Jan
An open letter to Australian Members of Parliament
Below we wish to share with you a fine Open Letter by Australian lawyer, Val Majkus who has written to all of her nation’s Members of Parliament to object to policy decisions being implemented on ‘junk’ climate science. In the letter Val, with a keen legal mind, goes to great lengths to explain the details of her concerns: recently substantiated by leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit in England. I hope others will join me in heartily endorsing Val’s campaign for a full public enquiry, i.e. a ‘Royal Commission’ on apparent unethical and/or illegal conduct by certain climatologists.
We hope her very detailed letter inspires a re-think, not just among Australian politicians, but elsewhere where democracy is still the cherished method of government. If you can spare a few minutes, then please also write to your own elected representatives in your respective countries to demand action – let it be known that you, too, will not stand for the great climate scam any longer.
We have provided hyperlinks as appropriate to other web pages where further information may be found.
Letter follows:
I intend e-mailing this letter to the media and to all Senators, the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition and such other persons as I consider appropriate.
Until Climategate occurred I didn’t really think much about global warming; like a friend of mine I thought ‘well the Government is relying upon expert opinion.’ When Climategate occurred as a person with a legal background and with an open mind I did a lot of research on the web. In light of that research I immediately wrote to Senators before the CPRS vote in the Senate late last year and this year I have written to Senator Moore saying dodgy science doesn’t make good laws; in the reply I received from her office I was referred to extensive processes which the Govt had undertaken. However those processes all took place before the revelations of the Climategate e-mails and therefore do not address the trustworthiness of the science. This must be addressed by a Royal Commission before Australia is saddled with a costly scheme to address a perceived problem which it is doubtful does exist.
As I understand it climate has changed in the past; is changing in the present and always will change. The Government’s proposed CPRS proposes to address the perceived ‘science consensus’ that global warming results from CO2; that is man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases.
My other concern is that the information displayed on the Government’s Dept of Climate Change’s website is misleading and deceptive and displays a lack of due diligence by the Government in the wake of Climategate. Before any legislation such as the Government’s proposed CPRS is further debated and sought to be passed to address a problem which may not exist the Government must have a Royal Commission to determine whether Anthropogenic Global Warming caused by CO2 does exist as it is evident from the e-mails that the IPCC process has been so politicised and is untrustworthy. The Climategate e-mails can be found at this link www.climate-gate.org/.
Among the more troubling revelations disclosed by the Climategate e-mails were data adjustments enhancing the perception that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases. (Reference: It Didn’t Start with Climategate.)
At the Government’s Dept of Climate Change’s website it is stated at ‘What is climate change” Science Facts and Fiction” Emails stolen from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia:
- There is clear evidence that our climate is changing, largely due to anthropogenic greenhouse gases. The Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), produced by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007, states that global warming is ‘unequivocal’ and that ‘most of the observed increase in globally-averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the observed increase in greenhouse gas concentrations’. …
- The emails and text files stolen from the University of East Anglia (UEA) Climate Research Unit (CRU) do not undermine the conclusions of the IPCC AR4. The UEA has announced that Sir Muir Russell, former Principal and Vice-Chancellor of the University of Glasgow, will head an independent review into allegations made against the CRU arising from the stolen emails. To date there is no evidence that the so-called ‘climategate’ emails will require any findings on which the IPCC AR4 conclusions are based to be revised. CRU’s published research is, and has always been, fully peer-reviewed by the relevant journals, and is only one strand of research underpinning the strong consensus that human activity is affecting the world’s climate in ways that are potentially dangerous. ….
- The UEA (in collaboration with the Hadley Centre) is one of three lead agencies that compile global surface temperature estimates. The other two agencies are the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the US NOAA National Climatic Data Centre. All data sets show very similar trends in temperature since 1850, with a strong warming trend evident from 1970. These instrumental records of air temperature are consistent with independent records showing rising sea levels, ocean warming and reduced snow and ice.
Addressing each of those paras in turn:
In relation to 1 above I attach an article by Dr S Fred Singer entitled CLIMATE POLICY—
FROM RIO TO KYOTO
A Political Issue for 2000—
and Beyond which examines the scientific basis of the Kyoto Protocol and draw to your attention specifically page 19 … “The IPCC Summary for Policy Makers (SPM) was approved at the Rome meeting of the IPCC plenary in December 1995, and the full report was accepted, including chapter 8. After the printed report appeared in May 1996, it was discovered that there had been some unannounced editing of this crucial chapter, which backs up the main conclusion of the IPCC report about a “discernible human influence.” Key phrases deleted are listed on page 20 and the following sentence was added in the final printed version: 6. “The body of statistical evidence in Chapter 8, when examined in the context of our physical understanding of the climate system, now points to a discernible human influence on the global climate.”
I also attach an article by John H Hindraker an attorney also summarising changes to the IPCC’S Second Assessment Report.
In relation to the ‘peer review’ referred to in 2 above I attach an analysis of the Climategate e-mails by John P. Costella. It seems clear to me from a perusal of the e-mails that the believers gained control of the main climate-profession journals. This allowed them to block publication of papers written by the skeptics and prohibit unfriendly peer review of their own papers. In relation to the ‘strong consensus’ referred to in 2 above here’s an article by Neal Frank published in the Houston Chronicle on 2 Jan 2010 and refer you to the paras below the words “But who are the skeptics.”
Climategate: You should be steamed
By NEIL FRANK
HOUSTON CHRONICLE
Jan. 2, 2010, 4:28PMNow that Copenhagen is past history, what is the next step in the man-made global warming controversy? Without question, there should be an immediate and thorough investigation of the scientific debauchery revealed by “Climategate.”
If you have not heard, hackers penetrated the computers of the Climate Research Unit, or CRU, of the United Kingdom’s University of East Anglia, exposing thousands of e-mails and other documents. CRU is one of the top climate research centers in the world. Many of the exchanges were between top mainstream climate scientists in Britain and the U.S. who are closely associated with the authoritative (albeit controversial) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Among the more troubling revelations were data adjustments enhancing the perception that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other atmospheric greenhouse gases.
Particularly disturbing was the way the core IPCC scientists (the believers) marginalized the skeptics of the theory that man-made global warming is large and potentially catastrophic. The e-mails document that the attack on the skeptics was twofold. First, the believers gained control of the main climate-profession journals. This allowed them to block publication of papers written by the skeptics and prohibit unfriendly peer review of their own papers. Second, the skeptics were demonized through false labeling and false accusations.
Climate alarmists would like you to believe the science has been settled and all respectable atmospheric scientists support their position. The believers also would like you to believe the skeptics are involved only because of the support of Big Oil and that they are few in number with minimal qualifications.
But who are the skeptics? A few examples reveal that they are numerous and well-qualified. Several years ago two scientists at the University of Oregon became so concerned about the overemphasis on man-made global warming that they put a statement on their Web site and asked for people’s endorsement; 32,000 have signed the petition, including more than 9,000 Ph.Ds. More than 700 scientists have endorsed a 231-page Senate minority report that questions man-made global warming. The Heartland Institute has recently sponsored three international meetings for skeptics. More than 800 scientists heard 80 presentations in March. They endorsed an 881-page document, created by 40 authors with outstanding academic credentials, that challenges the most recent publication by the IPCC. The IPCC panel’s report strongly concludes that man is causing global warming through the release of carbon dioxide.
Last year 60 German scientists sent a letter to Chancellor Angela Merkel urging her to “strongly reconsider” her position supporting man-made global warming. Sixty scientists in Canada took similar action. Recently, when the American Physical Society published its support for man-made global warming, 200 of its members objected and demanded that the membership be polled to determine the APS’ true position.
What do the skeptics believe? First, they concur with the believers that the Earth has been warming since the end of a Little Ice Age around 1850. The cause of this warming is the question. Believers think the warming is man-made, while the skeptics believe the warming is natural and contributions from man are minimal and certainly not potentially catastrophic a la Al Gore.
Second, skeptics argue that CO2 is not a pollutant but vital for plant life. Numerous field experiments have confirmed that higher levels of CO2 are positive for agricultural productivity. Furthermore, carbon dioxide is a very minor greenhouse gas. More than 90 percent of the warming from greenhouse gases is caused by water vapor. If you are going to change the temperature of the globe, it must involve water vapor.
