Jul 03 2008

The weather report for 2100… with a straight face, even

Category: global warming,Group-thinkharmonicminer @ 9:00 am

As usual, the AP is in the tank for global warming scare-mongering, and continues its policy of see no skeptics, hear no skeptics, speak no skeptics. It’s as if they walk around with their eyes covered, ears plugged, and duct tape to slap on the mouth of anyone who says anything they can’t stand to hear.

During the European heat wave of 2003 that killed tens of thousands, the temperature in parts of France hit 104 degrees. Nearly 15,000 people died in that country alone. During the Chicago heat wave of 1995, the mercury spiked at 106 and about 600 people died.

In a few decades, people will look back at those heat waves “and we will laugh,” said Andreas Sterl, author of a new study. “We will find (those temperatures) lovely and cool.”

Sterl’s computer model shows that by the end of the century, high temperatures for once-in-a-generation heat waves will rise twice as fast as everyday average temperatures. Chicago, for example, would reach 115 degrees in such an event by 2100. Paris heat waves could near 109 with Lyon coming closer to 114.

What the general public doesn’t understand is that “computer models” are essentially made up information, faked up to reach a conclusion, and adjusted until they DO reach that conclusion. Computer models can’t tell us any more than we already understand about how climate works, which, to be honest, isn’t a whole lot in comparison to what the doom-sayers claim. You can’t model something whose basic principles are not understood in considerable detail. (We know the basic principles, but not well enough to attach firm numbers to many of them, which are the “guesses” that go into the models.) All you can do is make guesses, and make them look pretty with graphics and simulations. The authors of the AP article could benefit from a little balance in the form of this report:

A PDF of this report is also available at the link. Just click the report cover above and there is a link for the PDF form of the report, or you can just read it at the site.

Or these two books:

Here are just a few of the eminent scientists who think the global warming alarmists are out to lunch. These are VERY eminent scientists, far more prominent in their fields than those quoted in the AP article…. apparently the AP can’t find its phone book to give them a call:

Dr. Edward Wegman–former chairman of the Committee on
Applied and Theoretical Statistics of the National Academy of
Sciences–demolishes the famous “hockey stick” graph that launched the
global warming panic.

Dr. David Bromwich–president of
the International Commission on Polar Meteorology–says “it’s hard to
see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now.”

Prof. Paul Reiter–Chief
of Insects and Infectious Diseases at the famed Pasteur Institute–says
“no major scientist with any long record in this field” accepts Al
Gore’s claim that global warming spreads mosquito-borne diseases.

Prof. Hendrik Tennekes–director
of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute–states “there
exists no sound theoretical framework for climate predictability
studies” used for global warming forecasts.

Dr. Christopher Landsea–past
chairman of the American Meteorological Society’s Committee on Tropical
Meteorology and Tropical Cyclones–says “there are no known scientific
studies that show a conclusive physical link between global warming and
observed hurricane frequency and intensity.”

Dr. Antonino Zichichi–one
of the world’s foremost physicists, former president of the European
Physical Society, who discovered nuclear antimatter–calls global
warming models “incoherent and invalid.”

Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski–world-renowned
expert on the ancient ice cores used in climate research–says the U.N.
“based its global-warming hypothesis on arbitrary assumptions and these
assumptions, it is now clear, are false.”

Prof. Tom V. Segalstad–head
of the Geological Museum, University of Oslo–says “most leading
geologists” know the U.N.’s views “of Earth processes are implausible.”

Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu–founding
director of the International Arctic Research Center, twice named one
of the “1,000 Most Cited Scientists,” says much “Arctic warming during
the last half of the last century is due to natural change.”

Dr. Claude Allegre–member,
U.S. National Academy of Sciences and French Academy of Science, he was
among the first to sound the alarm on the dangers of global warming.
His view now: “The cause of this climate change is unknown.”

Dr. Richard Lindzen–Professor
of Meteorology at M.I.T., member, the National Research Council Board
on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, says global warming alarmists “are
trumpeting catastrophes that couldn’t happen even if the models were

Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov–head of the space
research laboratory of the Russian Academy of Science’s Pulkovo
Observatory and of the International Space Station’s Astrometria
project says “the common view that man’s industrial activity is a
deciding factor in global warming has emerged from a misinterpretation
of cause and effect relations.”

Dr. Richard Tol–Principal
researcher at the Institute for Environmental Studies at Vrije
Universiteit, and Adjunct Professor at the Center for Integrated Study
of the Human Dimensions of Global Change, at Carnegie Mellon
University, calls the most influential global warming report of all
time “preposterous . . . alarmist and incompetent.”

Dr. Sami Solanki–director
and scientific member at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System
Research in Germany, who argues that changes in the Sun’s state, not
human activity, may be the principal cause of global warming: “The sun
has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be
affecting global temperatures.”

Prof. Freeman Dyson–one
of the world’s most eminent physicists says the models used to justify
global warming alarmism are “full of fudge factors” and “do not begin
to describe the real world.”

Dr. Eigils Friis-Christensen–director
of the Danish National Space Centre, vice-president of the
International Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, who argues that
changes in the Sun’s behavior could account for most of the warming
attributed by the UN to man-made CO2.

Just a short list from the Amazon website for “The Deniers”.

If you’re a true believer in anthropogenic global warming, aren’t you just a LITTLE BIT CURIOUS (?!?!?) about why these very prominent, world class scientists don’t buy it? If you aren’t, you’re likely a victim of group-think.

Tags: ,

11 Responses to “The weather report for 2100… with a straight face, even”

  1. harmonicminer » When Doing Nothing Is The Right Thing To Do says:

    [...] More on the religion of “global warming” here. [...]

  2. harmonicminer » Someone to Watch Over My Carbon Credits says:

    [...] going to make an opera about Al Gore’s chicken little book that tries to terrify the world. First there was the book. Then there was a slide show. Then there was a movie about Al Gore [...]

  3. harmonicminer » Yet another major scientist defects from the global warming religion says:

    [...] The article is worth a complete read. Add David Evans to the list of highly scientifically qualified anthropogenic global warming skeptics. [...]

  4. harmonicminer » Global warming and tree rings in Finland says:

    [...] It always has. But those changes have had nothing to do with human inputs, and current changes (which are overblown according to many experts) probably don’t have much to do with humans, [...]

  5. harmonicminer » Don’t get hot under the collar says:

    [...] And if this isn’t enough for you, start here. [...]

  6. harmonicminer » If you don’t want to know, don’t ask says:

    [...] There are questions that biologists aren’t supposed to ask, and questions social scientists aren’t supposed to ask, and so on.   I’ve reported on other manifestations of this here and here and here and here.  And, in the current climate change controversy, there is a clear preference for research funding to go to scientists who will affirm anthropogenic climate change, on the order of 100 to 1.  Most researchers know they don’t have much chance of getting funding if they are skeptical in any way about climate change, and its causes, despite the many experts who demur. [...]

  7. harmonicminer » Time to get RADICAL? says:

    [...] are some world class heavyweights for whom climate science, physics and economics ARE their specialties, who would disagree.  Not to knock Friedman, he’s a [...]

  8. harmonicminer » Climategate? Or just business as usual? says:

    [...] seems like a good time to review all those scientists who have thought all along that AGW was, if true, a very minor contributor to whatever overall [...]

  9. harmonicminer » How much of this can you tolerate? says:

    [...] There is nothing new here, except that now the liars are beginning to admit their prevarications. The fact that the science is anything but “settled” has been obvious for awhile. [...]

Leave a Reply