climate change

November 19, 2009. Robert H. Austin, Princeton University, Corresponding Author: Over 160 highly qualified scientists request that the APS change wording about climate change. Greenhouse gas emissions accompany human industrial and agricultural activity. While substantial concern has been expressed that emissions may cause significant climate change, 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.

Brian Dingwall, writer for www.whaleoil.co.nz: In 1212 another Crusade to the Holy Land took place, and this one has the popular name ‘the Children’s Crusade’, because it is thought to have been prompted by visions that came to children in France and Germany, and because many children took part in it. Some were sold into slavery. The name was also given to a civil rights movement in the USA in 963.

What we saw in March 2019 could be given the same appellation, though this time the focus was on ‘climate change’. A 14-year-old was quoted as saying; "My demands are short and simple: No Adani coal mine, no exports of coal from Australia, and all future additions to electricity must be through alternative sources, not fossil fuels." As the interview developed, it became clear that while Ambrose had only three simple demands, he had almost literally no idea of what he was promoting. When the interviewer pointed out gently that stopping all coal exports would make no difference to anyone other than Australians, whose standards of living would drop alarmingly, Ambrose seemed to indicate that didn’t matter. It was important that Australia showed the way.

It sounded very much like the Children’s Crusade of 1212, whose youthful participants had little idea of what actually was the case in what we now call Israel and Palestine. But, like the marchers last week, they knew they were right, while the students knew that they were the real victims of their elders’ folly in not dealing with climate change much earlier.

John Eidson, writer, analyst for energy, climate change, government policies, retired electrical engineer, independent voter: It is rare to find a person with all the skills, ethics, and live by example, like John Eidson. Here is his first open letter to Swedish child climate alarmist phenomena, Greta Thunberg. He writes with respect and offers sound advice for Greta and all who think like her.

Michael Shellenberger, Founder - President of Environmental Progress: We are writing as scientists, scholars, and concerned citizens to warn you of a persistent anti-nuclear bias in the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on keeping global temperatures from rising 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels.

Pat Boone, Tom Tamarkin: This letter to Pope Francis is about Anthropogenic Global Warming and our energy choices: wind, solar, fossil fuels, and nuclear with focus on nuclear fusion. Tragically the AGW concept has created corrupt conditions. This represents the worst side of economic imperialism: monies being taken from the people and redistributed to governments, institutions and corporations based on politics as opposed to science and solid economics.

Richard S Courtney BA ABSW FRSA ESEF: Reports published by the United Nations (UN) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are biased and misleading polemic and, therefore, any decisions based on them are likely to be very flawed. The IPCC’s Reports are political tracts that promote a political policy, and they are given the appearance of scientific documents by presenting selected scientific information and misrepresentation of scientific data together with a sham that the contents of the reports have been subjected to scientific peer review.

Roger A. Pielke, Jr., Professor in the Environmental Studies Program and a Fellow of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) at the University of Colorado, Boulder. This article presents his experience with climate research that does not agree with the mainstream in government and the media. This experience is similar to that of many people in climate science and nuclear energy over the last half century who differed with extreme environmentalists, anti fossil fuels, and anti nuclear energy activists. Countries that ignore demands of these extremist groups are making much better progress with sound science and technology.

Dennis Avery is an agricultural and environmental economist and a senior fellow for the Center for Global Food Issues: The latest data from the CERN particle physics lab has produced a model based on cycling – and it foresees no runaway warming. Instead, it sees an impending cold solar minimum. Is the long, wrong-headed war against carbon dioxide finally fading? Science certainly says it should. But perhaps there is still too much money, prestige and power in climate alarmism for that to happen.

By-products of oil make up more than half of its uses. Oil for energy and for by-products are key to the modern world. When we run out of oil, it will most likely be replaced by synthetic hydrocarbons, not hydrogen and electric batteries for wind, solar, and electric vehicles. This will continue the CO2, H2O, hydrocarbon cycle of nature. Hydrogen and Lithium batteries require different infrastructures than fossil fuels, have new risks, and more impact on the environment. Nuclear power advocates who claim that nuclear power can control climate change need to take a few more courses in the future of nuclear power and what controls climate. They are making a mistake that is not helping nuclear power construction to get going again.

Jim Steele, director emeritus of the Sierra Nevada Field Campus, SFSU and author Landscapes and Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism: There are too many fear mongering politicians pushing an “existential climate crisis”. I find the climate history told by the trees far more trustworthy, and the trees are whispering there is no crisis.

