The following is the introduction to a newly published report by the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (Minority), entitled, U.S. Senate report: over 400 prominent scientists disputed human-caused global warming claims in 2007. It is available at www.epw.senate.gov .
Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called “consensus” on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UN IPCC), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former U.S. vice-president Al Gore.
The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s office of the GOP Ranking Member, Senator James Inhofe (R — Okla.) details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.
Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October,
In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has “co-opted” the green movement.
This blockbuster Senate report lists the scientists by name, country of residence, and academic or institutional affiliation. It also features their own words, biographies, and web links to their peer-reviewed studies and original source materials as gathered from public statements, various news outlets, and websites in 2007. This new “consensus busters” report is poised to redefine the debate.
Many of the scientists featured in this report consistently stated that numerous colleagues shared their views, but they will not speak out publicly for fear of retribution. Atmospheric scientist Nathan Paldor, professor of dynamical meteorology and physical oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies, explains how many of his fellow scientists have been intimidated.
“Many of my colleagues with whom I spoke share these views and report on their inability to publish their skepticism in the scientific or public media,” Paldor wrote.
(See also the July 2007 Senate report detailing how skeptical scientists have faced threats and intimidation.)
This new report details how teams of international scientists are dissenting from the UN IPCC’s view of climate science. In such nations as Germany, Brazil, the Netherlands, Russia, New Zealand and France, scientists banded together in 2007 to oppose climate alarmism.
In addition, over 100 prominent international scientists sent an open letter in December 2007 to the UN stating attempts to control climate were “futile.”
Paleoclimatologist Tim Patterson, professor in the department of Earth Sciences at Carleton University in Ottawa, recently converted from a believer in man-made climate change to a skeptic.
Patterson noted that the notion of a “consensus” of scientists aligned with the UN IPCC or former vice-president Gore is false. “I was at the Geological Society of America meeting in Philadelphia in the fall and I would say that people with my opinion were probably in the majority.”
This new committee report, a first of its kind, comes after the UN IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri implied that there were only “about a dozen” skeptical scientists left in the world.
Gore has claimed that scientists skeptical of climate change are akin to “flat Earth society members” and similar in number to those who “believe the moon landing was actually staged in a movie lot in Arizona.”
The distinguished scientists featured in this new report are experts in diverse fields, including: climatology; oceanography; geology; biology; glaciology; biogeography; meteorology; oceanography; economics; chemistry; mathematics; environmental sciences; engineering; physics; and paleoclimatology.
Some of those profiled have won Nobel Prizes for their outstanding contribution to their field of expertise and many shared a portion of last year’s UN IPCC Nobel Peace Prize with Gore.
Additionally, these scientists hail from prestigious institutions worldwide, including: Harvard University; NASA; National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR); Massachusetts Institute of Technology; the UN IPCC; the Danish National Space Center; U.S. Department of Energy; Princeton University; the Environmental Protection Agency; University of Pennsylvania; Hebrew University of Jerusalem; the International Arctic Research Centre; the Pasteur Institute in Paris; the Belgian Weather Institute; Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute; the University of Helsinki; the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S., France, and Russia; the University of Pretoria; University of Notre Dame; Stockholm University; University of Melbourne; Columbia University; the World Federation of Scientists; and the University of London.
The voices of many of these hundreds of scientists serve as a direct challenge to the often media-hyped “consensus” that the debate is “settled.”
A May 2007, Senate report detailed scientists who had recently converted from believers in man-made global warming to skeptics. In addition, an August 2007 report detailed how proponents of human-caused global warming fears enjoy a monumental funding advantage over skeptical scientists.
The report counters the claims made by the promoters of man-made global warming fears that the number of skeptical scientists is dwindling.
The more than 400 skeptical scientists featured in this new report outnumber by nearly eight times the number of scientists who participated in the 2007 UN IPCC Summary for Policymakers.
The notion of “hundreds” or “thousands” of UN scientists agreeing to a scientific statement does not hold up to scrutiny.
Proponents of man-made global warming like to note how the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and the American Meteorological Society (AMS) have issued statements endorsing the so-called “consensus” view that man is driving global warming.
But both the NAS and AMS never allowed member scientists to directly vote on these climate statements. Essentially, only two dozen or so members on the governing boards of these institutions produced the “consensus” statements. This report gives a voice to the rank-and-file scientists who were shut out of the process.
The most recent attempt to imply there was an overwhelming scientific “consensus” in favour of human-caused global warming fears came in December 2007 during the UN climate conference in Bali, Indonesia.
A letter signed by only 215 scientists urged the UN to mandate deep cuts in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050. But absent from the letter were the signatures of these alleged “thousands” of scientists.
UN IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri urged the world at Bali conference to “please listen to the voice of science.”
The science has continued to grow loud and clear in 2007. In addition to the growing number of scientists expressing skepticism, an abundance of recent peer-reviewed studies have cast considerable doubt about man-made global warming fears. A November 2007, peer-reviewed study found that “solar changes significantly alter climate.”
A December 2007 peer-reviewed study recalculated and halved the global average surface temperature trend between 1980-2002. Another new study found the Medieval Warm Period “0.3 degrees Celsius warmer than 20th century.”
A peer-reviewed study by a team of scientists found that “warming is naturally caused and shows no human influence.” Another November 2007 peer-reviewed study in the journal Physical Geography found “Long-term climate change is driven by solar insolation changes.”
These recent stu
dies were in addition to the abundance of peer-reviewed studies earlier in 2007. With this new report profiling 400 skeptical scientists, the world can finally hear the voices of the “silent majority” of scientists.
Be the first to comment on "Commentary: US Senate report debunks ‘climate consensus’"