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 : Politics of Energy -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (79496)	11/28/2017 12:42:13 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 86355

Australian Bernie Lewin, who has carefully tracked the founding and financing of the IPCC, authored a new book, which complements the essay by Ian Flanigan, “Searching for the Catastrophe Signal: The Origins of The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.” According to government reports, the US government has spent over $40 billion on Climate Science, including helping finance the IPCC, and over $100 billion on “fighting climate change,” yet it has failed to find hard evidence that CO2 is causing dangerous global warming. Lewin’s new book may help explain why. On his web site, ‘Enthusiasm, Scepticism and Science,’ Lewin has thought provoking essays on the origins and impacts of global warming alarmism including the icon of the alarmists, “the distinct human fingerprint,” and the icon of the skeptics, a graph in the first IPCC report, the source of which was not known. Also, Lewin discusses how the alarmists tried to capture the work of H.H. Lamb, largely successfully, and how the entry of economists increased the “costs” by focusing on the “economic and social dimensions” of global warming / climate change. This joined the sustainability concepts that are now popular. In an essay posted on WUWT, Lewin discusses the sentence: “The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.” This sentence, along with the removal of skeptical passages, prompted the late Frederick Seitz, who was Chairman of SEPP, to call the IPCC process a “disturbing corruption of the peer-review process” and misleading to the public. Lewin’s essay suggests that the involvement of the US in the misleading process was significantly broader than just Ben Santer, who added the sentence after the peer-review. It implies that there was an orchestrated campaign to alter the scientific findings. If so, it will be valuable to discover how government entities misled the public, in hopes of preventing similar occurrences in the future. See links under Challenging the Orthodoxy – The IPCC History. wattsupwiththat.com