World's Fastest Browser

The Science of Global Warming

sci-ence - [sI-&n(t)s] - noun

1. the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding
2a. a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study <the science of theology>
2b. something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge <have it down to a science>
3a. knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method
3b. such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : NATURAL SCIENCE
4. a system or method reconciling practical ends with scientific laws <cooking is both a science and an art>

Science or Consensus?

I don't see the word consensus in any of the above definitions. Below is a partial list of scientific evidence and opinion that expresses some degree of skepticism towards the Global Warming Hyperbole.

IPCC WGII Fourth Assessment Report

Massive ice shelf collapses, but ice near record high - ...The full Wilkins 6,000 square mile ice shelf is just 0.39% of the current ice sheet (just 0.1% of the extent last September). Only a small portion of it between 1/10th-1/20th of Wilkins has separated so far, like an icicle falling off a snow and ice covered house. And this winter is coming on quickly. In fact the ice is returning so fast, it is running an amazing 60% ahead (4.0 vs 2.5 million square km extent) of last year when it set a new record. The ice extent is already approaching the second highest level for extent since the measurements began by satellite in 1979 and just a few days into the Southern Hemisphere winter and 6 months ahead of the peak. Wilkins like all the others that temporarily broke up will refreeze soon. We are very likely going to exceed last year’s record. Yet the world is left with the false impression Antarctica' ice sheet is also starting to disappear. PDF (icecap.us) (03/27/08)

Warming crowd fears real debate - By Dick Little - ...record levels of ice in the Antarctic sea have been reported, along with record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, and Chili. "All four major global temperature tracking outlets (Hadley, NASA's, GISS, UAH, and RSS) have released updated figures showing, 'over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously,'" Hadley scientists noted. (03/25/08)

New Evidence Discredits Global Warming Dogma - Some call data on carbon dioxide a bombshell, but so far global warming advocates have been bombproof.
On national radio in Australia, Jennifer Marohasy, a biologist and senior fellow of Melbourne-based think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, dropped a bombshell on those who support global warming: While carbon dioxide levels have risen for the last 10 years, the Earth has cooled, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change knows it. Marohasy said,
The head of the ipcc (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) has actually acknowledged it [that the Earth has cooled since 1998]. He talks about the apparent plateau in temperatures so far this century. So he recognizes that in this century, over the past eight years, temperatures have plateaued. … This is not what you"d expect, as I said, because if carbon dioxide is driving temperature then you"d expect that, given carbon dioxide levels have been continuing to increase, temperatures should be going up. (03/25/08)

Scientific Consensus on Climate Change? - By Klaus-Martin Schulte - FEAR of anthropogenic "global warming" can adversely affect patients" well-being. Accordingly, the state of the scientific consensus about climate change was studied by a review of the 539 papers on "global climate change" found on the Web of Science database from January 2004 to mid-February 2007, updating research by Oreskes (2004), who had reported that between 1993 and 2003 none of 928 scientific papers on "global climate change" had rejected the consensus that more than half of the warming of the past 50 years was likely to have been anthropogenic. In the present review, 31 papers (6% of the sample) explicitly or implicitly reject the consensus. Though Oreskes said that 75% of the papers in her sample endorsed the consensus, fewer than half now endorse it. Only 6% do so explicitly. Only one paper refers to "catastrophic" climate change, but without offering evidence. There appears to be little evidence in the learned journals to justify the climate-change alarm that now harms patients. (03/24/08)

NewsBusters: Inconvenient Truth: Global Warming Ended Ten Years Ago - By James Murray - Despite the more hysterical predictions we've heard of late, the evidence continues to mount that if the earth was warming, it stopped quite some time ago.
Of course, don't expect this fact to be widely reported, if it indeed even makes it into any U.S. newspapers or television broadcasts.
Read the entire interview from The Australian, but a couple of admissions are quite striking... (03/22/08)

Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling - Michael Asher - Twelve-month long drop in world temperatures wipes out a century of warming.
Over the past year, anecdotal evidence for a cooling planet has exploded. China has its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad sees its first snow in all recorded history. North America has the most snowcover in 50 years, with places like Wisconsin the highest since record-keeping began. Record levels of Antarctic sea ice, record cold in Minnesota, Texas, Florida, Mexico, Australia, Iran, Greece, South Africa, Greenland, Argentina, Chile -- the list goes on and on. (02/27/08)

World Temperatures according to the Hadley Center for Climate Prediction. Note the steep drop over the last year.Hadley Center Graph
photo: www.dailytech.com

New Study Shows Arctic Cooling Over last 1500 years - New Arctic Study published in Climate Dynamics, and the work was conducted by Håkan Grudd of Stockholm University's Department of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology - Published online: 30 January 2008.
Excerpt: "The late-twentieth century is not exceptionally warm in the new Torneträsk record: On decadal-to-century timescales, periods around AD 750, 1000, 1400, and 1750 were all equally warm, or warmer. The warmest summers in this new reconstruction occur in a 200-year period centred on AD 1000. A 'Medieval Warm Period' is supported by other paleoclimate evidence from northern Fennoscandia, although the new tree-ring evidence from Tornetraäsk suggests that this period was much warmer than previously recognised." < > "The new Torneträsk summer temperature reconstruction shows a trend of -0.3°C over the last 1,500 years." Paper available here: & Full Paper (pdf) available here: (02/08/08)

Watts Up With That?: NOAA/NCDC: Jan08 Colder than 20th century average - Let us give NOAA credit for making this release:
"The average temperature in January 2008 was 30.5 F. This was -0.3 F cooler than the 1901-2000 (20th century) average, the 49th coolest January in 114 years. The temperature trend for the period of record (1895 to present) is 0.1 degrees Fahrenheit per decade."
For those that have been harping about my "2nd coldest in 15 years" headline, it appears that NCDC has that one beat with "the 49th coolest January in 114 years".
Of course, we've had several prior years where the monthly average dipped below the 1901-2000 average, so this is nothing of real value, but I thought it was interesting to point out NCDC's choice of assigning a rank to the month. (02/07/08)

Wind Patterns Could Mask Effects Of Global Warming In Ocean - ScienceDaily - Scientists at the University of Liverpool have found that natural variability in the earth's atmosphere could be masking the overall effect of global warming in the North Atlantic Ocean.
Scientists have previously found that surface temperatures around the globe have risen over the last 30 years in accord with global warming. New data, however, shows that heat stored in the North Atlantic Ocean has a more complex pattern than initially expected, suggesting that natural changes in the atmosphere also play a role. (02/07/08)

Ah hah!
Warming May Reduce Hurricane Landfalls, Study Says - By Seth Borenstein, AP Science Writer - Associated Press January 23, 2008 - Contrary to many previous reports, global warming could reduce the number of hurricanes that strike the United States, according to a new study.
The work is the latest in a contentious scientific debate over how human-induced global warming might affect the intensity and frequency of hurricanes.
In the study, researchers from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the University of Miami in Florida link warming oceans to increased vertical wind shear in the Atlantic Ocean near the United States.
Wind shear---a change in upper-level wind speed or direction---makes it hard for hurricanes to form, strengthen, and stay active.
With every degree Celsius that the oceans warm, the wind shear increases by up to 10 miles (16 kilometers) an hour, said lead study author Chunzai Wang, a physical oceanographer at NOAA.
So that means "global warming may decrease the likelihood of hurricanes making landfall in the United States," according to the study authors. Imagine that. (01/23/08)

