Notices
ScoobyNet General General Subaru Discussion

Global Warming and PPP - Decision

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 27 May 2006, 12:33 AM
  #31  
Martin2005
Scooby Regular
 
Martin2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by hedgehog
It is far from being a fact. The output of what climate scientists call story lines are far from being facts, they are merely models run on computers. Some of them demonstrate human forcing, some don't.

There are lots of references from peer reviewed journals in my previous posts on the topic should you care to read up on it. However, global climate change is not caused by man in much the same way as man didn't cause the last ice age to suddenly melt.

Much as I'd love to have control of the climate the unfortunate truth is that I have no control over it at all.
So does that mean you totally dismiss the vast majority of the evidence because it doesn't fit your arguement, I think we should all keep more open minds on this issue.
Old 27 May 2006, 12:42 AM
  #32  
AVI-8
Scooby Regular
 
AVI-8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I dismiss it tests have proven that levels of CO2 have gone up and down over millions of years, all of industry, aeroplanes, cars and trucks running at the same time couldnt produce anywhere near the levels of CO2 being ejected into the atmosphere by the countless simultaneous volcano eruptions which was what was happening on our planet before life itself.

The slight increase we have now is a drop in the ocean.

Global warming my erse
Old 27 May 2006, 12:48 AM
  #33  
Martin2005
Scooby Regular
 
Martin2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by AVI-8
I dismiss it tests have proven that levels of CO2 have gone up and down over millions of years, all of industry, aeroplanes, cars and trucks running at the same time couldnt produce anywhere near the levels of CO2 being ejected into the atmosphere by the countless simultaneous volcano eruptions which was what was happening on our planet before life itself.

The slight increase we have now is a drop in the ocean.

Global warming my erse
Doesn't sound like an open mind to me

BTW the very recent rise in both temp and CO2 has nothing to do with vulcanic activity, according to the maths anyway

God all this talk about the environment is making me want to go out for a blast in my Scoob
Old 27 May 2006, 01:05 AM
  #34  
AVI-8
Scooby Regular
 
AVI-8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Scotland
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Martin2005
Doesn't sound like an open mind to me

BTW the very recent rise in both temp and CO2 has nothing to do with vulcanic activity, according to the maths anyway

God all this talk about the environment is making me want to go out for a blast in my Scoob
No I know the recent rise in temp has nothing to do with volcanic activity, but in milenia past it has and with no detrimental effect.

And no im not open minded , unlike most a take with a pinch of salt all the crap I read in newspapers.

And yes i'm looking forward to going for a blast in my Scoob as well but until I fit a new MAF sesor i'll just have do with a less polluting leisurly drive
Old 27 May 2006, 11:30 AM
  #35  
hedgehog
Scooby Regular
 
hedgehog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Martin2005
I know that the earth has been hotter than it is now, and I know it been colder before, but these changes happened over thousands of years, the recent increase in global temperature has happened over the last 30 years. The modelling work that has been done has proved that there is an absolute correlation between CO2 output and these temperature changes, so you have to disbelieve maths and physics not to accept that global warming and it's causes are real and man made.
The last ice age melted in approx 50 years. The current warming trend started at the end of the little ice age and, apart from a 0.2 degree drop in the middle part of the last century has managed a steady rise of 0.65 degress in about 150 years. We have recently made up the 0.2 degree drop.

All this is well documented in peer reviewed papers in the various science journals. Moonin et al also documented that connection between CO2 and temperature which indicates that a rise in atmospheric CO2 lags a temperature rise by 800 years or so. Some of the models being presented show impossible rises in temperature based upon current knowledge of the remaining supplies of fossil fuels.

To date science can demonstrate no evidence for man made global warming, any possible impact we might be having is well down in the noise, and as the following open letter to the PM of canada shows if you read the science with an open mind you will discover the same thing:

Dear Prime Minister:



As accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines, we are writing to propose that balanced, comprehensive public-consultation sessions be held so as to examine the scientific foundation of the federal government's climate-change plans. This would be entirely consistent with your recent commitment to conduct a review of the Kyoto Protocol. Although many of us made the same suggestion to then-prime ministers Martin and Chrétien, neither responded, and, to date, no formal, independent climate-science review has been conducted in Canada. Much of the billions of dollars earmarked for implementation of the protocol in Canada will be squandered without a proper assessment of recent developments in climate science.



Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. Yet this is precisely what the United Nations did in creating and promoting Kyoto and still does in the alarmist forecasts on which Canada's climate policies are based. Even if the climate models were realistic, the environmental impact of Canada delaying implementation of Kyoto or other greenhouse-gas reduction schemes, pending completion of consultations, would be insignificant. Directing your government to convene balanced, open hearings as soon as possible would be a most prudent and responsible course of action.



While the confident pronouncements of scientifically unqualified environmental groups may provide for sensational headlines, they are no basis for mature policy formulation. The study of global climate change is, as you have said, an "emerging science," one that is perhaps the most complex ever tackled. It may be many years yet before we properly understand the Earth's climate system. Nevertheless, significant advances have been made since the protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.



We appreciate the difficulty any government has formulating sensible science-based policy when the loudest voices always seem to be pushing in the opposite direction. However, by convening open, unbiased consultations, Canadians will be permitted to hear from experts on both sides of the debate in the climate-science community. When the public comes to understand that there is no "consensus" among climate scientists about the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, the government will be in a far better position to develop plans that reflect reality and so benefit both the environment and the economy.



"Climate change is real" is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural "noise." The new Canadian government's commitment to reducing air, land and water pollution is commendable, but allocating funds to "stopping climate change" would be irrational. We need to continue intensive research into the real causes of climate change and help our most vulnerable citizens adapt to whatever nature throws at us next.



We believe the Canadian public and government decision-makers need and deserve to hear the whole story concerning this very complex issue. It was only 30 years ago that many of today's global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.



We hope that you will examine our proposal carefully and we stand willing and able to furnish you with more information on this crucially important topic.



CC: The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment, and the Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources

- - -



Sincerely,



Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa



Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia's National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa



Dr. R. Timothy Patterson, professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa



Dr. Fred Michel, director, Institute of Environmental Science and associate professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa



Dr. Madhav Khandekar, former research scientist, Environment Canada. Member of editorial board of Climate Research and Natural Hazards



Dr. Paul Copper, FRSC, professor emeritus, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.



Dr. Ross McKitrick, associate professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Ont.



Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology, University of Winnipeg; environmental consultant



Dr. Andreas Prokocon, adjunct professor of earth sciences, University of Ottawa; consultant in statistics and geology



Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and past chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa



Dr. Christopher Essex, professor of applied mathematics and associate director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.



Dr. Gordon E. Swaters, professor of applied mathematics, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, and member, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Research Group, University of Alberta



Dr. L. Graham Smith, associate professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.



Dr. G. Cornelis van Kooten, professor and Canada Research Chair in environmental studies and climate change, Dept. of Economics, University of Victoria



Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Dept. of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax



Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, climate consultant, former meteorology advisor to the World Meteorological Organization. Previously research scientist in climatology at University of Exeter, U.K.



Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and professor emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta



Dr. David E. Wojick, P.Eng., energy consultant, Star Tannery, Va., and Sioux Lookout, Ont.



Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.



Dr. Douglas Leahey, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary



Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist, chemist, Cobourg, Ont.



Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, The University of Auckland, N.Z.



Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology



Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, emeritus professor of physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.



Mr. George Taylor, Dept. of Meteorology, Oregon State University; Oregon State climatologist; past president, American Association of State Climatologists



Dr. Ian Plimer, professor of geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide; emeritus professor of earth sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia



Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia



Mr. William Kininmonth, Australasian Climate Research, former Head National Climate Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology, Scientific and Technical Review



Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute



Dr. Gerrit J. van der Lingen, geologist/paleoclimatologist, Climate Change Consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand



Dr. Patrick J. Michaels, professor of environmental sciences, University of Virginia



Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics & geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden



Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.



Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville



Dr. Al Pekarek, associate professor of geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minn.



