More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claim

More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims:

“The chorus of skeptical scientific voices grew louder in 2010 as the Climategate scandal — which involved the
upper echelon of UN IPCC scientists — detonated upon on the international climate movement.

“’I view Climategate as science fraud, pure and simple,’
said noted

Princeton Physicist Dr. Robert Austin

shortly after the scandal broke….
Other UN scientists were more blunt.
A South African UN scientist… noted IPCC chair Pachauri is in ‘disgrace’. He also explained that the
‘fraudulent science continues to be exposed.’…

” ….Geologist Dr. Don Easterbrook, a
professor of geology at Western Washington University, summed up the scandal

on December 3, 2010: ‘The corruption within the IPCC revealed by the
Climategate scandal, the doctoring of data and the refusal to admit
mistakes have so severely tainted the IPCC that it is no longer a credible
agency.’…

Selected Highlights of the Updated 2010
Report featuring over 1,000 international scientists dissenting from
man-made climate fears:

“We’re not
scientifically there yet. Despite what you may have heard in the media,
there is nothing like a consensus of scientific opinion that this is a
problem. Because there is natural variability in the weather, you cannot
statistically know for another 150 years.”
— UN IPCC’s Tom Tripp, a member of the UN IPCC since 2004 and listed as one
of the lead authors and serves as the Director of Technical Services &
Development for U.S. Magnesium.

“Any
reasonable scientific analysis must conclude the basic theory wrong!!”
— NASA Scientist Dr. Leonard Weinstein who worked 35 years at the NASA
Langley Research Center and finished his career there as a Senior Research
Scientist. Weinstein is presently a Senior Research Fellow at the National
Institute of Aerospace.

“Please
remain calm: The Earth will heal itself — Climate is beyond our power to
control…Earth doesn’t care about governments or their legislation. You can’t
find much actual global warming in present-day weather observations. Climate
change is a matter of geologic time, something that the earth routinely does
on its own without asking anyone’s permission or explaining itself.”
— Nobel Prize-Winning Stanford University Physicist Dr. Robert B. Laughlin,
who won the Nobel Prize for physics in 1998, and was formerly a research
scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.

“In essence,
the jig is up. The whole thing is a fraud. And even the fraudsters that
fudged data are admitting to temperature history that they used to say
didn’t happen…Perhaps what has doomed the Climategate fraudsters the most
was their brazenness in fudging the data”
— Dr. Christopher J. Kobus, Associate Professor of Mechanical Engineering at
Oakland University, specializes in alternative energy, thermal transport
phenomena, two-phase flow and fluid and thermal energy systems.

“The energy
mankind generates is so small compared to that overall energy budget that it
simply cannot affect the climate…The planet’s climate is doing its own
thing, but we cannot pinpoint significant trends in changes to it because it
dates back millions of years while the study of it began only recently. We
are children of the Sun; we simply lack data to draw the proper
conclusions.” — Russian Scientist Dr.
Anatoly Levitin, the head of geomagnetic variations laboratory at the
Institute of Terrestrial Magnetism, Ionosphere and Radiowave Propagation of
the Russian Academy of Sciences.

“Hundreds of
billion dollars have been wasted with the attempt of imposing a
Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory that is not supported by physical
world evidences…AGW has been forcefully imposed by means of a barrage of
scare stories and indoctrination that begins in the elementary school
textbooks.” — Brazilian Geologist
Geraldo Luís Lino, who authored the 2009 book “The Global Warming Fraud: How
a Natural Phenomenon Was Converted into a False World Emergency.”

“I am an
environmentalist,” but “I must disagree with Mr. Gore”
— Chemistry Professor Dr. Mary Mumper, the chair of the Chemistry Department
at Frostburg State University in Maryland, during her presentation titled
“Anthropogenic Carbon Dioxide and Global Warming, the Skeptic’s View.”