A scientist's take on global warming - By JEFFREY P. SCHAFFER - John Stephens' piece on global warming ("From AmCan to Greenland, take action on warming," Oct. 24) outdoes Al Gore's "Inconvenient (Half) Truth" in hysteria.
Gore actually got quite a bit right, but his 20-foot sea level rise due to rapid melting of the Greenland ice sheet is far from reality, and Stephens' 23-foot rise in two or three years is worse. At an April 2007 American Association of Geographers conference I attended, its session on global warming produced estimates of only four to six inches by 2100, and that included Greenland ice melting three times faster than in the previous decade. Still, most would put the rise at one foot; the extremists, at three feet.
My background in science started in 1961 at M.I.T., and then later, at Berkeley. In addition to a full range of biological and geoscience courses (double major), I had a rigorous course on meteorology (physics of weather). Starting in 1972, when scientists were convinced global cooling was about to destroy civilization, I began to make weather observations in the Sierra Nevada (along with biological and geoscience observations). Beginning in 1986 I became seriously interested in global warming, and learned that the sea level would rise about 20 feet very rapidly due to melting ice shelves and sea ice. However, as any science-literate elementary school kid can tell you, when floating ice melts, it contracts; there is no increase in volume, so no sea-level rise. After about 10 years with this impending doom scenario, scientists dropped it. I suppose some elementary school kid told them about the "floating ice cubes" class experiment.
Back in the late 1980s, I made two global warming predictions. The first is that summers in the Bay Area would become cooler, windier and foggier, and this has already happened. The second is that by 2100, the sea level may drop a foot. How so? Easy. Greenland and other high-latitude lands are likely to warm about 10 degrees Celsius, and hence the air will be able to hold twice as much water vapor as it did before warming. This leads to twice as many clouds and twice as much precipitation. Thanks to satellite measurement, we can already observe parts of Greenland and Antarctica that have snow accumulating faster than ice is melting. As this trend accelerates, total snow accumulation should outpace total ice melting, and then the sea level will drop.
What I did not foresee back then is that although many of us felt that the Arctic Ocean would become ice-free in summer by about 2050, we did not think of the consequences with regard to sea level. Last century, as in past centuries, the polar region had a continental climate, which sent extremely cold, dry air south. But as sea ice continues to shrink, the polar region will shift increasingly to a maritime climate, which will greatly increase the number of storms in Eurasia, North America and Greenland. Snow could accumulate in Greenland (as well as in the mountains of Alaska and Canada) at a much higher rate than I had predicted.
Mr. Stephens recommends one book. I'll recommend three. (Like me, none of these books' authors doubts global warming.) The first is "Useless Arithmetic: Why Environmental Scientists Can't Predict the Future," by Orrin Pilkey. An old field scientist like me, Pilkey believes in detailed field work, not modeling, since models will always produce the results you want. The second is "Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming," by Bjorn Lomborg. If you are concerned about polar bears, he says, stop shooting them. (The hunting program is a way to control the bear's overpopulation problem.) The third is "State of Fear," a novel by Michael Crichton. Part fiction and part science, he shows how environmental organizations such as the Sierra Club create imaginary crises. Having been on the board of one organization and observing others, I can vouch for this. A perceived crisis really boosts your membership! For example, here is a global-warming quote by Stanford University climatologist Stephen Schneider: "We need to get some broad-based support to capture the public's imagination. That of course, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have."
(Schaffer is an instructor at Napa Valley College.) (11/14/07)

Sun and global warming: A cosmic connection? - By Richard Black, Environment correspondent, BBC News website
- In February 2007, depending on what newspaper you read, you might have seen an article detailing a "controversial new theory" of global warming.
The idea was that variations in cosmic rays penetrating the Earth's atmosphere would change the amount of cloud cover, in turn changing our planet's reflectivity, and so the temperature at its surface.
This, it was said, could be the reason why temperatures have been seen to be varying so much over the Earth's history, and why they are rising now.
The theory was detailed in a book, The Chilling Stars, written by Danish scientist Henrik Svensmark and British science writer Nigel Calder, which appeared on the shelves a week after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had published its landmark report concluding it was more than 90% likely that humankind's emissions of greenhouse gases were warming the planet. Continued. (11/14/07)

CO2 Science: Hurricanes (Global and/or General) -- Summary - Although some climate models suggest the intensity and frequency of tropical cyclones may be significantly reduced in response to global warming (Bengtsson et al., 1996), thus implying a "decrease in the global total number of tropical cyclones on doubling CO2," as noted by Sugi et al. (2002), most of them suggest otherwise, as noted by Free et al. (2004), who state that "increases in hurricane intensity are expected to result from increases in sea surface temperature and decreases in tropopause-level temperature accompanying greenhouse warming (Emanuel, 1987; Henderson-Sellers et al., 1998; Knutson et al., 1998)." Hence, it is important to see what the world of nature has to say about the issue. (11/13/07)

Trenberth's Twenty-Three Scientific Errors In One Short Article - By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley - Kevin Trenberth (Rocky Mountain News, October 24), commenting on Mike Rosen's article expressing legitimate doubts about the award of the Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore, makes 23 scientific mistakes, each of which falls in the direction of magnifying the unjustifiable alarm stoked by panicky politicians and extravagantly-funded environmentalists in cahoots with a shrinking clique of scientists in denial of observational climate data. PDF (10/24/07)

The sun - not CO2 - affects climate - A recent publication by S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of Environmental Science at the University of Virginia, research scientist and president of the Science and Environmental Policy Project, is extremely detailed.
He states:
1) There is no such "scientific consensus" that burning fossil fuels is the chief cause of global warming.
2) "The widely touted consensus of 2,500 scientists in the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change is an illusion" because only 52 panelists had scientific qualifications.
3) Estimates of the open rebellion within the American Meteorological Society rank and file scientists regarding manmade global warming are well over 50 percent.
Singer also states that observed and predicted patterns of global warming by computer models are incompatible. He states that: cloudiness reduces the warming effect of increased CO2; development of ethanol and hydrogen is counterproductive because of the great amounts of energy needed. Tens of thousands of interested persons benefit from the global warming scare to the tune of multi-billions of dollars.
Professor Singers states that "slightly warmer climates with more CO2 is beneficial" and will increase the GNP and raise the standard of living. CO2 is plant food and is essential to the growth of crops and trees and ultimately to the wellbeing of animals and humans. Canada, Russia and northern Europe including Mongolia come out to be clear winners due to slight global temperature increases with more CO2 because of large projected increases in agricultural production.
Research has shown it is the impact of the sun on past climate changes over thousands of years. It is the sun that affects the climate, stupid, not manmade CO2. Why do people believe the Associated Press and politicians who probably share a single brain cell amongst them? ~ Archie McPhee (09/20/07)

The truth on global warming - Phil Drietz, Delhi, West Central Tribune - The author of the Aug. 30 Public Forum letter, "Public service pledge is key," cited a three-point pledge that was presented to the presidential candidates for endorsement. I strongly agree with the second point: "Protect scientists who report inconvenient truths and remove from office those who manipulate public agency science for political ends." There are truthful scientists who have exposed global warming as junk science, but they seem to get nowhere when dealing with the politically correct media establishment. There is no evidence that man-made carbon dioxide is causing global warming. Now compare the United States Department of Energy figures on man-created carbon dioxide (11,880 parts per billion) and natural carbon dioxide (68,520 ppb). These figures are additions to the pre-industrial baseline of 288,000 ppb. Total concentration then is 368,400 ppb which means man-made carbon dioxide comprises about 3.2 percent of the total. But wait! We forgot water vapor, which comprises 95 percent of all greenhouse gases and that puts all carbon dioxide at 3.6 percent of the total. (Other miscellaneous gases make up the remainder.) Those put man-generated carbon dioxide at less than .12 percent of all greenhouse gases. Spend all the money you want, and you won't change anything. (09/15/07)

