[TheForge] Fw: Can't compete w/ this

[Rob Fertner]

Scientific consensus about Global Warming is a myth. Over a hundred leading
scientists sent the UN a letter denouncing the hysteria.

The letter follows:

Dec. 13, 2007

His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon

Secretary-General, United Nations 

New York, N.Y.

Dear Mr. Secretary-General,

Re: UN climate conference taking the World in entirely the wrong direction 

It is not possible to stop climate change, a natural phenomenon that has
affected humanity through the ages. Geological, archaeological, oral and
written histories all attest to the dramatic challenges posed to past
societies from unanticipated changes in temperature, precipitation, winds
and other climatic variables. We therefore need to equip nations to become
resilient to the full range of these natural phenomena by promoting economic
growth and wealth generation. 

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has
issued increasingly alarming conclusions about the climatic influences of
human-produced carbon dioxide (CO2), a non-polluting gas that is essential
to plant photosynthesis. While we understand the evidence that has led them
to view CO2 emissions as harmful, the IPCC's conclusions are quite
inadequate as justification for implementing policies that will markedly
diminish future prosperity. In particular, it is not established that it is
possible to significantly alter global climate through cuts in human
greenhouse gas emissions. On top of which, because attempts to cut emissions
will slow development, the current UN approach of CO2 reduction is likely to
increase human suffering from future climate change rather than to decrease
it.

The IPCC Summaries for Policy Makers are the most widely read IPCC reports
amongst politicians and non-scientists and are the basis for most climate
change policy formulation. Yet these Summaries are prepared by a relatively
small core writing team with the final drafts approved line-by-line by
-government -representatives. The great -majority of IPCC contributors and
-reviewers, and the tens of thousands of other scientists who are qualified
to comment on these matters, are not involved in the preparation of these
documents. The summaries therefore cannot properly be represented as a
consensus view among experts. 

Contrary to the impression left by the IPCC Summary reports:

Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise
and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for
abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie
outside the bounds of known natural variability. 
The average rate of warming of 0.1 to 0. 2 degrees Celsius per decade
recorded by satellites during the late 20th century falls within known
natural rates of warming and cooling over the last 10,000 years. 
Leading scientists, including some senior IPCC representatives, acknowledge
that today's computer models cannot predict climate. Consistent with this,
and despite computer projections of temperature rises, there has been no net
global warming since 1998. That the current temperature plateau follows a
late 20th-century period of warming is consistent with the continuation
today of natural multi-decadal or millennial climate cycling. 
In stark contrast to the often repeated assertion that the science of
climate change is "settled," significant new peer-reviewed research has cast
even more doubt on the hypothesis of dangerous human-caused global warming.
But because IPCC working groups were generally instructed (see
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/docs/wg1_timetable_2006-08-14.pdf) to consider
work published only through May, 2005, these important findings are not
included in their reports; i.e., the IPCC assessment reports are already
materially outdated.

The UN climate conference in Bali has been planned to take the world along a
path of severe CO2 restrictions, ignoring the lessons apparent from the
failure of the Kyoto Protocol, the chaotic nature of the European CO2
trading market, and the ineffectiveness of other costly initiatives to curb
greenhouse gas emissions. Balanced cost/benefit analyses provide no support
for the introduction of global measures to cap and reduce energy consumption
for the purpose of restricting CO2 emissions. Furthermore, it is irrational
to apply the "precautionary principle" because many scientists recognize
that both climatic coolings and warmings are realistic possibilities over
the medium-term future. 

The current UN focus on "fighting climate change," as illustrated in the
Nov. 27 UN Development Programme's Human Development Report, is distracting
governments from adapting to the threat of inevitable natural climate
changes, whatever forms they may take. National and international planning
for such changes is needed, with a focus on helping our most vulnerable
citizens adapt to conditions that lie ahead. Attempts to prevent global
climate change from occurring are ultimately futile, and constitute a tragic
misallocation of resources that would be better spent on humanity's real and
pressing problems.

Yours faithfully,

[List of signatories]


 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: theforge-bounces at mailman.qth.net
[mailto:theforge-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Peter Fels and Phoebe
Palmer
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 12:34 PM
To: Sponsored by ABANA
Subject: Re: [TheForge] Fw: Can't compete w/ this

 

Seems to me that the real, adult scientific community has come very nearly
to a consensis on this, that the possible consequences may be profound...

And if they are completely wrong, taking it seriously would have us doing
the right thing for the wrong reasons...pete f