“I am ashamed
of what climate science has become today.” The science “community is relying
on an inadequate model to blame CO2 and innocent citizens for global warming
in order to generate funding and to gain attention. If this is what
‘science’ has become today, I, as a scientist, am ashamed.”
— Research Chemist William C. Gilbert published a study in August 2010 in
the journal Energy & Environment titled “The thermodynamic relationship
between surface temperature and water vapor concentration in the
troposphere” and he published a paper in August 2009 titled “Atmospheric
Temperature Distribution in a Gravitational Field.” [Update December 9,
2010]

“The
dysfunctional nature of the climate sciences is nothing short of a scandal.
Science is too important for our society to be misused in the way it has
been done within the Climate Science Community.” The global warming
establishment “has actively suppressed research results presented by
researchers that do not comply with the dogma of the IPCC.”
— Swedish Climatologist Dr. Hans Jelbring, of the Paleogeophysics &
Geodynamics Unit at Stockholm University. [Updated December 9, 2010.
Corrects Jelbring’s quote.]

“Those who
call themselves ‘Green planet advocates’ should be arguing for a CO2-
fertilized atmosphere, not a CO2-starved atmosphere…Diversity increases when
the planet was warm AND had high CO2 atmospheric content…Al Gore’s personal
behavior supports a green planet – his enormous energy use with his 4 homes
and his bizjet, does indeed help make the planet greener. Kudos, Al for
doing your part to save the planet.” —
Renowned engineer and aviation/space pioneer Burt Rutan, who was named “100
most influential people in the world, 2004″ by Time Magazine and Newsweek
called him “the man responsible for more innovations in modern aviation than
any living engineer.”

“Global
warming is the central tenet of this new belief system in much the same way
that the Resurrection is the central tenet of Christianity. Al Gore has
taken a role corresponding to that of St Paul in proselytizing the new
faith…My skepticism about AGW arises from the fact that as a physicist who
has worked in closely related areas, I know how poor the underlying science
is. In effect the scientific method has been abandoned in this field.”
— Atmospheric Physicist Dr. John Reid, who worked with Australia’s CSIRO’s
(Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization) Division of
Oceanography and worked in surface gravity waves (ocean waves) research.

“We maintain
there is no reason whatsoever to worry about man-made climate change,
because there is no evidence whatsoever that such a thing is happening.”
— Greek Earth scientists Antonis Christofides and Nikos Mamassis of the
National Technical University of Athens’ Department of Water Resources and
Environmental Engineering.

“There are clear cycles
during which both temperature and salinity rise and fall. These cycles
are related to solar activity…In my opinion and that of our
institute, the problems connected to the current stage of warming are being
exaggerated. What we are dealing with is not a global warming of the
atmosphere or of the oceans.” —
Biologist Pavel Makarevich of the Biological Institute of the Russian
Academy of Sciences.

“Because the greenhouse
effect is temporary rather than permanent, predictions of significant global
warming in the 21st century by IPCC are not supported by the data.”
— Hebrew University Professor Dr. Michael Beenstock an honorary fellow with
Institute for Economic Affairs who published a study challenging man-made
global warming claims titled “Polynomial Cointegration Tests of the
Anthropogenic Theory of Global Warming.”

“The whole idea of
anthropogenic global warming is completely unfounded. There appears to have
been money gained by Michael Mann, Al Gore and UN IPCC’s Rajendra Pachauri
as a consequence of this deception, so it’s fraud.”
— South African astrophysicist Hilton Ratcliffe, a member of the
Astronomical Society of Southern Africa (ASSA) and the Astronomical Society
of the Pacific and a Fellow of the British Institute of Physics.

End Selected Excerpts

#

The rapidity of the global warming
establishment’s collapse would have been unheard of just two years ago.


Prominent physicist Hal Lewis resigned from American Physical
Society, calling “Global warming the greatest and most successful
pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life.”
UK

astrophysicist Piers Corbyn was
blunt about what Climategate revealed: “The case for climate fears is blown
to smithereens…the whole theory should be destroyed and discarded and UN
conference should be closed.”

