Climate is "unpredictable"
Posted on 02/24/2002 11:14:42 PM PST by My Identity
A group of scientists in the US and the UK says the accepted wisdom on climate change remains unproved.
They say rising greenhouse gas emissions may not be the main factor in global warming.
They argue that temperature rise projections this century are "unknown and unknowable".
They claim it is "a media myth" to suppose that only a few scientists share their scepticism.
The scientists, a group convened by the American George C. Marshall Institute, first published their report in the US.
'Political conclusions'
It has been republished in the UK by the European Science and Environment Forum (Esef), entitled Climate Science and Policy: Making the Connection.
Climate is "unpredictable"
|
The US group included a former CIA director and defence secretary, James Schlesinger, and Richard Lindzen, professor of meteorology at Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The report says the IPCC's conclusions "have become politicised and fail to convey the underlying uncertainties that are important in policy considerations."
Its detailed criticisms of the IPCC include:
The authors conclude: "The IPCC simulation of surface temperature appears to be little more than a fortuitous bit of curve-fitting rather than any genuine demonstration of human influence on global climate."
Accused of lying
Philip Stott, emeritus professor of biogeography in the University of London, is a prominent British climate sceptic.
 "No need" for green energy
|
Professor Stott told BBC News Online: "The problem with a chaotic coupled non-linear system as complex as climate is that you can no more predict successfully the outcome of doing something as of not doing something. Kyoto will not halt climate change. Full stop."
Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, used to work at the State Department and helped to shape US climate policy.
Heavyweight backing
She told BBC News Online: "This report dismisses the findings of the IPCC as alarmist, yet they are widely accepted as representative of the current state of scientific knowledge.
"A panel of the US's own National Academy of Sciences (which included Richard Lindzen) expressed general agreement with the IPCC's finding that warming is occurring, and that it is at least partly caused by humans.
"Uncertainty cuts both ways. Some of the IPCC's scenarios have been criticized as unduly pessimistic, others as unduly optimistic.
"What is important is that they reflect a balance of reasonable futures, and that the scientific findings should be based on the peer-reviewed literature. The IPCC has been able to accomplish exactly that.
"And Kyoto was only intended to be a first step in a long journey."
Global Warming Hoax :
| To find all articles tagged or indexed using Global Warming Hoax , click below: | ||||
| click here >>> | Global Warming Hoax | <<< click here | ||
| (To view all FR Bump Lists, click here) | ||||
nice catch.
To global taxation and tryanny, having nothing to do with carbon dioxide or climate change. Pew is a creature of Sunoco, an oil company. So is the World Wildlife Fund, that's Shell. Then there's the big daddy of environmental funding, uh, that would be Rockefeller.
These creeps aren't happy making money on just oil, they want to make money on burning it by trading in the carbon credits. It'a a crooked scam.
• projections of climate change based on models and assumptions which "are not only unknown, but unknowable within ranges relevant for policy-making"Guys, A lie by any other name is still a lie. In A commentary at News Max, Vox Day writes, "Science, for all of its tremendous accomplishments, is still merely the epitome of Man's knowledge......" in his "Satan, Science and the Supernatural". And, it would seem that science has become, not "the epitome of man's knowledge", but what man {scientists} can sell to the gullible. in the name of "science". Peace and love, George..
• models which "do not adequately characterise clouds, water vapour, aerosols, ocean currents and solar effects"
• a failure "to reproduce the difference in trends between the lower troposphere and surface temperatures over the past 20 years".
ALL, My BIG bad. Vox Day's article is at World Net Daily. SORRY 'bout that! Peace and love, George.
To learn more about GoreBull Warming click the Taz!
Ernest thanks for the ping!
There's a link on that page to an article about "The Isle of the Dead" and the tide benchmark there. I had bookmarked that site long ago, under the general heading "wacko science as politics". It's good material for refuting the "oceans are rising quickly" nonsense.
Weakly-written article for the BBC, as you will note the above-listed defender of the media's 'consensus' is introduced without proper contextual explanation as to her role and attempted defense of the Global Warming Myth (GWM, for short). GWM, as used by me stands not for the simple proposition that the Earth is getting warmer, although the evidence is now clear from the poles that it isn't, but rather, that there is A) a Problem, and B) that its due to Man's emissions activities as advanced by the Kyoto treaty disciples) Both manifestly dubious propositions...
A critcal reader would note however, Claussen's bias-factors, e.g., entrenched self-interest in defending her previous work product, and her current career position. The Global Climate Change Foundation would go out of business, and her fat paycheck with it, if, in fact, there is no substantial global climate change .
That reminds me.........I need to get mine pumped.
The US group included a former CIA director and defence secretary, James Schlesinger…
You know, if you’re going to produce a report on the politicization of science, perhaps you could leave the non-scientific, politic appointees off your commission.
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.