The Anglo/American Empire today resembles the decadent dying days of Rome. Europe is becoming a green energy wasteland, the British Empire died with Churchill, and America has dodderers and adolescents in charge. Australia plans to defend the outback with battery-powered Bushmasters (good for battlefields with plenty of power points).

Our farmers and miners produced wool booms, gold rushes, silver booms, coal bonanzas, and a cornucopia of meat and butter, iron and steel, oil and gas, copper, lead, zinc, nickel, aluminium, lithium, cobalt, manganese and uranium. But now green dreamers think we can afford to destroy our processing and manufacturing industry with solar/wind dreams, shut the gate on mining and exploration, and turn farms, forests and grassland into industry-free world-heritage and first-nations wilderness.

David Wojick, Heartland Institute, Ph.D. Philosophy of Science and Mathematical Logic, B.Sc. Civil Engineering:The climate change debate is not about the basic greenhouse effect. It is about what warming, if any, the increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration might bring and whether or not it is dangerous. Deming addresses none of this, which is certainly simple, but also useless. He simply equates the increased CO2 concentration with global warming. The validity of this equation is what most of the debate is about, but there is no hint of this in his presentation. It is as if the debate did not exist. He even suggests that this entire issue was settled over 100 years ago, which is simply laughable.

Calvin Beisner, Cornwall Alliance: From all appearances, the data-adjusters at PSMSL are attempting to “correct” the sea level rise data that do not support the conceptualization of a rapidly-rising sea level trend in response to rising human CO2 emissions. “It is always highly questionable to shift data collected in the far past without any proven new supporting material.” Apparently not even tide gauge measurements can be spared from those who tendentiously fiddle with raw data to satisfy an agenda. Alas, “A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is putting on its shoes,” as Mark Twain is (almost surely mistakenly) alleged to have said. Give this truth a little shove, and maybe it’ll catch and slay the lie.

Early 2020, the world was struck by the man-made disaster of the spread of the COVID-19 virus that escaped from the Wuhan laboratory (Rogin, 2021). But long before this incredible blunder started to be acknowledged after much denying, world leaders and some influential billionaires had already announced what would be the next and even more expensive economic devastation, climate change policies and “decarbonation” of our economies. These perspectives are far worse than a transient virus misery.

In the midst of this COVID-19 man-made disaster I started, as a geophysicist, geochemist and computer scientist, to painfully resent the ludicrous harping of ecologist crooks, NGOs and supranational bodies of the UN to make them feel guilty to just try to make a living for themselves and for their families and to the forthcoming requirement for them to resort to a more frugal way of living «to save the planet» when they themselves have probably not ever experienced what it means to make ends meets.

President Obama’s advice to college graduates «you can’t just accept what the experts and the people in charge tell you» was spot on and I could not accept to be a silent accomplice of the future destruction of western economies for a witch hunt without going in depth: 1) into the relevance of the brandished scientific « proofs » arising from so many disciplines as climate science is just an illusion but resorts to a bunch of well known disciplines as chemistry, physics, geology, astronomy, biology, to name a few, 2) the relevance of computer models mainly based on fluid mechanics equations which are unable to make a decent fifteen day forecast but will – based on the same physical principles and technology – tell you the average temperature a century away, and 3) the delirious policies that will be implemented to fight the enemy, nothing less than the gas of life, the gas which has enabled in the end all living species on this planet to exist. One should never forget that irreplaceable and widely available fossil energy sources together with nuclear energy have simply enabled mankind to move out of the cave and improve living conditions on earth as never imagined before.

NOTE: A 2nd edition is available. It has over 600 pages. This exceeds the 500 page limit of this website's subscription limit of 500 pages per article.

You can download it for free at: https://patricepoyet.org/

Richard Lindzen is an atmospheric physicist, Emeritus Professor at MIT. This short video explains the man-made climate change views of alarmists, skeptics, politicians, extreme environmental groups and the media and what to expect in the future.

Ed Berry, PhD in Physics with a focus on atmospheric physics. Dr. Berry’s theoretical PhD thesis is recognized as a breakthrough in the science of rain formation and in the use of computer-based numerical models: Inflows don’t add to the level of carbon dioxide. Inflows set balance levels. Then actual levels approach balance levels according to a residence time of about 4 years. This leads, with some simple math, to the conclusion that the ratio of human-produced to nature-produced carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is equal to the ratio of their inflows, which is about 1:20. This conclusion is supported by common sense.