. And that rise had a rate in the order of 1 millimeter per year. Not more. 1.1 is the exact figure. And we can check that, because Holland is a subsiding area; it has been subsiding for many millions of years; and Sweden, after the last Ice Age, was uplifted. So if you balance those, there is only one solution, and it will be this figure.

That ended in 1940, and there had been no rise until 1970; and then we can come into the debate here on what is going on, and we have to go to satellite altimetry, and I will return to that. But before doing that: There’s another way of checking it, because if the radius of the Earth increases, because sea level is rising, then immediately the Earth’s rate of rotation would slow down. That is a physical law, right? You have it in figure-skating: when they rotate very fast, the arms are close to the body; and then when they increase the radius, by putting out their arms, they stop by themselves. So you can look at the rotation and the same comes up: Yes, it might be 1.1 mm per year, but absolutely not more.

1.1 mm per year? That means that if this were to continue for 1000 years, sea levels would be 1.1 meters higher. Doesn’t sound very catastrophic, does it?

Mörner then addressed what in his view was a ridiculous error by the IPCC:

Another way of looking at what is going on is the tide gauge. Tide gauging is very complicated, because it gives different answers for wherever you are in the world. But we have to rely on geology when we interpret it. So, for example, those people in the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], choose Hong Kong, which has six tide gauges, and they choose the record of one, which gives 2.3 mm per year rise of sea level. Every geologist knows that that is a subsiding area. It’s the compaction of sediment; it is the only record which you shouldn’t use. And if that figure is correct, then Holland would not be subsiding, it would be uplifting. And that is just ridiculous. Not even ignorance could be responsible for a thing like that.

But that was just the beginning of Mörner’s problems with the IPCC:

Now, back to satellite altimetry, which shows the water, not just the coasts, but in the whole of the ocean. And you measure it by satellite. From 1992 to 2002, [the graph of the sea level] was a straight line, variability along a straight line, but absolutely no trend whatsoever. We could see those spikes: a very rapid rise, but then in half a year, they fall back again. But absolutely no trend, and to have a sea-level rise, you need a trend.

Then, in 2003, the same data set, which in their [IPCC's] publications, in their website, was a straight line—suddenly it changed, and showed a very strong line of uplift, 2.3 mm per year, the same as from the tide gauge. And that didn't look so nice. It looked as though they had recorded something; but they hadn't recorded anything. It was the original one which they had suddenly twisted up, because they entered a “correction factor,” which they took from the tide gauge. So it was not a measured thing, but a figure introduced from outside. I accused them of this at the Academy of Sciences in Moscow —I said you have introduced factors from outside; it's not a measurement. It looks like it is measured from the satellite, but you don't say what really happened. And they answered, that we had to do it, because otherwise we would not have gotten any trend!

That is terrible! As a matter of fact, it is a falsification of the data set. Why? Because they know the answer. And there you come to the point: They “know” the answer; the rest of us, we are searching for the answer. Because we are field geologists; they are computer scientists. So all this talk that sea level is rising, this stems from the computer modeling, not from observations. The observations don't find it!

Pretty extraordinary, wouldn’t you agree? A "correction factor." Honestly, the way these folks manipulate data is nothing less than astounding.

Yet, Mörner wasn’t finished, as he later detailed an incident when IPCC scientists actually destroyed evidence which refuted their rising sea level claims:

This tree, which I showed in the documentary, is interesting. This is a prison island, and when people left the island, from the '50s, it was a marker for them, when they saw this tree alone out there, they said, “Ah, freedom!” They were allowed back. And there have been writings and talks about this. I knew that this tree was in that terrible position already in the 1950s. So the slightest rise, and it would have been gone. I used it in my writings and for television. You know what happened? There came an Australian sea-level team, which was for the IPCC and against me. Then the students pulled down the tree by hand! They destroyed the evidence. What kind of people are those? And we came to launch this film, “Doomsday Called Off,” right after, and the tree was still green. And I heard from the locals that they had seen the people who had pulled it down. So I put it up again, by hand, and made my TV program. I haven't told anybody else, but this was the story.

      

They call themselves scientists, and they're destroying evidence! A scientist should always be open for reinterpretation, but you can never destroy evidence. And they were being watched, thinking they were clever.

Think Katie, Charlie, or Brian will be interviewing Mörner any time soon?

No, I don’t either.



TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: convenientfiction; convenientlie; globalwarming; globalwarmingping; newlysenkoism; un; unitednations
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

1 posted on 06/24/2007 6:40:57 PM PDT by lowbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

2 posted on 06/24/2007 6:44:26 PM PDT by sourcery (Double Feature: "The Amnestyville Horror" and "Kill the Bill, Vol. 2")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

This is the first I’ve seen of this. Thanks for the post; good read.