Third, and most important, skeptics believe that climate models are grossly overpredicting future warming from rising concentrations of carbon dioxide. We are being told that numerical models that cannot make accurate 5- to 10-day forecasts can be simplified and run forward for 100 years with results so reliable you can impose an economic disaster on the U.S. and the world.
The revelation of Climategate occurs at a time when the accuracy of the climate models is being seriously questioned. Over the last decade Earth’s temperature has not warmed, yet every model (there are many) predicted a significant increase in global temperatures for that time period. If the climate models cannot get it right for the past 10 years, why should we trust them for the next century?
Climategate reveals how predetermined political agendas shaped science rather than the other way around. It is high time to question the true agenda of the scientists now on the hot seat and to bring skeptics back into the public debate.
Neil Frank, who holds a Ph.D. from Florida State University in meteorology, was director of the National Hurricane Center (1974–87) and chief meteorologist at KHOU (Channel 11) until his retirement in 2008.
I also copy an open letter to the United Nations Secretary-General, Ban Ki Moon in which 141 Scientists state that the science behind anthropogenic global warming is anything but “settled”. This is from The Copenhagen Climate Challenge .
<h2>Open Letter to Secretary-General of United Nations</h2>
His Excellency Ban Ki Moon
Secretary-General, United Nations
New York, NY
United States of America
8 December 2009Dear Secretary-General,
Climate change science is in a period of ‘negative discovery’ – the more we learn about this exceptionally complex and rapidly evolving field the more we realize how little we know. Truly, the science is NOT settled.
Therefore, there is no sound reason to impose expensive and restrictive public policy decisions on the peoples of the Earth without first providing convincing evidence that human activities are causing dangerous climate change beyond that resulting from natural causes. Before any precipitate action is taken, we must have solid observational data demonstrating that recent changes in climate differ substantially from changes observed in the past and are well in excess of normal variations caused by solar cycles, ocean currents, changes in the Earth’s orbital parameters and other natural phenomena.
We the undersigned, being qualified in climate-related scientific disciplines, challenge the UNFCCC and supporters of the United Nations Climate Change Conference to produce convincing OBSERVATIONAL EVIDENCE for their claims of dangerous human-caused global warming and other changes in climate. Projections of possible future scenarios from unproven computer models of climate are not acceptable substitutes for real world data obtained through unbiased and rigorous scientific investigation.
Specifically, we challenge supporters of the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused climate change to demonstrate that:
- Variations in global climate in the last hundred years are significantly outside the natural range experienced in previous centuries;
- Humanity’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other ‘greenhouse gases’ (GHG) are having a dangerous impact on global climate;
- Computer-based models can meaningfully replicate the impact of all of the natural factors that may significantly influence climate;
- Sea levels are rising dangerously at a rate that has accelerated with increasing human GHG emissions, thereby threatening small islands and coastal communities;
- The incidence of malaria is increasing due to recent climate changes;
- Human society and natural ecosystems cannot adapt to foreseeable climate change as they have done in the past;
- Worldwide glacier retreat, and sea ice melting in Polar Regions , is unusual and related to increases in human GHG emissions;
- Polar bears and other Arctic and Antarctic wildlife are unable to adapt to anticipated local climate change effects, independent of the causes of those changes;
- Hurricanes, other tropical cyclones and associated extreme weather events are increasing in severity and frequency;
- Data recorded by ground-based stations are a reliable indicator of surface temperature trends.
It is not the responsibility of ‘climate realist’ scientists to prove that dangerous human-caused climate change is not happening. Rather, it is those who propose that it is, and promote the allocation of massive investments to solve the supposed ‘problem’, who have the obligation to convincingly demonstrate that recent climate change is not of mostly natural origin and, if we do nothing, catastrophic change will ensue. To date, this they have utterly failed to do so.
Signed by:
- Habibullo I. Abdussamatov, Dr. Sci., mathematician and astrophysicist, Head of the Russian-Ukrainian Astrometria project on the board of the Russian segment of the ISS, Head of Space Research Laboratory at the Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia
- Göran Ahlgren, docent organisk kemi, general secretary of the Stockholm Initiative, Professor of Organic Chemistry, Stockholm, Sweden
- Syun-Ichi Akasofu, PhD, Professor of Physics, Emeritus and Founding Director, International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska, U.S.A.
- J.R. Alexander, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Civil Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa; Member, UN Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000, Pretoria, South Africa.
- Jock Allison, PhD, ONZM, formerly Ministry of Agriculture Regional Research Director, Dunedin, New Zealand
- Bjarne Andresen, PhD, dr. scient, physicist, published and presents on the impossibility of a “global temperature”, Professor, The Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
- Timothy F. Ball, PhD, environmental consultant and former climatology professor, University of Winnipeg, Member, Science Advisory Board, ICSC, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
- Douglas W. Barr, BS (Meteorology, University of Chicago), BS and MS (Civil Engineering, University of Minnesota), Barr Engineering Co. (environmental issues and water resources), Minnesota, U.S.A.
- Romuald Bartnik, PhD (Organic Chemistry), Professor Emeritus, Former chairman of the Department of Organic and Applied Chemistry, climate work in cooperation with Department of Hydrology and Geological Museum, University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland
- Colin Barton, B.Sc., PhD, Earth Science, Principal research scientist (retd), Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- Joe Bastardi, BSc, (Meteorology, Pennsylvania State), meteorologist, State College, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.
- Ernst-Georg Beck, Dipl. Biol. (University of Freiburg), Biologist, Freiburg, Germany
- David Bellamy, OBE, English botanist, author, broadcaster, environmental campaigner, Hon. Professor of Botany (Geography), University of Nottingham, Hon. Prof. Faculty of Engineering and Physical Systems, Central Queensland University, Hon. Prof. of Adult and Continuing Education, University of Durham, United Nations Environment Program Global 500 Award Winner, Dutch Order of The Golden Ark, Bishop Auckland County, Durham, U.K.
- M. I. Bhat, Professor & Head, Department of Geology & Geophysics, University of Kashmir, Srinagar, Jammu & Kashmir, India
- Ian R. Bock, BSc, PhD, DSc, Biological sciences (retired), Ringkobing, Denmark
- Sonja A. Boehmer-Christiansen, PhD, Reader Emeritus, Dept. of Geography, Hull University, Editor – Energy&Environment, Multi-Science (www.multi-science.co.uk), Hull, United Kingdom
- Atholl Sutherland Brown, PhD (Geology, Princeton University), Regional Geology, Tectonics and Mineral Deposits, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
- Stephen C. Brown, PhD (Environmental Science, State University of New York), District Agriculture Agent, Assistant Professor, University of Alaska Fairbanks, Ground Penetrating Radar Glacier research, Palmer, Alaska, U.S.A.
- James Buckee, D.Phil. (Oxon), focus on stellar atmospheres, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Dan Carruthers, M.Sc., Arctic Animal Behavioural Ecologist, wildlife biology consultant specializing in animal ecology in Arctic and Subarctic regions, Alberta, Canada
- Robert M. Carter, PhD, Professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
- Dr. Arthur V. Chadwick, PhD, Geologist, dendrochronology (analyzing tree rings to determine past climate) lecturing, Southwestern Adventist University, Keene, Texas, U.S.A.
- George V. Chilingar, PhD, Member, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow President, Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, U.S.A. Section, Emeritus Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.
- Ian D. Clark, PhD, Professor (isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology), Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Charles A. Clough, BS (Mathematics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology), MS (Atmospheric Science, Texas Tech University), former (to 2006) Chief of the US Army Atmospheric Effects Team at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland; now residing in Bel Air, Maryland, U.S.A.
- Paul Copper, BSc, MSc, PhD, DIC, FRSC, Professor Emeritus, Department of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University Sudbury, Ontario, Canada
- Piers Corbyn, MSc (Physics (Imperial College London)), ARCS, FRAS, FRMetS, astrophysicist (Queen Mary College, London), consultant, founder WeatherAction long range forecasters, London, United Kingdom
- Allan Cortese, meteorological researcher and spotter for the National Weather Service, retired computer professional, Billerica, Massachusetts, U.S.A.