Challenge to Scientific Consensus on Global Warming: Analysis Finds Hundreds of Scientists Have Published Evidence Countering Man-Made Global Warming Fears - Author : Hudson Institute - 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. (09/12/07)

Record High Antarctic Ice Levels Ignored by Media - By Noel Sheppard - 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. (09/12/07)

Peer review? What peer review? - Failures of scrutiny in the UN's Fourth Assessment Report - Written by John McLean - INTRODUCTION: The IPCC would have us believe that its reports are diligently reviewed by many hundreds of scientists and that these reviewers endorse the contents of the report. An analysis of the reviewers' comments for the scientific assessment report by Working Group I show a very different and very worrying story. The comments for Working Group I are the only set of reviewers' comments to be made available to the public, and only then thanks to use of US Freedom of Information laws rather than a willingness on the part of the IPCC to allow people to examine the material. Surely all people should be able to examine the involvement and thinking of their governments and the reviewers from their own countries because it is the people who will most certainly bear the economic and political costs of any resultant actions. Perhaps the IPCC is simply worried that exposing the reviewers' comments and the responses to those comments to close scrutiny will reveal the delusions of thoroughness and widespread consensus. Continued. Or you may download the entire report in PDF format. (09/06/07)

An 800-Year Temperature History of Southern Siberia - What was learned
In describing their findings, Kalugin et al. say that "a global cold period, the Little Ice Age with Maunder minimum, is clearly designated, as well as global warming during the 19-20th centuries," all of which also implies the existence of the Medieval Warm Period that preceded the Little Ice Age. In fact, from their plot of the pertinent data, it can be seen that the mean peak temperature of the latter part of the Medieval Warm Period was about 0.5°C higher than the mean peak temperature of the Current Warm Period, which occurred at the end of the record.
What it means
During the peak warmth of the Medieval Warm Period, when there was fully 100 ppm less CO2 in the air than there is currently, it may well have been half a degree C warmer in southern Siberia than it is now. Adding this finding to the many other such findings from around the world that we routinely collect and display on a continuing basis in our Medieval Warm Period Project casts great doubt upon the climate-alarmist crowd's unflinching contention that our actually not-so-unprecedented current warmth is driven by our much more historic atmospheric CO2 concentration. The true facts of the case simply don't support this conclusion. (09/05/07)

The Past and Future Status of Kilimanjaro's Ice Fields - ...So what has actually been observed atop Kilimanjaro over the years? .. and what has caused the shrinking of its fabled ice cap? Observations suggest that between 1880 and 2003, there was a shrinkage of almost 90% in the ice-covered area of Kilimanjaro; but Mote and Kaser note that "much of that decline [66%] had already taken place by 1953." This "pacing of change," in their words, "is at odds with the pace of temperature changes globally." In fact, at the closest point of reanalysis temperature data availability in the vicinity of Kilimanjaro's peak, they say "there seems to be no trend since the late 1950s." Consequently, and based on a long list of other observations, the two researchers ascribe the long-term wasting away of ice on Kilimanjaro "to a combination of factors other than warming air - chiefly a drying of the surrounding air that reduced accumulation and increased ablation." (09/05/07)

Scientists warm up to Watts' work - By RYAN OLSON, Staff Writer - For a weatherman who has spent most of his career in front of a TV camera or radio microphone, Anthony Watts was a little concerned about speaking in front of dozens of scientists. "Although I'm great at giving a weather forecast, I'm a little rusty giving a scientific presentation," Watts said Friday. During a scientific workshop this week in Boulder, Colo., Watts presented his research on hundreds of weather stations used to help monitor the nation's climate. The preliminary results show Watts and his volunteers have surveyed about a quarter of the 1,221 stations making up the U.S. Historical Climatology Network. Of those, more than half appear to fall short of federal guidelines for optimum placement. (08/30/07)

Survey: Less Than Half of all Published Scientists Endorse Global Warming Theory - By Michael Asher - IPCC co-chairs for Netherlands and Sierra Leone debate changes to the Report Summary.Comprehensive survey of published climate research reveals changing viewpoints. In 2004, history professor Naomi Oreskes performed a survey of research papers on climate change. Examining peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science database from 1993 to 2003, she found a majority supported the "consensus view," defined as humans were having at least some effect on global climate change. Oreskes' work has been repeatedly cited, but as some of its data is now nearly 15 years old, its conclusions are becoming somewhat dated. Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte recently updated this research. Using the same database and search terms as Oreskes, he examined all papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising. Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus." (08/29/07)

New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears - By Marc Morano - Washington DC -- An abundance of new peer-reviewed studies, analysis, and data error discoveries in the last several months has prompted scientists to declare that fear of catastrophic man-made global warming "bites the dust" and the scientific underpinnings for alarm may be "falling apart." The latest study to cast doubt on climate fears finds that even a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide would not have the previously predicted dire impacts on global temperatures. This new study is not unique, as a host of recent peer-reviewed studies have cast a chill on global warming fears. "Anthropogenic (man-made) global warming bites the dust," declared astronomer Dr. Ian Wilson after reviewing the new study which has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Geophysical Research. Another scientist said the peer-reviewed study overturned "in one fell swoop" the climate fears promoted by the UN and former Vice President Al Gore. The study entitled "Heat Capacity, Time Constant, and Sensitivity of Earth's Climate System," was authored by Brookhaven National Lab scientist Stephen Schwartz. (08/29/07)

Falsification Of The Atmospheric Co2 Green house Effects Within The Frame Of Physics - Gerlich, a proffessor of mathematical physics at the Technical University Carolo-Wilhelmina in Germany and his colleague proffessor, Ralf D. Tscheuschner, examined the so-called "greenhouse effect" and found it to be pure fiction as an instrument of alledged global warming. In 114 pages laden with complicated equations, citations from the scientific literature, examinations of various experiments and conclusions based on physics and the laws of physics, the researchers expose the fraudulent grounds upon which the global warming theory rests. "It is shown that this effect neither has experimental nor theoretical foundations and must be considered as fictitious," the report states, adding that "the claim that Co2 emissions give rise to anthropogenic { manmade} climate changes has no physical basis." View the actual report. (08/25/07)

Latest Research Erodes CO2's Role in Global Warming - By Michael Asher - Researchers on three different continents agree; CO2 is not the devil we once thought -- Last week I reported on a new study by the Belgium Royal Meteorological Institute that stated the effects of CO2 on world temperatures had been "grossly overstated". The RMI's conclusion is supported by a pair of recent papers, both of which severely downgrade the warming effect of carbon dioxide. The first is by atmospheric scientist Stephen Schwartz, of Brookhaven National Labs. Entitled, "Heat Capacity, Time Constant, and Sensitivity of Earth's Climate System", the paper is based on more accurate estimates of feedback processes in the Earth's atmosphere. It concludes the IPCC estimate of 2 - 4.5C degrees warming (from the anticipated 1900-2100 doubling of CO2 levels) is much too high, and the actual figure should be closer to 1.1 degree. The conclusion is very significant as we've already experienced some 0.7 degrees of that warming. That means over the next century, only an additional 0.4 degrees warming is expected. And after that, the warming effect will nearly vanish. (08/24/07)

New Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies Chill Global Warming Fears - By Marc Morano - Washington DC - An abundance of new peer-reviewed studies, analysis, and data error discoveries in the last several months has prompted scientists to declare that fear of catastrophic man-made global warming "bites the dust" and the scientific underpinnings for alarm may be "falling apart." The latest study to cast doubt on climate fears finds that even a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide would not have the previously predicted dire impacts on global temperatures. This new study is not unique, as a host of recent peer-reviewed studies have cast a chill on global warming fears. (08/20/07)

Science says the Gulf Stream's not slowing - Tom Spears, CanWest News Service; Ottawa Citizen - A major study is throwing cold water on the idea that global warming is already slowing down the Gulf Stream, which supplies much of western Europe's warmth. (08/17/07)

Junkscience in Global Warming Theory? - Let's Count the Ways - By Michael R. Fox Ph.D. - In spite of what some call a national debate on global warming, there really hasn't been one. There has been name calling, personal attacks, calls for defunding the skeptics, calls for Nuremburg trials, muzzling the critics. This isn't debate, this is not a discussion, this isn't consensus, and it isn't science. It is bullying and thuggery, and reminiscent of remedial behavior classes. Significantly, as the numbers of scientists grow increasingly appalled with the unscientific bullying and are becoming skeptics themselves, massive re-examination of the entire global warming effort and the purported evidence is taking place. For scientists the findings thus far are worse than imagined. Much of the evidence put forth by the warmers for their theory is either exaggerated, wrong, or being fudged. (08/16/07)

Global Warming and James Hansen's Hacks - By Michael Fumento - If you follow the global warming debate, you "know" that nine of the ten warmest years recorded in the U.S. lower 48 since 1880 have occurred since 1995, with the very hottest being 1998. But whaddya know! Those figures are wrong. Data from NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) now show the hottest year since 1880 was 1934. Nineteen-ninety-eight dropped to second, while the third hottest year was way back in 1921. Indeed, four of the 10 hottest years were in the 1930s, while only three were in the past decade. (08/16/07)

Did Media Or NASA Withhold Climate History Data Changes From The Public? - By Noel Sheppard - A change in climate history data at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies recently occurred which dramatically alters the debate over global warming. Yet, this transpired with no official announcement from GISS head James Hansen, and went unreported until Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit discovered it Wednesday. For some background, one of the key tenets of the global warming myth being advanced by Hansen and soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore is that nine of the ten warmest years in history have occurred since 1995. McIntyre has been crunching the numbers used to determine such things as published by GISS, and has identified that the data have recently changed such that four of the top ten warmest years in American history occurred in the 1930s, with the warmest now in 1934 instead of the much-publicized 1998. As McIntyre wrote Wednesday:
"There has been some turmoil yesterday on the leaderboard of the U.S. (Temperature) Open and there is a new leader. [...] Four of the top 10 are now from the 1930s: 1934, 1931, 1938 and 1939, while only 3 of the top 10 are from the last 10 years (1998, 2006, 1999). Several years (2000, 2002, 2003, 2004) fell well down the leaderboard, behind even 1900.
Most importantly, according to the GISS, 1998 is no longer the warmest year in American history. That honor once again belongs to 1934.
(08/09/07)

Blogger Finds Y2K Bug in NASA Climate Data - Years of bad data corrected; 1998 no longer the warmest year on record - My earlier column this week detailed the work of a volunteer team to assess problems with US temperature data used for climate modeling. One of these people is Steve McIntyre, who operates the site climateaudit.org. While inspecting historical temperature graphs, he noticed a strange discontinuity, or "jump" in many locations, all occurring around the time of January, 2000. (08/09/07)

New Scandal Erupts over NOAA Climate Data - Weather station data hidden from public; scientists allege government cover-up - The theory of global warming began to explain one simple set of factsm-- surface temperature monitoring stations have shown a roughly one degree rise over the past century. But just where does these temperature readings come from? Most are reported by volunteer stations, usually no more than a thermometer inside a small wooden hut or below a roof overhang. In the US, 1,221 such stations exist, all administered by the National Climatic Data Center, a branch of the NOAA. (08/07/07)

Global warming is nature's doing - By Frank Britton -
In the 1970s, some climatologists warned the world about global cooling. Now it's global warming. Then it was particulates in the air blocking the sun; now it's carbon dioxide forming a greenhouse effect. Carbon dioxide (CO2) is now presented as the most dangerous greenhouse gas in the Earth's atmosphere, the primary cause of global warming. Some even call it a pollutant. With my education in physics and chemistry, I'd like to shed some light on this issue. CO2 makes a very small contribution to the Earth's temperature. It is only 0.039 percent of the atmosphere. Nitrogen, oxygen, water vapor and argon comprise more than 99 percent of the atmosphere. Furthermore, carbon dioxide is not a particularly effective greenhouse gas. Out of the wide spectrum of radiation received from the sun, CO2 only absorbs energy from three very narrow levels. Many people believe there is a difference between man-made CO2 and natural CO2. There is no difference. Carbon dioxide is comprised of one carbon atom and two oxygen atoms. CO2 is a natural, vital part of biological life. Ants, termites and decaying foliage account for the formation of most of the CO2. There are more than a quadrillion ants and termites. These also make a major contribution to other greenhouse gases, methane and ammonia. CO2 is removed from the atmosphere by plant life. (The vast amount of CO2 is removed by algae in the oceans, not by land plants.) Chemists call it equilibrium. When large amounts of CO2 are created by volcanoes or forest fires, the metabolism of plant life increases and in a short time removes the CO2 from the air. If there is less CO2 in the atmosphere, the metabolism of plant life slows down. Thus, the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere stay very close to a yearly average of 0.039 percent. Because of the dynamic nature of our atmosphere, CO2 levels are always rising or falling. Low levels follow high levels. Ice core sampling demonstrates that this equilibrium has been in place for millennia. The gas most responsible for the Earth's temperature is water vapor, by far the most important greenhouse gas. Not only does water vapor account for 3 percent to 4 percent of the atmosphere, it also accepts energy from the sun in virtually all energy levels. Water vapor is thousands of times more responsible for temperature than CO2. Ask any climatologist; he will tell you that this is in fact the case. The oceans control the level of water vapor in the atmosphere. Water vapor is also responsible for cooling the planet, forming the cloud layer and reflecting the sun's energy. Again, an equilibrium. True, the atmosphere may warm for a while, but this causes more water to leave the oceans and fill the atmosphere. Over time, this causes a denser cloud cover, cooling the Earth. A common practice among climatologists is to treat the Earth as a closed system. But certain gasses do in fact leave our atmosphere. All gases of a molecular weight 18 or above tend to be held by the Earth's gravitational field. Water is molecular weight (mw)18 and CO2 is mw44. They stay on the Earth. Methane and ammonia, the predominant gases of animal life on the planet, leave the gravitational field and go off into space and out of our atmosphere because their molecular weights are 16 and 17, respectively. Presenting these as greenhouse gases does not give a complete picture of their presence in our atmosphere. So the oceans control both the warming and the cooling of the earth. Man's contribution of these gases is almost not measurable compared to what nature produces. Humans, with all our cars and factories, account for less than 1 percent of the CO2 present at any one time. Furthermore, man does not control the water cycle. We simply are not that important. We can work to keep the Earth clean, but we cannot control the atmosphere. Many climatologists are aware of this but do not give this critical information to the public. Global-warming activists believe mankind is altering the Earth's temperature. Although many know that man's contribution is negligible, it is not to their political advantage to reveal this fact. Climate scientists receive funding from the government to research causes of and solutions to man-made global warming. If the current warming were demonstrated to be the natural cycle, this funding would be cut. The 1970s climatologists had incomplete data, believing we were plunging into an ice age. Predictions made now are equally apocalyptic. They again are based on climate models with incomplete data or, in some cases, deliberately withheld data. We are now making costly political decisions based on the "fact" that human activity is causing the temperature to rise. Many politicians believe that human-caused global warming is real and that since this view is held by a "consensus of scientists," further study is unnecessary. Climatologists need to come forward without fear and give the public the truth. Carbon dioxide's contribution to global warming is minimal; water vapor is the great buffer for the Earth's temperature; the oceans control this process. Human beings have no measurable control over global temperatures. (07/28/07)

