Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: average joe who wrote (17644)	11/22/2007 6:02:20 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36921

Leipzig...right... Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change From SourceWatch Jump to: navigation, search The Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change claims to be a petition from "scientists concerned with atmospheric and climate problems" who deny that human greenhouse gas emissions are causing global climate change. According to the declaration, "there does not exist today a general scientific consensus about the importance of greenhouse warming from rising levels of carbon dioxide. In fact, most climate specialists now agree that actual observations from both weather satellites and balloon-borne radiosondes show no current warming whatsoever."[1] The Leipzig Declaration emerged from a November 1995 conference, "The Greenhouse Controversy," cosponsored by S. Fred Singer's Science and Environmental Policy Project and the European Academy for Environmental Affairs in Leipzig, Germany. It has been widely cited by conservative voices in the "sound science" movement and is regarded in some circles as the gold standard of scientific expertise on the issue. It has been cited by Singer himself in editorial columns appearing in hundreds of conservative websites and major publications, including the Wall Street Journal, Miami Herald, Detroit News, Chicago Tribune, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Memphis Commercial-Appeal, Seattle Times, and Orange County Register. Jeff Jacoby, a columnist with the Boston Globe, describes the signers of the Leipzig Declaration as "prominent scholars." The Heritage Foundation calls them "noted scientists," as do conservative think tanks such as Citizens for a Sound Economy, the Heartland Institute, and Australia's Institute of Public Affairs. Both the Leipzig Declaration and Frederick Seitz's Oregon Petition have been quoted as authoritative sources during deliberations in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. When journalist David Olinger of the St. Petersburg Times investigated the Leipzig Declaration, however, he discovered that most of its signers have not dealt with climate issues at all and none of them is an acknowledged leading expert. Twenty-five of the signers were TV weathermen - a profession that requires no in-depth knowledge of climate research. Some did not even have a college degree, such as Dick Groeber of Dick's Weather Service in Springfield, Ohio. Did Groeber regard himself as a scientist? "I sort of consider myself so," he said when asked. "I had two or three years of college training in the scientific area, and 30 or 40 years of self-study." Other signers included a dentist, a medical laboratory researcher, a civil engineer, and an amateur meteorologist. Some were not even found to reside at the addresses they had given. A journalist with the Danish Broadcasting Company attempted to contact the declaration's 33 European signers and found that four of them could not be located, 12 denied ever having signed, and some had not even heard of the Leipzig Declaration. Those who did admit signing included a medical doctor, a nuclear scientist, and an expert on flying insects. After discounting the signers whose credentials were inflated, irrelevant, false, or unverifiable, it turned out that only 20 of the names on the list had any scientific connection with the study of climate change, and some of those names were known to have obtained grants from the oil and fuel industry, including the German coal industry and the government of Kuwait (a major oil exporter).[2] [edit]Related Resources David Olinger, "Cool to the Warnings of Global Warming's Dangers," St. Petersburg Times, July 29, 1996. Hans Bulow and Poul-Eric Heilburth, "The Energy Conspiracy" (video documentary), Filmakers Library, 124 East 40th Street, New York, NY 10016. Danish Broadcasting Corporation (DR1) report, cited in Christian Jensen, "Re: Fred Singer's Comment on Trenberth's Article," naturalSCIENCE, February 11, 1998. Doug Henwood, "Re: Global Warming," Left Business Observer, April 3, 2001 Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber, Trust Us, We're Experts: How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles With Your Future (New York, NY: Tarcher Putnam, 2002). "Leipzig Declaration," Wikipedia Retrieved from "http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Leipzig_Declaration_on_Global_Climate_Change" ==== Re: Fred Singer's Comment on Trenberth's Article A Comment by Christian Jensen Note 1 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Christian Jensen Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 17:13:44 +0000 Reply To: cj@dmi.min.dk To: publisher@naturalscience.com Subject: Fred Singer's comment on Trenberth's article How many climate researchers support the "Leipzig Declaration"? According to Fred Singer (letter to naturalSCIENCE), Kevin Trenberth's claim (naturalSCIENCE article Global warming: It's happening) that more than 2000 scientists were represented in the Scientific Assessment of the 1995 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC95) is the repetition of a long-standing fabrication. "There are," he says, "only about 100 climate scientists in the IPCC's listing, which includes economists, political scientists, government functionaries, and public relations specialists." Whatever the merit of Singer's charge, it prompts scrutiny of the list of over 100 "bone-fide experts" who Singer claims have signed his so-called Leipzig Declaration (1), a document expressing skepticism about the importance of greenhouse warming caused by rising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations. Such an examination has been undertaken by Danish Broadcasting Company (DR1) journalist, Øjvind Hesselager (2). In late 1997 he attempted to contact every signatory (82 at the time) to the "Leipzig Declaration." Of 33 European signatories: there were four he was unable to locate twelve denied