- Richard S. Courtney, PhD, energy and environmental consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, Falmouth, Cornwall, United Kingdom
- Susan Crockford, PhD (Zoology/Evolutionary Biology/Archaeozoology), Adjunct Professor (Anthropology/Faculty of Graduate Studies), University of Victoria, Victoria, British Colombia, Canada
- (Claude Culross, PhD (Organic Chemistry), retired, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, U.S.A.
- Joseph D’Aleo, BS, MS (Meteorology, University of Wisconsin), Doctoral Studies (NYU), Executive Director – ICECAP (International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project), Fellow of the AMS, College Professor Climatology/Meteorology, First Director of Meteorology The Weather Channel, Hudson, New Hampshire, U.S.A.
- Chris R. de Freitas, PhD, Climate Scientist, School of Environment, The University of Auckland, New Zealand
- Willem de Lange, MSc (Hons), DPhil (Computer and Earth Sciences), Senior Lecturer in Earth and Ocean Sciences, Waikato University, Hamilton, New Zealand
- James DeMeo, PhD (University of Kansas 1986, Earth/Climate Science), now in Private Research, Ashland, Oregon, U.S.A.
- David Deming, PhD (Geophysics), Associate Professor, College of Arts and Sciences, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, U.S.A.
- James E Dent; B.Sc., FCIWEM, C.Met, FRMetS, C.Env., Independent Consultant, Member of WMO OPACHE Group on Flood Warning, Hadleigh, Suffolk, England
- Robert W. Durrenberger, PhD, former Arizona State Climatologist and President of the American Association of State Climatologists, Professor Emeritus of Geography, Arizona State University; Sun City, Arizona, U.S.A.
- Don J. Easterbrook, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Geology, Western Washington, University, Bellingham, Washington, U.S.A.
- Per Engene, MSc, Biologist, Bø i Telemark, Norway, Co-author The Climate. Science and Politics (2009)
- Robert H. Essenhigh, PhD, E.G. Bailey Professor of Energy Conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, U.S.A.
- David Evans, PhD (EE), MSc (Stat), MSc (EE), MA (Math), BE (EE), BSc, mathematician, carbon accountant and modeler, computer and electrical engineer and head of ‘Science Speak’, Scientific Advisory Panel member – Australian Climate Science Coalition, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
- Sören Floderus, PhD (Physical Geography (Uppsala University)), coastal-environment specialization, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Louis Fowler, BS (Mathematics), MA (Physics), 33 years in environmental measurements (Ambient Air Quality Measurements), Austin, Texas, U.S.A.
- Stewart Franks, PhD, Professor, Hydroclimatologist, University of Newcastle, Australia
- Gordon Fulks, PhD (Physics, University of Chicago), cosmic radiation, solar wind, electromagnetic and geophysical phenomena, Corbett, Oregon, U.S.A.
- R. W. Gauldie, PhD, Research Professor, Hawai’i Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, School of Ocean Earth Sciences and Technology, University of Hawai’i at Manoa (Retired), U.S.A.
- David G. Gee, Professor of Geology (Emeritus), Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Villavagen 16, Uppsala, Sweden
- Lee C. Gerhard, PhD, Senior Scientist Emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey, U.S.A.
- Gerhard Gerlich, Dr.rer.nat. (Mathematical Physics: Magnetohydrodynamics) habil. (Real Measure Manifolds), Professor, Institut für Mathematische Physik, Technische Universität Carolo-Wilhelmina zu Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany, Co-author of “Falsification Of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics”, Int.J.Mod.Phys.,2009
- Albrecht Glatzle, PhD, ScAgr, Agro-Biologist and Gerente ejecutivo, Tropical pasture research and land use management, Director científico de INTTAS, Loma Plata, Paraguay
- Fred Goldberg, PhD, Adj Professor, Royal Institute of Technology (Mech, Eng.), Secretary General KTH International Climate Seminar 2006 and Climate analyst and member of NIPCC, Lidingö, Sweden
- Wayne Goodfellow, PhD (Earth Science), Ocean Evolution, Paleoenvironments, Adjunct Professor, Senior Research Scientist, University of Ottawa, Geological Survey of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Thomas B. Gray, MS, Meteorology, Retired, USAF, Yachats, Oregon, U.S.A.
- Vincent Gray, PhD, New Zealand Climate Coalition, expert reviewer for the IPCC, author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of Climate Change 2001, Wellington, New Zealand
- William M. Gray, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Dept. of Atmospheric Science, Colorado State University, Head of the Tropical Meteorology Project, Fort Collins, Colorado, U.S.A.
- Kenneth P. Green, M.Sc. (Biology, University of San Diego) and a Doctorate in Environmental Science and Engineering from the University of California at Los Angeles, Resident Scholar, American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC, U.S.A.
- Charles B. Hammons, PhD (Applied Mathematics), systems/software engineering, modeling & simulation, design, Consultant, Coyle, Oklahoma, U.S.A.
- William Happer, PhD, Cyrus Fogg Bracket Professor of Physics (research focus is interaction of light and matter, a key mechanism for global warming and cooling), Princeton University; Former Director, Office of Energy Research (now Office of Science), US Department of Energy (supervised climate change research), Member – National Academy of Sciences of the USA, American Academy of Arts and Sciences, American Philosophical Society; Princeton, NJ, USA.
- Howard Hayden, PhD, Emeritus Professor (Physics), University of Connecticut, The Energy Advocate, Connecticut, U.S.A.
- Ross Hays, Atmospheric Scientist, NASA Columbia Scientific Balloon Facility, Palestine, Texas, U.S.A.
- James A. Heimbach, Jr., BA Physics (Franklin and Marshall College), Master’s and PhD in Meteorology (Oklahoma University), Prof. Emeritus of Atmospheric Sciences (University of North Carolina at Asheville), Springvale, Maine, U.S.A.
- Ole Humlum, PhD, Professor, Department of Physical Geography, Institute of Geosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
- Craig D. Idso, PhD, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Tempe, Arizona, U.S.A.
- Sherwood B. Idso, PhD, President, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Tempe, Arizona, U.S.A.
- Terri Jackson, MSc MPhil., Director, Independent Climate Research Group, Northern Ireland and London (Founder of the Energy Group at the Institute of Physics, London), U.K.
- Albert F. Jacobs, Geol.Drs., P. Geol., Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Zbigniew Jaworowski, PhD, DSc, professor of natural sciences, Senior Science Adviser of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, researcher on ice core CO2 records, Warsaw, Poland.
- Terrell Johnson, B.S. (Zoology), M.S. (Wildlife & Range Resources, Air & Water Quality), Principal Environmental Engineer, Certified Wildlife Biologist, Green River, Wyoming, U.S.A.
- Bill Kappel, BS (Physical Science-Geology), BS (Meteorology), Storm Analysis, Climatology, Operation Forecasting, Vice President/Senior Meteorologist, Applied Weather Associates, LLC, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs, U.S.A.
- Wibjörn Karlén, MSc (quaternary sciences), PhD (physical geography), Professor emeritus, Stockholm University, Department of Social and Economic Geography, Geografiska Annaler Ser. A, Uppsala, Sweden
- Olavi Kärner, Ph.D., Extraordinary Research Associate; Dept. of Atmospheric Physics, Tartu Observatory, Toravere, Estonia
- David Kear, PhD, FRSNZ, CMG, geologist, former Director-General of NZ Dept. of Scientific & Industrial Research, Whakatane, Bay of Plenty, New Zealand
- Madhav L. Khandekar, PhD, consultant meteorologist, (former) Research Scientist, Environment Canada, Editor “Climate Research” (03-05), Editorial Board Member “Natural Hazards, IPCC Expert Reviewer 2007, Unionville, Ontario, Canada
- Leonid F. Khilyuk, PhD, Science Secretary, Russian Academy of Natural Sciences, Professor of Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.
- William Kininmonth MSc, MAdmin, former head of Australia’s National Climate Centre and a consultant to the World Meteorological organization’s Commission for Climatology, Kew, Victoria, Australia
- Gary Kubat, BS (Atmospheric Science), MS (Atmospheric Science), professional meteorologist last 18 years, O’Fallon, Illinois, U.S.A.
- Roar Larsen, Dr.ing.(PhD), Chief Scientist, SINTEF (Trondheim, Norway), Adjunct Professor, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
- Douglas Leahey, PhD, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, President – Friends of Science, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Jay Lehr, BEng (Princeton), PhD (environmental science and ground water hydrology), Science Director, The Heartland Institute, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
- Edward Liebsch, BS (Earth Science & Chemistry), MS (Meteorology, Pennsylvania State University), Senior Air Quality Scientist, HDR Inc., Maple Grove, MN, U.S.A.
- Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.
- Peter Link, BS, MS, PhD (Geology, Climatology), Geol/Paleoclimatology, retired, Active in Geol-paleoclimatology, Tulsa University and Industry, Evergreen, Colorado, U.S.A.
- Anthony R. Lupo, Ph.D., Professor of Atmospheric Science, Department of Soil, Environmental, and Atmospheric Science, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, U.S.A.
- Horst Malberg, PhD, former director of Institute of Meteorology, Free University of Berlin, Germany
- Björn Malmgren, PhD, Professor Emeritus in Marine Geology, Paleoclimate Science, Goteborg University, retired, Norrtälje, Sweden
- Fred Michel, PhD, Director, Institute of Environmental Sciences, Associate Professor of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Ferenc Mark Miskolczi, PhD, atmospheric physicist, formerly of NASA’s Langley Research Center, Hampton, Virginia, U.S.A.
- Asmunn Moene, PhD, MSc (Meteorology), former head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway
- Cdr. M. R. Morgan, PhD, FRMetS, climate consultant, former Director in marine meteorology policy and planning in DND Canada, NATO and World Meteorological Organization and later a research scientist in global climatology at Exeter University, UK, now residing in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
- Nils-Axel Mörner, PhD (Sea Level Changes and Climate), Emeritus Professor of Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden
- Robert Neff, M.S. (Meteorology, St Louis University), Weather Officer, USAF; Contractor support to NASA Meteorology Satellites, Retired, Camp Springs, Maryland, U.S.A.
- John Nicol, PhD, Physics, (Retired) James Cook University, Chairman – Australian Climate Science Coalition, Brisbane, Australia
- Ingemar Nordin, PhD, professor in philosophy of science (including a focus on “Climate research, philosophical and sociological aspects of a politicised research area”), Linköpings University, Sweden.
- David Nowell, M.Sc., Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, former chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- James J. O’Brien, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Meteorology and Oceanography, Florida State University, Florida, U.S.A.
- Peter Oliver, BSc (Geology), BSc (Hons, Geochemistry & Geophysics), MSc (Geochemistry), PhD (Geology), specialized in NZ quaternary glaciations, Geochemistry and Paleomagnetism, previously research scientist for the NZ Department of Scientific and Industrial Research, Upper Hutt, New Zealand
- Cliff Ollier, D.Sc., Professor Emeritus (School of Earth and Environment), Research Fellow, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, W.A., Australia
- Garth W. Paltridge, BSc Hons (Qld), MSc, PhD (Melb), DSc (Qld), Emeritus Professor, Honorary Research Fellow and former Director of the Institute of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Visiting Fellow, RSBS, ANU, Canberra, ACT, Australia
- R. Timothy Patterson, PhD, Professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Chair – International Climate Science Coalition, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Alfred H. Pekarek, PhD, Associate Professor of Geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Department, St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minnesota, U.S.A.
- Ian Plimer, PhD, Professor of Mining Geology, The University of Adelaide; Emeritus Professor of Earth Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Australia
- Daniel Joseph Pounder, BS (Meteorology, University of Oklahoma), MS (Atmospheric Sciences, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign); Weather Forecasting, Meteorologist, WILL AM/FM/TV, the public broadcasting station of the University of Illinois, Urbana, U.S.A.
- Brian Pratt, PhD, Professor of Geology (Sedimentology), University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
- Harry N.A. Priem, PhD, Professor (retired) Utrecht University, isotope and planetary geology, Past-President Royal Netherlands Society of Geology and Mining, former President of the Royal Geological and Mining Society of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
- Tom Quirk, MSc (Melbourne), D Phil, MA (Oxford), SMP (Harvard), Member of the Scientific Advisory Panel of the Australian Climate Science Coalition, Member Board Institute of Public Affairs, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
- George A. Reilly, PhD (Geology), Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
- Robert G. Roper, PhD, DSc (University of Adelaide, South Australia), Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.A.
- Arthur Rorsch, PhD, Emeritus Professor, Molecular Genetics, Leiden University, retired member board Netherlands Organization Applied Research TNO, Leiden, The Netherlands
- Curt Rose, BA, MA (University of Western Ontario), MA, PhD (Clark University), Professor Emeritus, Department of Environmental Studies and Geography, Bishop’s University, Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
- Rob Scagel, MSc (forest microclimate specialist), Principal Consultant – Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, British Columbia, Canada
- Clive Schaupmeyer, B.Sc., M.Sc., Professional Agrologist (awarded an Alberta “Distinguished Agrologist”), 40 years of weather and climate studies with respect to crops, Coaldale, Alberta, Canada
- Bruce Schwoegler, BS (Meteorology and Naval Science, University of Wisconsin-Madison), Chief Technology Officer, MySky Communications Inc, meteorologist, science writer and principal/co-founder of MySky, Lakeville, Massachusetts, U.S.A.
- John Shade, BS (Physics), MS (Atmospheric Physics), MS (Applied Statistics), Industrial Statistics Consultant, GDP, Dunfermline, Scotland, United Kingdom
- Gary Sharp, PhD, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, California, U.S.A.
- Thomas P. Sheahen, PhD (Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology), specialist in renewable energy, research and publication (Applied Optics) in modeling and measurement of absorption of infrared radiation by atmospheric CO2, Oakland, Maryland, U.S.A.
- Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist and chemist, Cobourg, Ontario, Canada
- L. Graham Smith, PhD, Associate Professor of Geography, specialising in Resource Management, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada.
- Roy W. Spencer, PhD, climatologist, Principal Research Scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville, Alabama, U.S.A.
- Walter Starck, PhD (Biological Oceanography), marine biologist (specialization in coral reefs and fisheries), author, photographer, Townsville, Australia
- Peter Stilbs, TeknD, Professor of Physical Chemistry, Research Leader, School of Chemical Science and Engineering, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), member of American Chemical Society and life member of American Physical Society, Chair of “Global Warming – Scientific Controversies in Climate Variability”, International seminar meeting at KTH, 2006, Stockholm, Sweden
- Arlin Super, PhD (Meteorology), former Professor of Meteorology at Montana State University, retired Research Meteorologist, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Saint Cloud, Minnesota, U.S.A.
- George H. Taylor, B.A. (Mathematics, U.C. Santa Barbara), M.S. (Meteorology, University of Utah), Certified Consulting Meteorologist, Applied Climate Services, LLC, Former State Climatologist (Oregon), President, American Association of State Climatologists (1998-2000), Corvallis, Oregon, U.S.A.
- Mitchell Taylor, PhD, Biologist (Polar Bear Specialist), Wildlife Research Section, Department of Environment, Igloolik, Nunavut, Canada
- Hendrik Tennekes, PhD, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute, Arnhem, The Netherlands
- Frank Tipler, PhD, Professor of Mathematical Physics, astrophysics, Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.
- Edward M. Tomlinson, MS (Meteorology), Ph.D. (Meteorology, University of Utah), President, Applied Weather Associates, LLC (leader in extreme rainfall storm analyses), 21 years US Air Force in meteorology (Air Weather Service), Monument, Colorado, U.S.A.
- Ralf D. Tscheuschner, Dr.rer.nat. (Theoretical physics: Quantum Theory), Freelance Lecturer and Researcher in Physics and Applied Informatics, Hamburg, Germany. Co-author of “Falsification of The Atmospheric CO2 Greenhouse Effects Within The Frame Of Physics, Int.J.Mod.Phys. 2009
- Gerrit J. van der Lingen, PhD (Utrecht University), geologist and paleoclimatologist, climate change consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, Christchurch, New Zealand
- A.J. (Tom) van Loon, PhD, Professor of Geology (Quaternary Geology), Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland; former President of the European Association of Science Editors
- Gösta Walin, PhD in Theoretical physics, Professor emeritus in oceanography, Earth Science Center, Göteborg University, Göteborg, Sweden
- Neil Waterhouse, PhD (Physics, Thermal, Precise Temperature Measurement), retired, National Research Council, Bell Northern Research, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
- Anthony Watts, 25-year broadcast meteorology veteran and currently chief meteorologist for KPAY-AM radio. In 1987, he founded ItWorks, which supplies custom weather stations, Internet servers, weather graphics content, and broadcast video equipment. In 2007, Watts founded SurfaceStations.org, a Web site devoted to photographing and documenting the quality of weather stations across the U.S., U.S.A.