3 posted on 06/24/2007 6:49:56 PM PDT by TheZMan (That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

Slowly but surely, the truth is coming out. Not even the biased MSM can suppress it forever. My guess is that in 5 years this whole thing will be considered a big joke - and Al Gore will be hitting the bottle big time.


4 posted on 06/24/2007 6:53:02 PM PDT by beethovenfan (If Islam is the solution, the "problem" must be freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

Thanks for the post. It is now in our archives to be sent to others.


5 posted on 06/24/2007 7:02:20 PM PDT by Marine_Uncle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

BUMP

WOW!


6 posted on 06/24/2007 7:11:03 PM PDT by kitkat (I refuse to let the DUers chase me off FR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cogitator

comments?


7 posted on 06/24/2007 7:15:56 PM PDT by rickylc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge
Thanks!. I saved the pdf of the actual interview for forwarding to my liberal friends that consider themselves such scientific experts. Should get me some nasty emails

/grin

8 posted on 06/24/2007 7:18:01 PM PDT by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s........you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

>if the radius of the Earth increases, because sea level is rising, then immediately the Earth’s rate of rotation would slow down.

Not to defend the IPCC, but I think that is incorrect, assuming the water came from any place above sea level. The effect would be to increas rotation rate (as in the skater example).


9 posted on 06/24/2007 7:20:37 PM PDT by chipengineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chipengineer

>assuming the water came from any place above sea level.

On further thought, that is not true. It depends on the latitude where the ice melted and the altitude.

Good math problem...


10 posted on 06/24/2007 7:25:29 PM PDT by chipengineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

Interesting, but it’d be better without the Lyndon LaRouche connection..


11 posted on 06/24/2007 7:25:43 PM PDT by D-fendr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chipengineer
but I think that is incorrect, assuming the water came from any place above sea level. The effect would be to increas rotation rate

You mean that darn Lisa Simpson is right?

12 posted on 06/24/2007 7:25:49 PM PDT by lowbridge ("The mainstream media IS the Democratic Party." - Rush Limbaugh)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

SITREP


13 posted on 06/24/2007 7:34:07 PM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: beethovenfan
"My guess is that in 5 years this whole thing will be considered a big joke - and Al Gore will be hitting the bottle big time."

Don't count on it. This isn't about global warming, it's about global governance. Global warming is just a facade these global Marxists are using to facilitate the erosion of national sovereignty and individual freedoms, private land ownership and use. One world, one way of thinking, all others be damned. Not suprising, David Suzuki's daughter said just that the other day.

14 posted on 06/24/2007 7:40:03 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ChildOfThe60s

AGW true believers won’t even read your emails. It goes against their religion, socialism. Liberals hate capitalism & free enterprise above all else. Global warming, global cooling, climate change, acid rain, ozone layer, they are all excuses enact laws to further socialism.


15 posted on 06/24/2007 7:47:07 PM PDT by preacher (A government which robs from Peter to pay Paul will always have the support of Paul.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: beethovenfan
Slowly but surely, the truth is coming out. Not even the biased MSM can suppress it forever. My guess is that in 5 years this whole thing will be considered a big joke - and Al Gore will be hitting the bottle big time.

Ah, but you just aren't on the right blast faxing list. You see, the cognoscenti have already dropped the term global warming because they KNOW that sufficient data is now available as to make the idea absurd on its face.

Therefore, the new buzz phrase is climate change. That way, no matter what the data shows, they can claim that the evil capitalists are destroying the global environment.

16 posted on 06/24/2007 7:53:38 PM PDT by Natty Bumppo@frontier.net (The facts of life are conservative -- Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

bookmarked


17 posted on 06/24/2007 8:01:00 PM PDT by chaosagent (Remember, no matter how you slice it, forbidden fruit still tastes the sweetest!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blam; SunkenCiv
Junk Science ping.

L

18 posted on 06/24/2007 8:03:32 PM PDT by Lurker (Comparing moderate islam to extremist islam is like comparing small pox to ebola.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: chipengineer
No.

The water would primarily have to come from the poles (melted ice). The elevation of the ice/water at the poles would have little affect since the angular momentum is low there.

19 posted on 06/24/2007 8:05:48 PM PDT by DB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Lurker; AdmSmith; Berosus; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; ...
Thanks Lurker. Here's something for the IPCC:
Universal Sign Language
...and this was generated with "fossil fuel", so there!
20 posted on 06/24/2007 8:07:20 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (Time heals all wounds, particularly when they're not yours. Profile updated June 23, 2007.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-39 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson