Challenge to Scientific Consensus on Global Warming

earthtimes.org ^ | Wed, 12 Sep 2007 | Hudson Institute

[listenhillary]

WASHINGTON, Sept. 12 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- A new analysis of peer-reviewed literature reveals that more than 500 scientists have published evidence refuting at least one element of current man-made global warming scares. More than 300 of the scientists found evidence that 1) a natural moderate 1,500-year climate cycle has produced more than a dozen global warmings similar to ours since the last Ice Age and/or that 2) our Modern Warming is linked strongly to variations in the sun's irradiance. "This data and the list of scientists make a mockery of recent claims that a scientific consensus blames humans as the primary cause of global temperature increases since 1850," said Hudson Institute Senior Fellow Dennis Avery.

Other researchers found evidence that 3) sea levels are failing to rise importantly; 4) that our storms and droughts are becoming fewer and milder with this warming as they did during previous global warmings; 5) that human deaths will be reduced with warming because cold kills twice as many people as heat; and 6) that corals, trees, birds, mammals, and butterflies are adapting well to the routine reality of changing climate.

Despite being published in such journals such as Science, Nature and Geophysical Review Letters, these scientists have gotten little media attention. "Not all of these researchers would describe themselves as global warming skeptics," said Avery, "but the evidence in their studies is there for all to see."

The names were compiled by Avery and climate physicist S. Fred Singer, the co-authors of the new book Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years, mainly from the peer-reviewed studies cited in their book. The researchers' specialties include tree rings, sea levels, stalagmites, lichens, pollen, plankton, insects, public health, Chinese history and astrophysics.

"We have had a Greenhouse Theory with no evidence to support it-except a moderate warming turned into a scare by computer models whose results have never been verified with real-world events," said co-author Singer. "On the other hand, we have compelling evidence of a real-world climate cycle averaging 1470 years (plus or minus 500) running through the last million years of history. The climate cycle has above all been moderate, and the trees, bears, birds, and humans have quietly adapted."

"Two thousand years of published human histories say that the warm periods were good for people," says Avery. "It was the harsh, unstable Dark Ages and Little Ice Age that brought bigger storms, untimely frost, widespread famine and plagues of disease." "There may have been a consensus of guesses among climate model-builders," says Singer. "However, the models only reflect the warming, not its cause." He noted that about 70 percent of the earth's post-1850 warming came before 1940, and thus was probably not caused by human-emitted greenhouse gases. The net post-1940 warming totals only a tiny 0.2 degrees C.

The historic evidence of the natural cycle includes the 5000-year record of Nile floods, 1st-century Roman wine production in Britain, and thousands of museum paintings that portrayed sunnier skies during the Medieval Warming and more cloudiness during the Little Ice Age. The physical evidence comes from oxygen isotopes, beryllium ions, tiny sea and pollen fossils, and ancient tree rings. The evidence recovered from ice cores, sea and lake sediments, cave stalagmites and glaciers has been analyzed by electron microscopes, satellites, and computers. Temperatures during the Medieval Warming Period on California's Whitewing Mountain must have been 3.2 degrees warmer than today, says Constance Millar of the U.S. Forest Service, based on her study of seven species of relict trees that grew above today's tree line.

Singer emphasized, "Humans have known since the invention of the telescope that the earth's climate variations were linked to the sunspot cycle, but we had not understood how. Recent experiments have demonstrated that more or fewer cosmic rays hitting the earth create more or fewer of the low, cooling clouds that deflect solar heat back into space-amplifying small variations in the intensity of the sun.

Avery and Singer noted that there are hundreds of additional peer-reviewed studies that have found cycle evidence, and that they will publish additional researchers' names and studies. They also noted that their book was funded by Wallace O. Sellers, a Hudson board member, without any corporate contributions.

Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years is available from Amazon.com:

http://www.amazon.com/Unstoppable-Global-Warming-Every-Years/dp/0742551172 /ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/102-6773465-0779318?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1189603742&sr=1-1

For more information, please contact Dennis Avery, Hudson Institute Senior Fellow and co-author of Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years, at 540-337-6354: Email: cgfi@hughes.net

Hudson Institute

[samm1148]

You mean the earf is like a big machine that goes through natural hot and cold cylcles? Who woulda thunk it? Guess the commonsensniks must be doing the science for a change.

[Always Right]

I can’t see how any honest scientist can stand behind the fear-mongering of the global warming alarmists.

[Names Ash Housewares]

Over at newsbusters...........

Record High Antarctic Ice Levels Ignored by Media

By Noel Sheppard | September 12, 2007 - 13:41 ET

NewsBusters reported Sunday that the media’s fascination with record low ice in the Arctic ignored history while relying on satellite data that’s only been around since 1979.

At the same time, the press have totally boycotted news from the Southern Hemisphere where ice and snow levels are currently at their highest since data have been collected.

Pretty convenient wouldn’t you agree?

Meteorologist Joe D’Aleo wrote at IceCap Tuesday (emphasis added throughout, h/t Marc Morano):

While the news focus has been on the lowest ice extent since satellite monitoring began in 1979 for the Arctic, the Southern Hemisphere (Antarctica) has quietly set a new record for most ice extent since 1979.

Yet, that’s not all the media are hiding from you about this region:

While the Antarctic Peninsula area has warmed in recent years and ice near it diminished during the Southern Hemisphere summer, the interior of Antarctica has been colder and ice elsewhere has been more extensive and longer lasting, which explains the increase in total extent. This dichotomy was shown in this World Climate Report blog posted recently with a similar tale told in this paper by Ohio State Researcher David Bromwich, who agreed “It’s hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now”.

Indeed, according the NASA GISS data, the South Pole winter (June/July/August) has cooled about 1 degree F since 1957 and the coldest year was 2004.

[]

As such, this is yet another instance of media deciding what is and isn’t newsworthy.

How disgraceful.

­Noel Sheppard is an economist, business owner, and Associate Editor of NewsBusters.

[sourcery]

Basic References:

• Challenge to Scientific Consensus on Global Warming: Analysis Finds Hundreds of Scientists Have Published Evidence Countering Man-Made Global Warming Fears
• The Year the Global Warming Hoax Died
• Hostages to a hoax
• Water Experts Find Earth’s Warming, Rainfall Linked to Sun
• Global Warming and Solar Radiation
• Milankovitch Cycles and Glaciation
• The Myth of Dangerous Human-Caused Climate Change (PDF)
• Up against the warming zealots
• When Physics Trumps Hysteria in Global Warming
• Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide
• Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists versus Scientific Forecasts
• Geophysical, archeological and historical evidence support a solar-output model for climate change (PDF)
• Gamma rays and climate (PDF)
• Temperature vs. Cosmic Ray Flux
• Linkages between solar activity, climate predictability and water resource development (PDF)
• Proof on Ice: Southern Greenland Was Once Green; Earth Warmer
• Global Warming and Nature's Thermostat
• The Past and Future of Climate (PDF)
• Global warming is not a crisis
• The Great Global Warming Swindle
• IceCap

Lawrence Solomon's "The Deniers" (a series of articles on the view of scientists who have been labelled "Global Warming Deniers"):

• Science, not politics
• Statistics needed
• The original denier: into the cold
• End the chill
• They call this a consensus?
• The limits of predictability
• Unsettled science
• Models trump measurements
• The ice-core man
• The hurricane expert who stood up to UN junk science
• Polar scientists on thin ice
• The sun moves climate change
• Bright sun, warm Earth. Coincidence?
• Look to Mars for the truth on global warming
• Read the sunspots
• Forget warming - beware the new ice age
• Little Ice Age is still with us
• Fighting climate 'fluff'

Other References:

• Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny
• The Global Warming Myth
• Global Warming: A Chilling Perspective
• Strong Evidence Points to Earth's Proximity to Sun as Ice Age Trigger
• THE NEXT ICE AGE - NOW!
• Father of Climatology Throws Up at the Thought of Al Gore's 'An Inconvenient Truth'
• IPCC Scientists Challenge Al Gore’s View of Global Warming Consensus
• Swedish Scientist Accuses UN's IPCC of Falsifying Data and Destroying Evidence
• CO2 Science
• Global Warming and Climate Forcing by Recent Albedo Changes on Mars
• Climate Momentum Shifting: Prominent Scientists Reverse Belief in Man-made Global Warming - Now Skeptics
• The Real 'Inconvenient Truth'
• New findings indicate today's greenhouse gas levels not unusual
• Climate Change: Incorrect information on pre-industrial CO2
• Global Warming as a Religion
• I Was On the Global Warming Gravy Train (By David Evans)
• Global Warming: it's not caused by greenhouse gases says academic
• Still Waiting for Greenhouse
• GREENIE WATCH
• Why Global Warming Would be Good for You
• Global Warming Primer (PDF)
• Global Warming: An Official Pseudoscience
• Sun's Output Increasing in Possible Trend Fueling Global Warming
• Fiddler On The Roof
• Debating Global Warming
• Climate Resistance

Antarctic Temperature Trend 1982-2004:

This map (left) shows key areas of Antarctica, including the vast East Antarctic ice sheet. The image on the right shows which areas of the continent's ice are thickening (coloured yellow and red) and thinning (coloured blue). © (Left)British Antarctic Survey, (Right)Science

[Freedom_Is_Not_Free]

I’m sure this will be the lead on CNN tomorrow. /sarcasm

[maine-iac7]

I can’t see how any honest scientist can stand behind the fear-mongering of the global warming alarmists.

It's called "don't put me on the no-grants list"

[maine-iac7]

Pretty convenient wouldn’t you agree?

Needs to be a new book " "Convenient Lies"

[Wilhelm Tell]

The same leftists who believe that nature is or should be static — that there is some Eden where nothing changes, also beleive that human society should be static and that a socialist dictatorship is needed to ban innovation and force people to live on a primitive subsistence level.

[TBP]

Did you know that many of the thermometers we use to measure temperatures are near heat sources? Did you know that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, they stopped measuring the temperature in Siberia?

Global warming is globaloney.

[Wil H]

Science isn’t achieved by “consensus” - it requires PROOF, and a proof that can be repeated.

[listenhillary]

This does manage to stump some leftists. What is the perfect earth temperature and who should control the thermostat?

[listenhillary]

GW is a multi billion dollar grant racket. Yet the left foams at the mouth if an energy company dares to contribute any rational dialog to the debate.

[JustDoItAlways]

The Antarctic polar ice is quite remarkable in the southern Atlantic ocean especially this year.

The ice extends out from Antarctica over 1,800 miles or more than half-way to Africa for example.

This satellite image from today is centered about 2,500 miles from Antarctica towards Africa and the bottom third of the pic is frozen ocean.

http://rapidfire.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/realtime/single.php?2007256/crefl1_143.A2007256080500-2007256081000.4km.jpg

[Jim Noble]

The term "scientific consensus" is meaningless.

Most scientists work on little tiny pieces of a gigantic puzzle. Their expertise out of their own narrow field of view is worth no more than yours or mine.

And in most instances when an attempt has been made to use "consensus" instead of iterative hypothesis testing to ascertain falsifiability , the consensus has been wrong.

[listenhillary]

The term “scientific consensus” is meaningless.

But it sounds good when you are trying to fool people.

[CodeMasterPhilzar]

They say "scientific consensus" when they lack "scientific proof." And no, computer models and predictions are not proof, never can be "proof" of anything.

What real data they have to support the claim of GW is suspect. For example, temperature readings are historically inaccurate and influenced by many other factors other than global climate. Influences include land use and populations around the temperature station; level of industrialization; changes in methods; changes in equipment etc. The "adjustments" or scaling factors applied to temperature data to account for these other influences are in fact many times greater than the GW trends these "scientists" are looking for. So minor changes in these factors can make the same temperature data show trends towards global melt-down, or trends towards the next ice-age. In other words, the trends they are looking for are so small compared to the noise and other variations in the temperature data that it renders the temperature data functionally, scientifically, useless for these kinds of studies. In another age, scientists trying to base theories on such shaking underpinnings would've been laughed out of publication. Now, they get time on TV...sigh

I think - strictly personal opinion here - that the study referenced here, and others to come, will show that the GW alarmists have grossly mis-interpreted what little hard data they do have. There's a saying, if all you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail. Well, if all they've had is a GW funding hammer, all their studies will find what they're looking for.

All we can hope for is that real science will leak-through and catch up - shout "The Emperor (GW) has no clothes!" Before the politicians and "leaders" {smirk} do something stupid.

[LexBaird]

He noted that about 70 percent of the earth's post-1850 warming came before 1940, and thus was probably not caused by human-emitted greenhouse gases.

IOW, 70% of the current warming trend happened in the first 57% of the time period. (Note that I am skeptical of arbitrary cut off dates, such as 1850 and 1940. They tend to be picked to exclude inconvenient data.)

[quadrant]

One has to understand: the theory of Global Warming is driven by man’s desire to be the center of the universe. If Global Warming is a natural event, then man is but a hapless player in the drama. But if man may control or influence such a stupendous event as a change in the climate, he takes on the attribute of a god, a being who can at will alter the weather of an entire planet.

Anyone with a shred of common sense realizes that human life sits on a thin sheet of inhabitable earth. Below this sheet is a fireball in the center of this planet. Above the sheet is a red hot glowing fireball, the sun. Those two infernos have far more effect on the climate of man’s world than any actions he may undertake.

Of course, man may despoiled (and has despoiled) vast stretches of his sheet of inhabitable space, but such actions can arrested by prudent actions. To change the natural course of climatic events is far beyond the capacity of man.

[xcamel]

FReepmail me to get on or off
Click on POGW graphic for full GW rundown
Dr. John Ray's
GREENIE WATCH

---