Global Warming and Solar Radiation - By D. Bruce Merrifield - Without the impact of solar radiation, the temperature on the earth would be about the same as the temperature of space, which is about -454 F. The amount of radiation reaching the earth is about 1,368 watts per square meter. This is a vast amount of energy, which would require the simultaneous output of 1.7 billion of our largest power plants to match. About 70 percent of this solar energy is absorbed and 30 percent is reflected. However, the amount of solar energy reaching the earth is not constant, but varies in several independent cycles of different degrees of magnitude, which may or may not reinforce each other. (07/11/07)

MUST READ!
The paper Global Warming: Forecasts by Scientists versus Scientific Forecasts - By Green and Armstrong, which was presented at the International Symposium on Forecasting in June 2007, has been extensively revised for publication in a Special Issue of Energy and Environment. The authors seek further peer review before they submit it to the journal review process. Download the pdf here. (07/10/07)

Global Warming - Can scientists be blindly trusted? - By Brian Bloom - Introduction - Arising from earlier articles which I published on the subject of the possible causes of Global Warming, I have been in email communication with three "heavyweights" in the fields of Physics, Geophysics, Astronomy and Chemistry. These gentlemen have taken the trouble to point out where, as a layman, my knowledge of science was deficient. They have also educated me in the processes involved in the phenomenon - as they see these processes. Of the three, one is committed to the linkage between Greenhouse Gases and Global Warming. The other two are not. I thank them for straightening out my thinking, and for enabling me to write the article below which sets out the state of play. (07/10/07)

The confessions of a former global warmer - By Russ Steele - Dr. David Evans worked for the Australian Greenhouse Office from 1999 to 2005. He recently declared, "I used to believe that carbon emissions probably caused global warming." Now he explains how he came to distrust the science and the political motives of those supporting claims of CO2 generated global warming. This short paper by Dr Evans is an awesome indictment of the whole anthropogenic CO2 charade. Please read it and tell me if you still believe Al Gore is right. Download D-Evans2007.pdf (07/09/07)

Canadian climatologist says sun causing global warming - By Dennis T. Avery - Another scientist has added his voice to the Global Warming debate. Canadian climatologist Tim Patterson says the sun drives the earth's climate changes - and Earth's current global warming is a direct result of a long, moderate 1,500-year cycle in the sun's irradiance. (07/09/07)

When Physics Trumps Hysteria in Global Warming - By Michael R. Fox Ph.D. - Studiously hidden from public view are some extraordinary findings in physics which are providing new understanding of our planetary history, as well as providing a much more plausible scientific understanding of Global Warming. Regrettably, the current hysteria about global warming is based much more on fear, political agendas, and computer models that don't agree with each other or the climate, rather than hard-nosed evidence and science. (07/02/07)

Jungbauer: Humans have little impact on global warming - By Bob Williams - Recent trends in global temperatures cannot be attributed to human activities, according to Sen. Mike Jungbauer (R-Dist.48), who gave a presentation on global warming to 35 residents, including Rep. Bud Nornes (R-10a) in Fergus Falls on Wednesday. "I was impressed with his knowledge, background and passion for detail," Nornes said. A global climate change survey from the National Registry of Environmental Professionals shows that 34 percent of environmental scientists and practitioners disagree that global warming is a serious problem facing the planet. "The temperature of Earth is always changing" Jungbauer said. "It's pretty weird thinking, to think we can control temperature." (06/30/07)

Global warming controversy generates heat - Scientists challenge prof - By Samara Kalk Derby - Since it was reported this month by The Capital Times, Professor Emeritus Reid Bryson's anti-establishment position against man-made global warming has provoked floods of interest, great indignation and -- particularly among his fellow University of Wisconsin scientists -- no shortage of exasperation. (06/30/07)

Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny - BY JAMES M. TAYLOR In his new book, The Assault on Reason, Al Gore pleads, "We must stop tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the purpose of intentionally clouding the public's ability to discern the truth." Gore repeatedly asks that science and reason displace cynical political posturing as the central focus of public discourse. (06/30/07)

IPCC Scientists Challenge Al Gore's View of Global Warming Consensus - By Noel Sheppard - The chinks in the armor that is a supposed scientific consensus regarding man's role in global warming continued to grow this week when it was identified that many of the folks involved in the most recent report from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change were not in agreement with the study's findings. Didn't hear about this? Well, how could you? Nobody reported it! (06/29/07)

PCC Scientist: IPCC 'Not in Business of Climate Prediction' - By Pam Meister - Not coming to a media outlet near you: Kevin Trenberth, an advisor to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), made some startling admissions regarding the IPCC's use of computer General Circulation Modules (GCMs) (h/t Moonbattery). Professor Bob Carter, a geologist writing for Australia's News.com, has the scoop: In a remarkable contribution to Nature magazine's Climate Feedback blog, Trenberth concedes GCMs cannot predict future climate and claims the IPCC is not in the business of climate prediction. This might be news to some people. Among other things, Trenberth asserts " ... there are no (climate) predictions by IPCC at all. And there never have been". Instead, there are only "what if" projections of future climate that correspond to certain emissions scenarios. (06/28/07)

Debunking global warming alarmism - Recent research by Henrik Svensmark and his group at the Danish National Space Center points to the real cause of the recent warming trend. In a series of experiments on the formation of clouds, these scientists have shown that fluctuations in the sun's output cause the observed changes in the Earth's temperature. (06/28/07)

Proof that Global Warming is a Galactic phenomenon? - By Ian Brockwell - For some years now I have believed that Global Warming (or climate change as some people prefer to call it) is the result of some influence from our own galaxy or beyond. Unfortunately, the majority of the people on this planet have preferred (and perhaps have been encouraged) to follow the belief that mankind is to blame. (06/24/07)

Peer Review - It is perhaps rather curmudgeonly to add a few "yes buts" when someone has paid you a bit of a compliment, but more needs to be said on the subject of peer review and editors, as raised by Charles Warren Hunt in Greenie Watch. There is certainly no question that the system is corruptible and has been corrupted, as ancient memories related in these pages have testified. Those were the days when science was free from the pressures of the new religious elite, and the situation is far, far worse now. (06/20/07)

Deeper Into the Dustbin of Silly Science: The Continuing Collapse of the Global Warming Hypothesis - By Michael R. Fox Ph.D. - The recent flood of scientific papers and books being published undermine the global warming hypothesis. See for example (http://tinyurl.com/34jx2m). The more carefully the pillars of the hypothesis are examined the more implausible it becomes. The man-made global warming hypothesis is failing scientific scrutiny. (06/18/07)

