PlanetZ forums - scopeusers.com

Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a
PhD in meteorology, formerly of NASA, has authored more than 190 studies and
has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years” by
atmospheric scientist Dr. Roger Pielke, Sr. Simpson declared she was “skeptical” of
catastrophic man-made warming in 2008. “Since I am no longer affiliated with any
organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly,” Simpson wrote in a
public letter on February 27, 2008. “The main basis of the claim that man’s release of
greenhouse gases is the cause of the warming is based almost entirely upon climate
models. We all know the frailty of models concerning the air-surface system. We only
need to watch the weather forecasts,” Simpson explained. “But as a scientist I remain
skeptical,” she added.

Physical chemist Dr. Peter Stilbs, who chairs the climate seminar Department of
Physical Chemistry at the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm, has
authored more than 165 scientific publications in refereed journals since 1970. Stilbs
coordinated a meeting of international scientists and declared his skepticism about manmade
climate fears. Stilbs wrote on December 21, 2006 that “by the final panel
discussion stage of the conference, there appeared to be wide agreement” about several
key points regarding man-made climate fears. Stilbs announced that the scientists
concluded, “There is no strong evidence to prove significant human influence on climate
on a global basis. The global cooling trend from 1940 to 1970 is inconsistent with models
based on anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. Actual claims put forward are that an
observed global temperature increase of about 0.3 degrees C since 1970 exceeds what
could be expected from natural variation. However, recent temperature data do not
indicate any continued global warming since 1998.” Stilbs also noted, “There is no
reliable evidence to support that the 20th century was the warmest in the last 1000 years.
Previous claims based on the ‘Mann hockey-stick curve’ are by now totally discredited.”
Stilbs noted that the team of international scientists concluded: “There is no doubt that
the science behind ‘the climate issue’ is far from settled. As so many cosmic effects are
omitted from climate models, there is no credibility for arguments such as ‘there is no
other explanation’ [than anthropogenic generation of carbon dioxide]. This must be
remembered when making future political decisions related to these matters.”
Stilbs also was one of the signatories of the December 13, 2007 letter critical of the UN
IPCC’s climate view. “These [IPCC] Summaries are prepared by a relatively small core
writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by government representatives.
The great majority of IPCC contributors and reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other
scientists who are qualified to comment on these matters, are not involved in the
preparation of these documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented
as a consensus view among experts," the letter Stilbs signed explained.

Solar physicists Galina Mashnich and Vladimir Bashkirtsev, of the Institute of
Solar-Terrestrial Physics of the Siberian Division of the Russian Academy of
Sciences, believe the climate is driven by the sun and predict global cooling will soon
occur. The two scientists are so convinced that global temperatures will cool within the
next decade they have placed a $10,000 wager with a UK scientist to prove their
certainty. The criteria for the $10,000 bet will be to "compare global temperatures
between 1998 and 2003 with those between 2012 and 2017. The loser will pay up in
2018," according to an April 16, 2007 article in Live Science. Bashkirtsev and
Mashnich have questioned the view that the "anthropogenic impact" is driving Earth's
climate. "None of the investigations dealing with the anthropogenic impact on climate
convincingly argues for such an impact," the two scientists noted in 2003. Bashkirtsev
and Mashnich believe the evidence of solar impacts on the climate "leave little room for
the anthropogenic impact on the Earth's climate." They believe that "solar variations
naturally explain global cooling observed in 1950-1970, which cannot be understood
from the standpoint of the greenhouse effect, since CO2 was intensely released into the
atmosphere in this period."

Geologist/Geochemist Dr. Tom V. Segalstad, a professor and head of the Geological
Museum at the University of Oslo and formerly an expert reviewer with the UN
IPCC, expressed skepticism of climate fears in 2007. A July 7, 2007 article in Canada's
Financial Post read, "In the real world, as measurable by science, CO2 in the atmosphere
and in the ocean reach a stable balance when the oceans contain 50 times as much CO2
as the atmosphere. ‘The IPCC postulates an atmospheric doubling of CO2, meaning that
the oceans would need to receive 50 times more CO2 to obtain chemical equilibrium,'
explains Prof. Segalstad. ‘This total of 51 times the present amount of carbon in
atmospheric CO2 exceeds the known reserves of fossil carbon-- it represents more carbon
than exists in all the coal, gas, and oil that we can exploit anywhere in the world.'" The
article continued, "Also in the real world, Prof. Segalstad's isotope mass balance
calculations -- a standard technique in science -- show that if CO2 in the atmosphere had
a lifetime of 50 to 200 years, as claimed by IPCC scientists, the atmosphere would
necessarily have half of its current CO2 mass. Because this is a nonsensical outcome, the
IPCC model postulates that half of the CO2 must be hiding somewhere, in ‘a missing
sink.' Many studies have sought this missing sink -- a Holy Grail of climate science
research-- without success. ‘It is a search for a mythical CO2 sink to explain an
immeasurable CO2 lifetime to fit a hypothetical CO2 computer model that purports to
show that an impossible amount of fossil fuel burning is heating the atmosphere,' Prof.
Segalstad concludes. ‘It is all a fiction.'"