Even the usually reliable news media has
started questioning the global warming claims. Newsweek Magazine

wrote in May 2010
about the “uncertain science” and how “climate researchers have lost the
public’s trust” from a “cascade of scandals” from the UN IPCC. Newsweek
compared the leaders of the climate science community to “used-car salesmen.
“Once celebrated climate researchers are feeling like the used-car salesmen”
and the magazine noted that “some of IPCC’s most-quoted data and
recommendations were taken straight out of unchecked activist brochures,
newspaper articles…Just as damaging, many climate scientists have responded
to critiques by questioning the integrity of their critics, rather than by
supplying data and reasoned arguments.” For full list of Climategate related
scandals See:

Climate Scandals: List Of 94 Climate-Gates — 94 climate-gates
total — 28 new gates — 145 links to reports with details

As the global warming edifice crumbled in 2010,
the movement lost one of its leading lights due to the Climategate
revelations. Dr. Judith Curry, the chair of Earth & Atmospheric Sciences at
GA Institute of Tech, explained her defection from the global warming
activist movement. “There is ‘a lack of willingness in the climate change
community to steer away from groupthink…’ They are setting themselves up as
second-rate scientists by not engaging,” Curry wrote in 2010. Curry
critiqued the UN IPCC for promoting “dogma” and clinging to the “religious
importance” of the IPCC’s claims.

“They will tolerate no dissent and seek to trample anyone who challenges
them,” Curry lamented. “The IPCC assessment process had a substantial
element of schoolyard bullies, trying to insulate their shoddy science from
outside scrutiny and attacks by skeptics…the IPCC and its conclusions were
set on a track to become a self fulfilling prophecy,” Curry wrote. Curry

called the Climategate fallout nothing short of a “rather spectacular
unraveling of the climate change juggernaut…I immediately realized that [Climategate]
could bring down the IPCC…I became concerned about the integrity of our
entire field…While my colleagues seemed focused on protecting the
reputations of the scientists involved and assuring people that the ‘science
hadn’t changed.” [Note: Curry is not included in the count of dissenting
scientists in this report.] Also see:

‘High Priestess of Global Warming’ No More! Former Warmist Judith Curry
Admits To Being ‘Duped Into Supporting IPCC’ – ‘If the IPCC is dogma, then
count me in as a heretic’] [Note: There
were many Cilmategate inquiries that sought to downplay Climategate, but
they fell short of their goal and were labeled as nothing more than the
“global warming establishment exonerating the global warming establishment.”
See

here,

here, and

here. The InterAcademy Council (IAC) was the

most competent of the inquires.]

As new data and science continued to call
into question man-made global warming claims, one of the movements leading
fear promoters shocked the world by beginning to retreat from his dire
predictions. Green guru

James Lovelock warned in 2007 that, “Before this century is over,
billions of us will die and the few breeding pairs of people that survive
will be in the Arctic.” Lovelock illustrates how the climate of the climate
change movement has been transformed in the last year. In May 2010, Lovelock
shocked the world by announcing: “Everybody
might be wrong. Climate change may not happen as fast as we thought, and
we may have 1,000 years to sort it out.” Lovelock went even father by noting
how the science of global warming is in its infancy and “we
haven’t got the physics worked out yet.” “The great climate science
centers around the world are more than well aware how weak their science is.
If you talk to them privately they’re scared stiff of the fact that they
don’t really know what the clouds and the aerosols are doing. They could be
absolutely running the show. We haven’t got the physics worked out yet,”
Lovelock explained. Lovelock now openly praises skeptics and worries that
climate fear promotion is akin to religion. In March of 2010,

Lovelock said: “The skeptics have kept us sane…They have kept us from
regarding climate science as a religion. It had gone too far that way.” [Note:
Lovelock is not included in the count of dissenting scientists in this
report.] [Note: Even the UN has grown
more uncertain about the science. See:

UN Fears (More) Global Cooling Commeth! IPCC Scientist Warns UN: We may be
about to enter ‘one or even 2 decades during which temps cool’ — Admits
‘Jury is still out’ on ocean cycle’s temp impact!]