Global warming's witch-hunt - By Michael D. Mason - To concisely summarize global warming, water vapor accounts for 95 percent of the greenhouse effect. Of the remaining 5 percent, carbon dioxide accounts for only 3.6 percent of the total. Further, of all the carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere, only 3.2 percent is from human activities, meaning that only about 0.12 percent of the greenhouse effect results from man's activities. But there's even more. Nature converts at least half of man's contribution back to carbon and oxygen, leaving us responsible for less that 0.06 percent of the total greenhouse effect. These are generally agreed on numbers even by the International Panel on Climate Control (IPCC) if you dig deep enough. That ought to be the end of the argument period. It's that simple. Instead, global warming has become an international witch-hunt. Q.E D. photo synthesis (plant life) is impossible without carbon dioxide. At 0.04 percent (four molecules out of 10,000 air molecules) of the atmosphere, more is better, not worse as claimed by the global warming groupies. (06-16-07)

The Woes of Kilimanjaro: Don't Blame Global Warming - Two scientists writing in a new magazine article say that global warming has nothing to do with the decline of ice atop Mount Kilimanjaro, and using the mountain in northern Tanzania as a "poster child" for climate change is simply inaccurate. - Newswise -- The "snows" of Africa's Mount Kilimanjaro inspired the title of an iconic American short story, but now its dwindling icecap is being cited as proof for human-induced global warming. However, two researchers writing in the July-August edition of American Scientist magazine say global warming has nothing to do with the decline of Kilimanjaro's ice, and using the mountain in northern Tanzania as a "poster child" for climate change is simply inaccurate. (06/11/07)

Climate alarmists lose another piece of evidence - By Dennis T. Avery - Don't look now, but another big chunk of the "evidence" for man-made global warming suddenly disappeared. Poof! Researchers just reported that the world's most recent case of "abrupt climate change"-which occurred a mere 12,000 years ago-was probably due to a comet strike, not to "climate sensitivity." (06/11/07)

Our uncertain friend Professor Wunsch is back in the news...
No Easy Answers for Global Warming, MIT Professor Says - Carl Wunsch, professor of physical oceanography at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told CNBC's "Squawk Box" that the debate about global warming can point out risks, but assertions of impending catastrophe can't be proven with mathematical certainty. (06/11/07)

NASA boss Michael Griffin on Global Warming - By William Atkins - National Pubic Radio (NPR) recently interviewed NASA Administrator Michael Griffin. He said, "I am not sure that it is fair to say that it is a problem we must wrestle with." In response, a barrage of criticisms is being levied against Griffin. Is it fair? Please read the NPR-Griffin story from SpaceDaily.com called "NASA Chief Questions Urgency of Glogal Warming". Other such stories are also available for your consideration. I'd like to comment on Griffin's comments and the opinions generated from this story. (06/02/07)

GRAY: No link between increased hurricanes & global warming - BRIDGEOWN, Barbados, June 1, 2007 - Today is the official start of the Atlantic hurricane season and Professor Bill Gray says that global warming has no relevance on the increase in the number of hurricanes and storms he has predicted for this year. (06/01/07)

Anthropogenic Global Warming Scientifically Debunked by 15 year-old High School Student!

A Challenge To Al Gore - Older folks sometimes snip about the younger generation and the litany of complaints is long and varied. But if all students are like Kristen Byrnes of Portland, Maine, the nation has nothing to worry about. Ms. Byrnes is a 15-year-old student at Portland High School and, when she is not running track and field, takes all honors classes, including Earth Science. Former Vice President Al Gore's film "A Convenient Truth" is being shown in many high school classes today. Apparently, Ms. Byrnes became upset at the sloppy science in the movie. So as a project for her Earth Science class, she created her own Web site and, well, very politely and scientifically, ripped the global-warming-caused-by-man theory to shreds. Her Web site looks at global warming "without financial and political bias." That should cause concern to global warming advocates right there. Plus, "It uses the most updated information provided by scientists and researchers and interjects common sense, an important component missing from the global warming debate." Using common sense against hysteria. Wonder if that will work? (05/29/07)

Warming-Induced Increases in Ocean Productivity - In setting the stage for their important new study, McGregor et al. (2007) say "coastal upwelling occurs along the eastern margins of major ocean basins and develops when predominantly along-shore winds force offshore Ekman transport of surface waters, which leads to the ascending (or upwelling) of cooler, nutrient-rich water." In addition, they note that these regions of coastal upwelling account for about 20% of the global fish catch while constituting less than 1% of the area covered by the world's oceans. (05/09/07)

Global Warming and Malaria: The Northern Thailand Story - Noting that "there has been a steady reduction through time of total malaria incidence in northern Thailand, with an average decline of 6.45% per year," Childs et al. say this result "reflects changing agronomic practices and patterns of immigration, as well as the success of interventions such as vector control programmes, improved availability of treatment and changing drug policies," which means that we can't attribute the welcome trend to global warming. Aw, shucks. (05/08/07)

Is Global Warming Causing the Earth to Burn? - ncreased wildfires are often said by climate alarmists to be caused by global warming, because somewhere on earth it is always possible to find such a trend; and in some of these cases, it is possible that rising temperatures may indeed have been involved. But what is learned when the entire world is surveyed? Although one can identify parts of the world that experienced increases in land area burned over the last two decades of the 20th century, for the globe as a whole there was absolutely no relationship between global warming and total area burned over this period. (05/08/07)

CO2: The Greatest Scientific Scandal of Our Time - By Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc. - Zbigniew Jaworowski is a multidisciplinary scientist, now a senior advisor at the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw. In the winter of 1957-58, he measured the concentration of CO2 in the atmospheric air at Spitsbergen. From 1972 to 1991, he investigated the history of the pollution of the global atmosphere, measuring the dust preserved in 17 glaciers: in the Tatra Mountains in Poland, in the Arctic, Antarctic, Alaska, Norway, the Alps, the Himalayas, the Ruwenzori Mountains in Uganda, and the Peruvian Andes. He has published many papers on climate, most of them concerning the CO2 measurements in ice cores. Two of his papers on climate appear on the website of 21st Century Science & Technology magazine, www.21stcenturysciencetech.com. (05/03/07)

Statistical Proof of sun caused global warming in South Australia Part I - Abstract: Statistical analysis of the rate of temperature change between times of proximity has shown that the rate of increase of temperature as a measure of time has significantly increased up until 3pm and then decreased until 9am in South Australia over the last 50 years. If Co2 levels were the major cause of global warming, then no rate of change in temperature between near times should exist, eg they should all increase at the same rate. Our analysis proves that this is not the case, and that temperature is increasing at a greater rate when the sun is at it's peak in the middle of the day. Hence our conclusion is that the major force behind global warming is not Co2 levels, but the sun. (05/03/07)

Canadian controversy: How do polar bears fare? - By Fred Langan - Despite global warming, an ongoing study says polar bear populations are rising in the country's eastern Arctic region. Polar bears are the poster animals of global warming. The image of a polar bear floating on an ice floe is one of the most dramatic visual statements in the fight against rising temperatures in the Arctic. But global warming is not killing the polar bears of Canada's eastern Arctic, according to one ongoing study. Scheduled for release next year, it says the number of polar bears in the Davis Strait area of Canada's eastern Arctic - one of 19 polar bear populations worldwide - has grown to 2,100, up from 850 in the mid-1980s. (05/03/07)

Arctic Ice and Polar Bears - A new study looking at observed and projected rates of Arctic sea ice loss concludes that the Arctic oceans are losing ice faster than expected considering anthropogenic greenhouse effect changes alone (or, alternatively, our expectations are in error). But before anyone goes off and starts pointing to the imminent demise to polar bears... oops, too late... (05/02/07)