having signed, and of these, some had not even heard of the "Leipzig Declaration" many signatories were not qualified in fields even remotely related to climate research. They included medical doctors, e.g., H. Metzner; nuclear scientists, e.g., M.J. Higatsberger; and one expert on flying insects, i.e., V. Svidersky some signatories had financial ties to the German coal industry or the Government of Kuwait (R. Balling and P. Michaels). These are hardly reliable authorities on climate research. Confronted with these facts, Singer removed many from the list, although not the five mentioned by name above (Dr. Metzner apparently played a central role in compiling the list of signatories). Other names were then added to make a total, today, of more than 100. Of the present signatories: twenty-five are TV-meteorologists (here in Denmark, being a TV-meteorologist does not imply any in-depth knowledge of climate research) nine do not appear, from the information provided in the published list (2), to be involved in relevant research fourteen claim the title "Professor," but the list gives no indication of their academic speciality or institutional affiliation forty-two are listed either as an oceanographer, meteorologist, climatologist, or geophysicist or as the employee of an institution involved with climate research. However, in only a minority of cases is it indicated by the list as currently published (1) whether these individuals are actually doing climate research. If the IPCC95 Scientific Assessment represented only 100 scientists, it is unfortunate that the number has been stated to be 2000. However, the scientists who were represented in the IPCC95 Scientific Assessment are among the best qualified individuals to evaluate mechanisms and impacts of potential climate change. This is more than can be said of many, and perhaps most, of those who have signed, or who are supposed to have signed, the "Leipzig Declaration." Reference (1) Signatories to the Leipzig Declaration: sepp.org (2) A DR1 (Danish Broadcasting Corporation) report concerning the signatories to the Leipzig Declaration: dr.dk. In Danish. 1 Christian Jensen Ph.D. student (Climate monitoring) Danish Meteorological Institute Research Department naturalscience.com

To: average joe who wrote (17644)	11/22/2007 6:13:05 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Respond to of 36921

"Also, the Leipzig Declaration disputes the IPCC assertions about man-made global warming. It was drafted following the Leipzig Climate Conference in November 1995 and has been signed by over 1,500 scientists from around the world" Now I know why you can't understand this stuff. Yer off by a factor of 10. Take some arithmetic, then take some math, then take yer science. Atlas can wait; he's got all the time in the world. Leipzig Declaration From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search The Leipzig Declaration on Global Climate Change is a statement made in 1995, issued in an updated form 1997 and revised in 2005 [3], claimed to have been signed by 80 Scientists and 25 Television News Meteorologists while the posting of 33 additional signatories is pending verification that those 33 additional scientists still agree with the statement [4], seeking to refute the claim there is a scientific consensus on the global warming issue [5]. The declaration, which opposes the global warming hypothesis and the Kyoto Protocol, has appeared in two versions, both penned by Fred Singer of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP). Global warming skeptics have hailed the declarations as a critical scientific turning point.[citation needed] Critics claim they were fraudulent publicity stunts and have questioned both the authenticity of the signatures and the credentials of the verifiable signers.[citation needed] The first declaration was based on a November 9-10 1995 conference, organized by Helmut Metzner in Leipzig, Germany.[1] The second declaration was additionally based on a successor conference in Bonn, Germany on November 10-11, 1997. The conferences were cosponsored by the SEPP and the European Academy for Environmental Affairs and titled International Symposium on the Greenhouse Controversy. Contents [hide] 1 Versions 1.1 The 1995 Declaration 1.1.1 Signatures 1.2 The 1997 Declaration 1.2.1 Signatures 1.3 2005, revised 2 Use of the declarations 3 References 4 See also 5 External links 6 Related resources [edit] Versions [edit] The 1995 Declaration The 1995 declaration asserts: "There does not exist today a general scientific consensus about the importance of greenhouse warming from rising levels of carbon dioxide. On the contrary, most scientists now accept the fact that actual observations from earth satellites show no climate warming whatsoever." The latter statement was broadly accurate at the time, but with additional data and correction of errors, all analyses of satellite temperature measurements now show statistically-significant warming. The declaration also criticised the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, saying: "Energy is essential for all economic growth, and fossil fuels provide today's principal global energy source. In a world in which poverty is the greatest social pollutant, any restriction on energy use that inhibits economic growth should be viewed with caution. For this reason, we consider 'carbon taxes' and other drastic control policies ... to be ill-advised, premature, wrought with economic danger, and likely to be counterproductive." [edit] Signatures According to the SEPP website, there were 79 signatures to the 1995 declaration, including Frederick Seitz: the current SEPP chair. The signature list was last updated on July 16, 1996. Of these 79, 33 failed to respond when the SEPP asked them to sign the 1997 declaration. The SEPP calls the signatories "nearly 100 climate experts". The signatures to the 1995 declaration were disputed by David Olinger of the St. Petersburg Times. In an article on July 29, 1996, he revealed that many signers, including Chauncey Starr, Robert Balling, and Patrick Michaels, have received funding from the oil industry, while others had no scientific training or could not be identified.[2] The 1995 declarations begins: "As scientists, we are intensely interested in the possibility that human activities may affect the global climate". However, those identified as scientists and climate experts include at least ten weather presenters, including Dick Groeber of Dick's Weather Service in Springfield, Ohio. Groeber, who had not completed a university degree, labelled himself a scientist by virtue of his thirty to forty years of self-study.[2] In any case, it is difficult to accurately evaluate the list of signatures of the 1995 declaration, as the SEPP website provides no additional details about them except for their university, if they are professors. [edit] The 1997 Declaration The 1997 declaration updated the 1995 declaration in a number of ways. The most obvious difference was its focus on the Kyoto Protocol, as the Kyoto conference was in the process of being finalised. The declaration says: "We believe the Kyoto Protocol -- to curtail carbon dioxide emissions from only part of the world community -- is dangerously simplistic, quite ineffective, and economically destructive to jobs and standards-of-living. ... We consider the drastic emission control policies deriving from the Kyoto conference -- lacking credible support from the underlying science -- to be ill-advised and premature." The 1997 declaration also updated its citations of evidence that appeared to run contrary to the consensus on global warming. For example, the 1995 declaration cites "observations from earth satellites," where the 1997 declaration cites "observations from both weather satellites and balloon-borne radiosondes." As with satellite data, subsequent analysis of radiosondes has shown a statistically-significant warming trend. [edit] Signatures The declaration begins: "As independent scientists concerned with atmospheric and climate problems, we...". As with the 1995 declaration, questions have been raised about the scientific background of the signers, and others have questioned the degree to which they can be deemed to be independent. Because many of those who signed the 1997 declaration also signed the 1995 declaration, the concerns raised by David Olinger and others after the 1995 declaration are still relevant. The signers are generally described by Fred Singer and his supporters as climate scientists, although the current signers also include 25 weather presenters. One key report opposing the scientific credentials of the signers was a Danish Broadcasting Company TV special by Øjvind Hesselager.[6] Hesselager attempted to contact the declaration's 33 European signers and found that four of them could not be located, twelve denied ever having signed, and some had not even heard of the Leipzig Declaration. Those who verified signing included a medical doctor, a nuclear scientist, and an entomologist. After discounting the signers whose credentials were inflated, irrelevant, false, or unverifiable, Hesselager claimed that only 20 of the names on the list had any scientific connection with the study of climate change, and some of those names were known to have obtained grants from the oil and fuel industry, including the German coal industry and the government of Kuwait (a major oil exporter). As a result of Hesselager's report, Singer removed some, but not all, of the discredited signatures. The number of signatures on the document, according to the SEPP's own press releases, has declined from 140 (according to a December 1997 press release) to 105 (as of February 2003). The SEPP's position is that "a few of the original signers did not have the 'proper' academic credentials - even though they understand the scientific climate issues quite well. To avoid this kind of smear, we want to restrict the Leipzig Declaration to signers with impeccable qualifications." To address the signer credibility issue, the SEPP has provided considerably more information about each signer on their website and lists the weather presenters separately from the other signers. [edit] 2005, revised Comparison of ground based (blue) and satellite based (red: UAH; green: RSS) records of temperature variations since 1979. Trends plotted since January 1982The Sepp website currently lists a "2005, revised" declaration [7]. The revision is fairly light, since it still speaks of the 1997 Kyoto conference as a future event. This version includes In fact, many climate specialists now agree that actual observations from weather satellites show no global warming whatsoever, which is not in accordance with any version of the satellite temperature record. [edit] Use of the declarations The declarations have been widely cited by some in the "sound science" movement. It has been cited by Fred Singer in editorial columns appearing in hundreds of websites and major publications, including The Wall Street Journal, Miami Herald, Detroit News, Chicago Tribune, Cleveland Plain Dealer, Memphis Commercial-Appeal, The Seattle Times, and The Orange County Register. Jeff Jacoby, a columnist with the Boston Globe, describes the signers of the Leipzig Declaration as "climate scientists" that "include prominent scholars." Think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation, the Heartland Institute, and Australia's Institute for Public Affairs calls them "noted scientists." Both the Leipzig Declaration and Frederick Seitz's Oregon Petition have been quoted as authoritative sources during deliberations in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. Although the key data on which the Leipzig declaration relied (see: satellite temperature record) has been invalidated by subsequent research, and much new evidence has accumulated[3], the declaration continues to be cited, along with the Oregon petition as evidence of the current views of scientists on climate change. Moreover, the organizers have not changed their stated position of rejecting anthropogenic global warming. en.wikipedia.org