- Charles L. Wax, PhD (physical geography: climatology, LSU), State Climatologist – Mississippi, past President of the American Association of State Climatologists, Professor, Department of Geosciences, Mississippi State University, U.S.A.
- James Weeg, BS (Geology), MS (Environmental Science), Professional Geologist/hydrologist, Advent Environmental Inc, Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina, U.S.A.
- Forese-Carlo Wezel, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Stratigraphy (global and Mediterranean geology, mass biotic extinctions and paleoclimatology), University of Urbino, Urbino, Italy
- Boris Winterhalter, PhD, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former adjunct professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
- David E. Wojick, PhD, PE, energy and environmental consultant, Technical Advisory Board member – Climate Science Coalition of America, Star Tannery, Virginia, U.S.A.
- Raphael Wust, PhD, Adj Sen. Lecturer, Marine Geology/Sedimentology, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia
- Stan Zlochen, BS (Atmospheric Science), MS (Atmospheric Science), USAF (retired), Omaha, Nebraska, U.S.A.
I also attach a link to an article by Dr Tim Ball called Depoliticising the Weather Forecast which includes the following para “The claim human CO2 is responsible for global warming of the last 50 years is a based on two assumptions now falsified. First, was the claim CO2 stayed in the atmosphere (residency time) for at least 100 years. We now know it is about 5 years. Second, they said the level of human sourced CO2 would accumulate in the atmosphere. This is wrong as Professor Knorr showed in his November 7, 2009 article titled “Is the airborne fraction of anthropogenic CO2 emissions increasing?” His finding, “…the trend in the airborne fraction since 1850 has been 0.7 ± 1.4% per decade, i.e. close to and not significantly different from zero.”
As to the claim in 3 above All data sets show very similar trends in temperature since 1850, with a strong warming trend evident from 1970. These instrumental records of air temperature are consistent with independent records showing rising sea levels, ocean warming and reduced snow and ice my research on the web discloses:
- I refer to my submissions above in respect to data sets showing similar trends in temperature and to the article Hungarian Physicist Dr. Ferenc Miskolczi proves CO2 emissions irrelevant in Earth’s Climate. Written by Dianna Cotter, Portland Examiner | January 12 2010
- Sea level has been rising at a rate of 1.8 mm per year for the past 8,000 years. The IPCC notes that “No significant acceleration in the rate of sea level rise during the 20th century has been detected.” Unless there is another Little Ice Age, they will continue rising at roughly this rate for centuries to come. As to open water in the Arctic, it happens every year in late summer—following weeks in the 40s and 50s.
- Ocean warming and Reduced snow and ice as to both these Professor Singer’s interview of 29 December 2009
Climate Change 101: Is the globe warming? is as follows:
Examiner Interview: Part 1S. Fred Singer is an American atmospheric physicist, Professor Emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, specializing in planetary science, global warming, ozone depletion, and other global environmental issues. He was a Special Advisor on space developments to President Eisenhower and the first Director of the National Weather Satellite Service Center. He is President of the non-profit Science & Environmental Policy Project, author of Hot Talk Cold Science: Global Warming’s Unfinished Debate, Unstoppable Global Warming (NY Times Bestseller), and editor of Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate.
Examiner: Is the globe warming?
Singer: Yes, global mean temperatures have been increasing since 1978, or since 1910, or since 1600, or since the last ice age ended, around 8,000 BC. Global climate has always changed and we should be grateful that we’re in one of those warming periods, which have always been beneficial to humans.
Scientists have been able to identify some of the temperature cycles in nature, but historic data is sparse and inconsistent, depending on conflicting proxies for temperature measurements. Our best global temperature measures are from satellites and weather balloons, covering only the last few decades.
If we use the standard definition of climate as 30-year norms, we don’t have accurate data for even one cycle. Our best measures indicate that global temperatures have been stable, or slightly declining, over the past decade.
Examiner: Is recent global warming exceptional?
Singer: Not in terms of decadal, much less millennial, trends. Several natural cycles, like El Niño, solar intensity, and ocean currents have probably influenced the minor warming trends of the last three decades. In the context of ice ages, the globe is approaching another ice age, just as it has been doing every 100,000 years or so.
Ice core sampling doesn’t produce high-resolution data, like modern satellites do, so the short-term variations can’t be compared. During the past decade, annual averages have fallen and trends have stabilized.
Some temperature charts give the impression of exceptional warming because they begin at the trough of prior cool periods, such as the Little Ice Age and Maunder Minimum. Most charts start at 1890, when we first started to estimate global temperatures from direct instrumentation. There’s nothing exceptional about that date in terms of industrialization or the intensive use of fossil fuels, which accelerated several decades later.
Examiner: But, the North Pole is melting, polar bears are dying, and sea levels are rising. Right?
Singer: Let’s take those one at a time. When global temperatures are increasing, the amount of sea ice decreases. Arctic ice cover has been decreasing. Some of our media expresses surprise that some northern shipping lanes are nearly ice free. They shouldn’t be shocked. Just a hundred years ago, Roald Amundsen navigated the Northwest Passage, above Canada, in a wooden boat, when no icebreakers existed. Baron Adolf Nordenskiöld sailed through the Northeast Passage, above Russia, in 1878. It’s really nothing new.
Remember that Arctic ice cover is only ten percent of the global area, with the remainder in Antarctica. We’ve been able to accurately measure total global ice cover by satellite since 1979 and the trend line is nearly flat, with some decreases in the Northern Hemisphere and some increases in the Southern.
I’m no expert on polar bears, but there was over-hunting in the 1970s that reduced the population. Since restrictions were imposed, almost all of those populations have recovered. The bottom line is that polar bears don’t need ice to survive; they need open water, where they catch and eat seals. [Reference]
Sea levels. It is absolutely true that sea levels are rising. It’s also absolutely true that they’ve been rising at about the same rate for the past 3000 years; roughly 7 inches per century. [Reference]
Let me add another: retreating glaciers. There are many anecdotal stories about mountain glaciers fading away in temperate climes. Mount Kilimanjaro is one. Scientists have studied the causes and discovered that global warming is not the culprit. Changing humidity, prevailing winds, and deforestation explain almost all of the retreat.
In respect to whether or not the globe is warming; the question in respect to the Government’s CPRS legislation is not whether or not warming is happening but whether or not it is attributable to CO2 or does Carbon Dioxide cause global warming and in respect to that question see Professor Singer at Climate Change 101: Does Carbon Dioxide Cause Global Warming?
It is clear that the information on the Government’s Dept of Climate Change website is misleading and deceptive and displays a lack of due diligence by the Government in the wake of Climategate; the IPCC’s peer review process is shown to be corrupted; there is no scientific concensus; best measures indicate that global temperatures have been stable, or slightly declining, over the past decade; the trend line for sea ice is nearly flat, with some decreases in the Northern Hemisphere and some increases in the Southern.
I ask that the information on the Government’s Dept of Climate Change website be immediately amended and that a Royal Commission be commissioned to examine the question as to whether CO2 is causing global warming. What is the use of having such a costly scheme unless we know it actually serves a purpose other than the ‘wonderous glory of an everlasting tax’ to quote Patrick Cook in the Spectator Australia 23 November 2009.
Finally I attach Malcolm Roberts’ excellent paper “Thriving with Nature and Humanity” and Professor Singer’s latest article entitled ‘ClimateGate’ saved our economic future and I hope this communication finds an open mind and honesty in our elected representatives and the media
Yours sincerely,
Val Majkus
Possibly related posts:
I recommend your readers to the paper produced by Costella and referenced in the article above. It concisely sets out the UEA emails in chronological order and provides commentary and explanations throughout. It is an invaluable resource for the layman attempting to understand the (damning) implications of these emails.
I’ve read it. It is so easy to follow the shenanigans of Mann and his co-conspiritors step by step in this paper. It is long, but can be downloaded to be read at leisure. Well worth the time. Even warmists should reconsider their position after reading it.
You can download it at :
http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/reprint/climategate_analysis.pdf .