More woes for the movement were felt when
left-leaning environmental activists began jumping ship. See:

Left-wing Env. Scientist Denis Rancourt Bails Out Of Global
Warming Movement: Declares it a ‘corrupt social phenomenon…strictly an
imaginary problem of the 1st World middleclass’
&

Meet the green who doubts ‘The Science’: Environmentalist
Peter Taylor ‘explains why he’s skeptical about manmade global warming — and
why greens are so intolerant’ & Activists at

green festivals expressing doubts
over man-made climate fears. “One college professor, confided to me in
private conversation that, ‘I’m not sure climate change is real,’” according
to a report from the New York Green Festival.

2010 saw the once vaunted UN IPCC now become the
object of ridicule and scrutiny. In June 2010, Climate Scientist

Mike Hulme took apart a key claim. Hulme noted that claims such as
“2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human
activities are having a significant influence on the climate” are
disingenuous. Hulme noted that the key scientific case for Co2 driving
global warming was reached by a very small gaggle of people. “That
particular consensus judgment, as are many others in the IPCC reports, is
reached by only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and
attribution studies; other IPCC authors are experts in other fields.” [Note:
Hulme is not included in the count of dissenting scientists in this report.]

In another blow to the UN IPCC’s carefully
crafted image, was

Scientist Dr. William Schlesinger admission in that only 20% of UN IPCC
scientists deal with climate. Schlesinger said, “Something on the order
of 20 percent [of UN scientists] have had some dealing with climate.” By
Schlesinger’s own admission, 80% of the UN IPCC membership has no dealing
with the climate as part of their academic studies. Also note, that climate
requires a wide range of disciplines:

See: ‘There are more than 100 expert sub disciplines involved in climate
change studies’ &

Science magazine confused about who is a ‘prominent climate scientist’ —
‘there is no specific climate discipline’ &

Claims of ‘overwhelming majority’ of scientists exposed as
laughable! ‘There are just 94 authors responsible for compiling the report
in which…the [UN IPCC’s] modeling case for alarm rests’

The notion of climate “tipping points”,
popularized by former Vice President Al Gore and NASA Scientist James
Hansen, became the object of derision as well in 2010. See:

190-year climate ‘tipping point’ issued — Despite fact that
UN began 10-Year ‘Climate Tipping Point’ in 1989! Climate Depot Factsheet on
Inconvenient History of Global Warming ‘Tipping Points’ — Hours, Days,
Months, Years, Millennium — Earth ‘Serially Doomed’

Once respected global warming stalwarts like
NASA’s James Hansen descended into political and ideological activism by
being arrested multiple times protesting coal use. Hansen also

endorsed a book which calls for ‘”ridding the world of Industrial
Civilization”. Hansen declared the author “has it right…the system is the
problem.” Hansen did this despite the fact that the book proposes ‘”razing
cities to the ground, blowing up dams and switching off the greenhouse gas
emissions machine.” The Grist eco-magazine writer

David Roberts noted in August 2010: “‘I know I’m not supposed to say
this, but James Hansen managed his transition from scientist to activist
terribly. All influence lost.”

Energy Sec. Chu came under fire for
claiming science told him what the world was going to be like 100 years from
now. See:

Obama’s ‘Climate Astrologer’: Energy Sec. Chu claims he knows
‘what the future will be 100 years from now’

Obama Science Advisor John Holdren found
his knowledge of the science of climate change come under scrutiny after he
issued a bizarre warning about the possible loss of WINTER sea ice in the
arctic. See:

Obama science advisor: John Holdren ridiculed for claiming
Arctic could be ICE FREE IN WINTER!

The U.S. Congressional cap-and-trade bill
collapse and the UN climate treaty failure has left disillusioned within the
global warming movement. Gore has admitted to feeling

“a little depressed.”
And it has left a spectacle of world leaders promising verbal non-binding
agreements to limit the earth’s temp have left modern society attempting to
ape primitive cultures efforts to control the climate. See:

Blaming all recent weather events on man-made global warming
is akin to astrology & Climate Astrology —

‘It Has Been Foretold’ of Extreme Weather: ‘UN IPCC science
has a status similar to interpretations of Nostradamus and the Mayan
calendars’

In addition, the scientific underpinnings
and the

public support around the globe has dropped so significantly that there
is now open talk of moving on to the “next eco-scare”

Demoted: UN officially throws global warming under the bus: UN now says case
for saving species ‘more powerful than climate change’ – May 21, 2010 &


Time for next eco-scare already?! As Global Warming Movement
Collapses, Activists Already ‘Test-Marketing’ the Next Eco-Fear! ‘Laughing
Gas’ Crisis? Oxygen Crisis? Plastics?