Dr. Marcel Leroux, professor emeritus of climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS



Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, Unit of Insects and Infectious Diseases, Paris, France. Expert reviewer, IPCC Working group II, chapter 8 (human health)



Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, physicist and chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland



Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, reader, Dept. of Geography, University of Hull, U.K.; editor, Energy & Environment



Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations) and an economist who has focused on climate change



Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, senior scientist emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey



Dr. Asmunn Moene, past head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway



Dr. August H. Auer, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand



Dr. Vincent Gray, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of 'Climate Change 2001,' Wellington, N.Z.



Dr. Howard Hayden, emeritus professor of physics, University of Connecticut



Dr Benny Peiser, professor of social anthropology, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K.



Dr. Jack Barrett, chemist and spectroscopist, formerly with Imperial College London, U.K.



Dr. William J.R. Alexander, professor emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa. Member, United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000



Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences, University of Virginia; former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service



Dr. Harry N.A. Priem, emeritus professor of planetary geology and isotope geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences; past president of the Royal Netherlands Geological & Mining Society



Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey professor of energy conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University



Dr. Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist and climate researcher, Boston, Mass.



Douglas Hoyt, senior scientist at Raytheon (retired) and co-author of the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change; previously with NCAR, NOAA, and the World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland



Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller, official IPCC reviewer, Bavaria, Germany



Dr. Boris Winterhalter, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland



Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden



Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, physicist/meteorologist, previously with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Calif.; atmospheric consultant.



Dr. Art Robinson, founder, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Ore.



Dr. Arthur Rörsch, emeritus professor of molecular genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands; past board member, Netherlands organization for applied research (TNO) in environmental, food and public health



Dr. Alister McFarquhar, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.; international economist



Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.
Old 27 May 2006, 12:10 PM
  #36  
Martin2005
Scooby Regular
 
Martin2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by hedgehog
The last ice age melted in approx 50 years. The current warming trend started at the end of the little ice age and, apart from a 0.2 degree drop in the middle part of the last century has managed a steady rise of 0.65 degress in about 150 years. We have recently made up the 0.2 degree drop.

All this is well documented in peer reviewed papers in the various science journals. Moonin et al also documented that connection between CO2 and temperature which indicates that a rise in atmospheric CO2 lags a temperature rise by 800 years or so. Some of the models being presented show impossible rises in temperature based upon current knowledge of the remaining supplies of fossil fuels.

To date science can demonstrate no evidence for man made global warming, any possible impact we might be having is well down in the noise, and as the following open letter to the PM of canada shows if you read the science with an open mind you will discover the same thing:

Dear Prime Minister:



As accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines, we are writing to propose that balanced, comprehensive public-consultation sessions be held so as to examine the scientific foundation of the federal government's climate-change plans. This would be entirely consistent with your recent commitment to conduct a review of the Kyoto Protocol. Although many of us made the same suggestion to then-prime ministers Martin and Chrétien, neither responded, and, to date, no formal, independent climate-science review has been conducted in Canada. Much of the billions of dollars earmarked for implementation of the protocol in Canada will be squandered without a proper assessment of recent developments in climate science.



Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. Yet this is precisely what the United Nations did in creating and promoting Kyoto and still does in the alarmist forecasts on which Canada's climate policies are based. Even if the climate models were realistic, the environmental impact of Canada delaying implementation of Kyoto or other greenhouse-gas reduction schemes, pending completion of consultations, would be insignificant. Directing your government to convene balanced, open hearings as soon as possible would be a most prudent and responsible course of action.



While the confident pronouncements of scientifically unqualified environmental groups may provide for sensational headlines, they are no basis for mature policy formulation. The study of global climate change is, as you have said, an "emerging science," one that is perhaps the most complex ever tackled. It may be many years yet before we properly understand the Earth's climate system. Nevertheless, significant advances have been made since the protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.



We appreciate the difficulty any government has formulating sensible science-based policy when the loudest voices always seem to be pushing in the opposite direction. However, by convening open, unbiased consultations, Canadians will be permitted to hear from experts on both sides of the debate in the climate-science community. When the public comes to understand that there is no "consensus" among climate scientists about the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, the government will be in a far better position to develop plans that reflect reality and so benefit both the environment and the economy.



"Climate change is real" is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural "noise." The new Canadian government's commitment to reducing air, land and water pollution is commendable, but allocating funds to "stopping climate change" would be irrational. We need to continue intensive research into the real causes of climate change and help our most vulnerable citizens adapt to whatever nature throws at us next.



We believe the Canadian public and government decision-makers need and deserve to hear the whole story concerning this very complex issue. It was only 30 years ago that many of today's global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.



We hope that you will examine our proposal carefully and we stand willing and able to furnish you with more information on this crucially important topic.



CC: The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment, and the Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources

- - -



Sincerely,



Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa



Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia's National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa



Dr. R. Timothy Patterson, professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa



Dr. Fred Michel, director, Institute of Environmental Science and associate professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa



Dr. Madhav Khandekar, former research scientist, Environment Canada. Member of editorial board of Climate Research and Natural Hazards



Dr. Paul Copper, FRSC, professor emeritus, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.



Dr. Ross McKitrick, associate professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Ont.



Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology, University of Winnipeg; environmental consultant



Dr. Andreas Prokocon, adjunct professor of earth sciences, University of Ottawa; consultant in statistics and geology



Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and past chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa



Dr. Christopher Essex, professor of applied mathematics and associate director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.



Dr. Gordon E. Swaters, professor of applied mathematics, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, and member, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Research Group, University of Alberta



Dr. L. Graham Smith, associate professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.



Dr. G. Cornelis van Kooten, professor and Canada Research Chair in environmental studies and climate change, Dept. of Economics, University of Victoria



Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Dept. of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax



Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, climate consultant, former meteorology advisor to the World Meteorological Organization. Previously research scientist in climatology at University of Exeter, U.K.



Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and professor emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta



Dr. David E. Wojick, P.Eng., energy consultant, Star Tannery, Va., and Sioux Lookout, Ont.



Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.



Dr. Douglas Leahey, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary



Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist, chemist, Cobourg, Ont.



Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, The University of Auckland, N.Z.



Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology



Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, emeritus professor of physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.



Mr. George Taylor, Dept. of Meteorology, Oregon State University; Oregon State climatologist; past president, American Association of State Climatologists



Dr. Ian Plimer, professor of geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide; emeritus professor of earth sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia



Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia



Mr. William Kininmonth, Australasian Climate Research, former Head National Climate Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology, Scientific and Technical Review



Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute



Dr. Gerrit J. van der Lingen, geologist/paleoclimatologist, Climate Change Consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand



Dr. Patrick J. Michaels, professor of environmental sciences, University of Virginia



Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics & geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden



Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.



Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville



Dr. Al Pekarek, associate professor of geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minn.



Dr. Marcel Leroux, professor emeritus of climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS



Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, Unit of Insects and Infectious Diseases, Paris, France. Expert reviewer, IPCC Working group II, chapter 8 (human health)



Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, physicist and chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland



Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, reader, Dept. of Geography, University of Hull, U.K.; editor, Energy & Environment



Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations) and an economist who has focused on climate change



Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, senior scientist emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey



Dr. Asmunn Moene, past head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway



Dr. August H. Auer, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand



Dr. Vincent Gray, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of 'Climate Change 2001,' Wellington, N.Z.



Dr. Howard Hayden, emeritus professor of physics, University of Connecticut



Dr Benny Peiser, professor of social anthropology, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K.



Dr. Jack Barrett, chemist and spectroscopist, formerly with Imperial College London, U.K.



Dr. William J.R. Alexander, professor emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa. Member, United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000



Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences, University of Virginia; former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service



Dr. Harry N.A. Priem, emeritus professor of planetary geology and isotope geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences; past president of the Royal Netherlands Geological & Mining Society



Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey professor of energy conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University



Dr. Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist and climate researcher, Boston, Mass.



Douglas Hoyt, senior scientist at Raytheon (retired) and co-author of the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change; previously with NCAR, NOAA, and the World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland



Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller, official IPCC reviewer, Bavaria, Germany



Dr. Boris Winterhalter, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland



Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden



Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, physicist/meteorologist, previously with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Calif.; atmospheric consultant.



Dr. Art Robinson, founder, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Ore.



Dr. Arthur Rörsch, emeritus professor of molecular genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands; past board member, Netherlands organization for applied research (TNO) in environmental, food and public health



Dr. Alister McFarquhar, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.; international economist



Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.
Intersting stuff, and I really hope they're right and the vast majority of the scientific community are wrong.

BTW go back 10 years and the scientific community were split 50 : 50 on climate change and it's causes. Over that time most of 'anti global warming' scientist have changed their view, no doubt including many of the scientist that are listed in above.

I think that we should not dismiss either side of the arguement, because this would be one hell of an issue to get wrong
Old 27 May 2006, 12:31 PM
  #37  
hedgehog
Scooby Regular
 
hedgehog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Martin2005
Intersting stuff, and I really hope they're right and the vast majority of the scientific community are wrong.

BTW go back 10 years and the scientific community were split 50 : 50 on climate change and it's causes. Over that time most of 'anti global warming' scientist have changed their view, no doubt including many of the scientist that are listed in above.

I think that we should not dismiss either side of the arguement, because this would be one hell of an issue to get wrong
I'm not dismissing it, science dismisses it because there is no evidence for it. You will find that the "vast majority" of the scientific community do not, as you might read in the tabloids, support the theory of man made global warming. To be fair this may be the impression you have gained from the newspapers but read the science and you find it is surprisingly far from the truth. Nor were they split 50:50, going back to the Rio Summit at the peak of global warming hysteria the approx 400 scientists attending were asked, by Greenpeace, if they believed in man made global warming, 15 said yes. Greenpeace were probably surprised at how low the number was, I was surprised at how high it was.
Old 27 May 2006, 12:44 PM
  #38  
Martin2005
Scooby Regular
 
Martin2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Type 25. Build No.34
Posts: 8,222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by hedgehog
I'm not dismissing it, science dismisses it because there is no evidence for it. You will find that the "vast majority" of the scientific community do not, as you might read in the tabloids, support the theory of man made global warming. To be fair this may be the impression you have gained from the newspapers but read the science and you find it is surprisingly far from the truth. Nor were they split 50:50, going back to the Rio Summit at the peak of global warming hysteria the approx 400 scientists attending were asked, by Greenpeace, if they believed in man made global warming, 15 said yes. Greenpeace were probably surprised at how low the number was, I was surprised at how high it was.
OK here's the opposite view from the governments chief scientist Sir David King

Sir David writes that there is no scientific debate around the fundamentals of climate change (as it is known to be happening and it's causes are clear) , only a false image in the world’s media. “There is also an issue that some, including some politicians, simply do not want to hear the evidence, regarding the implications as just too unpalatable (and politically unpopular) to be faced”.
Old 27 May 2006, 01:38 PM
  #39  
hedgehog
Scooby Regular
 
hedgehog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,985
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

This is an opinion expressed by Sir David and, I suspect, it is an opinion driven by political expediency. Reading the letter quoted above, signed by 60 climate scientists with a very many published papers between them, it is easy to see why Sir David wants there to be no debate on the current government position.

Sir David has, that I am aware, never had a peer reviewed paper published on climate and so my money remains firmly with science rather than with politics.
Old 27 May 2006, 03:15 PM
  #40  
bob r
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (46)
 
bob r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Probably polishing it.Lol
Posts: 5,381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

this thread.......wtf
Old 27 May 2006, 04:03 PM
  #41  
mutant_matt
Scooby Regular
 
mutant_matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: London
Posts: 7,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Personally, anything George W Bush thinks is a good idea can't be anything but! If he's coming round to the idea then it must be flawed!!

The fact that anyone thinks there is anything like a consensus shows just how well the spin doctors are doing...

Also, how anyone can think that the results of a model = "fact" is beyond me!

Matt.
Old 27 May 2006, 04:07 PM
  #42  
suffolkdar
Scooby Regular
 
suffolkdar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Really hot summers, Hot winters ,clear blue seas...... The fishing is gonna big GREAT!
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
aaron_ions
General Technical
17
03 November 2021 11:07 AM
Aeleys
Subaru
17
19 February 2019 04:52 PM
Abx
Subaru
22
09 January 2016 05:42 PM
Scott@ScoobySpares
Full Cars Breaking For Spares
7
14 December 2015 08:16 AM
FuZzBoM
Wheels, Tyres & Brakes
16
04 October 2015 09:49 PM



Quick Reply: Global Warming and PPP - Decision



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:11 PM.