Also an interesting experiment, which if true makes a mockery of all those warmist scientists.
http://www.minnesotansforglobalwarming.com/m4gw/
I’m scientifically challenged so perhaps someone out there can verify it?
One could nitpick about a lot of the statements here. One nit that I would pick is that “skeptics” do not all believe that any modern warming is due to natural causes. I think most of them believe that the warming COULD be due to natural causes and that we don’t have any good evidence proving that is not the case. That is one of the most important issues related to Climategate: the emails show a concerted effort by some very influential scientists to “bury” evidence for the Medieval Warming Period, evidence which makes it very plausible that some or all of the modern warming IS due to natural causes. Of course there are already hundreds of peer-reviewed papers that attest to a very warm Medieval Warming Period (see CO2science.org), but Climategate brought the issue to light for THOUSANDS of people who would never have bothered looking at the literature. Nothing like a little scandal to get people’s attention!
This post is excellent. But what worries me is that this message will hit a wall ultimately paid for by the taxpayer, so that the taxpayer(s) will not be able to make a value judgement and see that their money
is being horribly misused.
I commend Val Majkus for her efforts. I have been calling for a Australian Royal Commission since Climategate happened. However, my call is for an enquiry into our own Met Office and the CSIRO. There are references in the emails but more importantly in the file Harry_Read_Me to Australian temperature records being fudged up.
With all due respect to Val, I do not think that you will get the Australian Government buying into a Royal Commission on what is essentially something that is happening overseas, for example, the CRU, the IPCC, and scientific papers and reports. The effort and expense of getting everyone here to testify would preclude that.
However, the Australian temperature data is on Australian territory, the institutions of the Australian Met Office and CSIRO are all under our governance, and there are people here who know how the Australian data is taken and now being manipulated.
I believe we should be concentrating our efforts on what is happening in Australia.
I have sent much of the above data that Val has sent, to the Liberal party leader Mr Abbott, with no response so far, not even an acknowledgement of my letter, and to the shadow environment minister Greg Hunt. Mr Hunt keeps telling me to send it to the Government, in spite of my requests for him to bring these things up in Federal Parliament in question time.
Mr Hunt says he has an open mind, but then quotes the usual about thousands of scientists agreeing with the IPCC, the Nobel prize people being on AGW side etc.
I think there is a lot of scope also to start calling for an enquiry into the Climate departments of our own Universities, what they are teaching and so on. This is all on Australian soil and we can all do our bit here chipping away at the edifice.
I for one, am quite horrified by the tales coming from Britain of people having to go off the electricity grid supply altogether, because they can no longer afford electricity. Prices are predicted to go to over 5000 pounds a year!
The various Australian pensioner groups are retiree groups should be contacted with this information. The Government says it will compensate lower income groups but will it? For how long (I did see a report a while ago it would only be for 3 years)? And by how much?
Hi xyzlatin I agree you have a point but the Govt’s retabling of its CPRS proposed legislation gives the matter some relevance and urgency so far as the Aust people are concerned; in regard to temp I’m sure you are aware of http://www.warwickhughes.com/blog/
and there’s a recent tip to WUWT by Jeff of Gembrook AU said on Tips and Notes to WUWT
January 11, 2010 at 1:20 pm
Anthony; I’ve just about completed assembling the raw data for Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, with records dating back to 1st May, 1855.
The original data was supplied to me by Australia’s Bureau of Meteorology in late 2000, and I have added to that data via their monthly updates (last 13 months available online) ever since.
Melbourne temperature recordings were originally recorded in Farenheit until 31st August 1972 and have been recorded in Centigrade since.
The data supplied to me was converted by the Bureau from F to C before I received it.
The Melbourne site would be seriously affected by UHI, and it’s wind sensing data was withdrawn last year after consistently being less windy; and the wind coming from a different direction, compared to nearly all other metropolitan Melbourne observation stations. The rain recording still exists, but would be seriously compromised by the multi-storey buildings to the southern side of the site. The prevailing weather in Melbourne comes from the south-west.
The document is in Excel 2007 & about 1.2 GB uncompressed.
This forum doesn’t allow me to attach a document, so if you could e-mail me at my work email (supplied) – which will hopefully get through our spam filters – I can attach it in a reply.
I’m on holiday next week so this will either need to be before Friday or after 1st February.
I’ll put a comment on this site if there’s further info on WUWT from Jeff
Thanks for the reply Val. I agree that this matter is urgent and the more people calling for a Royal Commission into this matter the better. You have done a lot of work on assembling this submission and I congratulate you for this.
It’s very important for everyone who knows about Val’s submission, to write or email their local member of parliament supporting it. I can’t stress enough that politicians will only react if they think the numbers are changing and their own livelihood is in danger. They do not go on science (if any of them understood it), only on voting numbers.
BTW I can’f find that remark on WUWT tips it has been cleaned off I think. They may be working on an article on it, let’s hope so.
I have been writing to various politicians for a few years now, about this ETS scheme. First Mr Howard, then Brendan Nelson, Malcolm Turnbull, Tony Abbott, Greg Hunt, all the Liberals in House of Reps and Senate, the Nationals, and Labour. No reply from Labour at all, they are sticking together.
Except for the Nationals, and Dr Jensen, the story back is always the same – that the majority of the Australian people want something done about climate change, which is real and the IPCC has spoken and that they are doing the will of the people.
I have been emailing my friends for some time now about the ETS and how it will effect all of us for no useful reason, and asking them to pass it on in the way that jokes are passed around the internet.
It is only now in the last week, that I am finally receiving articles that other people are emailing about the ETS and the climate skulduggery. This is very good news after three years of feeling like I was the only person crying in the wilderness.
People are starting to wake up, but it is taking time to build up this movement and will not be readily apparent before the bill is represented to Parliament. My feeling is that it will pass as there are some Liberals in the Senate who are convinced it is necessary to save the planet.
In my opinion, very few politicians have any scientific knowledge but they can all count the voting numbers which is all they care about.
The good news is in my opinion, that this thing will not lie down and go away. People will have to keep hammering it, because the cost is so huge. There will be many people in Australia who will not be able to afford an extra $1000 (Govt estimate) to $5000 (my estimate) costs.
However, the bad news is that the Green groups are very well funded. If you have been following the EU Referendum blog of Richard North, you will see what huge funds are being siphoned off to support the NGO and green groups.
Because of the preference deals being made with the Greens, to stay in power Labor will sup with the devil. For instance, we have Noel Pearson now up in arms about the Wild Rivers Legislation Qld which has thrown the Aborigines of Cape York under the bus, for Green preferences.
So it is all about the numbers, with very little about science or logic.
Best wishes with the submission. I will keep up my end hammering them with the latest scientific results.
I’m very impressed with the content.
I appreciate so much that those who have advanced knowledge in the physical sciences are giving of themselves in this way.
I entirely agree that ‘Anthropogenic Global Warming’ is the biggest scam of all time.
Dr Playford, I wish you would talk to some of your peers at your Alma mater UWA (University of Western Australia). Under the auspices of the Vice Chancellor Prof Allan Robson, a Prof of Psychology, Stephan Lewandowsky was able to hold a rabid pro AGW presentation supposedly to help the addled minded to distinguish between deniers and sceptics. The presentation ended with past Labor State Premier and Federal Member of Parliament Carmen Lawrence bidding the audience to sign petitions of support for the IPCC Consensus Science. I wrote to the Vice Chancellor expressing my dismay at not receiving a balanced presentation as was inferred by the invitation. The response on the Vice Chancellor’s behalf by Prof Bill Louden was “Many of the scientists at The University of Western Australia are engaged in research that will illuminate the debates on climate change. I defer to them, and to the peer review processes that underpin the international research efforts in science, on the substantive matters you mention in your email.” I wonder if they have even heard of Climategate?
How did the remains of Oetzi, the 5000 year old “Ice Man” found on a rocky slope in the Alps a few years ago, survive the Medieval Warming?
why does this matter about the ice man not melting during the medieval warming? relevance is?
Norm, the medieval warming did not thaw out the glaciers, they just retreated a bit around the edges like what is now happening. Logic would say that if the man was intact, he must have been in a bit which had not thawed out before now.
However, as you are able to quote the man’s name, you must already be familiar with the case so your point is?
My point is that the Medieval Warming is presented as evidence that current high temperatures are part of the natural cycle so they are caused by natural forces, but if a ~400 year period of higher temperatures didn’t melt glaciers that are melting today, today’s warming is extraordinary. So what is happening now for the first time in over 5000 years? An obvious answer is the rapid rise in atmospheric CO2. I have seen no other explanation of sufficient magnitude and timing.
Norm – quote “I have seen no other explanation of sufficient magnitude and timing.”
Maybe you haven’t looked very hard. Today’s warming is not extraordinary. There are plenty of books, articles, graphs and papers discussing other reasons for climate fluctuations if you really want to inform yourself.
There is also a rather large debate over the actual magnitude of the predictions from the computer models. The “real” temperature station figures are in a mess, and there has been a huge reduction in temperature stations all around the world.
As for your statement “if a ~400 year period of higher temperatures didn’t melt glaciers that are melting today”, you are carelessly casting a wide net aren’t you? How do you know which glaciers melted when?
Actually the IPCC has just had to retract it’s (also careless) statement about glaciers melting in the Himalayas by 2035. It turns out that it (carelessly) took the “facts” from a WWF propaganda leaflet, that itself (carelessly or otherwise) took its facts from a phone call by a journalist who had heard something from an Indian scientist who was just speculating! How’s that for scientific integrity of the IPCC?
“So what is happening now for the first time in over 5000 years?” Again, you are way out of your depth with your wild statements. 5000 years? First time? Please.
Perhaps you might like to read up on what the sun is doing at the moment. You might find a completely opposite viewpoint on what may be happening to the Earth soon, and it’s a lot scarier than warming. Try Abdussamatov.
Try the website Wattsupwiththat and follow the links to other sites at the right hand side. Try CLOUD.
From the Times online 17th January 2010.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article6991177.ece
“A WARNING that climate change will melt most of the Himalayan glaciers by 2035 is likely to be retracted after a series of scientific blunders by the United Nations body that issued it.
Two years ago the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a benchmark report that was claimed to incorporate the latest and most detailed research into the impact of global warming. A central claim was the world’s glaciers were melting so fast that those in the Himalayas could vanish by 2035.
In the past few days the scientists behind the warning have admitted that it was based on a news story in the New Scientist, a popular science journal, published eight years before the IPCC’s 2007 report.
It has also emerged that the New Scientist report was itself based on a short telephone interview with Syed Hasnain, a little-known Indian scientist then based at Jawaharlal Nehru University in Delhi.
Hasnain has since admitted that the claim was “speculation” and was not supported by any formal research. If confirmed it would be one of the most serious failures yet seen in climate research. The IPCC was set up precisely to ensure that world leaders had the best possible scientific advice on climate change.
Professor Murari Lal, who oversaw the chapter on glaciers in the IPCC report, said he would recommend that the claim about glaciers be dropped: “If Hasnain says officially that he never asserted this, or that it is a wrong presumption, than I will recommend that the assertion about Himalayan glaciers be removed from future IPCC assessments.”
I have read many reports and watched many videos by Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) critics. (Sorry, I don’t hold Russian climate science in high regard. Their objectivity in the face of Russia’s heavy dependence on fossil fuels is suspect.) At some point they all rely on today’s conditions being considered normal, albeit warmer than average. If present temperatures are extraordinary, which I believe is shown by Oetzi’s found remains, there must be some cause that did not exist until now. It seems extremely unlikely that we are so unlucky as to be living (and burning fossil fuel as never before) at exactly the time when some natural cause or causes fool us into thinking AGW is true. I conclude that it is.
The remaining question is whether AGW will be severe enough to damage human society more than the cost of minimising it. Melting permafrost or, more hypothetically, subsea clathrates releasing gigatons of methane would be catastrophic. Perhaps that won’t happen (although see http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/climate/2009/07/14/the-latest-on-permafrost/), but reducing CO2 emissions is something we should be doing anyway. Importing oil costs hundreds of billions, mining coal is highly destructive, and, although they are difficult and somewhat expensive now, alternatives can eventually supply our energy needs with much lower environmental impact. Energy conservation is already cheaper than finding more.
Humans are on a selfish and self-destructive path. Let’s not resist finding a new one.
Norm Rhett..
Yes Norm do some digging..your’re not likey to find anything really worth while on Wattsupwiththat but sure, go ahead. You’ll really find your time rewarded by going to Realclimate.org or skeptical science though…or DeSmogBlog or Climate Progress..
The ice in glaciers moves.
A glacier is sometimes called a river of ice. After 5000 years a human body on a glacier would be highly diluted soup.
No. The river analogy is not a good one. There aren’t any “rapids,” for example. The ice flows as a “chunk,” although it breaks apart somewhat as it moves (crevasses). Many things are preserved well in glaciers.
Does any sensible person camp on a glacier? A brief search only turned up strong warnings about even crossing one.
Evidently so, here’s a website, looks like some offer backpacking trips with camping on the glaciers.
http://www.myseveralworlds.com/2009/03/02/the-worlds-best-glacier-trekking-getaways/
I was mistaken about the body not being found in a glacier. However,
“http://www.mummytombs.com/otzi/findspot.htm” provides the description, “In this protected area beneath the glacier, the ice of the glacier moved above the iceman, allowing him to stay securely in place. The glacier began to melt in the 1800s and has continued melting today.” He was apparently found where he died.
Phil Playford is wrong!
The biggest scam is yet to arrive.The Rudd Governments new tax ,ETS, to be perpetrated on the deliberately misled Aussie taxpayers.
Val Majkus letter is not sufficiently punchy, though I applaud the effort[ie it lacks "sound bites"] to get through to our elected reps.
Also, may I draw your collective attentions to Christopher Bookers excellent “The Real Global Warming Disaster”[Continuum International publishing 2009 isbn 9781441110527] which carefully documents and references the “crisis”of the last 20 years. It is replete with quotable content such as Alexander Illarionov [Moscow 2004]” none of the assertions made in the Kyoto Protocol and the “scientific ” theory on which the Kyoto Protocol is based have been borne out by actual data.”
By the way, there is an online petition to the UK Govt requesting an enquiry into the climategate emails. Only for UK citizens but still, another small chip emerging. Uk people go here to sign
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/HADLEY-LEAK/#detail
Hello from Canada,
I am not a scientist but have been following this since the e-mails/computer codes were released. It does not take a high degree of intelligence to figure out what is going on here. AGW is a trojan horse for Cap and Trade. The Government wins through the tax on the Cap. Financial institutions and certain individuals with a personal interest in this gain through the sale of carbon credits. Universities and foundations gain through grants when it falls under the umbrella of global warming. The big threat here is Cap and Trade. All governments should have a legitimate policy in place to deal with the environment. Governments should also assist in the funding for R & D into green technology to replace fossil fuels. The current process (Copenhagen) and Mexico next should be scrapped.
The cracks are starting to appear in this scam. James Coleman’s Special Report on KUSI TV San Diego will certainly help. Lord Monckton is doing everything he can as well.
The situation Peter Spencer is in is horrendous. Search Peter Spencer, Kyoto, Australia. This is about a farmer losing his property as a result of the Australia government enforcing the Kyoto protocol agreement.
This could happen again. Check into UN Agenda 21 – Rio Delegation
(principles)
A very ugly picture presents itself when you look at Lord Moncktons critique of the Copenhagen Treaty combinded with UN Agenda 21. There is a ton of information criticizing UN Agenda 21 on the internet.
It seems AGW provides for taxation and redistribution of wealth.
UN Agenda 21 will define how we live.
Here is an article that appeared in the Winnipeg Sun regarding Cap and Trade.
http://www.winnipegsun.com/comment/columnists/lorrie_goldstein/2010/01/13/12455671-qmi.html
We have to somehow get our politicians to scrap Cap and Trade and go back to the drawing board regarding Climate policy and R & D for green energy.
