Is global warming a myth?
17,000 US scientists signed a petition circulated at The Oregon Institute of Science
and Medicine refuting the following:
that CO2 causes harmful
temperatures
that increasing CO2 are
harmful
that human activity is responsible for global warming.
REF: Seitz, Frederick; Research Review of Global Warming Evidence;
Petition Project; La Jolla, California.
http://www.oism.org/pproject.
More than 100 scientists signed what is known as the Leipzig Declaration, where they
condemned the IPCC's
Kyoto treaty as
simplistic
ineffective
economically devastating (we discuss the economic issues in another policy tab)
REF: Science and Environmental Policy Protection Project, The; The Leipzig Declaration
on Global Climate Change; Fairfax, Virginia; 1997.
http://www.sepp.org/LDrevis.html.
See IPCC policy tab for
more of the history of the treaties.
Vice-president, Al Gore, likens science that calls global warming a myth
to "junk science" when being interviewed by Peter Jennings.
REF: Christianson, G.E; Greenhouse - the
200-year story of global warming; page 259. "Junk science" is a term Mr.
Gore also applies to the tobacco cover-up of the health hazards of smoking.
It is one thing to talk about the mathematical calculations of the
heat retained by increasing CO2,
but many scientists say that nothing beats actually measuring the
temperature increases. So it comes down to climate and warming
"models." Do these computer models agree with actual instrumentation
measurements?
Scientific method constantly tests "theory" against actual outcome. Global warming
skeptics use the
null hypothesis. For a fuller explanation of
hypothesis testing, click
here.
Physicist, Nigel Calder believes that we have the cart before the horse. He maintains
that carbon dioxide increases are a result of natural climate change and the sun's
activity, not from man's activity. In a paper called Global Warming - a chilling
perspective, which may be found at
http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.htm, he
quotes Dr. John R. Christy of the University of Alabama and feels that warming and cooling
run in cycles, where there are adjustments. In other words, there is warming, then cooling,
etc. While he feels that the sun primarily affects climate change (not humans), he also
lists other factors such as cloud cover, volcanic ash, and polar ice. Although he concedes
that greenhouse gases contribute to warming in the paper, he downplays this contribution.
In the 1990s, most scientists who believed global warming was not to be alarming, pointed
to the lack of computerized climate modeling to predict accurately. In 1990, several of
these scientists appear in a documentary in the UK, expressing this point. The documentary
was called The Greenhouse Conspiracy, which tells you the bent of the
discussions. A transcript was still available on the internet 8/15/2000 at
http://web.ukonline.co.uk/Members/ad.johnson/text/grnhscon.htm
. The transcript contains excerpts various interviews in the 1990s.
Positions of scientists on climate change in the 1990s
A recap of the positions of the scientists appearing on documentaries from the transcript
is as follow:
Dr. Robert Balling, Arizona State University
Felt that from his studies of temperature readings in this century that temperatures
had fallen in the United States.
Dr. John Houghton, Meteorological Office
Physics tells us that we should expect warming with increasing greenhouse gas
concentrations in the air.
Dr. Sherwood Idso, US Water Conservation Laboratories
I see not warming trend over the last 100 to 150 years.
The physics and the climate modeling have predicted more warming than measured.
As carbon dioxide increases, plants will respond in feedback by growing more
vigorously, thereby balancing the additions by removing more carbon dioxide from the air.
Dr. Peter Jonas, UMIST
Clouds complicate climate modeling. As temperatures rise, evaporation increases, and
cloud increase. The clouds reflect solar radiation, thus producing cooling as a
feedback. The greenhouse gas, water vapor produces warming.
Dr. Richard Lindzen, MIT
He believed that "global warming" was like a self-fulfilling prophecy. He felt that
after enough people kept talking about it, people started believing it, even though it
was not true.
He felt like there was evidence against global warming as a reality
He states that temperature measurements are distorted because they are taken in
urban, not natural settings.
He looks at overall cooling from 1930 to 1970 and concludes that there is no
trend or pattern of warming.
Dr. Pat Michaels, University of Virginia
The magnitude of the warming escalation is exaggerated
The sign (plus, minus) on temperature change may be - not +. He sites 1988 declines.
The climate record does not prove that carbon dioxide causes temperature change.
He believes that there is a natural balance. With carbon dioxide increase, evaporation
increases, clouds increase, but the clouds block solar radiation and counteract or
"balance" out the warming effect with cooling effect.
Dr. Reginald Newell, MIT
There is no evidence supporting catastrophic change in climate
Climate models do not take into effect feedbacks. They are too simplistic. We can't
take seriously their predictions.
Why so many scientists fail to accept the premise that increasing carbon dioxide will
produce warming is that as warming occurs, evaporation increases, and the increased cloud
cover reflects radiative solar energy.
Dr. Julian Paren, British Antarctic Survey
When temperatures rise (like fizz coming out of a heated soft drink), carbon dioxide
increases. The assumption that increasing carbon dioxide causes warming may be
backwards.
Dr. Roy Spencer, NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, University of Alabama
Satellite data showed cooling warming in the early 1980s and warming in the late 1980s.
Therefore, there is no trend one way or another.
Dr. Tom Wigley, University of East Anglia
Temperature has increased almost 1°F in the last 100 years, but very few scientists
accept this fact.
Scientific approach: 1990 vs. 2000
In the 1990s, the issues revolved around climatic modeling. In the 2000s, according the
US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP)
http://www.usgcrp.gov, scientists will concentrate on unanswered
questions impacting society as consequences of global warming:
could warming be affecting the duration and timing of El Nino?
how has human land use policy affected the carbon cycle?
how do we explain the rapid changes in climate recently?
REF: Changing vision for the research agenda for the 21st century - creating a new
partnership between science and public policy; U.S. Global Change Research Information
Office; Palisades, New York; August 2000.
http://www.gcrio.org/ocp00/OCP2000p8.html.
Australian federal government cover up
Later we'll see how nations are coming together to list commitments to certain levels
of CO2 baselined to 1990 emissions in the
IPCC tab. By pressing on the hyperlink one can see
that Australia has pledged +8% (an increase in emissions).
On April 15, 1999, Greenpeace accused the Australian federal government of not being
truthful with the Australian people in telling them that they would be +70% by 2014.
