A list of scientists who oppose Global Warming Panic. Email It
The Dennis Prager Show
3-27-07 at 10:42 PM
Read Article & Comments (3) Trackbacks Post Your Comments
DP: For my listener, Allen, in Castro Valley, California, who wants me to name any scientist who disputes Al Gore’s theses, here is a list that I’d like to offer you, and it’s just a list of some of the biggest names. And later on, I’m going to go into the question of traffic. I’ve got a lot to talk to you about. But this is…I don’t say that Al Gore lies when he speaks about global warming. I think he’s hysterical on it. But I don’t say he lies. But it is a lie when he says that it is unanimous that it’s manmade, and that it’s catastrophic.
Claude Allègre is a member of the U.S. Academy of Sciences, and the French Academy of Science. He’s a French geophysicist.
And Robert C. Balling, Jr. is director of the Office of Climatology, associate professor of geography, Arizona State University. “It is very likely that the recent upward trend in global surface temperature is very real, and that the upward signal is greater than any noise introduced from uncertainties in the record. However, the general error is most likely to be in the warming direction, with a maximum possible (though unlikely) value of 0.3 °C.
Chris de Freitas, Associate Professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland: "There is evidence of global warming. ... But warming does not confirm that carbon dioxide is causing it. Climate is always warming or cooling. There are natural variability theories of warming. To support the argument that carbon dioxide is causing it, the evidence would have to distinguish between human-caused and natural warming. This has not been done."
David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma: "The amount of climatic warming that has taken place in the past 150 years is poorly constrained, and its cause--human or natural--is unknown. There is no sound scientific basis for predicting future climate change with any degree of certainty. If the climate does warm, it is likely to be beneficial to humanity rather than harmful. In my opinion, it would be foolish to establish national energy policy on the basis of misinformation and irrational hysteria." (Testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, December 6, 2006 [7])
Richard Lindzen, professor of meteorology and member of the National Academy of Sciences, professor at MIT, is considered one of the great experts in the world on weather, Richard Lindzen, MIT, National Academy of Sciences. Allen, I’ll have you react after this. I wonder what…I usually can predict reactions, but I can’t react my callers’ reaction on this. I trust you’re listening. Okay, next. That was Lindzen of MIT.
Roy Spencer, principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville: "We need to find out how much of the warming we are seeing could be due to mankind, because I still maintain we have no idea how much you can attribute to mankind." (George C. Marshall Institute Washington Roundtable on Science and Public Policy, April 17, 2006 [10])
Scientists who conclude that natural causes are more likely to blame than human activities for observed rising temperatures from next include:
Khabibullo Ismailovich Abdusamatov, Russian Academy of Sciences, supervisor of the Astrometria project of the Russian section of the International Space Station: "Global warming results not from the emission of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, but from an unusually high level of solar radiation and a lengthy - almost throughout the last century - growth in its intensity."
Sallie Baliunas, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics: "[T]he recent warming trend in the surface temperature record cannot be caused by the increase of human-made greenhouse gases in the air."
Robert M. Carter, researcher at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia. “Climate changes naturally all the time.”
George V. Chilingar, Professor of Civil and Petroleum Engineering at the University of Southern California.
Ian Clark, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa.
Tim Patterson [31], paleoclimatologist and Professor of Geology at Carleton University in Canada.
Frederick Seitz, former solid-state physicist, former president of the National Academy of Sciences: "So we see that the scientific facts indicate that all the temperature changes observed in the last 100 years were largely natural changes and were not caused by carbon dioxide produced in human activities."
Nir Shaviv, astrophysicist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, “…natural causes probably being more important over the past century.”
Fred Singer, Professor emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia: "The greenhouse effect is real. However, the effect is minute, insignificant, and very difficult to detect."
Willie Soon, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics: "[T]here's increasingly strong evidence that previous research conclusions, including those of the United Nations and the United States government concerning 20th century warming, may have been biased by underestimation of natural climate variations.”
Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London: "...the myth is starting to implode. ... Serious new research at The Max Planck Institute has indicated that the sun is a far more significant factor..."
Allen in Castro Valley, California, have I answered your question?
Allen: Well, I just have a question. What experimentation…
DP: Wait, wait. First, answer mine. Have I answered your first question to name a scientist who disputes this?
Allen: Oh, yes. You gave me some names, and I appreciate that, but what experimentation and studies did they engage in that has been replicated that refutes the data that the people that have actually engaged in research studies and experimentation put forth. You’re saying that they are making a statement where they don’t…but what research and studies and experimentation do they do to actually refute the findings and the evidence that the people that found global warming have performed?
DP: How do you know that the research of these illustrious scientists is less impressive than the research of the scientists you agree with?
Allen: I didn’t say it was. I just didn’t hear you mention an experimentation or studies that they engaged in that has replicated and authenticated…
DP: All right, Allen, Allen, Allen, neither you nor I have the ability to answer that question. I don’t know how the doctor who gave me the flu shot came up…I don’t know how they came up with flu shots. I simply take one. It’s…you called up and you asked to name any scientist, in the singular, who disputes Al Gore and the global warming. I gave you the names of some of the greatest scientists in climatology on the face of the Earth today. And now you challenge their research? I have no comment. So here is…there is the verdict. Even those of you who believe that we are in the downward spiral to catastrophe, and are crying along with Amy Klobuchar’s 8 year old about penguins drowning, you have to acknowledge that what Al Gore said about the unanimity of scientists is a lie. I’m not saying what he says about global warming is a lie, because he may be right. I would bet everything I have, I am betting everything I have. I’m betting my reputation. I will look pretty bad if he turns out to be right. My grandchildren will think their grandfather was a kook, like the people who denied Galileo. I’ll worry about it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vote on this Article
dennisprager.townhall.com |