…”A very ugly picture presents itself when you look at Lord Moncktons critique of the Copenhagen Treaty…”
This statement on it’s own is the most truthful statement in this post
Yes a very ugly picture of climategate. UEA, Michael Mann and lemmings like you Steve.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/01/18/climategate-the-crutape-letters-now-online-at-amazon-com/#more-15371
The first book on climategate now available on Amazon or from the authors.
xyzlatin; with your interest in temperatures you would want to read this article
http://www.scribd.com/doc/25338819/What-Does-Averge-Temperature-Actually-Mean
hope you can use that for some ammunition;
xyzlatin; Jury still out on climate change: CSIRO
BY ROSSLYN BEEBY, SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
19 Jan, 2010 08:54 AM http://www.canberratimes.com.au:80/news/local/news/general/jury-still-out-on-climate-change-csiro/1728307.aspx
i’m sure you’ll be interested
Norm Rhett illustrates beautifully in one blog the entire psychology of Climate Alarm. At the heart of the movement is the fundamental belief that “Humans are on a selfish and self-destructive path” and that we must find a new path. This path shuns “destructive coal mining” and use of oil, “so reducing CO2 emissions is something we should be doing anyway” – i.e. regardless whether CO2 causes dangerous global warming. So he really does not care if AGW is true – I have heard this from many greens. That is why we get arguments of fallacy and unreason from otherwise intelligent people – such as the irrelevant Oetzi’s man trying to disprove MWP, and the “I can’t think of any other reason for warming so it must be CO2” and the ever shriller warnings of catastrophe such as melting permafrost, to support action not by science but by the precautionary principle. It is thus not possible to convince emotional environmentalists like Norm with arguments of science.
I would be very happy to be convinced by arguments of science because science is based on evidence. My evidence shows that today’s temperatures are the warmest in over 5000 years, which is hardly irrelevant. It undercuts any claim that the present warming is natural. That natural causes lay dormant for millenia, then appeared just when humans dramatically increased fossil fuel burning is incredible. Any valid scientific counter argument must disprove my evidence.
Norm and Steve will soon be at a theater near you starring in: “Clueless Science” also known as “Dumb and Dumber 2″.
Norm, Here is a link to 500 peer-Reviewed- Papers Supporting Skepticism of “Man-Made” Global Warming .
http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html
Now, when you have read through that lot, get back to us and let us know your conclusions. No cherry picking now, read the lot.
Chris, I’m still waiting for an explanation of how the Medieval Warming, with temperatures alleged to have been higher than today’s, failed to melt a glacier containing a 5000 year old human body that was found recently. I think the case for natural causes of today’s warming hangs on that evidence.
There might be something useful in
Was the Medieval Warm Period Global?
Wallace S. Broecker
Science, New Series, Vol. 291, No. 5508. (Feb. 23, 2001), pp. 1497-1499.
Reading it requires a subscription. If you have such could you please send me a copy?
Well mate, here’s an explanation for you and your 5000 year old Ice Man: I guess not all the glaciers in Europe melted during the Medieval warming period.
Now why don’t you and the Ice Man go back to your AGW alter and continue praying for a some REAL evidence (no, ice men not included). I believe the high priest Al Gore will be delivering a sermon later, on boosting profits on the back of harmless gasses.
Allow me to fill you in on a little secret. It was the AGW scientist crowds that said we have proof of AGW. Unfortunately they are yet to prove it as it appears their proof and indeed their whole scientific methodology is highly questionable. We, the non-believers don’t have anything to prove because we are not the ones predicting catastrophic climate change!
“[...]an explanation of how the Medieval Warming, with temperatures alleged to have been higher than today’s, failed to melt a glacier containing a 5000 year old human body that was found recently.”
Weather isn’t a simple world blanket, right? Conditions for local weather and climates would be different then than they are now. It is not likely that the same glacier would always melt at exactly the same rate at the exact same global average temperature. If climate and weather were really that predictable, everyone would know for sure by now whether or not we’re to blame for global climate change and the local weather man wouldn’t ruin my plans to go to the park.
Norm, as you have pointed out the glacier over the ICE man has known to been ‘been melting from 1880′. The melting took time. The fact that it finally melted enough to find the Ice man has little to do with the current climate. Such a discussion is common and meaningless cherry picking of data by AWG supporters, it proves nothing, is a neither scientific nor valid argument. You should look for real proof not speculation.
Your impression that current temperatures are the warmest in 5000 years is a myth. The myth is supported by frauds such as Michael Mann and published in shoddy sites like Real Climate. I have looked at that site. It is full of misinformation, shoddy revisionist work and science fiction. The myth was created by revisionist rewriting of the temperature records by our so called scientific community. The debunked hockey stick graph was part of that myth. Michael Mann still claims that his hockey stick chart is good science. But, one does not need a PHD to understand just how weak that claim is.
Look at the temperature record at real climate and see how cold the 1930′s appear compared to now. If you are fooled by that presentation, you would never know that 1934-1939 was as warm as today. And that the warmest year in recent history was in the late 1930′s. Until recently a more correct temperature presentation was commonly presented which properly showed the historical temperatures. There are other charts on RealClimate which tell a different story. Older charts which clearly show that the 1930′s were equally warm with the last 10 years. These non-revised charts are also found within many scientific reports and on web sites.
The revised charts now produced from the altered data by both national and international data bases are self debunking to anyone who has been alive more than a few decades and who has a minimal level of critical thinking skills. You just have to get over the fact that the data has been altered for political reasons.
The fact that climate gate and published papers explain how this fraud was done (yes peer reviewed) is comforting to those of us who have long recognized the fraud.
Do not be made a fool of by revisionists. Open your mind to the possibility of your being misled. Check the data. Cross check with WUWT and other sites and see what is really up. If you still want to play the fool go for it. Just do not expect to impress us with already debunked myths.
The Medieval Warming is consistently shown by sceptics as four centuries of temperatures well above the end of today’s hockey stick. See http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/11/29/the-medieval-warm-period-a-global-phenonmena-unprecedented-warming-or-unprecedented-data-manipulation/
wherein “Glaciers were smaller than today” and a graph as described above. Let me know if you find one of your climate experts who makes the case that the whole world was warmer except the Austro-Italian Alps.
The argument that the globe as a whole is getting warmer even though some local areas are getting colder is being used to explain the climate today. Why can’t it be used to explain the climate hundreds of years ago?
I don’t think that just because one glacier was able to melt more in our time than it did in previous times means that all of them melted in the same way. Just like I don’t automatically believe that every last feature on earth was affected exactly the same way in the past (such as the statement where all glaciers were melted more then than they are now). Such generalizations make any argument in this debate lack the details needed to make a point argumentative. We’re talking about the planet, which is constantly changing in more ways than we know, not a set of ice cubes in an atmospherically controlled lab where conditions are still less than perfectly replicated over and over. The planet has never been the same for any period of time, ever. The surface of the planet will always be affected differently by even the same exact forces to any extent.
The gorebull warming scam is being driven by :
1. Those at the UN who aspire to global governance
2. “Scientists” dependent on grants
3. Governments jumping on a tax opportunity
4. Scam artists in “carbon” trading
There is no empirical evidence that carbon dioxide is a driver of a constantly changing climate. Let alone man’s miniscule contribution to the level of of it in the atmosphere.
I applaud the efforts of all who attempt to draw the attention of vote conscious politicians to these facts so that the ridiculous ETS/CRPS legislation can be rejected.
Hello Valerie.
Many thanks for your note. It is pleasing to me to see you are a wake up and an activist.
I cannot help you with the names of, (sucked in and dumb), industry leaders, but a couple of my friends may be able to help you.
For sound information, there are a number of excellent Web sites.
Below is an easily understood presentation by Hans Schreuder.
Please note that Mr. Schreuder is a member of Mensa. He is a genuine scientist and his logical arguments are irrefutable.
A reasonably well educated person of 16 to 17 years of age could understand this presentation.
Under no circumstances should Australians be lulled into a EMS or any other measure which may allegedly effect the climate.
http://www.nothingtodowithco2.com/pdf/AGW_presentation_ILMCD.pdf
You will see that Carbon Dioxide has not and cannot effect the climate in any manner whatsoever. And in particular Carbon Dioxide emitted by Man’s activities.
Senators and MHRs should do all in their power to arrest the proposed ETS legislation, as well as any other “Climate Control” measures.
Regards,
[...] reader Ronald Kitching made a comment that includes a link to an easy-to-read presentation that as he says is, “an easily [...]
Val
It is a long piece but very good. I will be interested in any responses you get eventually
Barb
[...] friends in Australia. We recently published a fine Open Letter to Aussie politicians by attorney, Val Majkus and articles highlighting the superb analysis of the Climategate emails, by Australian physicist, [...]
[...] More here [...]