The carefully crafted “consensus” of man-made
global warming has unraveled. See:

Prominent Geologist Dr. Easterbrook Slams Geological Society
of America’s climate statement ‘as easily refuted by data that clearly shows
no correlation between CO2 and global climate change’
&

American Meteorological Society Members Reject Man-made Climate Claims: 75%
Do Not Agree With UN IPCC Claims — 29% Agree ‘Global Warming is a Scam’
&

Meteorologists Reject U.N.’s Global Warming Claims: Only 1 in
4 American Meteorological Society broadcast meteorologists agree with UN

In 2009, the world’s largest science group, the
American Chemical Society (ACS) was

“startled” by an outpouring of scientists rejecting man-made climate
fears, with many calling for the removal of the ACS’s climate activist
editor.

A 2010 Open Letter signed by more than 130
German scientists urging German Chancellor to “reconsider” her climate
views. See:

‘Consensus’ Takes Another Hit! More than 130 German Scientists Dissent Over
Global Warming Claims! Call Climate Fears ‘Pseudo ‘Religion’; Urge
Chancellor to ‘reconsider’ views – August 4, 2009 More than 100
international scientists challenged President Obama’s climate claims,
calling them

“simply incorrect.” In December 8 2009,
166 scientists from
around the world wrote an Open Letter to the UN Secretary-General
rebuking the UN and declaring that “the science is NOT settled.” On May 1,
2009, the American Physical Society (APS) Council decided to review its
current climate statement via a high-level subcommittee of respected senior
scientists. The decision was prompted after a group of

over 80 prominent physicists petitioned the APS revise its global
warming position and
more than
250 scientists urged a change in the group’s climate statement in 2010.
The
physicists wrote to APS governing board: “Measured or reconstructed
temperature records indicate that 20th – 21st century changes are neither
exceptional nor persistent, and the historical and geological records show
many periods warmer than today.” An American Physical Society editor
conceded that

a “considerable presence” of scientific skeptics exists.

Russian scientists “rejected the very idea that carbon
dioxide may be responsible for global warming”.


India Issued a report challenging global warming fears.

International Scientists demanded the UN IPCC “be called to
account and cease its deceptive practices,” and


a 2008 canvass of more than 51,000 Canadian scientists
revealed 68% disagree that global warming science is “settled.”

Scientific meetings are being dominated by
a growing number of skeptical scientists. The prestigious International
Geological Congress, dubbed the geologists’ equivalent of the Olympic Games,
was held in Norway in August 2008 and prominently featured the voices of
scientists skeptical of man-made global warming fears. [See:

Skeptical scientists overwhelm conference: ‘2/3 of presenters
and question-askers were hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC’
& see full reports

here &

here – Also see:

UN IPCC’s William Schlesinger admits in 2009 that only 20% of
IPCC scientists deal with climate ]

Despite these developments, global warming
promoters have sought to cite a survey alleging 97% of climatologists agree
with the “consensus” view. But the survey does not hold up to scrutiny. See:


‘Consensus’ claims challenged: Only 77 scientists were
interviewed to get 97.4% agreement — ‘It would be interesting to learn who
these individuals are’
&

Climate Con: 97% ‘Consensus’ Claim is only 76 Anonymous
Self-Selected Climatologists

#

This Climate Depot Special Report is not a
“list” of scientists, but a report that includes full biographies of each
scientist and their quotes, papers and links for further reading. The
scientists featured in the report express their views in their own words,
complete with their intended subtleties and caveats. This report features
the names, biographies, academic/institutional affiliation, and quotes of
literally hundreds of additional international scientists who publicly
dissented from man-made climate fears. This report lists the scientists by
name, country of residence, and academic/institutional affiliation. It also
features their own words, biographies, and web links to their peer reviewed
studies, scientific analyses and original source materials as gathered from
directly from the scientists or from public statements, news outlets, and
websites in 2007 and 2008.

