Ten Major Failures of So-called Consensus Climate Science (via Watts Up With That?)


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/21/ten-major-failures-of-so-called-consensus-climate-science/

Proved: There is no climate crisis
Major paper shows CO2’s effect on temperature was overstated 500-2000%
WASHINGTON (7-15-08) – Mathematical proof that there is no “climate crisis” appears today in a
major, peer-reviewed paper in Physics and Society, a learned journal of the 46,000-strong American
Physical Society, SPPI reports.
Christopher Monckton, who once advised Margaret Thatcher, demonstrates via 30 equations that computer models used by
the UN’s climate panel (IPCC) were pre-programmed with overstated values for the three variables whose product is
“climate sensitivity” (temperature increase in response to greenhouse-gas increase), resulting in a 500-2000% overstatement
of CO2’s effect on temperature in the IPCC’s latest climate assessment report, published in 2007.
Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered [http://www.aps.org/units/fps/newsletters/200807/index.cfm] demonstrates that later this
century a doubling of the concentration of CO2 compared with pre-industrial levels will increase global mean surface
temperature not by the 6 °F predicted by the IPCC but, harmlessly, by little more than 1 °F. Lord Monckton concludes –
“… Perhaps real-world climate sensitivity is very much below the IPCC’s estimates. Perhaps, therefore, there is no
‘climate crisis’ at all. … The correct policy approach to a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing.”
Larry Gould, Professor of Physics at the University of Hartford and Chair (2004) of the New England Section of the
American Physical Society (APS), has been studying climate-change science for four years. He said:
“I was impressed by an hour-long academic lecture which criticized claims about ‘global warming’ and explained
the implications of the physics of radiative transfer for climate change. I was pleased that the audience responded
to the informative presentation with a prolonged, standing ovation. That is what happened when, at the invitation of
the President of our University, Christopher Monckton lectured here in Hartford this spring. I am delighted that
Physics and Society, an APS journal, has published his detailed paper refining and reporting his important and
revealing results.
“To me the value of this paper lies in its dispassionate but ruthlessly clear exposition – or, rather, exposé – of the
IPCC’s method of evaluating climate sensitivity. The detailed arguments in this paper, and, indeed, in a large
number of other scientific papers, point up extensive errors, including numerous projection errors of climate
models, as well as misleading statements by the IPCC. Consequently, there are no rational grounds for believing
either the IPCC or any other claims of dangerous anthropogenic ‘global warming’.”
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.
Contact: Robert Ferguson, Science and Public Policy Institute http://www.scienceandpublicpolicy.org
202-288-5699 bferguson@sppinstitute.org

Ten Major Failures of So-called Consensus Climate Science By Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, AMS Fellow INTRODUCTION The US congress sub-committee on Energy and Commerce Committee held hearings on whether to restrict in some way the EPA’s regulatory authority relative to greenhouse gas emissions. There were 7 scientists invited to testify. Three of the four who argued not to restrict the EPA played a key role in the last IPCC report (and will also in the next one) and generally started with the position that IPCC s … Read More

via Watts Up With That?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Ten Major Failures of So-called Consensus Climate Science (via Watts Up With That?)

  1. Ida Prince says:

    SHE has proposed yet another tax for Australians
    SHE is off on a trip to Japan then on to UK Royal Wedding
    UK Company in charge of detainees in Sydney detention center.
    What is the difference in them and the Red Coats of 1st White Fella Settlement?

    Still our OPRESSORS..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s