Internationally renowned scientist Dr. Antonio Zichichi, president of the World
Federation of Scientists and a retired Professor of Advanced Physics at the
University of Bologna in Italy, who has published over 800 scientific papers,
questioned man-made global warming fears. According to an April 27, 2007 article at
Zenit.org, Zichichi "pointed out that human activity has less than 10% impact on the
environment." The article noted that Zichichi "showed that the mathematical models
used by the [UN's] IPCC do not correspond to the criteria of the scientific method. He
said the IPCC used ‘the method of 'forcing' to arrive at their conclusions that human
activity produces meteorological variations.'" Zichichi said that based upon actual
scientific fact "it is not possible to exclude the idea that climate changes can be due to
natural causes," and he added that it is plausible that "man is not to blame." According to
the article, "He also reminded those present that 500,000 years ago the Earth lost the
North and South Poles four times. The poles disappeared and reformed four times, he
said. Zichichi said that in the end he is not convinced that global warming is caused by
the increase of emissions of ‘greenhouse gases' produced through human activity.
Climate changes, he said, depend in a significant way on the fluctuation of cosmic rays."
89
Zichichi also signed a December 2007 open letter to the United Nations stating in part
"Significant new peer-reviewed research has cast even more doubt on the hypothesis of
dangerous human-caused global warming."

Computer modeler Dr. Donald DuBois, who holds a PhD in Philosophy of Science,
has spent most of his career modeling computer networks for NASA's International
Space Station, GE Space Systems, the Air Force, and the Navy. DuBois is very
skeptical of climate computer models predicting doom. "I know something about how
misleading models can be, and the fact that their underlying assumptions can completely
predetermine the results of the model. If the major climate models that are having a
major impact on public policy were documented and put in the public domain, other
qualified professionals around the world would be interested in looking into the validity
of these models," DuBois wrote to EPW on May 17, 2007. "Right now, climate science is
a black box that is highly questionable with unstated assumptions and model inputs. It is
especially urgent that these models come out in the open considering how much climate
change legislation could cost the United States and the world economies. Ross
McKitrick's difficulty in getting the information from [Michael] Mann on his famous
‘hockey stick' [temperature] curve is a case in point which should be a scandal not worth
repeating. The cost of documenting the models and making them available would be a
trifle; the cost of not doing so could be astronomical," DuBois wrote. "I headed up a
project to model computer networks (to see how they will perform before they are built)
for NASA's International Space Station (including the ground stations around the globe).
If I had suggested a $250 million network for the ISS and said that I was basing this
recommendation on my modeling but the models were not available for inspection, I
would have been laughed out of the auditorium in Houston."

Anton Uriarte, a professor of Physical Geography at the University of the Basque
Country in Spain and author of a book on the paleoclimate, rejected man-made
climate fears. "It's just a political thing, and the lies about global warming are
contributing to the proliferation of nuclear energy," Uriarte said according to a September
2007 article in the Spanish newspaper El Correo. "There's no need to be worried. It's very
interesting to study [climate change], but there's no need to be worried," Uriarte wrote.
"Far from provoking the so-called greenhouse effect, [CO2] stabilizes the climate."
Uriarte noted that "the Earth is not becoming desertified, it's greener all the time." Uriarte
says natural factors dominate the climate system. "The Earth being spherical, the tropics
always receive more heat than the poles and the imbalance has to be continually rectified.
They change places because of the tilt of the earth's axis. And, moreover, the planet isn't
smooth, but rough, which produces perturbations in the interchange of air masses. We
know the history of the climate very well and it has changed continuously," he wrote.
"It's evident that the Earth is a human planet, and that being so, it's quite normal that we
influence the atmosphere. It's something else altogether to say that things will get worse.
I believe that a little more heat will be very good for us. The epochs of vegetational
exuberance coincided with those of more heat," he explained. "In warm periods, when there are more greenhouse gases in the atmosphere - more CO2 and water vapour -
climate variability is less. In these periods greenhouse gases, which act as a blanket,
cushion the differences between the tropics and the poles. There is less interchange of air
masses, less storms. We're talking about a climate which is much less variable," he
added.

XITE-1/4LIVE wrote:I wanted to go to DC and change the laws, forcing Senators to wear sheets like they did in Athens and Rome. They are already a bunch of FAT BASTARDS, the robe would be perfect.

braincell wrote:There is increasing evidence that global warming is real and it is man made. Scientists don't always get everything right but eventually mistakes are corrected. The tide is not in your favor Gary.

XITE-1/4LIVE wrote:Yes, even in modern day Babylon.
So is this Global Cooling?

Shroomz~> wrote:Gary, you should really consider running for office to be able to put your knowledge to good use.

braincell wrote:There is increasing evidence that global warming is real and it is man made. Scientists don't always get everything right but eventually mistakes are corrected. The tide is not in your favor Gary.