The distinguished scientists featured in this
new report are experts in diverse fields, including: climatology; geology;
biology; glaciology; biogeography; meteorology; oceanography; economics;
chemistry; mathematics; environmental sciences; astrophysics, engineering;
physics and paleoclimatology. Some of those profiled have won Nobel Prizes
for their outstanding contribution to their field of expertise and many
shared a portion of the UN IPCC Nobel Peace Prize with Vice President Gore.
Additionally, these scientists hail from prestigious institutions worldwide,
including: Harvard University; NASA; National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR);
Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the UN IPCC; the Danish National
Space Center; U.S. Department of Energy; Princeton University; the
Environmental Protection Agency; University of Pennsylvania; Hebrew
University of Jerusalem; the International Arctic Research Centre; the
Pasteur Institute in Paris; Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute; the
University of Helsinki; the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.,
France, and Russia; the University of Pretoria; University of Notre Dame;
Abo Akademi University in Finland; University of La Plata in Argentina;
Stockholm University; Punjab University in India; University of Melbourne;
Columbia University; the World Federation of Scientists; and the University
of London.

Background:
Only 52 Scientists Participated in UN IPCC Summary

The notion of “hundreds” or “thousands” of
UN scientists agreeing to a scientific statement does not hold up to
scrutiny. (See report debunking “consensus”

LINK)
Recent research by Australian climate data analyst John McLean revealed that
the IPCC’s peer-review process for the Summary for Policymakers leaves much
to be desired. (LINK)
(LINK)
(LINK)
& (LINK)
(Note: The 52 scientists who participated in the 2007 IPCC Summary for
Policymakers had to adhere to the wishes of the UN political leaders and
delegates in a process described as more closely resembling a political
party’s convention platform battle, not a scientific process –

LINK)

Proponents of man-made global warming like to
note how the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the American
Meteorological Society (AMS) have issued statements endorsing the so-called
“consensus” view that man is driving global warming. But both the NAS and
AMS never allowed member scientists to directly vote on these climate
statements. Essentially, only two dozen or so members on the governing
boards of these institutions produced the “consensus” statements. This
report gives a voice to the rank-and-file scientists who were shut out of
the process. (LINK)

The NAS has come under fire for its lobbying
practices. See:

NAS Pres. Ralph Cicerone Turns Science Org. into political advocacy group:
$6 million NAS study is used to lobby for global warming bill &

Cicerone’s Shame: NAS Urges Carbon Tax, Becomes Advocacy Group — ‘political
appointees heading politicized scientific institutions that are virtually
100% dependent on gov’t funding’ MIT’s Richard Lindzen harshly rebuked
NAS president Cicerone in

his Congressional testimony in November 2010. Lindzen testified:
“Cicerone [of NAS] is saying that regardless of evidence the answer is
predetermined. If government wants carbon control, that is the answer that
the Academies will provide.” [ Also See:
MIT Climate Scientist Exposes ‘Corrupted Science’ in Devastating Critique –
November 29, 2008 ]

While the scientists contained in this report
hold a diverse range of views, they generally rally around several key
points. 1) The Earth is

currently
well within
natural climate variability. 2) Almost all climate fear is

generated by unproven computer model

predictions. 3) An

abundance of peer-reviewed studies continue to debunk

rising CO2 fears and, 4)

“Consensus” has been
manufactured
for
political, not scientific purposes.

Scientists caution that the key to remember is
“climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables,” not just
CO2. UK Professor Emeritus of Biogeography Philip Stott of the University of
London decried the notion that CO2 is the main climate driver. “As I have
said, over and over again, the fundamental point has always been this:
climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the
very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and
manipulating at the margins one politically-selected factor is as misguided
as it gets,” Stott

wrote in 2008. Even the climate activists at RealClimate.org let this
fact slip out in

a September 20, 2008 article. “The actual temperature rise is an
emergent property resulting from interactions among hundreds of factors,”
RealClimate.org admitted in a rare moment of candor.]

# #

Read Full Report:

Link to Complete 321-Page PDF Special Report: