{"id":88,"date":"2008-07-03T09:00:52","date_gmt":"2008-07-03T16:00:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.harmonicminer.com\/wordpress\/?p=88"},"modified":"2008-07-02T17:49:38","modified_gmt":"2008-07-03T00:49:38","slug":"the-weather-report-for-2100-with-a-straight-face-even","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.harmonicminer.com\/wordpress\/2008\/07\/03\/the-weather-report-for-2100-with-a-straight-face-even\/","title":{"rendered":"The weather report for 2100… with a straight face, even"},"content":{"rendered":"

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.<\/a> 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.
\n<\/big><\/p>\n

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.<\/big><\/p>\n

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.”<\/big><\/p>\n

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.<\/big><\/p><\/blockquote>\n


\n 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>:<\/big><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/big><\/p>\n

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.<\/big><\/p>\n

Or these two books:<\/big><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/a><\/big><\/p>\n

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:<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Edward Wegman<\/strong>–former chairman of the Committee on
\nApplied and Theoretical Statistics of the National Academy of
\nSciences–demolishes the famous “hockey stick” graph that launched the
\nglobal warming panic.<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. David Bromwich<\/strong>–president of
\nthe International Commission on Polar Meteorology–says “it’s hard to
\nsee a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Prof. Paul Reiter<\/strong>–Chief
\nof Insects and Infectious Diseases at the famed Pasteur Institute–says
\n“no major scientist with any long record in this field” accepts Al
\nGore’s claim that global warming spreads mosquito-borne diseases.<\/big><\/p>\n

Prof. Hendrik Tennekes<\/strong>–director
\nof research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute–states “there
\nexists no sound theoretical framework for climate predictability
\nstudies” used for global warming forecasts.<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Christopher Landsea<\/strong>–past
\nchairman of the American Meteorological Society’s Committee on Tropical
\nMeteorology and Tropical Cyclones–says “there are no known scientific
\nstudies that show a conclusive physical link between global warming and
\nobserved hurricane frequency and intensity.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Antonino Zichichi<\/strong>–one
\nof the world’s foremost physicists, former president of the European
\nPhysical Society, who discovered nuclear antimatter–calls global
\nwarming models “incoherent and invalid.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski<\/strong>–world-renowned
\nexpert on the ancient ice cores used in climate research–says the U.N.
\n“based its global-warming hypothesis on arbitrary assumptions and these
\nassumptions, it is now clear, are false.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Prof. Tom V. Segalstad<\/strong>–head
\nof the Geological Museum, University of Oslo–says “most leading
\ngeologists” know the U.N.’s views “of Earth processes are implausible.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu<\/strong>–founding
\ndirector of the International Arctic Research Center, twice named one
\nof the “1,000 Most Cited Scientists,” says much “Arctic warming during
\nthe last half of the last century is due to natural change.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Claude Allegre<\/strong>–member,
\nU.S. National Academy of Sciences and French Academy of Science, he was
\namong the first to sound the alarm on the dangers of global warming.
\nHis view now: “The cause of this climate change is unknown.” <\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Richard Lindzen<\/strong>–Professor
\nof Meteorology at M.I.T., member, the National Research Council Board
\non Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, says global warming alarmists “are
\ntrumpeting catastrophes that couldn’t happen even if the models were
\nright.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov<\/strong>–head of the space
\nresearch laboratory of the Russian Academy of Science’s Pulkovo
\nObservatory and of the International Space Station’s Astrometria
\nproject says “the common view that man’s industrial activity is a
\ndeciding factor in global warming has emerged from a misinterpretation
\nof cause and effect relations.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Richard Tol<\/strong>–Principal
\nresearcher at the Institute for Environmental Studies at Vrije
\nUniversiteit, and Adjunct Professor at the Center for Integrated Study
\nof the Human Dimensions of Global Change, at Carnegie Mellon
\nUniversity, calls the most influential global warming report of all
\ntime “preposterous . . . alarmist and incompetent.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Sami Solanki<\/strong>–director
\nand scientific member at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System
\nResearch in Germany, who argues that changes in the Sun’s state, not
\nhuman activity, may be the principal cause of global warming: “The sun
\nhas been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be
\naffecting global temperatures.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Prof. Freeman Dyson<\/strong>–one
\nof the world’s most eminent physicists says the models used to justify
\nglobal warming alarmism are “full of fudge factors” and “do not begin
\nto describe the real world.”<\/big><\/p>\n

Dr. Eigils Friis-Christensen<\/strong>–director
\nof the Danish National Space Centre, vice-president of the
\nInternational Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, who argues that
\nchanges in the Sun’s behavior could account for most of the warming
\nattributed by the UN to man-made CO2.<\/big><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Just a short list from the Amazon website for “The Deniers”.<\/big><\/p>\n

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<\/a>.
\n<\/big><\/p>\n

Share this:<\/h3>