posted July 17, 2008 04:47 PM         

Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate
July 16, 2008 http://www.dailytech.com/Myth+of+Consensus+Explodes+APS+Opens+Global+Warmi ng+Debate/article12403.htm

quote:

---

The APS is opening its debate with the publication of a paper by Lord Monckton of Brenchley, which concludes that climate sensitivity -- the rate of temperature change a given amount of greenhouse gas will cause -- has been grossly overstated by IPCC modeling. A low sensitivity implies additional atmospheric CO2 will have little effect on global climate.
Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chairman of the New England Section of the APS, called Monckton's paper an "expose of the IPCC that details numerous exaggerations and "extensive errors"

In an email to DailyTech, Monckton says, "I was dismayed to discover that the IPCC's 2001 and 2007 reports did not devote chapters to the central 'climate sensitivity' question, and did not explain in proper, systematic detail the methods by which they evaluated it. When I began to investigate, it seemed that the IPCC was deliberately concealing and obscuring its method."

---

Physics & Society: Editor's Comments http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/editor.cfm

quote:

---

There is a considerable presence within the scientific community of people who do not agree with the IPCC conclusion that anthropogenic CO2 emissions are very probably likely to be primarily responsible for the global warming that has occurred since the Industrial Revolution. Since the correctness or fallacy of that conclusion has immense implications for public policy and for the future of the biosphere, we thought it appropriate to present a debate within the pages of P&S concerning that conclusion.

---

SPPI http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/press/proved_no_climate_crisis.html

Lord Monckton’s paper reveals that –

The IPCC’s 2007 climate summary overstated CO2’s impact on temperature by 500-2000%;

CO2 enrichment will add little more than 1 °F (0.6 °C) to global mean surface temperature by 2100;

Not one of the three key variables whose product is climate sensitivity can be measured directly;

The IPCC’s values for these key variables are taken from only four published papers, not 2,500;

The IPCC’s values for each of the three variables, and hence for climate sensitivity, are overstated;

“Global warming” halted ten years ago, and surface temperature has been falling for seven years;

Not one of the computer models relied upon by the IPCC predicted so long and rapid a cooling;

The IPCC inserted a table into the scientists’ draft, overstating the effect of ice-melt by 1000%;

It was proved 50 years ago that predicting climate more than two weeks ahead is impossible;

Mars, Jupiter, Neptune’s largest moon, and Pluto warmed at the same time as Earth warmed;

In the past 70 years the Sun was more active than at almost any other time in the past 11,400 years.

------------

Here are some noteworthy websites discussing global warming for those that want to understancd the scientific and political stance on this topic:

Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr. Research Group News http://climatesci.org/

Watts Up With That http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/

ICE CAP http://icecap.us

World Climate Report http://www.worldclimatereport.com/

Climate Audit http://climateaudit.org/

CO2 Science http://www.co2science.org/

Junk Science http://www.junkscience.com/

posted July 17, 2008 07:10 PM         

Select Thursday July 17 and 3 PM. The interview starts at approximately 35:30.

---------

"One of the most disfiguring parts of the deliberations of the UN's climate panel has been the insistence of the bureaucrats that run it that a particular orthodoxy shall be reflected in the scientific documents it produces. The scientists are not, repeat, not in charge of the UN's climate panel. It is political representatives who agree the final text and it is bureaucrats who prepare that final text for them after the scientists have all signed off the final version.

And when I got my final version of it and read through it I saw that these bureaucrats had inserted, among many other things, a table of figures in which, by ingenious manipulation of 4 decimal points, they had succeeded in exaggerating the contribution of melting ice sheets and glaciers - the sort of thing that Al Gore is always banging on about - not just a little exaggeration but a ten-fold exaggeration, a thousand percent exaggeration.

And so I, I wrote to the IPCC and said, look, once we've signed off on this document it is not for you to insert tables like this without our sanction and without having drawn our attention to it."