Video interview with Dr. Dennis Avery, Director of the Center for Global Food Issues of the Hudson Institute, who believes global warming is a natural phenomenon. He is the co-author of "Unstoppable Global Warming". (04/28/07)

Video interview with Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Richard S. Lindzen, who believes global warming is a natural phenomenon. He is a meteorologist and a leading expert on climate. (04/28/07)

A Little Testy at RealClimate - By Pielke Jr., R. - Based on my most recent interaction, the folks at RealClimate seem less interested than ever on an open exchange of views on scientific topics. But I guess that is what might be expected when one points out that the they are spreading misinformation. (04/19/07)

Chris Landsea on New Hurricane Science - Chris Landsea has submitted a guest post today on a recent paper on hurricanes and global warming. We share Chris' comments below, and welcome reactions and alternative perspectives. (04/18/07)

"Warming is not a big deal and is not a bad thing." - Oral Statement by Dr. John T. Everett - Hearing on Wildlife and Oceans in a Changing Climate before the Committee on Natural Resources, Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Oceans - U.S. House Of Representatives, April 17, 2007 (04/17/07)

Study: Global warming may diminish Atlantic hurricane activity - By Randolph E. Schmid, AP Science Writer
WASHINGTON - The debate over whether global warming affects hurricanes may be running into some unexpected turbulence. Many researchers believe warming is causing the storms to get stronger, while others aren't so sure. Now, a new study raises the possibility that global warming might even make it harder for hurricanes to form. (04/17/07)

Carbon cycle modeling and the residence time of natural and anthropogenic atmospheric CO2: on the construction of the "Greenhouse Effect Global Warming" dogma. - By Tom V. Segalstad, Mineralogical-Geological Museum, University of Oslo Sars' Gate 1, N-0562 Oslo Norway - "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." ~ Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (1859-1930). (04/17/07)

This is Just Embarrassing - Author: Pielke Jr., R. - The Figure below is found in the IPCC WG II report, Chapter 7, supplementary material (p. 3 here in PDF). I am shocked to see such a figure in the IPCC of all places, purporting to show something meaningful and scientifically vetted. Sorry to be harsh, but this figure is neither. [Note: The reference (Miller et al. 2006) is not listed in the report (pointers from readers would be welcomed).] (04/11/07)

ipccwgiism-1-1.png
source - UC Colorado at Boulder

I am amazed that this figure made it past review of any sort, but especially given what the broader literature on this subject actually says. I have generally been a supporter of the IPCC, but I do have to admit that if it is this sloppy and irresponsible in an area of climate change where I have expertise, why should I have confidence in the areas where I am not an expert? (04/11/07)

Top scientist debunks global warming - By Simon Kirby - MANKIND is naive to think it can influence climate change, according to a prize-winning Australian geologist. Solar activity is a greater driver of climate change than man-made carbon dioxide, argues Ian Plimer, Professor of Mining Geology at the University of Adelaide and winner of several notable science prizes. "When meteorologists can change the weather then we can start to think about humans changing climate," Prof Plimer said. (04/11/07)

Global warming related to our Earth's natural cycles - Dr. Daniel W Nebert - Compared to our planet, humans are no more important than the eye of a gnat sitting on a huge elephant. We saw the power of Mother Nature during the Southeast Asia tsunami and Hurricane Katrina in our own country. How much of our current global warming reflects human greenhouse gases? I would guess somewhere in the range of 1 percent to 0.1 percent; the rest is up to Mother Nature, and so far we do not understand these "warm-cold" cycles at all. (04/08/07)

Climate change report is wrong: academic - The global scientific report blaming carbon emissions for climate change is based on misconceptions about the Earth's behavior, says an Australian academic who believes global warming is not caused by mankind. (04/05/07)

A Litmus Test For Global Warming - A Much Overdue Requirement - Roger Pielke Sr. - The recently released 2007 IPCC Statement for Policymakers (SPM) has received extensive media coverage, while a range of television shows (e.g. see) and even a Hollywood movie (An Inconvenient Truth) have promoted gloomy forecasts of the climate in coming decades. We need an unambiguous litmus test which can be accepted by all credible climate scientists, however, to assess the magnitude of global warming on which these alarmist forecasts are based. (04/04/07)

Global Warming? Science And History Say No - The sun heats the earth; cosmic radiation cools it. Do some scientific reading and let Al Gore's PG rated scare dry up and blow away. He's simply an irrelevant opportunistic manipulative politician. His only followers are sheep. See Power Point Presentation. By Francis T. Manns, Ph.D., P.Geo. (Ontario) Artesian Geological Research (03/25/07)

Global Warming Is Not a Crisis - NPR Radio Debate - In this debate, the proposition was: "Global Warming Is Not a Crisis." In a vote before the debate, about 30 percent of the audience agreed with the motion, while 57 percent were against and 13 percent undecided. The debate seemed to affect a number of people: Afterward, about 46 percent agreed with the motion, roughly 42 percent were opposed and about 12 percent were undecided. (03/22/07)

Tim Ball's The Science Isn't Settled Presentation - Center for Science and Public Policy 3/21/07 Capitol Hill Briefing Series Tim's presentation takes on assumption of the accuracy of the station data, model forecasting ability and carbon dioxide historical levels and the downplaying of natural factors. See Tim's PPT (03/22/07)

Sun Blamed for Warming of Earth and Other Worlds - By Ker Than, LiveScience Staff Writer - Earth is heating up lately, but so are Mars, Pluto and other worlds in our solar system, leading some scientists to speculate that a change in the sun's activity is the common thread linking all these baking events. (03/12/07)

The Great Global Warming Swindle - British documentary aired on Channel 4 on March 8, 2007. (03/078/07)

Inconvenient Truths about Global Warming - Some "Global Warming" Myths Exposed (03/07/07)

Global Warming: The momentum has shifted to climate skeptics - Politicians and scientists line up against Al Gore and Hollywood - Canada Free Press - Original article from Senator Inhofe's blog is here. (03/03/07)

Global Warming: Truth or Dare? NOT THE GREATEST POTENTIAL THREAT TO HUMANITY - (02/27/07)

Researchers Blame Cosmic Rays for Global Warming - Henrik Svensmark, a weather scientist at the Danish National Space Center, claims that much of the Earth's global warming may be caused by fluctuations in cosmic rays hitting the atmosphere. Svensmark, a weather scientist at the Danish National Space Center said that human activity may have less to do with global warming than previously thought. source - UPI
(02/12/07)

Man-made Global Warming is Politics Not Science -
Opinion/Commentary By freelance writer John Bender (02/12/07)

An experiment that hints we are wrong on climate change - Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, says the orthodoxy must be challenged. From The Sunday Times (02/11/07)

Here is a link to a radio interview with Dr. Arthur B. Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine and United States Senator James Inhofe (01/30/07)

Apocalypse Canceled - In the Sunday Telegraph article for 5 November 2006 and in that which will follow on 12 November, I have done my best to steer between the strongly-held opinions and propaganda statements of climatechange true-believers and contrarians alike. Climate change is an inescapably political issue. I have spent several months reading the leading scientific papers and assessing the arguments put forward, often with passionate conviction, by the protagonists on both sides. The official case depends crucially on a series of assumptions whose truth has not been demonstrated, some of which are not easily testable. In particular, the temperature effect at the surface of the incompletely-saturated peripheral absorption bands of CO2 at the tropopause cannot be confidently estimated. Air and sea temperatures have failed to rise anything like as much as "global-warming" theory predicts. Explanations for the shortfall of observed outturn against theoretical projection are mutually inconsistent and scientifically dubious. I conclude that, on the balance of probabilities, the contrarians are significantly closer to the truth than the UN and its supporters. - M of B (11/05/06)

Academic Global Warming Dissent - Former director of the National Hurricane Center William Gray, told the Washington Post that global warming is "one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people." (07/11/06)

Open Kyoto to debate - 60 scientists call on Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to revisit the science of global warming :Special to the Financial Post (04/06/06)

"It's All Over for Science" - Science does not claim to have "the truth". It proposes hypotheses, devises experiments to bolster or disprove those hypotheses and attempts to provide a theoretical explanation to account for the observations. (05/01/05)

Leading scientific journals 'are censoring debate on global warming' - Two of the world's leading scientific journals have come under fire from researchers for refusing to publish papers which challenge fashionable wisdom over global warming.

Here is a link to a Radio Liberty interview with Dr. Arthur B. Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. (02/07/05). (file size - 7.3 meg)

CBC (not BBC): Global warming: Doomsday called off - In 2004, CBC (Canada) has produced a similar 45-minute-long film, and it has been available on YouTube for two weeks or so. source: The Reference Frame - found by the Junkman

Scientists Debunk "Global Warming" Effect on Hurricanes - By Melanie Hunter, CNSNews.com Deputy Managing Editor (09/15/04)

The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame - (07/17/04)

Solar Cycles, Not CO2, Determine Climate Change - Professor Zbigniew Jaworowski M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc. is the chairman of the Scientific Council of the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw. This paper that appeared in the winter 2003-2004 edition of 21st Century Science & Technology Magazine. (2003-2004)

The real story about "Greenhouse Gases"
Water Vapor Rules the Greenhouse System - By Monte Hieb - Just how much of the "Greenhouse Effect" is caused by human activity? It is about 0.28%, if water vapor is taken into account-- about 5.53%, if not. This point is so crucial to the debate over global warming that how water vapor is or isn't factored into an analysis of Earth's greenhouse gases makes the difference between describing a significant human contribution to the greenhouse effect, or a negligible one. Water vapor constitutes Earth's most significant greenhouse gas, accounting for about 95% of Earth's greenhouse effect. Interestingly, many "facts and figures' regarding global warming completely ignore the powerful effects of water vapor in the greenhouse system, carelessly (perhaps, deliberately) overstating human impacts as much as 20-fold. Water vapor is 99.999% of natural origin. Other atmospheric greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and miscellaneous other gases (CFC's, etc.), are also mostly of natural origin (except for the latter, which is mostly anthropogenic). Human activites contribute slightly to greenhouse gas concentrations through farming, manufacturing, power generation, and transportation. However, these emissions are so dwarfed in comparison to emissions from natural sources we can do nothing about, that even the most costly efforts to limit human emissions would have a very small-- perhaps undetectable-- effect on global climate. (01/10/03)

Debunking Modern Climate Myths, 14 Fallacies - source: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change (12/25/02)

Blame Sun For Global Warming - Climate trends vary primarily with the sun's heat output not human activity as popularly believed. (06/04/02)

Does CO2 really drive global warming? - By Robert H. Essenhigh - I don't believe that it does. To the contrary, if you apply the IFF test-if-and-only - if or necessary-and-sufficient - the outcome would appear to be exactly the reverse. Rather than the rising levels of carbon dioxide driving up the temperature, the logical conclusion is that it is the rising temperature that is driving up the CO2 level. Of course, this raises a raft of questions, but they are all answerable. What is particularly critical is distinguishing between the observed phenomenon, or the "what", from the governing mechanism, or the "why". Confusion between these two would appear to be the source of much of the noise in the global warming debate. (2001)

Sun's warming influence 'underestimated' - Article by BBC News Online science editor Dr David Whitehouse, in which Dr John Butler of Armagh Observatory claims that he suspects "that the greenhouse lobby have underestimated the role of solar variability in climate change." This article appeared in November of 2000.

Doctor Arthur B. Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine lectures on the flawed science of Global Warming. Dr. Robinson is also the author of the Oregon Petition signed by over 17,000 scientists which states in part that "there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."

"Climate Catastrophe Canceled: What You're Not Being Told About the Science of Climate Change" - Friends of Science multi-part video

The Global Warming Folly - by Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.O., and D.Sc., who is a professor at the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw. A multidisciplinary scientist, he has studied glacier ice samples from around the world, analyzing traces of heavy metals and radionuclides. He is well known as an expert on radiation effects, and has served as the chairman of the UNSCEAR (United Nations Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation). Among his previous articles in 21st Century Science & Technology is "Ice Core Data Show No Carbon Dioxide Increase, " Spring 1997, p. 42.

The Greenhouse Conspiracy - 1990 Documentary (Google Video) Worth watching.

Policy Makers

Independent Summary for Policy Makers - An alternative perspective to the IPCC, produced by the Fraser Institute. (02/28/07)


HOME | ABOUT | ARCHIVES | CHRISTY | CLIMATE INQUISITION | CONTACT | COOLING WORLD | BLOG | EVANS CONFESSION | GERHARD GERLICH REPORT | GLOBAL WARMING FALSE ALARMS | HEALTH FEARS | HOCKEY STICK | INCONVENIENT HYPE | LIVESTOCK'S LONG SHADOW | MASS. VS. EPA | MYTHS OF GLOBAL WARMING | PEER REVIEW? | POLITICS | RELIGION | SCIENCE | SITE MAP | SKEPTIC GUIDE | STORE | TRENBETH'S 23 SCIENTIFIC ERRORS | ZBIGNIEW JAWOROWSKI - 21st CENTURY SCI-TECH |


MUST-SEE DVD's

SWINDLED!

Find out the truth about the IPCC and the real agenda behind the Global Warming Religion!

BUY IT NOW

Own a DVD of "The Great Global Warming Swindle" for only $24.95

Global Warming or Global Governance?

BUY IT NOW

If "Swindle" shocked you, this one will surely get your attention. Should the U.S. give up it's soverignty and submit to world government?

MUST-SEE VIDEOS
Freely Available on the Web (for now)

Exposed: Climate of Fear
A Glenn Beck Special that aired on CNN May 2, 2007.

Global warming: Doomsday called off
2004 CBC Documentaty

The Greenhouse Conspiracy
1990 Btitish Documentary

MUST-READ BOOKS

A Climate Crisis a la Gore: The real profit pushing the perception of manmade global warming.
Buy it now at Amazon
Paul Spite

Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming
Buy it now at Amazon
Bjørn Lomborg

The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World
Buy it now at Amazon

Bjørn Lomborg

The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global WarmingBuy it now at Amazon
Christopher Horner

Eco-Freaks: Environmentalism Is Hazardous to Your Health!
Buy it now at Amazon
John Berlau

Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years
Buy it now at Amazon
Dennis Avery, S. Fred Singer

Hot Talk Cold Science: Global Warming's Unfinished Debate
Buy it now at Amazon
S. Fred Singer, Frederick Seitz

Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media
Buy it now at Amazon
Patrick Michaels

Shattered Consensus: The True State of Global Warming
Buy it now at Amazon
Patrick Michaels

The Chilling Stars: The New Theory of Climate Change
Buy it now at Amazon

Henrik Svensmark

Valid HTML 4.01 Transitional

Valid CSS!

site map